On Feb 8, 2013, at 2:15 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2013-02-08 19:29, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 2013, at 12:48 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2013-02-08 15:54, Steve Davidson wrote:
Bob,
Why Phase-III?
I think it was an implication for the time period he was looking for. Phase IV would be too new. And phase II do not have MOP, as far as I know.
I think Phase II does have MOP, and it looks like Phase I does, also. Look in the revision history of the MOP spec. While the latest (Phase IV, V3.0.0) spec does not show the dates of the versions, the previous one (Phase III, V2.1.0, in document AA-K178A-TK) does. It mentions V1.1 was dated January 1976 and V2.0.0 was March 1978. That fits the dates for Phase I and Phase II respectively, I believe. And the revision history mentions a change to a download protocol message between V1.1 and V2.0, implying that download was part of the 1/1976 edition of MOP.
Interesting. Definitely more than I know. I only saw the mention that MOP (or atleast downline loading) was added in phase III on the Wikipedie page about DECnet. Which is a rather shaky source...
Fixed.
paul
On 2013-02-08 19:29, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 2013, at 12:48 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2013-02-08 15:54, Steve Davidson wrote:
Bob,
Why Phase-III?
I think it was an implication for the time period he was looking for. Phase IV would be too new. And phase II do not have MOP, as far as I know.
I think Phase II does have MOP, and it looks like Phase I does, also. Look in the revision history of the MOP spec. While the latest (Phase IV, V3.0.0) spec does not show the dates of the versions, the previous one (Phase III, V2.1.0, in document AA-K178A-TK) does. It mentions V1.1 was dated January 1976 and V2.0.0 was March 1978. That fits the dates for Phase I and Phase II respectively, I believe. And the revision history mentions a change to a download protocol message between V1.1 and V2.0, implying that download was part of the 1/1976 edition of MOP.
Interesting. Definitely more than I know. I only saw the mention that MOP (or atleast downline loading) was added in phase III on the Wikipedie page about DECnet. Which is a rather shaky source...
Johnny
On Feb 8, 2013, at 1:29 PM, <Paul_Koning at Dell.com>
wrote:
On Feb 8, 2013, at 12:48 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2013-02-08 15:54, Steve Davidson wrote:
Bob,
Why Phase-III?
I think it was an implication for the time period he was looking for. Phase IV would be too new. And phase II do not have MOP, as far as I know.
I think Phase II does have MOP, and it looks like Phase I does, also. Look in the revision history of the MOP spec. While the latest (Phase IV, V3.0.0) spec does not show the dates of the versions, the previous one (Phase III, V2.1.0, in document AA-K178A-TK) does. It mentions V1.1 was dated January 1976 and V2.0.0 was March 1978. That fits the dates for Phase I and Phase II respectively, I believe. And the revision history mentions a change to a download protocol message between V1.1 and V2.0, implying that download was part of the 1/1976 edition of MOP.
More data: the Phase II MOP spec is here: http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/www.computer.museum.uq.edu.au/pdf/AA-D60… . Neat, I've never seen that document before...
(Phase II DAP, NSP, and DDCMP specs can also be found there)
paul
On Feb 8, 2013, at 12:48 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2013-02-08 15:54, Steve Davidson wrote:
Bob,
Why Phase-III?
I think it was an implication for the time period he was looking for. Phase IV would be too new. And phase II do not have MOP, as far as I know.
I think Phase II does have MOP, and it looks like Phase I does, also. Look in the revision history of the MOP spec. While the latest (Phase IV, V3.0.0) spec does not show the dates of the versions, the previous one (Phase III, V2.1.0, in document AA-K178A-TK) does. It mentions V1.1 was dated January 1976 and V2.0.0 was March 1978. That fits the dates for Phase I and Phase II respectively, I believe. And the revision history mentions a change to a download protocol message between V1.1 and V2.0, implying that download was part of the 1/1976 edition of MOP.
paul
On 2013-02-08 15:54, Steve Davidson wrote:
Bob,
Why Phase-III?
I think it was an implication for the time period he was looking for. Phase IV would be too new. And phase II do not have MOP, as far as I know.
Johnny
-Steve
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE]
*On Behalf Of *Bob Armstrong
*Sent:* Wednesday, February 06, 2013 22:10
*To:* hecnet at Update.UU.SE
*Subject:* [HECnet] DECnet Phase-III anywhere?
I have a need to set up a PDP-11 running DECnet Phase-III,
preferably under RSX11M although I d take RSTS in a pinch. Not
RT-11. Have any of the install tapes or manuals been archived
online? Could anybody give me a hint or pointer?
I m not even sure exactly which version of RSX I m looking for.
