On 25 Dec 2012, at 15:01, "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" <system at TMESIS.COM> wrote: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> writes: On 25 Dec 2012, at 14:55, "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" = <system at TMESIS.COM> wrote: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> writes:=20 >=20 >>=20 >> On 25 Dec 2012, at 14:28, sampsa at mac.com wrote:=20 >>=20 >>> =3D20 > On 25 Dec 2012, at 21:27, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote: = >=3D20 >>>> =3D20 >> On 25 Dec 2012, at 14:25, sampsa at mac.com wrote: >>=3D20 = >>> >> 46.65.175.115 (gvax.sampsa.com) >>>=3D20 >>> Circuit is up on my end. >>>> =3D20 >> Okay. it'll be a bit for me=3D85I forgot his router = password and >> I need =3D an area for this. ;) >=3D20 > Well, ask Johnny for an area = then - >> and get your nodes into the DB :)=20 >>=20 >> Will it be a problem that all of these systems are DECnet-OSI?=20 >=20 > Clustering does not depend on DECnet or TCP/IP! Really? I thought clustering over ethernet used DECnet. Clustering over ethernet uses ethernet phsy/data-link and adds its own network layer. Cluster communications over ethernet (LAVC) begin early in VMS long before DECnet or TCP/IP are ever started. Recent versions of VMS for Alphas and Itanium do have a cluster-over-IP option but it's not a requirement to cluster over ethernet. Ah. Is any sort of encryption done for cluster-over-IP? -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.