3 Apr
2019
3 Apr
'19
11:42 p.m.
Folks,
Do I still need a fixed IP address to have a node on HECNET? I can't see
anything on the HECNET web site.
Dave Wade
G4UGM & EA7KAE
4 Apr
4 Apr
12:08 a.m.
I would imagine if you?re initiating the connection upstream over TCP then probably not.
Keith
On 3 Apr 2019, at 22:43, Dave Wade <dave.g4ugm at gmail.com<mailto:dave.g4ugm at
gmail.com>> wrote:
Folks,
Do I still need a fixed IP address to have a node on HECNET? I can?t see anything on the
HECNET web site.
Dave Wade
G4UGM & EA7KAE
1:47 a.m.
On 2019-04-03 23:42, Dave Wade wrote:
Folks,
Do I still need a fixed IP address to have a node on HECNET? I can?t see
anything on the HECNET web site.
No you don't. But it do depend on how you connect.
RSX mulitnet links using TCP handles if you have a dynamic IP address
just fine.
VMS multinet links I think not, and the bridge certainly do not.
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
8:42 a.m.
Johnny,
As I only have VMS systems, and a dynamic IP looks like I am stuck for a
while.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE> On
Behalf Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 00:48
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
On 2019-04-03 23:42, Dave Wade wrote:
Folks,
Do I still need a fixed IP address to have a node on HECNET? I can't
see anything on the HECNET web site.
No you don't. But it do depend on how you connect.
RSX mulitnet links using TCP handles if you have a dynamic IP address just
fine.
VMS multinet links I think not, and the bridge certainly do not.
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
9:13 a.m.
Not necessarily. What you need is an RSX system to peer with.
Unfortunately, I think I am having enough connections to MIM to maybe
not be able to hook you up there. But maybe there is someone else
around? Also, maybe someone a bit closer to you...?
Where are you located? And is there someone else with an RSX system
willing to peer?
Oh, and you'd need to install Multinet on your VMS system, Dave.
Johnny
On 2019-04-04 08:42, Dave Wade wrote:
Johnny,
As I only have VMS systems, and a dynamic IP looks like I am stuck for a
while.
Dave
--
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
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE> On
Behalf Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 00:48
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
On 2019-04-03 23:42, Dave Wade wrote:
Folks,
Do I still need a fixed IP address to have a node on HECNET? I can't
see anything on the HECNET web site.
No you don't. But it do depend on how you connect.
RSX mulitnet links using TCP handles if you have a dynamic IP address just
fine.
VMS multinet links I think not, and the bridge certainly do not.
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
9:32 a.m.
Johnny,
OK I am in Manchester, England, quite close to Rob Jarrett. Some of my VAXES came from
him.
I have MULTINET TCPIP installed on one of the VAXES because I couldn't get TN3270 to
my P390 working.
My VMS never was very good so please excuse the idiot questions.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE> On
Behalf Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 08:14
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
Not necessarily. What you need is an RSX system to peer with.
Unfortunately, I think I am having enough connections to MIM to maybe not
be able to hook you up there. But maybe there is someone else around?
Also, maybe someone a bit closer to you...?
Where are you located? And is there someone else with an RSX system
willing to peer?
Oh, and you'd need to install Multinet on your VMS system, Dave.
Johnny
On 2019-04-04 08:42, Dave Wade wrote:
--
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
Johnny,
As I only have VMS systems, and a dynamic IP looks like I am stuck
for a while.
Dave
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
On
Behalf
Of Johnny
Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 00:48
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
On 2019-04-03 23:42, Dave Wade wrote:
Folks,
Do I still need a fixed IP address to have a node on HECNET? I can't
see anything on the HECNET web site.
No you don't. But it do depend on how you connect.
RSX mulitnet links using TCP handles if you have a dynamic IP address
just fine.
VMS multinet links I think not, and the bridge certainly do not.
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
12:12 p.m.
Hi,
I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to it on VAX Multinet.
UDP is a different matter.
For example, there's a listener device set up with a 1.1.1.1 address on DUNE here.
PIVAX0 connects to it from a completely different address. I use access controls on the
router to restrict just who is allowed to connect to it.
If you want I can set up another incoming line/circuit and you can connect to it. I'm
in area 29 FYI.
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Dave
Wade
Sent: 04 April 2019 08:32
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: RE: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
Johnny,
OK I am in Manchester, England, quite close to Rob Jarrett. Some of my VAXES came from
him.
I have MULTINET TCPIP installed on one of the VAXES because I couldn't get TN3270 to
my P390 working.
My VMS never was very good so please excuse the idiot questions.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE> On Behalf
Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 08:14
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
Not necessarily. What you need is an RSX system to peer with.
Unfortunately, I think I am having enough connections to MIM to maybe
not be able to hook you up there. But maybe there is someone else around?
Also, maybe someone a bit closer to you...?
Where are you located? And is there someone else with an RSX system
willing to peer?
Oh, and you'd need to install Multinet on your VMS system, Dave.
Johnny
On 2019-04-04 08:42, Dave Wade wrote:
--
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
Johnny,
As I only have VMS systems, and a dynamic IP looks like I am stuck
for a while.
Dave
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
On
Behalf
Of Johnny
Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 00:48
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
On 2019-04-03 23:42, Dave Wade wrote:
Folks,
Do I still need a fixed IP address to have a node on HECNET? I
can't see anything on the HECNET web site.
No you don't. But it do depend on how you connect.
RSX mulitnet links using TCP handles if you have a dynamic IP
address just fine.
VMS multinet links I think not, and the bridge certainly do not.
