29 Jun
2019
29 Jun
'19
4:03 a.m.
On 6/28/19 6:40 PM, Keith Halewood wrote:
Multinet?s network interface is a bit of a mish-mash
for my mind. I have
a recollection of using CMUTEK TCP/IP under VAX/VMS several ?centuries?
ago and that was a pure $QIO(W)-based interface, wonderfully
straightforward. Multinet offers a $QIO interface? and then ruins it by
insisting on socket-like data structures for establishing connections ?
yuck.
I've noticed this as well. While I love that we have Multinet, I do
have pretty fond memories of CMU-TEK IP and its more "VMS-like" API. I
ran CMU-TEK at a US Gov't-related facility under VMS 5.1 and 5.5 when I
was a VMS admin a very long time ago. It worked great and the API was good.
Multinet is ok, but the whole thing just appears to be a port of a BSD
UNIX network stack and all of the relevant applications to VMS. I've
not looked under the hood (I install Multinet on the machines at the
museum to ssh and ftp around, not to dig into its internals) but it sure
looks that way. While I'm fine with that approach in general, and I'm a
dyed-in-the-wool UNIX guy, it really doesn't feel very "VMSy" to me.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA