9 Dec
2021
9 Dec
'21
1:09 p.m.
On 2021-12-09 08:29, Mark J. Blair wrote:
Hmm. Interesting. I know that if you only give one number on a phase IV
node, it will assume it's in the current area, or if area is sortof not
defined, then it's in area 1.
You seem to have it understand that it was in area 2. How did that happen?
It would suggest that you managed to correctly enter a full phase IV
address.
On Dec 8, 2021, at 11:18 PM, Supratim Sanyal
<supratim at riseup.net> wrote:
Looks like it. The lowest I could go so far is 31.31 (XLIV) @ 4.4. We should try 3.4+
with the key sometime.
I tried 3.5 with the license installed, and then upgraded it to 3.7 and tried again. It
asks for an address in the range 1..1023, but I didn't see any way to specify an area.
When I tried starting the network in any of them, I got errors like:
> $ @startnet
> %RUN-S-PROC_ID, identification of created process is 0001000E
> %OPCOM, 8-DEC-2021 18:33:36.97, message from user DECNET
> DECnet starting
> %NCP-I-NMLRSP, listener response - Invalid parameter value, Maximum address
> Executor node = 2.617 (PUGGLE)
>
> %RUN-S-PROC_ID, identification of created process is 0001000C
> %NCP-I-NMLRSP, listener response - Invalid parameter value, Maximum address
> Executor node = 2.617 (PUGGLE) In that case I had type in my 2.617 address without
paying enough attention to the prompt asking for a number in the range 1..1023. I got the
same kinds of errors after I reconfigured with an address of 617.
Yes, I would expect so. The error you get is something else, which don't
change because you use different areas...
4.0 was the first version that prompted me for a
regular Phase IV address, and it gave me errors like:
> %RUN-S-PROC_ID, identification of created process is 0000004A
> $
> %%%%%%%%%%% OPCOM 8-DEC-2021 19:23:45.49 %%%%%%%%%%%
> Message from user DECNET
> DECnet event 4.19, adjacency down, operator initiated
> From node 2.617 (PUGGLE), 8-DEC-2021 19:23:45.49
> Circuit UNA-0, Adjacent node address out of range
> Packet beginning = 0B020000AA000400BB0A024F0240000A
I'd guess it is the related to the error you got on 3.5 and 3.7. And
that seems to have come from a machine with the address 2.699.
I speculate that it was reacting poorly to traffic it
saw on my local network, between my router LABRDR and my nodes HUSKY and BULDOG which were
up?
2.699 seems to be GLDRTR, but I'm sure you got it for several hosts...
4.7 is working well, but I have not tried any other
versions between 4.0 and 4.7 yet.
I suspect you might get even 3.5 working. But you need to go into NCP
and change a thing.
At least with RSX, you have a parameter that tells which is the highest
node number it should handle, and if you see, or configure, a number
higher than that, you'll get some kind of error similar to what you have
described above.
In RSX, this is the EXECUTOR parameter MAXIMUM ADDRESS. Check if you
don't have that one, and what it's set to in 3.5, 3.7 and 4.0.
You might also want to check for MAXIMUM AREA while you're at it...
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol