Yes I can provide that but we must see where to put it; maybe temporarily on Swbv55 as that one is usually active on hecnet or I will create a Tops10 node linked to Swbv55 with a sync line.
Remember though, Anf10 has a limitation of 64 nodes including DN200's, so there is a limit.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Peter Lothberg
Sent: Wednesday, 17 November, 2021 01:02
To: hecnet <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Subject: Re: [HECnet] ANF10 network --> Anf10 KL<>KS + DN200 --> DN200/DN20 parameters
Reindert,
can you put the DN200 complete package up for grabs?
Ad se can have an "infinite number" of virtual dn200's to link the systems together, this might be the best thing for a HECanf10 before Paul writes a perl version -:)
--P
----- Original Message -----
> From: "R. Voorhorst" <R.Voorhorst at swabhawat.com>
> To: "hecnet" <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 6:36:02 PM
> Subject: RE: [HECnet] ANF10 network --> Anf10 KL<>KS + DN200 -->
> DN200/DN20 parameters
> The DN200/DN20 actually supports 5 Dmc class sync lines with some
> limitations with number of buffers per line; the system is unmapped
> i.e. only 28 kW available and only 5 concurrent sync lines of one
> class will fit comfortably within an otherwise maxed combination of terminal lines and peripherals.
> I use the Dmc's for that as they will communicate with every class of
> sync interfaces, so with Dups as well.
> Mixed varieties of sync lines diminish the max achievable active
> number of lines.
> Theoretically one can have more lines per controller and more
> controllers, but memory constrains what will work. I have not tried
> Dup's yet for exceeding the pseudo standard of 2 lines.
>
> Reindert
Yes, I will collect them and make them available and it is for 8 dups. You can then choose how many you actually have active. Decnet supports up to 8 circuits/lines.
Reindert
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Peter Lothberg
Sent: Wednesday, 17 November, 2021 00:02
To: hecnet <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Subject: Re: [HECnet] ANF10 network --> Anf10 KL<>KS + DN200
Reindert,
Would you share the patches to Tops10/simh to support the 4 DUP-11's?
-P
----- Original Message -----
> From: "R. Voorhorst" <R.Voorhorst at swabhawat.com>
> To: "hecnet" <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 5:15:00 PM
> Subject: RE: [HECnet] ANF10 network --> Anf10 KL<>KS + DN200
> L.S.
>
> Anf10 ethernet and sync lines are 2 separate domains and currently
> there are no standard interconnections.
> The (now late) Johnny Ericsson had an Anf10 tunnel but I never tried it.
> On a KL10 with dte interface a certain routing should be possible, but
> that cannot yet be done I also restored a DN200 Pdp11 simh workstation
> (see Anfu63) with terminals and peripherals with remote printing,
> plotting etc.
> The network looks like this from the multi kdp/dup node with 2 decnet
> and 2
> anf10 active:
>
>
> .net/t
> [ANF10 network: connected to ANFW08(57), located at ANFW08(57), 5 nodes]
> Node ANFW04 (53) 77(8), 55(8), 54(8)
> Node ANFW05 (54) 77(8), 53(8)
> Node ANFW06 (55) 77(8), 53(8)
> Node ANFW08 (57) 77(10)
> Node ANFU63 (77) 53(6), 54(6), 55(6), 57(6)
>
> [DECnet network: local node SWBW08, 8 reachable nodes in area 63]
> Name Number Line Cost Hops L.Links Delay
> SWBC01 (63.50) KDP-0-0 7 1
> SWBV89 (63.89) KDP-0-0 7 1
> SWBW01 (63.51) KDP-0-0 11 2
> SWBW04 (63.54) KDP-0-0 12 2
> SWBW05 (63.55) KDP-0-1 7 1
> SWBW06 (63.56) KDP-0-0 12 2
> SWBW08 (63.58) local 0 0 0 5000
> SWBX01 (63.41) KDP-0-0 11 2
>
> .net
> [ANF10 network: connected to ANFW08(57), located at ANFW08(57), 5 nodes]
> Node ANFW04 (53) Swbw04 Tops10-7.07/34201 01-aug-20
> Node ANFW05 (54) Swbw05 Tops10-7.07/34201 01-aug-20
> Node ANFW06 (55) Swbw06 Tops10-7.07/34201 16-jul-20
> Node ANFW08 (57) SwbW08 Tops10-7.06/34100 27-Jul-20
> Node ANFU63 (77) DN200 V25(244) 02-Aug-89
>
> [DECnet network: local node SWBW08, 8 reachable nodes in area 63]
> SWBC01 SWBV89 SWBW01 SWBW04 SWBW05 SWBW06 SWBW08 SWBX01
>
> Reindert
L.S.
