Op 29 apr. 2018, om 18:19 heeft Hans Vlems <hvlems at zonnet.nl> het volgende geschreven: Johnny My connection to Hecnet is thru your site with your bridge program. It runs on a Fedora (17) system that also hosts A44RTR. None of my systems run Multinet, and A44RTR runs VAX/VMS V7.3 and DECnet phase IV. It may be converted to run phase V if that would help you. My internet connection is ADSL2+ which translates to 11 Mb/s downstream and less than 400 kb/s upstream. Not bloody useful as a hub, then again Netherlands is not exactly in southern Europe. Hans Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone

On Apr 29, 2018, at 1:54 PM, Steve Davidson <steve at davidson.net> wrote: I can do eastern US like I did the bridge. I have to finish the Tex build though... -Steve Davidson Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 29, 2018, at 15:48, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote: I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't think I'd be interested in any kind of automation like that for my systems. I prefer to know explicitly what I have. 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

I can and that would probably be my fall back option. On Sun, Apr 29, 2018, 18:45 Steve Davidson <steve at davidson.net <mailto:steve at davidson.net>> wrote: Can you output "C"? -Steve Davidson Sent from my iPhone <mailto:bqt at softjar.se>> wrote: interested in any kind of automation like that for my systems. I prefer to know explicitly what I have. similar to what I do for the cisco tunnels? Mayne now is the time to look to expanding it as well. can all manage your own endpoints. to manage it as those are all unix boxes and so I should be able to generate binaries for that. binaries for VMS/RSX/etc so I may have to pick something else there. Not sure what I?d do. <mailto:steve at davidson.net>> wrote: the Tex build though... <idiotoflinux at gmail.com <mailto:idiotoflinux at gmail.com>> wrote: exactly static (although it stays the same most of the time...), and as it's running at home im willing to run? a bridge but i cannot guarantee uptime <mailto:hvlems at zonnet.nl>> het volgende geschreven: program. It runs on a Fedora (17) system that also hosts A44RTR. and DECnet phase IV. It may be converted to run phase V if that would help you. downstream and less than 400 kb/s upstream. Not bloody useful as a hub, then again Netherlands is not exactly in southern Europe. <bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se>> het volgende geschreven: handling of connections to HECnet. but this is not a solution that scales very well, so in general I now try to discourage people from this option. When possible, I prefer to move people away from it. use directly both in VMS and RSX. However, it is silly and inefficient if all multinet links are to go to me. So I'm thinking about identifying a few people/places elsewhere in the world, which can be used for connections where it makes more sense for a somewhat closer point of connection. be that we'd like a second point in the south of Europe, but that is not a high priority right now. location on each coast, which have a capable system, and normally is always online, and which have a good bandwidth, and would be willing to setup connections to new machines that want to come online. point of contact when people come asking, but I'd be happy if I could redirect them to the appropriate person once we have figured out a few basic details. actual link. ?||? Reading murder books B. Idol Reading murder books

The idea is to expand the cisco tunnel configuration management tool I wrote to support multinet and the bridge.

Wherever there are endpoints (bridge, multinet) there would be an agent that manages the config driven by a centralized system.

I was going to re-write the cisco tunnel one anyway, so figured why not expand if people were interested. The nice part about this is the people who manage the "hubs" wouldn't have to do anything. It would all be user self service driven. With the cisco tunnel thing I can just use SNMP to push config fragments onto the routers. WIth the bridge and multinet that's not an option, so a locally running agent would take up that work.

Why you ask? I automate things for a living. It's what I enjoy doing. :)

