4 Nov
2018
4 Nov
'18
3:54 p.m.
On 2018-11-04 14:59, supratim sanyal wrote:
Hi Douglas,
Great, I will mark port 60004 as allocated to you.
One reason for TCP is it does not require Johnny to go change the IP
address on his end every time a residential ISP IP address changes.
Which is not maybe that relevant in a link between you two... The VMS
Multinet do not appear to be as flexible in configuring peers, so you
might need to restart if addresses change anyway. But yes, for the RSX
Multinet-compatible links, the active end can change IP address without
me having to do anything on my side. TCP also have the advantage to
better handle if packets might be dropped, which can be an issue over
long haul links, as well as better match what these Multinet links
pretend to be to DECnet, which are DDCMP links. But the VMS
implementation seems to be cheating in several ways, making it look
funny at times, so it might not matter much from that point.
Also, TCP is easier if you have firewalls or NAT. UDP can also be made
to work, but is usually a little more complicated here.
Does ?MCR NCP COPY KNOWN NODES FROM MIM TO BOTH? not
work to copy over
node db from MIM?
It should work for him, once he have MIM defined.
I also run a neat command file by Steve Davidson that
I found somewhere
(maybe on MIM or STRGTE) which I am attaching ? it runs on SYS$BATCH and
updates local node db automatically. The .XCOMX extension should be
.COM, psilobyte rejects .COM file attachments.
I could also mention that I have an automated system that sends mails
when I update the nodename database, in case anyone would want such a
thing. If you are creative, you set things up so that script is run
automatically when such a mail is received.
Johnny
Best,
Supratim
Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
Windows 10
*From: *Douglas Hall <mailto:dhall.hecnet at dhcl.co.uk>
*Sent: *Sunday, November 4, 2018 07:57
*To: *hecnet at Update.UU.SE <mailto:hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
*Subject: *Re: [HECnet] Multinet connection in UK
On Sun, 4 Nov 2018, at 11:19, supratim sanyal wrote:
If you wish you can run an experiment with IMPVAX (VA, USA); I have
heard trans-Atlantic loop latencies are not as bad as one might
think. TCP only, Something like this in DECNET-CIRCUITS.COM should work:
$ multinet set /decnet /remote=52.23.221.223 /port=60000
/device=tcpa0: /connect /tcp=connect /buffers=24
That looks to be working OK. It's very bursty to some locations, e.g.
BOPOHA, but connectivity is connectivity. Thanks! ?Out of interest, what
is reason for using TCP as the underlying transport protocol instead of
the default? ?I've configured the link with a reasonably high cost in
case I make another connection somewhere more local.
This is my first experience with DECnet over more than a few local
nodes, is there an easy way to get a full node list onto my systems?
This all takes me back a while. Last commercial VMS/DECnet systems I
used were back in 1994. ?I actually stumbled across hecnet whilst trying
to find out if anyone still used uucp for anything. I was the last
sysadmin of the UKNET uucp setup, then managed by PSINet before we
finally dismantled all that infrastructure in 1999.
Douglas
--
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