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 
1:53 p.m.
On 4/4/19 6:12 AM, Keith Halewood wrote:
Hi,
I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to it on VAX
Multinet. UDP is a different matter.
For example, there's a listener device set up with a 1.1.1.1 address on DUNE here.
PIVAX0 connects to it from a completely different address. I use access controls on the
router to restrict just who is allowed to connect to it.
If you want I can set up another incoming line/circuit and you can connect to it. I'm
in area 29 FYI.
I have listeners waiting on 0.0.0.0. Yes, MULTINET does not seem to care
what address connections come in from. For example:
$ multinet set /decnet /remote=0.0.0.0 /port=60005 /device=tcpa6:
/tcp=listen /buffers=24
Watching this thread with interest, I would like to know too if dynamic
IP clients work transparently with MULTINET/VMS.
Supratim
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of
Dave Wade
Sent: 04 April 2019 08:32
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: RE: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
Johnny,
OK I am in Manchester, England, quite close to Rob Jarrett. Some of my VAXES came from
him.
I have MULTINET TCPIP installed on one of the VAXES because I couldn't get TN3270
to my P390 working.
My VMS never was very good so please excuse the idiot questions.
Dave
--
Sent from a Compaq CQ61 running Linux Mint Tessa
-
Ain't got no cash, ain't got no style
Ain't got no gal to make you smile
Don't worry, be happy
- Bobby McFerrin
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE> On Behalf
Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 08:14
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
Not necessarily. What you need is an RSX system to peer with.
Unfortunately, I think I am having enough connections to MIM to maybe
not be able to hook you up there. But maybe there is someone else around?
Also, maybe someone a bit closer to you...?
Where are you located? And is there someone else with an RSX system
willing to peer?
Oh, and you'd need to install Multinet on your VMS system, Dave.
Johnny
On 2019-04-04 08:42, Dave Wade wrote:
--
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
Johnny,
As I only have VMS systems, and a dynamic IP looks like I am stuck
for a while.
Dave
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
On
Behalf
Of Johnny
Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 00:48
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
On 2019-04-03 23:42, Dave Wade wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Do I still need a fixed IP address to have a node on HECNET? I
> can't see anything on the HECNET web site.
No you don't. But it do depend on how you connect.
RSX mulitnet links using TCP handles if you have a dynamic IP
address just fine.
VMS multinet links I think not, and the bridge certainly do not.
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
2:03 p.m.
Hi all,
I have an unused VM running here in Austria. It has a fixed IP. When there is a need for I
could spin up a SimH instance with RSX and let it play the router game....
Regards Wolfgang.
________________________________
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE> on behalf of
Supratim Sanyal <supratim at riseup.net>
Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2019 1:53:44 PM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
On 4/4/19 6:12 AM, Keith Halewood wrote:
Hi,
I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to it on VAX
Multinet. UDP is a different matter.
For example, there's a listener device set up with a 1.1.1.1 address on DUNE here.
PIVAX0 connects to it from a completely different address. I use access controls on the
router to restrict just who is allowed to connect to it.
If you want I can set up another incoming line/circuit and you can connect to it. I'm
in area 29 FYI.
I have listeners waiting on 0.0.0.0. Yes, MULTINET does not seem to care
what address connections come in from. For example:
$ multinet set /decnet /remote=0.0.0.0 /port=60005 /device=tcpa6:
/tcp=listen /buffers=24
Watching this thread with interest, I would like to know too if dynamic
IP clients work transparently with MULTINET/VMS.
Supratim
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of
Dave Wade
Sent: 04 April 2019 08:32
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: RE: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
Johnny,
OK I am in Manchester, England, quite close to Rob Jarrett. Some of my VAXES came from
him.
I have MULTINET TCPIP installed on one of the VAXES because I couldn't get TN3270
to my P390 working.
My VMS never was very good so please excuse the idiot questions.
Dave
--
Sent from a Compaq CQ61 running Linux Mint Tessa
-
Ain't got no cash, ain't got no style
Ain't got no gal to make you smile
Don't worry, be happy
- Bobby McFerrin
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE> On Behalf
Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 08:14
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
Not necessarily. What you need is an RSX system to peer with.
Unfortunately, I think I am having enough connections to MIM to maybe
not be able to hook you up there. But maybe there is someone else around?
Also, maybe someone a bit closer to you...?
Where are you located? And is there someone else with an RSX system
willing to peer?
Oh, and you'd need to install Multinet on your VMS system, Dave.
Johnny
On 2019-04-04 08:42, Dave Wade wrote:
--
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
Johnny,
As I only have VMS systems, and a dynamic IP looks like I am stuck
for a while.
Dave
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
On
Behalf
Of Johnny
Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 00:48
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
On 2019-04-03 23:42, Dave Wade wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Do I still need a fixed IP address to have a node on HECNET? I
> can't see anything on the HECNET web site.
No you don't. But it do depend on how you connect.
RSX mulitnet links using TCP handles if you have a dynamic IP
address just fine.
VMS multinet links I think not, and the bridge certainly do not.
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
3:28 p.m.
On Apr 4, 2019, at 7:53 AM, Supratim Sanyal
<supratim at riseup.net> wrote:
On 4/4/19 6:12 AM, Keith Halewood wrote:
Does that mean anyone can connect to HECnet without any authentication? Or is DECnet node
init authentication used?
"Security by obscurity" only goes so far. Is it good enough for HECnet?
paul
Hi,
I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to it on VAX
Multinet. UDP is a different matter.
For example, there's a listener device set up with a 1.1.1.1 address on DUNE here.