-brian On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 5:12 PM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se>> wrote: On that topic, why would you be generating code? It's just a config file that needs changing, and then a signal sent to the process. (For the bridge). For multinet, it essentially would be a couple of configuration commands under VMS or RSX. I don't get the "output 'C'" comment at all. ? Johnny On 2018-04-30 01:02, Brian Hechinger wrote: I can and that would probably be my fall back option. On Sun, Apr 29, 2018, 18:45 Steve Davidson <steve at davidson.net <mailto:steve at davidson.net> <mailto:steve at davidson.net <mailto:steve at davidson.net>>> wrote: ? ? Can you output "C"? ? ? -Steve Davidson ? ? Sent from my iPhone ? ? ?> On Apr 29, 2018, at 15:48, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se> ? ? <mailto:bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se>>> wrote: ? ? ?> ? ? ?> I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't think I'd be ? ? interested in any kind of automation like that for my systems. I ? ? prefer to know explicitly what I have. ? ? ?> ? ? ?>? Johnny ? ? ?> ? ? ?>> On 2018-04-29 21:20, Brian Hechinger wrote: ? ? ?>> Would anyone be interested in some manner of automation for this ? ? similar to what I do for the cisco tunnels? ? ? ?>> Re-writing that in Go has been on my short list for a while now. ? ? Mayne now is the time to look to expanding it as well. ? ? ?>> One of the things I was going to add was a web front end so you ? ? can all manage your own endpoints. ? ? ?>> The bridge will be easy, I can write an agent that can run there ? ? to manage it as those are all unix boxes and so I should be able to ? ? generate binaries for that. ? ? ?>> Multinet may be a tad trickier since Go doesn?t generate ? ? binaries for VMS/RSX/etc so I may have to pick something else there. ? ? Not sure what I?d do. ? ? ?>> Thoughts? ? ? ?>> -brian ? ? ?>>> On Apr 29, 2018, at 1:54 PM, Steve Davidson <steve at davidson.net <mailto:steve at davidson.net> ? ? <mailto:steve at davidson.net <mailto:steve at davidson.net>>> wrote: ? ? ?>>> ? ? ?>>> I can do eastern US like I did the bridge.? I have to finish ? ? the Tex build though... ? ? ?>>> ? ? ?>>> -Steve Davidson ? ? ?>>> ? ? ?>>> Sent from my iPhone ? ? ?>>> ? ? ?>>>> On Apr 29, 2018, at 12:23, Jeroen Brons ? ? <idiotoflinux at gmail.com <mailto:idiotoflinux at gmail.com> <mailto:idiotoflinux at gmail.com <mailto:idiotoflinux at gmail.com>>> wrote: ? ? ?>>>> ? ? ?>>>> i''m Also in the Netherlands, but because of my ISP my IP isnt ? ? exactly static (although it stays the same most of the time...), and ? ? as it's running at home im willing to run? a bridge but i cannot ? ? guarantee uptime ? ? ?>>>>> Op 29 apr. 2018, om 18:19 heeft Hans Vlems <hvlems at zonnet.nl <mailto:hvlems at zonnet.nl> ? ? <mailto:hvlems at zonnet.nl <mailto:hvlems at zonnet.nl>>> het volgende geschreven: ? ? ?>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>> Johnny ? ? ?>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>> My connection to Hecnet is thru your site with your bridge ? ? program. It runs on a Fedora (17) system that also hosts A44RTR. ? ? ?>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>> None of my systems run Multinet, and A44RTR runs VAX/VMS V7.3 ? ? and DECnet phase IV. It may be converted to run phase V if that ? ? would help you. ? ? ?>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>> My internet connection is ADSL2+ which translates to 11 Mb/s ? ? downstream and less than 400 kb/s upstream. Not bloody useful as a ? ? hub, then again Netherlands is not exactly in southern Europe. ? ? ?>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>> Hans ? ? ?>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>> Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone ? ? ?>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>>> Op 29 apr. 2018 om 17:52 heeft Johnny Billquist ? ? <bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se> <mailto:bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se>>> het volgende geschreven: ? ? ?>>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>>> Guys. I figure I should try to get a more formalized ? ? handling of connections to HECnet. ? ? ?>>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>>> With my bridge, it's mostly just people connecting to me, ? ? but this is not a solution that scales very well, so in general I ? ? now try to discourage people from this option. When possible, I ? ? prefer to move people away from it. ? ? ?>>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>>> Multinet on the other hand scales well. And is possible to ? ? use directly both in VMS and RSX. However, it is silly and ? ? inefficient if all multinet links are to go to me. So I'm thinking ? ? about identifying a few people/places elsewhere in the world, which ? ? can be used for connections where it makes more sense for a somewhat ? ? closer point of connection. ? ? ?>>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>>> So, I would go on dealing with Europe. Might at some point ? ? be that we'd like a second point in the south of Europe, but that is ? ? not a high priority right now. ? ? ?>>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>>> However, for the US, it would be nice if we could identify a ? ? location on each coast, which have a capable system, and normally is ? ? always online, and which have a good bandwidth, and would be willing ? ? to setup connections to new machines that want to come online. ? ? ?>>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>>> So, are there any takers? I'll continue to be the first ? ? point of contact when people come asking, but I'd be happy if I ? ? could redirect them to the appropriate person once we have figured ? ? out a few basic details. ? ? ?>>>>>> And then these two persons can work on establishing the ? ? actual link. ? ? ?>>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>>> Johnny ? ? ?>>>>>> ? ? ?>>>>>> -- ? ? ?>>>>>> Johnny Billquist? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? || "I'm on a bus ? ? ?>>>>>>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?||? on a psychedelic trip ? ? ?>>>>>> email: bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se> <mailto:bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se>> ?||? Reading murder books ? ? ?>>>>>> pdp is alive!? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?||? tryin' to stay hip" - ? ? B. Idol ? ? ?>>>>> ? ? ?>>>> ? ? ?>>> ? ? ?> ? ? ?> -- ? ? ?> Johnny Billquist? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? || "I'm on a bus ? ? ?>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ||? on a psychedelic trip ? ? ?> email: bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se> <mailto:bqt at softjar.se <mailto:bqt at softjar.se>>? ? ? ? ? ? ?|| ? ?Reading murder books ? ? ?> pdp is alive!? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?||? tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol -- 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

