"Echos of DECnet" is one word for the box of legacy DEC networking hardware I have :)
Ian
On 2013-06-07, at 10:59 AM, <Paul_Koning at Dell.com> wrote:
On Jun 7, 2013, at 1:54 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jun 2013, Brian Hechinger wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 04:25:53AM -0000, Cory Smelosky wrote:
Hello all,
I've recently gotten my Cisco 7200 working. (by "recently" I mean within
the past hour...)
Brian, can you update the config generator and change Ethernet1/0 to
FastEthernet1/0 and push a new config?
Done!
Yup! Thanks!
marianne>ping 1.13
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte DECnet echos to atg 0 area.node 1.13, timeout is 5 seconds:
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 224/248/288 ms
Is "DECnet echo" Cisco-speak for Ethernet Loopback packets? Or MIRROR packets? Either way, one wonders why they felt it was necessary to pick their own off the wall names for these documented mechanisms.
paul
---
Filter service subscribers can train this email as spam or not-spam here: http://my.email-as.net/spamham/cgi-bin/learn.pl?messageid=0B7F92B0CF9C11E2A…
On Jun 7, 2013, at 1:54 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jun 2013, Brian Hechinger wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 04:25:53AM -0000, Cory Smelosky wrote:
Hello all,
I've recently gotten my Cisco 7200 working. (by "recently" I mean within
the past hour...)
Brian, can you update the config generator and change Ethernet1/0 to
FastEthernet1/0 and push a new config?
Done!
Yup! Thanks!
marianne>ping 1.13
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte DECnet echos to atg 0 area.node 1.13, timeout is 5 seconds:
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 224/248/288 ms
Is "DECnet echo" Cisco-speak for Ethernet Loopback packets? Or MIRROR packets? Either way, one wonders why they felt it was necessary to pick their own off the wall names for these documented mechanisms.
paul
On Fri, 7 Jun 2013, Brian Hechinger wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 04:25:53AM -0000, Cory Smelosky wrote:
Hello all,
I've recently gotten my Cisco 7200 working. (by "recently" I mean within
the past hour...)
Brian, can you update the config generator and change Ethernet1/0 to
FastEthernet1/0 and push a new config?
Done!
Yup! Thanks!
marianne>ping 1.13
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte DECnet echos to atg 0 area.node 1.13, timeout is 5 seconds:
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 224/248/288 ms
I didn't even need to do anything! ;)
-brian
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Experiments
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 04:25:53AM -0000, Cory Smelosky wrote:
Hello all,
I've recently gotten my Cisco 7200 working. (by "recently" I mean within
the past hour...)
Brian, can you update the config generator and change Ethernet1/0 to
FastEthernet1/0 and push a new config?
Done!
-brian
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
<jg at jordi.guillaumes.name> wrote:
El 06/06/2013, a les 22:05, "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" <system at TMESIS.COM> va escriure:
Sadly HP never really listened to DoD security concerns and didn't upgrade V=
MS to address the items (like native PKI support) we had to move away from V=
MS since the vendor had no plans to fix.=20
Although PKI isn't particularly an OS issue.
Just as a sidenote, z/OS (to name a system government agencies usually love) does not have a "native PKI" either. It can be installed as a layered product, either from IBM (RACF) or from third parties (CA-TopSecret).
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
jg at jordi.guillaumes.name
HECnet: BITXOV::JGUILLAUMES
Hello!
Sadly yes. And the other problem is that the auditors who claim to be
responsible for security issues do not understand the roles of
mainframes, and of systems who run VMS. Or even native UNIX.
----
This does not explain why there are four odd looking entities breaking
and entering into systems in two different places.
-----
Gregg C Levine gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com
"This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again."
El 06/06/2013, a les 22:05, "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" <system at TMESIS.COM> va escriure:
Sadly HP never really listened to DoD security concerns and didn't upgrade V=
MS to address the items (like native PKI support) we had to move away from V=
MS since the vendor had no plans to fix.=20
Although PKI isn't particularly an OS issue.
Just as a sidenote, z/OS (to name a system government agencies usually love) does not have a "native PKI" either. It can be installed as a layered product, either from IBM (RACF) or from third parties (CA-TopSecret).
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
jg at jordi.guillaumes.name
HECnet: BITXOV::JGUILLAUMES
Michael Holmes <mholmes10 at hotmail.com> writes:
On Jun 6, 2013, at 8:19 AM, "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" <system at TMESIS.C=
OM> wrote:
Michael Holmes <mholmes10 at hotmail.com> writes:
=20
Damn!
