On 06/08/2012 11:08 AM, Gregg Levine wrote:
At one point in time, the OS for the Mac did speak natively to the DEC
family of hardware. It would be very interesting to find out how they
did it. This would greatly benefit Sampsa at least.
Yes, but *which one*? The "original" MacOS bears no resemblance to,
and shares no code with, the current UNIX-based OS. I know of no
MacOS-X-based DECnet implementations. (sadly)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
This end is a FVS318...
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
[mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Bob Armstrong
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2012 18:45
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: RE: [HECnet] netowrk flapping....
and Bob A has a home gw (forgot what it
was) that he claims do the right thing, (not decnet routing..)
Well, I have a Netgear FVS338. It's a "SOHO" box -
somewhere between a
turnkey home router and a fancy Cisco box. I never thought
of it as all
that great, but it does allow me to set up static routes. In
particular I can map specific external ports/Internet IPs to
internal ports/IPs independent of the NAT.
Bob
Any chance this device can be replaced with something IP compatible?
(What's the uplink interface?)
I don't know of a device that I could easily replace it with that is still supported, has VLAN support with multiple virtual interfaces, and without being too prohibitive for a home router.
The uplink port is a gigabit port connected to my FiOS ONT (connected at 100 Mbps).
--Marc
With my connection, I noticed that the circuit would disconnect and
reconnect periodically. It corresponded to the timeout in my firewall
causing the UDP association to be lost. When I increased the timeout
in my firewall for these port 700 UDP "connections", that made my
circuit much more stable.
Like Peter said, Peter and I had a big debate about this at lunch today.
UDP is, by definition (or so I thought), both stateless and connectionless.
I can't understand what state or connection is being timed out in this
case....
Yes, a UDP session is connectionless, however when a firewall is doing
NAT and/or PAT (remember I mentioned that my firewall is randomizing the
source port number, so the LAN port numbers are different from the ones
sent over the internet), it needs to maintain a session table to keep
track of which IP addresses and port numbers map to which systems and
port numbers locally. Those connections time out after a while, and then
subsequent UDP packets wouldn't be recognized.
Any chance this device can be replaced with something IP compatible?
(What's the uplink interface?)
--P
Yup, that's basically a deficiency I've got...
Yeah, but the next question is "Are you the only one", or do other
people's routers have similar timeout issues?
Bob
Ok, I looked thru 36 hours of OPERATOR.LOG on LEGATO for listener receive timeout adjacency down/adjacency up ( flapping as Peter calls it). Here s what I found
The Multinet connection to SG1 flaps all the time, almost like clockwork, with a period of about 20 minutes.
The Multinet connection to GORVAX flapped once in that same 36 hour period.
The Multinet connection to STUPI never flapped, although it did suffer from one corrupted packet error.
The Multinet connections to CIERE and FRUGAL never, ever, flapped nor suffered any corrupted packets.
So, what s it mean?? Bob
I guess that's the issue - you (or your router) really needs a way to
statically define these associations (at least in some specific cases). I
sort of assumed all routers could do that, but maybe I expect too much.
Yup, that's basically a deficiency I've got... well, that and the fact that I can't stop it from changing my source port numbers. I needed this kind of router for VLAN support, so I'm missing a few features that lower-end models would offer like UPnP.
--Marc
it needs to maintain a session table to keep track of which
IP addresses and port numbers map to which systems and port numbers
locally.
I guess that's the issue - you (or your router) really needs a way to
statically define these associations (at least in some specific cases). I
sort of assumed all routers could do that, but maybe I expect too much.
Bob
With my connection, I noticed that the circuit would disconnect and
reconnect periodically. It corresponded to the timeout in my firewall
causing the UDP association to be lost. When I increased the timeout
in my firewall for these port 700 UDP "connections", that made my
circuit much more stable.
Like Peter said, Peter and I had a big debate about this at lunch today.
UDP is, by definition (or so I thought), both stateless and connectionless.
I can't understand what state or connection is being timed out in this
case....
Yes, a UDP session is connectionless, however when a firewall is doing NAT and/or PAT (remember I mentioned that my firewall is randomizing the source port number, so the LAN port numbers are different from the ones sent over the internet), it needs to maintain a session table to keep track of which IP addresses and port numbers map to which systems and port numbers locally. Those connections time out after a while, and then subsequent UDP packets wouldn't be recognized.
--Marc
Marc Chametzky wrote:
With my connection, I noticed that the circuit would disconnect and
reconnect periodically. It corresponded to the timeout in my firewall
causing the UDP association to be lost. When I increased the timeout
in my firewall for these port 700 UDP "connections", that made my
circuit much more stable.
Like Peter said, Peter and I had a big debate about this at lunch today.
UDP is, by definition (or so I thought), both stateless and connectionless.
I can't understand what state or connection is being timed out in this
case....
Bob
The Internet between two end-systems is by arkitekture completely state less when it comes to
knewing anything about what the packets are all about... Unfortenly people love to break that
model to *add value*... -:)
-P