But I'm almost a bit surprised that noone have really stepped up with multinet links in the US. Is there really noone with the resources and ability to connect potential new people?

On May 2, 2018, at 1:49 PM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote: On 2018-05-02 22:09, Zane Healy wrote: Time is a resource generally in short supply. :-) But I'm almost a bit surprised that noone have really stepped up with multinet links in the US. Is there really noone with the resources and ability to connect potential new people? Johnny

On May 2, 2018, at 1:58 PM, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote: On 05/02/2018 04:57 PM, Zane Healy wrote: For one baby desktop system? Do you not have air conditioning out there? ;) -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA

I've been connecting people via Multinet on LEGATO for some time now, and I don't see any problem with continuing to do that. I think there are about half a dozen active connections on LEGATO now. I really prefer that people have static IPs, because updating dynamic IPs with Multinet is a royal pain, however there are a few dynamic ones in there. My IP is always available at decnet.jfcl.com. I have plenty of bandwidth, although not admittedly not gigabit levels, but frankly the amount of traffic on HECnet is pretty much inconsequential so it's hardly an issue so far. Oh, and I live in San Jose CA USA.

I've been connecting people via Multinet on LEGATO for some time now, and I don't see any problem with continuing to do that. I think there are about half a dozen active connections on LEGATO now. I really prefer that people have static IPs, because updating dynamic IPs with Multinet is a royal pain, however there are a few dynamic ones in there. My IP is always available at decnet.jfcl.com.

My Multinet compatible implementation under RSX might have some issues communicating with VMS nodes, but in general it seems to be working just fine.

The setup under RSX do not really have any problems with dynamic IP ...

Actually, the script that ran on SG1:: took care of that automagically...

you do not even have to enter the remote address if using TCP and you are the listening side.

In RSX, you can have any number of listeners on one specific port,

The Multinet tunnel software emulates a point to point circuit, like a DDCMP synchronous link only with TCP/IP. In theory the only traffic that goes down that link should be messages addressed to the node on the other end (or any node that it's the next hop for). If you accept multiple connections on the same port, how do you know who is on the other end? I don't remember anything in the Multinet protocol to identify the nodes. If you don't know who is on the other end, how do you know what traffic to send him??

It's TCP. It's always point to point. There are no broadcast ability in TCP. However, there is nothing preventing you to have multiple TCP connections with the same local port. It's still separate connections.

It's just plain simple point-to-point links.