PIVAX0 connects to it from a completely different address. I use access controls on the
router to restrict just who is allowed to connect to it.
If you want I can set up another incoming line/circuit and you can connect to it. I'm
in area 29 FYI.
I have listeners waiting on 0.0.0.0. Yes, MULTINET does not seem to care what address
connections come in from.
4:16 p.m.
On 4/4/2019 09:28, Paul Koning wrote:
Good point. If a TCP-x-y circuit is on, yes - anyone can establish a
connection to the corresponding port. I keep my unused circuits off
until someone wants to connect; not sure what others do.
GRE tunnels are a bit safer since they need a static IP address for both
ends.
This begs for a DECnet honeypot to be put up on the internet - could be
interesting to observe who is establishing DECnet connections over
MULTINET from where :)
Supratim
On Apr 4, 2019, at 7:53 AM, Supratim Sanyal
<supratim at riseup.net> wrote:
On 4/4/19 6:12 AM, Keith Halewood wrote:
Does that mean anyone can connect to HECnet without any authentication? Or is DECnet
node init authentication used?
"Security by obscurity" only goes so far. Is it good enough for HECnet?
paul
Hi,
I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to it on VAX
Multinet. UDP is a different matter.
For example, there's a listener device set up with a 1.1.1.1 address on DUNE here.
PIVAX0 connects to it from a completely different address. I use access controls on the
router to restrict just who is allowed to connect to it.
If you want I can set up another incoming line/circuit and you can connect to it. I'm
in area 29 FYI.
I have listeners waiting on 0.0.0.0. Yes, MULTINET does not seem to care what address
connections come in from.
5 Apr
5 Apr
12:32 a.m.
On 2019-04-04 15:28, Paul Koning wrote:
So far that's mostly what we have, yes.
I have from time to time considered maybe adding a password on the link,
as DECnet do support that.
But so far, there has never been a single instance of someone actually
trying to connect some unknown node with DECnet on any link of mine. But
it is most likely just because pretty much any remote script-kid just
have no clue that DECnet even exists, what to do with it, or anything else.
Also, the worst I think anyone could do would just be disrupting DECnet.
But maybe someone else can think of anything else potentially
interesting someone could do by hijacking a circuit.
My biggest issue with those link passwords in RSX is that I think I can
only have one password, and it will be applied to all links. And I also
think that maybe I had to turn it on on all links if I turn it on on any.
But if people are willing to experiment some, we could test enabling it.
For the bridge, though, it requires that both ends are known. No
wildcard connections allowed.
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
On Apr 4, 2019, at 7:53 AM, Supratim Sanyal
<supratim at riseup.net> wrote:
On 4/4/19 6:12 AM, Keith Halewood wrote:
Does that mean anyone can connect to HECnet without any authentication? Or is DECnet
node init authentication used?
"Security by obscurity" only goes so far. Is it good enough for HECnet?
Hi,
I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to it on VAX
Multinet. UDP is a different matter.
For example, there's a listener device set up with a 1.1.1.1 address on DUNE here.
PIVAX0 connects to it from a completely different address. I use access controls on the
router to restrict just who is allowed to connect to it.
If you want I can set up another incoming line/circuit and you can connect to it. I'm
in area 29 FYI.
I have listeners waiting on 0.0.0.0. Yes, MULTINET does not seem to care what address
connections come in from.
2:03 a.m.
On Apr 4, 2019, at 6:32 PM, Johnny Billquist <bqt
at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2019-04-04 15:28, Paul Koning wrote:
So far that's mostly what we have, yes.
I have from time to time considered maybe adding a password on the link, as DECnet do
support that.
But so far, there has never been a single instance of someone actually trying to connect
some unknown node with DECnet on any link of mine. But it is most likely just because
pretty much any remote script-kid just have no clue that DECnet even exists, what to do
with it, or anything else.
Also, the worst I think anyone could do would just be disrupting DECnet. But maybe
someone else can think of anything else potentially interesting someone could do by
hijacking a circuit.
The worst you could do is what was done with BGP in the past: create a route diversion
that sends a pile of the traffic to a rogue router. Most of that traffic would not be all
that interesting, I suppose.
On Apr 4,
2019, at 7:53 AM, Supratim Sanyal <supratim at riseup.net> wrote:
On 4/4/19 6:12 AM, Keith Halewood wrote:
Does that mean anyone can connect to HECnet without any
authentication? Or is DECnet node init authentication used?
"Security by obscurity" only goes so far. Is it good enough for HECnet? Hi,
I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to it on VAX
Multinet. UDP is a different matter.
For example, there's a listener device set up with a 1.1.1.1 address on DUNE here.
PIVAX0 connects to it from a completely different address. I use access controls on the
router to restrict just who is allowed to connect to it.
If you want I can set up another incoming line/circuit and you can connect to it. I'm
in area 29 FYI.
I have listeners waiting on 0.0.0.0. Yes, MULTINET does not seem to care what address
connections come in from. My biggest issue with those link passwords in RSX is
that I think I can only have one password, and it will be applied to all links. And I also
think that maybe I had to turn it on on all links if I turn it on on any.
But if people are willing to experiment some, we could test enabling it.
For RSTS, the password to use is a node attribute, so you specify what password to send to
and expect from a given claimed neighbor node. (RSTS doesn't support Multinet or GRE,
though -- but it does support DDCMP which is a fine way to offer point to point links over
TCP.) And of course for routers we build we can make the flexibility whatever we care to
code.
paul
3:32 a.m.
