Perhaps a little off topic for the group in some ways...
Has anyone attended a Connect OpenVMS Webinar? This one is a bit late (early?!) for those of us in the States... but I'm always games for a late-night technical conference.
OpenVMS Application Modernization Series III
Software development environments on OpenVMS: Developing software employing latest technologies, including Open Source
http://connect-community.site-ym.com/events/event_details.asp?id=326729
Joe
Hello all,
I'm not sure what I've done...but since the move to a real 7200...DECnet has stopped working. ;)
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 = 220/261/292 ms
GEWT::B4$ set host mim
%SYSTEM-F-UNREACHABLE, remote node is not currently reachable
(takes awhile to time out)
The 7200 IS configured to be an area router, and I changed the MAC address to match 9.1023.
marianne#sh int fastethernet1/0
FastEthernet1/0 is up, line protocol is up
Hardware is i82543 (Livengood), address is aa00.0400.ff27 (bia 00d0.6353.881c)
NCP>sh node 9.1023
Node Volatile Summary as of 10-JUN-2013 01:29:42
Node State Active Delay Circuit Next node
Links
9.1023 reachable QNA-0 9.1023
marianne.gimme-sympathy.org (10.10.0.5) at aa:00:04:00:ff:27 [ether] on eth0
Any ideas? Everything looks to be in order...
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Experiments
On Fri, 7 Jun 2013, Ian McLaughlin wrote:
"Echos of DECnet" is one word for the box of legacy DEC networking hardware I have :)
That's 3 words, Ian!
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…
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Experiments
"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.