Anf10 ethernet and sync lines are 2 separate domains and currently there are no standard interconnections.
The (now late) Johnny Ericsson had an Anf10 tunnel but I never tried it.
On a KL10 with dte interface a certain routing should be possible, but that cannot yet be done
I also restored a DN200 Pdp11 simh workstation (see Anfu63) with terminals and peripherals with remote printing, plotting etc.
The network looks like this from the multi kdp/dup node with 2 decnet and 2 anf10 active:
.net/t
[ANF10 network: connected to ANFW08(57), located at ANFW08(57), 5 nodes]
Node ANFW04 (53) 77(8), 55(8), 54(8)
Node ANFW05 (54) 77(8), 53(8)
Node ANFW06 (55) 77(8), 53(8)
Node ANFW08 (57) 77(10)
Node ANFU63 (77) 53(6), 54(6), 55(6), 57(6)
[DECnet network: local node SWBW08, 8 reachable nodes in area 63]
Name Number Line Cost Hops L.Links Delay
SWBC01 (63.50) KDP-0-0 7 1
SWBV89 (63.89) KDP-0-0 7 1
SWBW01 (63.51) KDP-0-0 11 2
SWBW04 (63.54) KDP-0-0 12 2
SWBW05 (63.55) KDP-0-1 7 1
SWBW06 (63.56) KDP-0-0 12 2
SWBW08 (63.58) local 0 0 0 5000
SWBX01 (63.41) KDP-0-0 11 2
.net
[ANF10 network: connected to ANFW08(57), located at ANFW08(57), 5 nodes]
Node ANFW04 (53) Swbw04 Tops10-7.07/34201 01-aug-20
Node ANFW05 (54) Swbw05 Tops10-7.07/34201 01-aug-20
Node ANFW06 (55) Swbw06 Tops10-7.07/34201 16-jul-20
Node ANFW08 (57) SwbW08 Tops10-7.06/34100 27-Jul-20
Node ANFU63 (77) DN200 V25(244) 02-Aug-89
[DECnet network: local node SWBW08, 8 reachable nodes in area 63]
SWBC01 SWBV89 SWBW01 SWBW04 SWBW05 SWBW06 SWBW08 SWBX01
Reindert
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of G.
Sent: Tuesday, 16 November, 2021 21:36
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] ANF10 network
> It was not full mesh. ANF10 has routing with metrics like DECnet and
> RDH even wrote a driver to talk over Ethernet between KL's.
If anyone is curious, here below is a link to the ANF-to-Ethernet code by RDH.
It contains some nice explanation too :)
http://pdp-10.trailing-edge.com/bb-jr93k-bb/01/10,7/mon/d8eint.mac.html
G.
L.S.
It is quite easy to expand this; currently I run 8 lines from the Kdp/dup
and it works quite well.
It needs a slight adaptation in Simh and another in Tops10, but you have to
rebuild the monitor.
Reindert
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf
Of Robert Armstrong
Sent: Tuesday, 16 November, 2021 17:34
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: [HECnet] ANF10 network
Supratim and I (with some help and encouragement from Peter) have set up
an ANF10 network between the TOPS10 nodes VENTI and TWONKY. If you haven't
heard of it, ANF10 (short for "A Networking Feature" - yes, really!)
predates DECnet (I'm pretty sure, although I'm sure there will be debate
about that) and provides mostly the same functions - remote terminals, file
transfer, etc. ANF10 also has remote RJEs with card readers, line printers
and terminal concentrators.
.net/anf
[ANF10 network: connected to VENTI(20), located at VENTI(20), 2 nodes]
Node VENTI (20) SIMH KS10 VENTI 7.04 NET 14-Nov-21
Node TWONKY (37) SIMH KS10 TWONKY 7.04NET 15-Nov-21
It's possible to run ANF10 and DECnet both, and that's what we're doing so
TWONKY and VENTI are also available on HECnet. If anybody else has a TOPS10
system and would like to connect it would be nice to add a few more nodes,
but there is a problem. TOPS10 supports a maximum of two KDP/DUP lines on
the KS10, and you need one for DECnet and the other for ANF10. That means
each system can talk to at most one other ANF10 system, which limits the
network size to two nodes. Bummer.
There are a few options available -
* DEC made some DNxx PDP-11 boxes that supported multiple ANF10
connections. We could set up one of these as a router.
* Somebody could hack TOPS10 to allow more than two DUP lines.
* Somebody could write a pyDECnet type gizmo that speaks ANF10.
And there might be others that I haven't thought of yet. Any ideas?