I can configure my system to accept a connection from a host with a dynamic address since
I can limit the port to the range of possible addresses instead of opening it to the
world. I would probably want to configure the circuit to use a routing initialization
password, however. Let me know if interested.
Mark Berryman
On Apr 4, 2019, at 6:03 PM, Paul Koning <paulkoning
at comcast.net> wrote:
On Apr 4, 2019, at 6:32 PM, Johnny Billquist
<bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2019-04-04 15:28, Paul Koning wrote:
So far that's mostly what we have, yes.
I have from time to time considered maybe adding a password on the link, as DECnet do
support that.
But so far, there has never been a single instance of someone actually trying to connect
some unknown node with DECnet on any link of mine. But it is most likely just because
pretty much any remote script-kid just have no clue that DECnet even exists, what to do
with it, or anything else.
Also, the worst I think anyone could do would just be disrupting DECnet. But maybe
someone else can think of anything else potentially interesting someone could do by
hijacking a circuit.
The worst you could do is what was done with BGP in the past: create a route diversion
that sends a pile of the traffic to a rogue router. Most of that traffic would not be all
that interesting, I suppose.
On Apr 4,
2019, at 7:53 AM, Supratim Sanyal <supratim at riseup.net> wrote:
On 4/4/19 6:12 AM, Keith Halewood wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to it on VAX
Multinet. UDP is a different matter.
> For example, there's a listener device set up with a 1.1.1.1 address on DUNE
here. PIVAX0 connects to it from a completely different address. I use access controls on
the router to restrict just who is allowed to connect to it.
> If you want I can set up another incoming line/circuit and you can connect to it.
I'm in area 29 FYI.
I have listeners waiting on 0.0.0.0. Yes, MULTINET does not seem to care what address
connections come in from.
Does that mean anyone can connect to HECnet without any
authentication? Or is DECnet node init authentication used?
"Security by obscurity" only goes so far. Is it good enough for HECnet? My biggest issue with those link passwords in RSX
is that I think I can only have one password, and it will be applied to all links. And I
also think that maybe I had to turn it on on all links if I turn it on on any.
But if people are willing to experiment some, we could test enabling it.
For RSTS, the password to use is a node attribute, so you specify what password to send
to and expect from a given claimed neighbor node. (RSTS doesn't support Multinet or
GRE, though -- but it does support DDCMP which is a fine way to offer point to point links
over TCP.) And of course for routers we build we can make the flexibility whatever we
care to code.
paul
8:18 p.m.
Hi,
This is a partial repeat of another message addressed to individuals.
Sorry I've been incommunicado. To cut a long story short, a car crashed into our local
exchange and completely demolished it. Our internet routing failed over to 4G (dynamically
allocated IP address ironically) so our source IP addresses have changed. This should not
have affected email because we have failover there too. Due to a slight misconfiguration,
this didn't happen properly. I've only just noticed with a whole load of messages
bouncing back to me from our email server.
So, as a result, at least until end of Sunday, I won't be able to accept incoming
DECnet over TCP connections to our fixed addresses. I notice that area 46 is connected via
31. PIVAX0 on 29.200 is currently connectionless though.
Incidentally, gmail doesn't seem to care about SPF configuration (or is yet to see my
updated value) and so is treating mail to it from me via a backup route as spam and
blocking it. This may fix itself shortly.
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of
Johnny Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 23:32
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
On 2019-04-04 15:28, Paul Koning wrote:
So far that's mostly what we have, yes.
I have from time to time considered maybe adding a password on the link, as DECnet do
support that.
But so far, there has never been a single instance of someone actually trying to connect
some unknown node with DECnet on any link of mine. But it is most likely just because
pretty much any remote script-kid just have no clue that DECnet even exists, what to do
with it, or anything else.
Also, the worst I think anyone could do would just be disrupting DECnet.
But maybe someone else can think of anything else potentially interesting someone could do
by hijacking a circuit.
My biggest issue with those link passwords in RSX is that I think I can only have one
password, and it will be applied to all links. And I also think that maybe I had to turn
it on on all links if I turn it on on any.
But if people are willing to experiment some, we could test enabling it.
For the bridge, though, it requires that both ends are known. No wildcard connections
allowed.
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
On Apr 4, 2019, at 7:53 AM, Supratim Sanyal
<supratim at riseup.net> wrote:
On 4/4/19 6:12 AM, Keith Halewood wrote:
Does that mean anyone can connect to HECnet without any authentication? Or is DECnet
node init authentication used?
"Security by obscurity" only goes so far. Is it good enough for HECnet?
Hi,
I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to it on VAX
Multinet. UDP is a different matter.
For example, there's a listener device set up with a 1.1.1.1 address on DUNE here.
PIVAX0 connects to it from a completely different address. I use access controls on the
router to restrict just who is allowed to connect to it.
If you want I can set up another incoming line/circuit and you can connect to it. I'm
in area 29 FYI.
I have listeners waiting on 0.0.0.0. Yes, MULTINET does not seem to care what address
connections come in from.
6 Apr
6 Apr
12:28 a.m.
You do realize that DUNE connected right back from your new IP address with no
intervention needed at least on IMPVAX, don't you? Which would be encouraging news for
Dave's original concern with dynamic IPs.
Supratim
On Apr 5, 2019, at 2:18 PM, Keith Halewood
<Keith.Halewood at pitbulluk.org> wrote:
Hi,
This is a partial repeat of another message addressed to individuals.
Sorry I've been incommunicado. To cut a long story short, a car crashed into our
local exchange and completely demolished it. Our internet routing failed over to 4G
(dynamically allocated IP address ironically) so our source IP addresses have changed.