On May 4, 2018, at 2:46 AM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote: On 2018-05-04 05:55, Robert Armstrong wrote: There are a little bit more to it, but first of all, ethernet is special. The protocol DECnet uses over ethernet is a bit different than the protocol used over point-to-point links. But in addition, you also have multipoint circuits, which is a variant of point-to-point circuits, but which have several endpoints/adjacent nodes. So ethernet is not the only one able to do that.

On May 4, 2018, at 5:41 PM, Robert Armstrong <bob at jfcl.com> wrote: I had forgotten about multidrop DDCMP connections. I agree that would work for what we want to do, but Multinet didn't implement it that way. The only fix I can see would be to write another DECnet device driver that does. In the current implementation there's a 1-1 relation between the Multinet lines, circuits and tunnels -

are there any Multinet implementations that support IPv6?

On May 2, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote: But I'm almost a bit surprised that noone have really stepped up with multinet links in the US. Is there really noone with the resources and ability to connect potential new people?

Sumpratim, an area router is just a more capable DECnet router. It has to be either a PDP-11 or a VAX. Alpha's does/did not support area routing. Obviously other gear like Ciscos can also act as area routers. There are various rules on what is connected to what when it comes to the various routing domains in DECnet. Once you have an area router then yes, any number (well, up to 63) is supported. There are no other limitations. Essentially, area routing isn't anh more complicated that routing within the area. As an admin, you don't really have to do much of anything. But it's good if you have some bandwidth, a fixed address, and are generally online. ? Johnny

Hi Johnny, On 5/2/18 6:15 PM, Supratim Sanyal wrote: I have made some progress. IMPVAX is now running on a VPS with a dedicated static IP address and plenty of bandwidth. It is configured as an Area router (Level 2) and connected to MIM via MULTINET. It is communicating successfully with my other nodes at home via a VDE uplink.

Next steps: (1) configure your bridge.c on the VPS and try to connect to it from home instead of VDE (2) configure MULTINET server (3) configure GRE endpoint.

On 5/4/18 5:51 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote: I thought some folks would like to connect using your bridge or GRE. Will not bother with bridge and GRE then.

I think I will have to open up some port for others to connect to IMPVAX and also maybe configure the Server part of MULTINET on IMPVAX (have always been a client to you). That is the pending research I have to do.

At some point, I am going to have to ask for help from someone running Multinet for testing.

since once Multinet grabs the interface, I can?t get to the underlying host.

lose my SSH session into the VPC and when I reconnect, it is to my simulated VAX.

host. Actually I think it?s a limitation in simh and the pcap library ? the simh guest OS can?t talk to the host OS on the same interface. You can work around the problem with a TAP device. Check the archives for the simh mailing list ? it?s been discussed many times before.

OP here, if both the host and the SIMH guest are listening for SSH traffic on the same interface / IP address then only one of them is going to make the connection. Since the SIMH guest is the last to register, it gets the traffic.

On Saturday, May 5, 2018 at 3:27 AM, Johnny Billquist wrote: On 2018-05-05 03:39, Robert Armstrong wrote: No. That is not correct. I run simh myself on a machine where I have both the native host and simh talking on the same ethernet. And they are both reachable by other hosts. The OP must be doing something else funny. 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

Johnny Billquist (bqt at softjar.se) wrote: No. That is not correct.

On 2018-05-05 03:39, Robert Armstrong wrote: No. That is not correct. I run simh myself on a machine where I have both the native host and simh talking on the same ethernet. And they are both reachable by other hosts. The OP must be doing something else funny. 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

host. Actually I think it?s a limitation in simh and the pcap library ? the simh guest OS can?t talk to the host OS on the same interface. You can work around the problem with a TAP device. Check the archives for the simh mailing list ? it?s been discussed many times before.

host. Actually I think it?s a limitation in simh and the pcap library ? the simh guest OS can?t talk to the host OS on the same interface. You can work around the problem with a TAP device. Check the archives for the simh mailing list ? it?s been discussed many times before.

