Well that is a good summary Johnny. The application are compatible, phone and sethost work well between nodes. I think phase V maintains a lot more information so the management software might return error messages because the phase V node doesn't understand the incoming request. IIRC phase V nodes still have a small NCP database so that remote phase IV nodes can interrogate (a subset of) executor parameters. Hans -----Original Message----- From: Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 10:20:27 To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE> Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SESubject: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem / NIKKEL On 2011-12-27 09.35, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote: That's what I meant :-) sorry for the obscure language. More precisely: phase IV has no clue about phase V. It is possible to get information from a phase IV node while running ncl. I'll boot a phase IV area router this evening. Everything is shutdown right now except the bridge program. Well, phase V is supposed to be backwards compatible with phase IV, meaning a phase IV node can talk with a phase V node, as far as phase IV functionality goes. NCP (and NCL, which I assume is the phase V tool for manipulating things) are just the local tool. When you give commands over the network, you talk a protocol called NICE, which is a known object in DECnet. Phase IV or phase V shouldn't make a difference, since the NICE protocol is still the same (or should be). It would appear the made some incompatible change after all, which atleast makes RSX machines not happy with the response from a NICE server on a phase V node. Oh well... Not that important, I guess. Johnny -----Original Message----- From: Johnny Billquist<bqt at softjar.se> Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 09:23:22 To:<hecnet at Update.UU.SE> Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SESubject: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem / NIKKEL On 2011-12-26 23.26, H Vlems wrote: Could that be ncl talking back to your ncp? Not sure what you mean by that. But the fact that it's a phase V node might be the reason. Slightly incompatible with phase IV sometimes... Johnny -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] Namens Johnny Billquist Verzonden: maandag, december 2011 22:29 Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem / NIKKEL On 2011-12-26 18.46, H Vlems wrote: Johnny, what is wrong with NIKKEL as seen from your end? Sorry. I should really have told that one... .ncp tell nikkel sho exec NCP -- Show failed, oversized Management command message Johnny Hans PS Ni is a phase V decnet node -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] Namens Johnny Billquist Verzonden: maandag, december 2011 15:37 Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem On 2011-12-26 15.24, Johnny Billquist wrote: On 2011-12-26 15.07, Bob Armstrong wrote: Hmmm.. LEGATO can't talk to ROOSTA ("remote node not currently reachable") even though there's a direct Multinet link to ROOSTA (and yes, the link is UP and working). I think the problem is that ROOSTA is in area 6, and the area router for 6 is STAR69. Trouble is, STAR69 doesn't have a path to ROOSTA and doesn't know how to send it packets. Unless ROOSTA is an area router, that link makes no sense. You cannot have (usable) links between different areas unless both ends are area routers... It would appear something is more broken currently. I can't talk to SG1 from MIM either, and thus nothing beyond it. And SG1 is currently acting as the next hop for a whole bunch of areas, as seen from area 1. Also, while I'm at it: NIKKEL - There is some issue with that machine too. Can others talk with it? Johnny