On Jun 5, 2014, at 2:46 PM, Mark Pizzolato - Info Comm <Mark at infocomm.com>
wrote:
...
All of this is absolutely true, but it would seem that no one is trying to push full wire
speed traffic between systems. It would seem that given high quality signal levels on
the wires in the data path (i.e. no excessive collisions due to speed/duplex mismatching),
that the natural protocol on the wire (with acknowledgements, etc.) should be able to move
data at the speed of the lowest component in the datapath. That may be either the Unibus
or Qbus or the PDP11's CPU.
True, provided congestion control is working. In the days of DECnet Phase IV, congestion
control was a topic of active research, rather than a well understood problem. (Things
like the TCP/IP DEC bit are an outcome of that work as well as a lot of other less
obvious knowledge that made its way into other protocols.) So in Phase IV, you probably
don t have effective congestion control, and scenarios with widely differing bandwidth
points are likely to behave poorly. In Phase V, that should all be much better.
...
Hmmm...Grind...Grind... I do seem have some vague recollection of an issue with some DEQNA
devices not being able to handle back-to-back packets coming in from the wire. This
issue might have been behind DEC's wholesale replacement/upgrading of every DEQNA in
the field, and it also may have had something to do with the DEQNA not being officially
supported as a cluster device...
I m not sure about that for QNA. It certainly was an incorrigible device, which is why
VMS dropped it, but I don t remember back to back packets being its specific issue.
I do remember that the 3C901 had this issue, and DECnet/DOS (Pathworks) ran into big
trouble with that. There was even a proposal to throttle sending speeds across all
DECnet implementations as a workaround for that design error; that proposal went down in
flames very quickly indeed. So at that point it was even more clearly understood that
back to back packets at the wire end of a NIC must always be handled.
paul
Show replies by date