This should not have affected email because we have failover there too. Due to a slight
misconfiguration, this didn't happen properly. I've only just noticed with a whole
load of messages bouncing back to me from our email server.
So, as a result, at least until end of Sunday, I won't be able to accept incoming
DECnet over TCP connections to our fixed addresses. I notice that area 46 is connected via
31. PIVAX0 on 29.200 is currently connectionless though.
Incidentally, gmail doesn't seem to care about SPF configuration (or is yet to see my
updated value) and so is treating mail to it from me via a backup route as spam and
blocking it. This may fix itself shortly.
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of
Johnny Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 23:32
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
On 2019-04-04 15:28, Paul Koning wrote:
So far that's mostly what we have, yes.
I have from time to time considered maybe adding a password on the link, as DECnet do
support that.
But so far, there has never been a single instance of someone actually trying to connect
some unknown node with DECnet on any link of mine. But it is most likely just because
pretty much any remote script-kid just have no clue that DECnet even exists, what to do
with it, or anything else.
Also, the worst I think anyone could do would just be disrupting DECnet.
But maybe someone else can think of anything else potentially interesting someone could
do by hijacking a circuit.
My biggest issue with those link passwords in RSX is that I think I can only have one
password, and it will be applied to all links. And I also think that maybe I had to turn
it on on all links if I turn it on on any.
But if people are willing to experiment some, we could test enabling it.
For the bridge, though, it requires that both ends are known. No wildcard connections
allowed.
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 On Apr 4, 2019, at 7:53 AM, Supratim Sanyal
<supratim at riseup.net> wrote:
On 4/4/19 6:12 AM, Keith Halewood wrote:
Does that mean anyone can connect to HECnet without any authentication? Or is DECnet
node init authentication used?
"Security by obscurity" only goes so far. Is it good enough for HECnet? Hi,
I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to it on VAX
Multinet. UDP is a different matter.
For example, there's a listener device set up with a 1.1.1.1 address on DUNE here.
PIVAX0 connects to it from a completely different address. I use access controls on the
router to restrict just who is allowed to connect to it.
If you want I can set up another incoming line/circuit and you can connect to it. I'm
in area 29 FYI.
I have listeners waiting on 0.0.0.0. Yes, MULTINET does not seem to care what address
connections come in from.
9:44 a.m.
I know :)
I think the 'other' endpoint address is only needed for UDP circuits.
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of
Supratim Sanyal
Sent: 05 April 2019 23:28
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
You do realize that DUNE connected right back from your new IP address with no
intervention needed at least on IMPVAX, don't you? Which would be encouraging news for
Dave's original concern with dynamic IPs.
Supratim
On Apr 5, 2019, at 2:18 PM, Keith Halewood
<Keith.Halewood at pitbulluk.org> wrote:
Hi,
This is a partial repeat of another message addressed to individuals.
Sorry I've been incommunicado. To cut a long story short, a car crashed into our
local exchange and completely demolished it. Our internet routing failed over to 4G
(dynamically allocated IP address ironically) so our source IP addresses have changed.
This should not have affected email because we have failover there too. Due to a slight
misconfiguration, this didn't happen properly. I've only just noticed with a whole
load of messages bouncing back to me from our email server.
So, as a result, at least until end of Sunday, I won't be able to accept incoming
DECnet over TCP connections to our fixed addresses. I notice that area 46 is connected via
31. PIVAX0 on 29.200 is currently connectionless though.
Incidentally, gmail doesn't seem to care about SPF configuration (or is yet to see my
updated value) and so is treating mail to it from me via a backup route as spam and
blocking it. This may fix itself shortly.
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of
Johnny Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 23:32
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
On 2019-04-04 15:28, Paul Koning wrote:
So far that's mostly what we have, yes.
I have from time to time considered maybe adding a password on the link, as DECnet do
support that.
But so far, there has never been a single instance of someone actually trying to connect
some unknown node with DECnet on any link of mine. But it is most likely just because
pretty much any remote script-kid just have no clue that DECnet even exists, what to do
with it, or anything else.
Also, the worst I think anyone could do would just be disrupting DECnet.
But maybe someone else can think of anything else potentially interesting someone could
do by hijacking a circuit.
My biggest issue with those link passwords in RSX is that I think I can only have one
password, and it will be applied to all links. And I also think that maybe I had to turn
it on on all links if I turn it on on any.
But if people are willing to experiment some, we could test enabling it.
For the bridge, though, it requires that both ends are known. No wildcard connections
allowed.
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 On Apr 4, 2019, at 7:53 AM, Supratim Sanyal
<supratim at riseup.net> wrote:
On 4/4/19 6:12 AM, Keith Halewood wrote:
Does that mean anyone can connect to HECnet without any authentication? Or is DECnet
node init authentication used?
"Security by obscurity" only goes so far. Is it good enough for HECnet? Hi,
I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to it on VAX
Multinet. UDP is a different matter.
For example, there's a listener device set up with a 1.1.1.1 address on DUNE here.
PIVAX0 connects to it from a completely different address. I use access controls on the
router to restrict just who is allowed to connect to it.
If you want I can set up another incoming line/circuit and you can connect to it. I'm
in area 29 FYI.
I have listeners waiting on 0.0.0.0. Yes, MULTINET does not seem to care what address
connections come in from. 
4:11 p.m.
TCP tracks the state of the connection. When I server accepts a TCP
connection it takes note of the source address and port and sends responses
there.
UDP just blindly throws packets wherever you tell it to. It does not track
state and so it has no idea where to send the response. That's why UDP
based services need to be setup on both ends.