Hi Mark, I?m not understanding what you saying here. Are you suggesting that on a single host system, you?ve got multiple independent simulators running which all are using the same IP address as the host system? And, if true these devices can then, not only uniquely communicate with remote systems (on the Internet say), and also to each other AND the host system? - Mark *From:* owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] *On Behalf Of *Mark Abene *Sent:* Saturday, May 5, 2018 10:45 AM *To:* hecnet at update.uu.se *Subject:* Re: [HECnet] Connections? This is an often misunderstood generalization, with some people able and others not. I remember this being true on *BSD. You could not connect to a simulated IP on the same host. It *used* to also be true on Linux, but is no longer the case for some time. On my ubuntu server where I run dynamips, simh, and klh10, all on bridged taps, I can telnet to all instances, even locally. -Mark On Sat, May 5, 2018, 12:27 AM Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote: On 2018-05-05 03:39, Robert Armstrong wrote: No. That is not correct. I run simh myself on a machine where I have both the native host and simh talking on the same ethernet. And they are both reachable by other hosts. The OP must be doing something else funny. 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

Mark, I?ve seen no evidence that anything has changed at all on Linux or other operating systems. Changes have been made within simh to better support some situations where bridges are used, but some sort of bridge setup needs to be done like it did long ago. Please point at specifics of what you are seeing that now allows telnet to an emulator?s IP address without setting up some sort of bridging. - Mark *From:* owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] *On Behalf Of *Mark Abene *Sent:* Saturday, May 5, 2018 3:57 PM *To:* hecnet at update.uu.se *Subject:* Re: [HECnet] Connections? Nothing of the sort. I'm saying that in the past, you couldn't telnet to an emulator's IP address from within the same host server. Naturally the host server has multiple IPs for all the emulated guest OSes. This was a well known and well documented peculiarity of BSD and Linux when logged into a shell on the host server. It's no longer the case on more recent Linux systems. -Mark On Sat, May 5, 2018, 10:56 AM Mark Pizzolato <Mark at infocomm.com> wrote: Hi Mark, I?m not understanding what you saying here. Are you suggesting that on a single host system, you?ve got multiple independent simulators running which all are using the same IP address as the host system? And, if true these devices can then, not only uniquely communicate with remote systems (on the Internet say), and also to each other AND the host system? - Mark *From:* owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] *On Behalf Of *Mark Abene *Sent:* Saturday, May 5, 2018 10:45 AM *To:* hecnet at update.uu.se *Subject:* Re: [HECnet] Connections? This is an often misunderstood generalization, with some people able and others not. I remember this being true on *BSD. You could not connect to a simulated IP on the same host. It *used* to also be true on Linux, but is no longer the case for some time. On my ubuntu server where I run dynamips, simh, and klh10, all on bridged taps, I can telnet to all instances, even locally. -Mark On Sat, May 5, 2018, 12:27 AM Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote: On 2018-05-05 03:39, Robert Armstrong wrote: No. That is not correct. I run simh myself on a machine where I have both the native host and simh talking on the same ethernet. And they are both reachable by other hosts. The OP must be doing something else funny. 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

What Mark actually is talking about, and referring to, is the question if sending packets are also seen by others connected to the same interface and receiving packets. It's a bit more complicated than just saying "BSD" does this, or "Linux" does that. But the bottom line is that some systems, and some hardware, makes outgoing packets also visible to programs reading from the interface, and other combinations do not. And if you do not receive outgoing packets, then two virtual machines on the same host, using the same interface, cannot communicate with each other. Johnny On 2018-05-06 04:00, Mark Pizzolato wrote: Idol -- 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

Out of curiosity, is this functionality available on Itanium or Xeon VMS systems?

Alpha's does/did not support area routing.

From day 1 on Alpha.

On May 2, 2018, at 4:09 PM, Zane Healy <healyzh at avanthar.com> wrote: I?m not quite ready, but I?m headed in the direction of being able to do this, and I?m on a 50Mbit commercial line. Today PDXVAX is a VAXstation 4000/60. I?ve been planning to migrate it to SIMH running on a RPi3+. Once it is migrated, I can keep it online during the summer (which I can?t today). I just need to figure out how I want to image the drive. I run your bridge on my Firewall, and I have MultiNet running on PDXVAX, but I don?t think the Multinet link is active anymore.