I think Phase-III was first released around 1980-81, but I m not
even sure of that.
Thanks,
Bob
Bob,
Why Phase-III?
-Steve
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Bob Armstrong
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 22:10
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: [HECnet] DECnet Phase-III anywhere?
I have a need to set up a PDP-11 running DECnet Phase-III, preferably under RSX11M although I d take RSTS in a pinch. Not RT-11. Have any of the install tapes or manuals been archived online? Could anybody give me a hint or pointer?
I m not even sure exactly which version of RSX I m looking for. I think Phase-III was first released around 1980-81, but I m not even sure of that.
Thanks,
Bob
On 02/07/2013 01:41 PM, Ian McLaughlin wrote:
I'm running mrtg on my tunnels at this page:
http://monitor.platinum.net/hecnet
I can add others if you want. It's not that difficult.
Nice setup!
I use Cacti for monitoring; it too is a front end for RRDTool.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
The problem there is that it's not that simple. It's not like an LDAP schema where the OIDs are right in the file. MIBs do all sorts of weird referential stuff. If you look at the cisco decnet mib file there aren't actually any OIDs in it.
-brian
On 2/7/2013 12:29 PM, Ian McLaughlin wrote:
Perhaps reading the MIB file might give you a clue to the oid? It's just a text file.
Ian
On 2013-02-07, at 9:28 AM, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
I'll have to take another look at that, didn't have much luck with that before.
I shouldn't need the MIB files if anyone actually knew the OIDs for what I need to fetch. That's how I do the tftp load thing. I don't have MIBs and don't want/need them. I just use the numeric OIDs.
-brian
On 2/7/2013 12:25 PM, Ian McLaughlin wrote:
Brian,
I *think* you have to load the Cisco Decnet MIB in to your local machine before snmpwalk will walk the Decnet portion. I found a MIB from Cisco but was unable to get it loaded on my Linux box, so I gave up. Not that I tried really hard, though.
Ian
On 2013-02-07, at 9:23 AM, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
On 2/7/2013 12:04 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
On 7 Feb 2013, at 12:03, Ian McLaughlin<ian at platinum.net> wrote:
Brian,
I just wanted to take a moment to say thank you for your hard work on this! The level of automation is incredible. Now we just have to get Peter on board:)
I second this. Thank you.
Thank you very much guys. This has been amazingly fun to do and quite a learning experience as well. I've done stuff I've never had to do before. I learned new things! :)
I think that you are now the perfect source of information to assist in the Hecnet mapping project - at least for the Cisco part.
I think he is as well.;)
That and I wrote the NCP based mapping code, so yeah, I might just be the right guy. :)
Looking at an snmpwalk of my router I'm just not seeing anything DECnet in any way. I think I'm going to have to resort to other options (all of which had issues of some sort, so we'll see what we come up with).
If anyone knows what I should be looking at in SNMP or what I need to do to be able to get DECnet info out of SNMP on a cisco, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. :)
-brian
---
Filter service subscribers can train this email as spam or not-spam here: http://my.email-as.net/spamham/cgi-bin/learn.pl?messageid=1C921C6C714B11E28…
---
Filter service subscribers can train this email as spam or not-spam here: http://my.email-as.net/spamham/cgi-bin/learn.pl?messageid=DC8AD0A4714B11E28…
I'm running mrtg on my tunnels at this page:
http://monitor.platinum.net/hecnet
I can add others if you want. It's not that difficult.
Ian
On 2013-02-07, at 10:37 AM, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
On 02/07/2013 12:02 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
And now it works perfectly.
Cool.;)
Now all we need are charts. As one can NEVER have enough
charts...
What do you want charts of? I'm sure we can do that. :)
Per-tunnel traffic graphs could be fun. ;)
I would very much like to see these. I can likely already do them for
my own router; I'm running Cacti here. It is a very busy day here but I
might be able to do some stuff with that later to see how it goes. It'd
be looking at raw interface counters, but since those particular tunnels
only carry DECnet traffic that should be fine.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
---
Filter service subscribers can train this email as spam or not-spam here: http://my.email-as.net/spamham/cgi-bin/learn.pl?messageid=79170704715511E28…
On 02/07/2013 12:02 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
And now it works perfectly.
Cool.;)
Now all we need are charts. As one can NEVER have enough
charts...
What do you want charts of? I'm sure we can do that. :)
Per-tunnel traffic graphs could be fun. ;)
I would very much like to see these. I can likely already do them for
my own router; I'm running Cacti here. It is a very busy day here but I
might be able to do some stuff with that later to see how it goes. It'd
be looking at raw interface counters, but since those particular tunnels
only carry DECnet traffic that should be fine.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