-brian
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019, 03:44 Keith Halewood <Keith.Halewood at pitbulluk.org>
wrote:
I know :)
I think the 'other' endpoint address is only needed for UDP circuits.
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Supratim Sanyal
Sent: 05 April 2019 23:28
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
You do realize that DUNE connected right back from your new IP address
with no intervention needed at least on IMPVAX, don't you? Which would be
encouraging news for Dave's original concern with dynamic IPs.
Supratim
as DECnet
do support that.
On Apr 5, 2019, at 2:18 PM, Keith Halewood
<Keith.Halewood at pitbulluk.org>
wrote:
Hi,
This is a partial repeat of another message addressed to individuals.
Sorry I've been incommunicado. To cut a long story short, a car crashed
into
our local exchange and completely demolished it. Our internet routing
failed over to 4G (dynamically allocated IP address ironically) so our
source IP addresses have changed. This should not have affected email
because we have failover there too. Due to a slight misconfiguration, this
didn't happen properly. I've only just noticed with a whole load of
messages bouncing back to me from our email server.
So, as a result, at least until end of Sunday, I won't be able to accept
incoming DECnet over TCP connections to our fixed addresses. I notice that
area 46 is connected via 31. PIVAX0 on 29.200 is currently connectionless
though.
Incidentally, gmail doesn't seem to care about SPF configuration (or is
yet to
see my updated value) and so is treating mail to it from me via a
backup route as spam and blocking it. This may fix itself shortly.
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf
Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 23:32
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
> On 2019-04-04 15:28, Paul Koning wrote:
>
>
>> On Apr 4, 2019, at 7:53 AM, Supratim Sanyal <supratim at riseup.net>
wrote:
>>
>> On 4/4/19 6:12 AM, Keith Halewood wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to it on
VAX Multinet. UDP is a different matter.
>>> For example, there's a listener
device set up with a 1.1.1.1 address
on DUNE here. PIVAX0 connects to it from a
completely different address. I
use access controls on the router to restrict just who is allowed to
connect to it.
>>> If you want I can set up another
incoming line/circuit and you can
connect to it. I'm in area 29 FYI.
>>
>> I have listeners waiting on 0.0.0.0. Yes, MULTINET does not seem to
care
what address connections come in from.
>
> Does that mean anyone can connect to HECnet without any
authentication? Or is
DECnet node init authentication used?
"Security by obscurity" only goes so far. Is it good enough for HECnet?
So far that's mostly what we have, yes.
I have from time to time considered maybe adding a password on the link,
But so far, there has never been a single instance of someone actually
trying to
connect some unknown node with DECnet on any link of mine. But it
is most likely just because pretty much any remote script-kid just have no
clue that DECnet even exists, what to do with it, or anything else.
Also, the worst I think anyone could do would just be disrupting DECnet.
But maybe someone else can think of anything else potentially
interesting someone
could do by hijacking a circuit.
My biggest issue with those link passwords in RSX is that I think I can
only have
one password, and it will be applied to all links. And I also
think that maybe I had to turn it on on all links if I turn it on on any.
But if people are willing to experiment some, we could test enabling it.
For the bridge, though, it requires that both ends are known. No
wildcard
connections allowed.
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
7 Apr
7 Apr
10:50 a.m.
On 2019-04-06 16:11, Brian Hechinger wrote:
TCP tracks the state of the connection. When I server
accepts a TCP
connection it takes note of the source address and port and sends
responses there.
UDP just blindly throws packets wherever you tell it to. It does not
track state and so it has no idea where to send the response. That's why
UDP based services need to be setup on both ends.
This is a slight bit simplified.
For TCP, when you create a socket listening for an incoming connection,
you can either define the other end to be a wildcard, in which case it
will accept a connection from anywhere, and record the actual remote end
when the connection is established, just like you say, or you can define
the remote end from the start, in which case the TCP socket will only
accept a connection from that remote destination.
Or at least, this is how all TCP implementations I've seen works. I have
not looked at the VMS implementation, so it might be that it is
different. But all Unixes I've ever seen, as well as my implementation
for RSX works that way.
For UDP, you can bind a socket to a specific remote destination or not.
If you do not bind it, every transmit will have to also provide what
destination to send the packet to, and at reception any received packet
is acceptable. However, if you do bind the socket, you do not need to
tell where to send each packet, since that will be given by the socket
information instead, and at reception only packets from that specific
remote host will be accepted and all others will be dropped. But, as you
say, for UDP this binding is not automatic. But you don't need to set it
up in the socket at all.
Johnny
-brian
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019, 03:44 Keith Halewood <Keith.Halewood at pitbulluk.org
<mailto:Keith.Halewood at pitbulluk.org>> wrote:
I know :)
I think the 'other' endpoint address is only needed for UDP circuits.
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
[mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
<mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE>] On Behalf Of Supratim Sanyal
Sent: 05 April 2019 23:28
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE <mailto:hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
You do realize that DUNE connected right back from your new IP
address with no intervention needed at least on IMPVAX, don't you?
Which would be encouraging news for Dave's original concern with
dynamic IPs.
Supratim
--
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
On Apr 5, 2019, at 2:18 PM, Keith Halewood
<Keith.Halewood at pitbulluk.org <mailto:Keith.Halewood at
pitbulluk.org>>
wrote:
Hi,
This is a partial repeat of another message addressed to individuals.
