Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on Alpha? - VMS

This is a discussion on Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on Alpha? - VMS ; [ON TOPIC!!!] VAX can do DDCMP circuits. Alpha can't. >From the DECnet for OpenVMS Networking Manual: "On AXP systems, Digital supports level 1 routing only for nodes acting as routers for a cluster alias. Digital does not support level 2 ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on Alpha?

  1. Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on Alpha?

    [ON TOPIC!!!]

    VAX can do DDCMP circuits. Alpha can't.

    >From the DECnet for OpenVMS Networking Manual:


    "On AXP systems, Digital supports level 1 routing only for nodes
    acting as routers for a cluster alias. Digital does not support level
    2 routing or routing between multiple circuits."

    It looks like routing control is also limited on Alpha.

    Also DECdns namespace appears to be missing for Alpha.

    And CI appears absent for Alpha.

    Why are all these things missing from the Alpha version? Are people
    just expected to use Phase V and if so, does it have all these things
    missing from Phase IV for Alpha?

    Thanks!

    AEF


  2. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than onAlpha?

    AEF wrote:
    > And CI appears absent for Alpha.


    DECnet performance over CI was never great, but DECnet was supported on
    CI on VAX. The interface between VMS and the CI adapter changed
    dramatically for Alpha, with the introduction of the NPORT architecture,
    so that change may have been a factor. In any case, today, Fast Ethernet
    or Gigabit Ethernet would be much better than CI for DECnet.

  3. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than onAlpha?

    AEF wrote:
    > [ON TOPIC!!!]
    >
    > VAX can do DDCMP circuits. Alpha can't.
    >
    >>From the DECnet for OpenVMS Networking Manual:

    >
    > "On AXP systems, Digital supports level 1 routing only for nodes
    > acting as routers for a cluster alias. Digital does not support level
    > 2 routing or routing between multiple circuits."
    >
    > It looks like routing control is also limited on Alpha.
    >
    > Also DECdns namespace appears to be missing for Alpha.
    >
    > And CI appears absent for Alpha.
    >
    > Why are all these things missing from the Alpha version? Are people
    > just expected to use Phase V and if so, does it have all these things
    > missing from Phase IV for Alpha?
    >
    > Thanks!
    >
    > AEF
    >


    Well, I spent about 20 years in the VAX/Alpha VMS world and NEVER
    encountered DDCMP! Perhaps the fact that DDCMP is almost unknown might
    have something to do with it. Even if DEC supported DDCMP, did anyone
    else???? It seems to me that there were a lot of LAN/WAN protocols that
    never really achieved general acceptance!

    There was a big fuss about DECnet Phase V and ISO protocols a back in
    the 90's but who uses them now? TCP/IP has, for practical purposes,
    conquered the world!


  4. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than onAlpha?

    Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
    > Well, I spent about 20 years in the VAX/Alpha VMS world and NEVER
    > encountered DDCMP!



    I used DDMCP twice. Once with a friend to test its functionality over
    what was then new technology: MNP-5 modems (which were supposedly not
    supported for DDMCP)

    Second time was to establish a link between 2 vaxes before I received
    the AUI-Coax transceivers to allow me to connect a partially installed
    3100 with the all mighty microvax 2. (this allowed me to copy files over
    to the 3100).

    (For those who don't know, DDMCP is decnet over a serial line).

  5. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on Alpha?

    On Nov 6, 2:50 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert"
    wrote:
    > AEF wrote:
    > > [ON TOPIC!!!]

    >
    > > VAX can do DDCMP circuits. Alpha can't.

    >
    > >>From the DECnet for OpenVMS Networking Manual:

    >
    > > "On AXP systems, Digital supports level 1 routing only for nodes
    > > acting as routers for a cluster alias. Digital does not support level
    > > 2 routing or routing between multiple circuits."

    >
    > > It looks like routing control is also limited on Alpha.

    >
    > > Also DECdns namespace appears to be missing for Alpha.

    >
    > > And CI appears absent for Alpha.

    >
    > > Why are all these things missing from the Alpha version? Are people
    > > just expected to use Phase V and if so, does it have all these things
    > > missing from Phase IV for Alpha?

    >
    > > Thanks!

    >
    > > AEF

    >
    > Well, I spent about 20 years in the VAX/Alpha VMS world and NEVER
    > encountered DDCMP! Perhaps the fact that DDCMP is almost unknown might
    > have something to do with it. Even if DEC supported DDCMP, did anyone
    > else???? It seems to me that there were a lot of LAN/WAN protocols that
    > never really achieved general acceptance!
    >
    > There was a big fuss about DECnet Phase V and ISO protocols a back in
    > the 90's but who uses them now? TCP/IP has, for practical purposes,
    > conquered the world!