Bob
Johnny's FIX.T20 HECnet node list works on TOPS-10 as well (same NCP, same
commands), BUT there's an issue.
What you'd really like to do is to put something like "TAKE HECNET.CMD"
inside of [1,4]SYSTEM.CMD. The latter is executed automatically at boot
time and this would let you define all HECnet nodes when you start up.
However OPR (at least the version with TOPS-10 7.04) doesn't allow nested
TAKE commands, so the "TAKE HECNET." inside of SYSTEM.CMD fails.
Has somebody figured out a trick to get around this?
Bob
I was doing some more Kermit-20 measurements while I continue to debug
the NRT code.
Again, the fastest transfer rate that I could get out of a loopback
pseudo-terminal connection was 129.16 KBps with a packet size of 140
characters (note previous post was in baud) .? Since this is not going
outside of the PDP-10, one assumes that it would either be the top speed
possible or near it as we are just talking shuttling data between buffers.
I did a transfer of the same file to an iMac and was /very/ surprised to
find that I got 4,000 byte packet size and a transfer rate 151.78 KBps.?
That's right, using the NI resulted in a speed _increase_ of 17%.? I
instrumented Kermit to report the allocated monitor buffers by line type
and got the table below from various sign ons, viz:
? TTY line Type:?? FE?? PTY? NRT? TVT? CTM
? Input Buffers:??? 1??? 1??? 1??? 1??? 1
? Output Buffers:?? 2??? 1??? 2??? 4??? 2
The abbreviations are as follows:
* ?FE, Front End (RSX-20F) terminal (there is only one, CTY)
* PTY, Pseudo-terminal
* NRT, DECnet Network Remote Terminal
* TVT, Internet Telnet Virtual Terminal
* CTM, DECnet CTERM (I forget what CTERM abbreviates to)
* LAT, Local Area Terminal (I don't currently have a working transport
and client for this)
So what we can see is that a TVT has four _times_ the buffers to play
with than the PTY.? I don't currently know how large a terminal buffer
is nor what else this might mean, but it is suggestive.
For what it's worth, I also did comparison with FTP.? A data transfer in
the RFC959 paradigm is acknowledged on the control channel with return
code of 226.? There are no acknowledgements of the data channel; it's a
straight fire hose.? As I expected, an FTP transfer blew Kermit right
out of the water.? For the same sized file, the 20 measured an upload
data rate of 1.09 *M*Bps with a 10 microsecond resolution (from first
network write to return from closing the transfer 'socket').? The iMac
measured 1.25 *M*Bps download.
So it would appear that an FTP transfer is about 7.38 times faster,
which is of interest, but otherwise perhaps irrelevant as they are not
even remotely doing the same thing.? One expects the same result for
DAP, once I get FTP up on that transport.? Again, we're not comparing
apples to apples.
My network scanner is getting very strange responses from three different nodes all misbehaving the same way: CAIR, MAGPIE, and FARGO.
What I see is:
1. The connection to object 19 (NICE, the network management listener) is accepted, but the version number that is supposed to be sent as part of the accept is missing.
2. When I send a NICE request to the node, I get back a message with this content:
<28>Nov 12 20:35:16 dnetd[1688]: Cannot chdir to /nonexistent : No such file or directory\n\xff\x00\x00
All three nodes do this. Configuration error that just happens to exist on all three?
paul
With the recent talk about the magic 9-Nov-2021 date affecting TOPS-10, I
notice today that
my RSTS/E V10.1 system has started putting out console messages -
?EVTLOG (BLDNIC) -- %Integer error
I'm running this on my PiPDP-11 which uses the Oscar modified SIMH PDP11
11/70 emulation.
It's 10-Nov-2021 in Australia!
I'm running the Paul Koning's updated Y2K version of EVTLOG from
https://github.com/pkoning2/decstuff/tree/master/decnete
Any ideas? I've tried rebooting and the message appears after start-up has
completed, and at shutdown when the date is set to 10-Nov-21 - but not when
use yesterday's date 9-Nov-21
Tony
--
Tony Nicholson <tony.nicholson at computer.org>
. not date related this time (or at least I don't think it is).
Every time I boot TOPS-10 (7.04, KS10, simh) I get stopcode NTMNEC. The
job running is NML and the user PC is 511522. This is a debug stopcode so
the system keeps going.
The manual says of NTMNEC - "Some routine took the non-skip return, but
did not give an error code by calling NTExxx. This means that the program
returned to top level and field NXERR was zero. Determine which
routine is failing, and make the error return give an error code."
Has anybody else seen this? Is there a patch? It's getting a bit
annoying, not to mention that it keeps crash dumping.
Thanks,
Bob