Sorry I've been incommunicado. To cut a long story short, a car
crashed
into our local exchange and completely demolished it. Our
internet routing failed over to 4G (dynamically allocated IP address
ironically) so our source IP addresses have changed. This should not
have affected email because we have failover there too. Due to a
slight misconfiguration, this didn't happen properly. I've only just
noticed with a whole load of messages bouncing back to me from our
email server.
So, as a result, at least until end of Sunday, I won't be able to
accept
incoming DECnet over TCP connections to our fixed addresses.
I notice that area 46 is connected via 31. PIVAX0 on 29.200 is
currently connectionless though.
Incidentally, gmail doesn't seem to care about SPF configuration
(or is
yet to see my updated value) and so is treating mail to it
from me via a backup route as spam and blocking it. This may fix
itself shortly.
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
<mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
[mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
<mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE>] On Behalf Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 23:32
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE <mailto:hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
> On 2019-04-04 15:28, Paul Koning wrote:
>
>
>> On Apr 4, 2019, at 7:53 AM, Supratim Sanyal
<supratim at riseup.net
<mailto:supratim at riseup.net>> wrote:
>>
>> On 4/4/19 6:12 AM, Keith Halewood wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to
it on VAX Multinet. UDP is a different matter.
>>> For example, there's a listener
device set up with a 1.1.1.1
address on DUNE here. PIVAX0 connects to it from a
completely
different address. I use access controls on the router to restrict
just who is allowed to connect to it.
>>> If you want I can set up another
incoming line/circuit and you
can connect to it. I'm in area 29 FYI.
>>
>> I have listeners waiting on 0.0.0.0. Yes, MULTINET does not
seem to
care what address connections come in from.
>
> Does that mean anyone can connect to HECnet without any
authentication??
Or is DECnet node init authentication used?
>
> "Security by obscurity" only goes so far.? Is it good enough for
HECnet?
So far that's mostly what we have, yes.
I have from time to time considered maybe adding a password on
the link, as
DECnet do support that.
But so far, there has never been a single instance of someone
actually trying
to connect some unknown node with DECnet on any link
of mine. But it is most likely just because pretty much any remote
script-kid just have no clue that DECnet even exists, what to do
with it, or anything else.
Also, the worst I think anyone could do would just be disrupting
DECnet.
But maybe someone else can think of anything else
potentially
interesting someone could do by hijacking a circuit.
My biggest issue with those link passwords in RSX is that I think
I can only
have one password, and it will be applied to all links.
And I also think that maybe I had to turn it on on all links if I
turn it on on any.
But if people are willing to experiment some, we could test
enabling it.
For the bridge, though, it requires that both ends are known. No
wildcard
connections allowed.
? ?Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? || "I'm on a bus
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?||? on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se>? ? ? ? ? ? ?||
Reading murder books
pdp is alive!? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?||? tryin'
to stay hip" - B. Idol
5 Apr
5 Apr
12:21 a.m.
I don't know for sure about VMS Multinet links over TCP. I can only
repeat what I've been told.
For RSX, you can either lock it to a specific remote IP address, or
accept from anyone. Same with the remote port. And you can also use
multiple local ports, to keep different remote ends separated.
Johnny
On 2019-04-04 12:12, Keith Halewood wrote:
Hi,
I'm pretty sure that a TCP listen doesn't care who connects to it on VAX
Multinet. UDP is a different matter.
For example, there's a listener device set up with a 1.1.1.1 address on DUNE here.
PIVAX0 connects to it from a completely different address. I use access controls on the
router to restrict just who is allowed to connect to it.
If you want I can set up another incoming line/circuit and you can connect to it. I'm
in area 29 FYI.
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of
Dave Wade
Sent: 04 April 2019 08:32
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: RE: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
Johnny,
OK I am in Manchester, England, quite close to Rob Jarrett. Some of my VAXES came from
him.
I have MULTINET TCPIP installed on one of the VAXES because I couldn't get TN3270
to my P390 working.
My VMS never was very good so please excuse the idiot questions.
Dave
--
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
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE> On Behalf
Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 08:14
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
Not necessarily. What you need is an RSX system to peer with.
Unfortunately, I think I am having enough connections to MIM to maybe
not be able to hook you up there. But maybe there is someone else around?
Also, maybe someone a bit closer to you...?
Where are you located? And is there someone else with an RSX system
willing to peer?
Oh, and you'd need to install Multinet on your VMS system, Dave.
Johnny
On 2019-04-04 08:42, Dave Wade wrote:
--
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
Johnny,
As I only have VMS systems, and a dynamic IP looks like I am stuck
for a while.
Dave
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
On
Behalf
Of Johnny
Billquist
Sent: 04 April 2019 00:48
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
On 2019-04-03 23:42, Dave Wade wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Do I still need a fixed IP address to have a node on HECNET? I
> can't see anything on the HECNET web site.
No you don't. But it do depend on how you connect.
RSX mulitnet links using TCP handles if you have a dynamic IP
address just fine.
VMS multinet links I think not, and the bridge certainly do not.
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
4 Apr
4 Apr
9:27 a.m.
I use dynamic IP and for the most part it works with the bridge because my
IP doesn't actually change all that often. When it does I ask Johnny to
restart the bridge and it all works again. I actually built some code in my
user mode decnet router to periodically check IP addresses without blocking
and I reckon it would be quite easy to update the bridge to use the same
code.
Regards
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE> On
Behalf Of Dave Wade
Sent: 04 April 2019 07:43
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: RE: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
Johnny,
As I only have VMS systems, and a dynamic IP looks like I am stuck for a
while.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE> On
Behalf
> Of Johnny Billquist
> Sent: 04 April 2019 00:48
> To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
> Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
>
> On 2019-04-03 23:42, Dave Wade wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > Do I still need a fixed IP address to have a node on HECNET? I can't
> > see anything on the HECNET web site.
