[HECnet] Multinet peerings...?

-----Original Message----- From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner- hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Johnny Billquist Sent: 15 January 2016 02:42 To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Subject: Re: [HECnet] Multinet peerings...? On 2016-01-15 03:25, Brian Hechinger wrote: <Paul_Koning at Dell.com> wrote: >> >>

ethernet segments that are less geographically diverse. Put routers between them. That should solve most problems, no? Yes. This is actually just the traditional way networks are designed. Ethernet is a LAN - as in local. It's not designed for long haul connections. It only works because the internet today have pretty amazing capacity compared to the 80s. But to get a more traditional topology, we need the routers in between somehow - and the WAN links. The problem with that have been that much DECnet gear only supports various links that best would be described as arcane by todays standards, in addition to the ethernet. How many use X.25 nowadays? Or synchronous serial lines? Well, if you were running a Cisco box, you could tunnel DECnet over GRE. Not everyone have one of those. The other option more "generally" available was VMS machines running Multinet, as that supported DECnet links carried over IP. One option that is slowly becoming more and more plausible are specific routers, such as Pauls python router, and Rob Jarrats implementation.

I can now happily add another. I think I found the annoying bug in my Multinet-compatible DECnet driver for RSX, so now RSX can also haul long links over point-to-point instead of having to rely on the bridge. First link, between MIM and LEGATO is up, and looking stable. More coming, I hope. Steve, how about SG1? ;-) Peter, would you like a link or two between somewhere at your end and MIM as well? Maybe less useful, since we already have DIMMA that does the same. 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