    [My apologies if this shows up twice -- Google Groups wasn't
    responding and I "timed it out". This is my third(!) attempt to post
    this.]

    Hey, at least this is on topic!!! |:-D)

    Anyway,

    So what about the routing? Wouldn't it be easier for someone moving
    from VAX to Alpha if at least the same level of routing functionality
    were kept? Was it a big deal to to multiple circuits on an Alpha?

    AEF



  6. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than onAlpha?

    le 06.11.2007 21:20 JF Mezei a écrit:
    > Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
    >> Well, I spent about 20 years in the VAX/Alpha VMS world and NEVER
    >> encountered DDCMP!

    >
    >
    > I used DDMCP twice. Once with a friend to test its functionality over
    > what was then new technology: MNP-5 modems (which were supposedly not
    > supported for DDMCP)
    >
    > Second time was to establish a link between 2 vaxes before I received
    > the AUI-Coax transceivers to allow me to connect a partially installed
    > 3100 with the all mighty microvax 2. (this allowed me to copy files over
    > to the 3100).
    >
    > (For those who don't know, DDMCP is decnet over a serial line).

    Pfff... isn't it DDCMP ???

  7. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on Alpha?

    On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 14:50:48 -0500, "Richard B. Gilbert"
    wrote:

    >AEF wrote:
    >> [ON TOPIC!!!]
    >>
    >> VAX can do DDCMP circuits. Alpha can't.


    DDCMP was legacy that wasn't needed anymore.

    >>>From the DECnet for OpenVMS Networking Manual:

    >>
    >> "On AXP systems, Digital supports level 1 routing only for nodes
    >> acting as routers for a cluster alias. Digital does not support level
    >> 2 routing or routing between multiple circuits."
    >>
    >> It looks like routing control is also limited on Alpha.
    >>
    >> Also DECdns namespace appears to be missing for Alpha.
    >>
    >> And CI appears absent for Alpha.
    >>
    >> Why are all these things missing from the Alpha version? Are people
    >> just expected to use Phase V and if so, does it have all these things
    >> missing from Phase IV for Alpha?
    >>
    >> Thanks!
    >>
    >> AEF
    >>

    >
    >Well, I spent about 20 years in the VAX/Alpha VMS world and NEVER
    >encountered DDCMP! Perhaps the fact that DDCMP is almost unknown might
    >have something to do with it. Even if DEC supported DDCMP, did anyone
    >else???? It seems to me that there were a lot of LAN/WAN protocols that
    >never really achieved general acceptance!


    It was widely used between PDP-11s and VAXen in lab settings. The
    DDCMP is good point to point but the media was range limited even with
    SYNC modems which often only ran at 9600 baud. The latter is the big
    issue as it was rare thing to see it used with a serial line faster
    than 64kbaud. Even Ethernet 10mb beats that hands down but
    then Ethernet was far more costly than a serial line.

    >There was a big fuss about DECnet Phase V and ISO protocols a back in
    >the 90's but who uses them now? TCP/IP has, for practical purposes,
    >conquered the world!


    Back then networking was new and robust routing protocals were few.
    Of those Banyan Vines, TCP/IP and DECnet were leaders. And also back
    then it was common to see IP tunneled on DECnet!


    Allison



  8. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on Alpha?

    "Richard B. Gilbert" wrote in
    news:4730C598.2030902@comcast.net:

    > Well, I spent about 20 years in the VAX/Alpha VMS world and NEVER
    > encountered DDCMP! Perhaps the fact that DDCMP is almost unknown might
    > have something to do with it. Even if DEC supported DDCMP, did anyone
    > else???? It seems to me that there were a lot of LAN/WAN protocols that
    > never really achieved general acceptance!


    DDCMP == Digital Data Communications Message Protocol :-)

    Actually there were various Motorola CPUs that implemented
    parts of DDCMP (or maybe even all of it) but they may have been
    general purpose masked parts produced at DEC's request.

    Of your 20 years in the VAX/Alpha world, the Alpha part wouldn't
    have helped: DDCMP never made it over there (and I can confidently
    predict that it never will :-)).