>
> No you don't. But it do depend on how you connect.
> RSX mulitnet links using TCP handles if you have a dynamic IP address
> just fine.
> VMS multinet links I think not, and the bridge certainly do not.
>
> 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
4:37 p.m.
New subject: portable / user mode DECnet router?
On 4/4/2019 03:27, Rob Jarratt wrote:
--
Sent via Thunderbird for Windows 10 on Lenovo Legion Y720
I actually built some code in my
user mode decnet router to periodically check IP addresses without blocking
and I reckon it would be quite easy to update the bridge to use the same
code.
Regards
Rob
Rob,
I looked around the internet for information about your user mode DECnet
router and saw a few posts and a mention at the 2012 retrochallenge website.
Does it compile on Linux? Is it open-source / can it be shared (i.e. can
one have a copy to experiment)?
Thanks
Supratim
-----Original
Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE> On
Behalf Of Dave Wade
Sent: 04 April 2019 07:43
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: RE: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
Johnny,
As I only have VMS systems, and a dynamic IP looks like I am stuck for a
while.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE> On
Behalf
> Of Johnny Billquist
> Sent: 04 April 2019 00:48
> To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
> Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
>
> On 2019-04-03 23:42, Dave Wade wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> Do I still need a fixed IP address to have a node on HECNET? I can't
>> see anything on the HECNET web site.
>
> No you don't. But it do depend on how you connect.
> RSX mulitnet links using TCP handles if you have a dynamic IP address
> just fine.
> VMS multinet links I think not, and the bridge certainly do not.
>
> 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
4:49 p.m.
New subject: portable / user mode DECnet router?
It is here: https://github.com/rjarratt/Route20
I haven't touched it for a while now, if you have any problems let me know. It is
running on my Raspberry Pi at the moment.
Regards
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE> On
Behalf Of Supratim Sanyal
Sent: 04 April 2019 15:38
To: hecnet at update.uu.se
Subject: [HECnet] portable / user mode DECnet router?
On 4/4/2019 03:27, Rob Jarratt wrote:
--
Sent via Thunderbird for Windows 10 on Lenovo Legion Y720
I actually built some code in my
user mode decnet router to periodically check IP addresses without
blocking and I reckon it would be quite easy to update the bridge to
use the same code.
Regards
Rob
Rob,
I looked around the internet for information about your user mode DECnet
router and saw a few posts and a mention at the 2012 retrochallenge
website.
Does it compile on Linux? Is it open-source / can it be shared (i.e. can one
have a copy to experiment)?
Thanks
Supratim
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
On
Behalf
> Of Dave Wade
> Sent: 04 April 2019 07:43
> To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
> Subject: RE: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
>
> Johnny,
> As I only have VMS systems, and a dynamic IP looks like I am stuck
> for a while.
> Dave
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE <owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
On
Behalf
> Of Johnny Billquist
> Sent: 04 April 2019 00:48
> To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
> Subject: Re: [HECnet] Minimal Requirements
>
> On 2019-04-03 23:42, Dave Wade wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> Do I still need a fixed IP address to have a node on HECNET? I
>> can't see anything on the HECNET web site.
>
> No you don't. But it do depend on how you connect.
> RSX mulitnet links using TCP handles if you have a dynamic IP
> address just fine.
> VMS multinet links I think not, and the bridge certainly do not.
>
> 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
5 p.m.
New subject: portable / user mode DECnet router?
On Apr 4, 2019, at 10:37 AM, Supratim Sanyal
<supratim at riseup.net> wrote:
On 4/4/2019 03:27, Rob Jarratt wrote:
There's also the one I wrote in Python, if you want to try that. It's on my
Subversion server.
paul
I actually built some code in my
user mode decnet router to periodically check IP addresses without blocking
and I reckon it would be quite easy to update the bridge to use the same
code.
Regards
Rob
Rob,
I looked around the internet for information about your user mode DECnet router and saw a
few posts and a mention at the 2012 retrochallenge website.
Does it compile on Linux? Is it open-source / can it be shared (i.e. can one have a copy
to experiment)?
Thanks
Supratim 
6:50 p.m.
New subject: portable / user mode DECnet router?
On Thu, Apr 4, 2019, at 11:02, Paul Koning wrote:
There's also the one I wrote in Python, if you
want to try that. It's
on my Subversion server.
paul
Could you remind me what the URL for this SVN repository is?
Thank you,
--
Ryan Blair
6:59 p.m.
New subject: portable / user mode DECnet router?
On Apr 4, 2019, at 12:50 PM, Ryan Blair <rblair at
epoxy-networks.com> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 4, 2019, at 11:02, Paul Koning wrote:
It is at svn://akdesign.dyndns.org/pydecnet/trunk/pydecnet . There's some
documentation; it may not all be exactly right so please ask questions if necessary.
paul
There's also the one I wrote in Python, if
you want to try that. It's
on my Subversion server.
paul
Could you remind me what the URL for this SVN repository is?
1855
days inactive
1859
days old
26 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
bqt＠softjar.se -
dave.g4ugm＠gmail.com -
Keith.Halewood＠pitbulluk.org -
mark＠theberrymans.com -
oe5ewl＠gmail.com -
paulkoning＠comcast.net -
rblair＠epoxy-networks.com -
robert.jarratt＠ntlworld.com -
supratim＠riseup.net -
wonko＠4amlunch.net