17 Jul
2025
17 Jul
'25
4:05 p.m.
On Jul 17, 2025, at 9:39 AM, Paul Koning
<paulkoning(a)comcast.net> wrote:
I found it in the VMS manuals, and they point to some RFCs. I'll read those.
paul
On Jul 16, 2025, at 6:42 PM, Johnny Billquist
<bqt(a)softjar.se> wrote:
On 2025-07-16 14:29, Paul Koning wrote:
Paul, any reason why you think DEC would have done the same thing Multinet did, which is
DDCMP inside TCP with 4 byte headers, two being length, and two just ignored?
As we've discussed plenty of times in the past, the Multinet solution is really a bad
back and abuse. And I've never heard anyone reporting to have connected a Phase V
node's DECnet-over-IP to a Multinet Phase IV node DECnet-over-IP.
It's not about the compatibility between the implementations of DECnet in the phases,
but about how you encapsulate the whole thing if you want to use TCP as the carrier...
Oh. I hadn't thought about two independent solutions to DECnet over TCP. Is the DEC
answer indeed different? If so, do you know where to find specs for it? On Jul
16, 2025, at 6:22 AM, Trevor Warwick <twarwick(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Decnet+ aka Phase V will talk to HECnet perfectly fine.
I set up my DECnet/VMS
Phase V node (x86) to talk to PyDECnet, over Ethernet. Works fine. I have not tried it
over Multinet/TCP but I would besurprised if that fails, there's nothing in the
Multinet "protocol" thatis Phase V dependent, obviously, and VMS is usually
pretty good about clean layering.