"complaining"? I had thought my observations were something more along
lines of "bewailing". The difference? It's not that Tops-20 doesn't do
something, which would be complaining. It's that I don't have the
sources to do something about it. How about whining? 😁
Seriously, because I have monitor and CUSP sources, I have been able to
fix a lot of bugs in Tops-20's DECnet implementation and related
software and also add enhancements. What does "a lot" mean? By my
count, 74, so far. I was really getting on a roll before I fell into
the Kermit-20 NRT black hole.
You are, of course, entirely correct about the Tops-10/Tops-20's DECnet
implementation only supporting end-node and level-1 router, yet this
wasn't quite what I was getting at. What I had in mind was taking the
information that Tops-20 discards in the router HELLO message and
putting it into a table so that this area information could be queried.
It doesn't matter that there is no JSYS interface to query it with, I
can't update NCU to have a user interface.
The reason I've been thinking about areas is that I have been wondering
about implementing changes to make Tops-20 be a level two router. Only
having Phase II NCU to work with is what I would call an 'unfortunate'
hurdle.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 9/10/22 7:34 PM, Peter Lothberg wrote:
TommyT was complaining that he could not get area info from T10/T20 that's because it
can either be end-node or level-1 router, not level 2 router.