=20
I work in federal govt and we have numerous (3 digits) VMS hosts world-wi=
de t=3D
hat never gave us any trouble (especially compared to windoze).=3D20
=20
Really? According to HP's Lorraine Bartlett VP BCS Marketing & Strategy w=
ho
gave a keynote at the recent OpenVMS Bootcamp in mid-March, there were les=
s
than 200 VMS customers and none were in Gov't. I, and those in attendance=
,
knew better. That figure must represent the largest VMS Itanium customers=
and HP only case about LARGE sales. I know of at least 100 sites with VMS=
Itanium boxes in the US and I am sure there are more world-wide. Itanium,=
not the first generation anyway, did not win the hearts of VMS afficionado=
s
happily running it on Alpha. IMO, it was not until recent blade comfigura=
-
tions that people started to move. Some are happy with their Alpha instal=
-
lations and were waiting for VMS in i4. So, HP created a self-fulfilling
prophecy.
=20
=20
That is BS.
Of course, and that's what I said.
I worked in DoD Military Health System and we had at least 101 h=
ost sites which we had to upgrade the big sites to Itanium (C7000 & blades) a=
s the alphas were end of life and we recycled some of the alphas as spares f=
or the smaller sites until they could be moved over to the smaller C3000 bla=
des setup.=20
When I left we were looking at potentially moving the application to run und=
er windows server, but it couldn't do clustering like VMS could.=20
Who can?
HP is missing a huge market in healthcare as the 3 major commercial electron=
ic health record systems all are run under MUMPS which runs great on VMS.=20=
Yup.
Sadly HP never really listened to DoD security concerns and didn't upgrade V=
MS to address the items (like native PKI support) we had to move away from V=
MS since the vendor had no plans to fix.=20
Although PKI isn't particularly an OS issue.
--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG
Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
On Jun 6, 2013, at 8:19 AM, "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" <system at TMESIS.COM> wrote:
Michael Holmes <mholmes10 at hotmail.com> writes:
Damn!
I work in federal govt and we have numerous (3 digits) VMS hosts world-wide t=
hat never gave us any trouble (especially compared to windoze).=20
Really? According to HP's Lorraine Bartlett VP BCS Marketing & Strategy who
gave a keynote at the recent OpenVMS Bootcamp in mid-March, there were less
than 200 VMS customers and none were in Gov't. I, and those in attendance,
knew better. That figure must represent the largest VMS Itanium customers
and HP only case about LARGE sales. I know of at least 100 sites with VMS
Itanium boxes in the US and I am sure there are more world-wide. Itanium,
not the first generation anyway, did not win the hearts of VMS afficionados
happily running it on Alpha. IMO, it was not until recent blade comfigura-
tions that people started to move. Some are happy with their Alpha instal-
lations and were waiting for VMS in i4. So, HP created a self-fulfilling
prophecy.
That is BS. I worked in DoD Military Health System and we had at least 101 host sites which we had to upgrade the big sites to Itanium (C7000 & blades) as the alphas were end of life and we recycled some of the alphas as spares for the smaller sites until they could be moved over to the smaller C3000 blades setup.
When I left we were looking at potentially moving the application to run under windows server, but it couldn't do clustering like VMS could.
HP is missing a huge market in healthcare as the 3 major commercial electronic health record systems all are run under MUMPS which runs great on VMS.
Sadly HP never really listened to DoD security concerns and didn't upgrade VMS to address the items (like native PKI support) we had to move away from VMS since the vendor had no plans to fix.
Guess well have to suffer more critical system failures in the future.=20
Hopelessly Pathetic, isn't it?
--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG
Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
On Thu, 6 Jun 2013, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 06/06/2013 11:54 AM, Ian McLaughlin wrote:
Now that HP have effectively discontinued VMS and associated hardware (I
know - a few years out, but once you announce a sunset date, it's
basically over) are we going to see hoarding of harware? Are Ebay prices
going to start going up?
I'm hoarding hardware already.
But then I've been doing that for thirty years! B-)
(I just got my first VMS-capable Itanium2 machine!)
If you end up with a surplus of Itanium machines, let me know. I'm looking for examples of many different architecture. Eventually I will compare performance between them somehow perhaps. ;)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Experiments
On Thu, 6 Jun 2013, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2013-06-06 10:53, Mark Benson wrote:
I wouldn't hold out hope for the Hobbyist program lasting much longer
than 2016 or at best the 2020 EOL.
Afraid you might be right. However, a pipe dream would be that HP
actually released all DEC-related stuff at that point. Finally shaking
RSX and other PDP-11 software free would be nice.
That would be VERY nice. ;)
Ultimately, we don't *need* it we just prefer working legitimately if we
can. How many people here have legit RSX-11 licenses and still use it as
Hobbyists anyway?
How about having legit license, and use it professionally? (Yes, we do
exist...)
Anyway, yeah, from a pure practical point of view, the licenses are not
really needed.
Johnny
Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 08:54:13AM +0100, Mark Benson wrote:
I cant say I'm exactly shocked. HP are 8n serious trouble and
are shedding stuff to try and stop sinking.
HP came out and did a "keynote" at the yearly company get together thing
my last workplace had. It was less of a keynote and more of a plea to
not abandon them. It was actually very sad.
I wonder when Hobbyist licenses will cease issuing...
Never, I hope. :/
-brian
--
Mark Benson
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Experiments