    Antonio

    arcarlini@iee.org

  9. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than onAlpha?

    no.spam@no.uce.bellatlantic.net wrote:
    > On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 14:50:48 -0500, "Richard B. Gilbert"
    > wrote:
    >
    >> AEF wrote:
    >>> [ON TOPIC!!!]
    >>>
    >>> VAX can do DDCMP circuits. Alpha can't.
    >>>

    >> Well, I spent about 20 years in the VAX/Alpha VMS world and NEVER
    >> encountered DDCMP! Perhaps the fact that DDCMP is almost unknown might
    >> have something to do with it. Even if DEC supported DDCMP, did anyone
    >> else???? It seems to me that there were a lot of LAN/WAN protocols that
    >> never really achieved general acceptance!

    >
    > It was widely used between PDP-11s and VAXen in lab settings. The
    > DDCMP is good point to point but the media was range limited even with
    > SYNC modems which often only ran at 9600 baud. The latter is the big
    > issue as it was rare thing to see it used with a serial line faster
    > than 64kbaud. Even Ethernet 10mb beats that hands down but
    > then Ethernet was far more costly than a serial line.


    I have used DDCMP on dialup modems at 19.2Kb with several clients.

    I even used it to connect from Texas to a client in London, UK. (I was
    rather surprised at how well that worked.) At the time, overseas calls
    were about $1/min, but it was still much less expensive than a plane ticket.

    For clients with VAXen that are not connected to the internet, it is a
    very handy capability.

    If it existed on Alphas, it would be useful for accessing systems that
    are not accessible from the internet.

    --
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chris Scheers, Applied Synergy, Inc.

    Voice: 817-237-3360 Internet: chris@applied-synergy.com
    Fax: 817-237-3074

  10. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than onAlpha?

    AEF wrote:
    > On Nov 6, 2:50 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert"
    > wrote:
    >
    >>AEF wrote:
    >>
    >>>[ON TOPIC!!!]

    >>
    >>>VAX can do DDCMP circuits. Alpha can't.

    >>
    >>>>From the DECnet for OpenVMS Networking Manual:

    >>
    >>>"On AXP systems, Digital supports level 1 routing only for nodes
    >>>acting as routers for a cluster alias. Digital does not support level
    >>>2 routing or routing between multiple circuits."

    >>
    >>>It looks like routing control is also limited on Alpha.

    >>
    >>>Also DECdns namespace appears to be missing for Alpha.

    >>
    >>>And CI appears absent for Alpha.

    >>
    >>>Why are all these things missing from the Alpha version? Are people
    >>>just expected to use Phase V and if so, does it have all these things
    >>>missing from Phase IV for Alpha?

    >>
    >>>Thanks!

    >>
    >>>AEF

    >>
    >>Well, I spent about 20 years in the VAX/Alpha VMS world and NEVER
    >>encountered DDCMP! Perhaps the fact that DDCMP is almost unknown might
    >>have something to do with it. Even if DEC supported DDCMP, did anyone
    >>else???? It seems to me that there were a lot of LAN/WAN protocols that
    >>never really achieved general acceptance!
    >>
    >>There was a big fuss about DECnet Phase V and ISO protocols a back in
    >>the 90's but who uses them now? TCP/IP has, for practical purposes,
    >>conquered the world!

    >
    >
    > [My apologies if this shows up twice -- Google Groups wasn't
    > responding and I "timed it out". This is my third(!) attempt to post
    > this.]
    >
    > Hey, at least this is on topic!!! |:-D)
    >
    > Anyway,
    >
    > So what about the routing? Wouldn't it be easier for someone moving
    > from VAX to Alpha if at least the same level of routing functionality
    > were kept? Was it a big deal to to multiple circuits on an Alpha?
    >
    > AEF
    >
    >


    My Alphas spoke DECNet Phase 4 to each other and TCP/IP to the rest of
    the world. A Cisco router handled the routing. In the days when I
    still managed VAXen, they too spoke DECNet Phase 4 to each other and
    TCP/IP to the rest of the world. I never had a VMS system that did any
    routing whatever!


  11. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than onAlpha?

    AEF wrote:
    > [ON TOPIC!!!]
    >
    > VAX can do DDCMP circuits. Alpha can't.
    >
    >>From the DECnet for OpenVMS Networking Manual:

    >
    > "On AXP systems, Digital supports level 1 routing only for nodes
    > acting as routers for a cluster alias. Digital does not support level
    > 2 routing or routing between multiple circuits."
    >
    > It looks like routing control is also limited on Alpha.
    >
    > Also DECdns namespace appears to be missing for Alpha.
    >
    > And CI appears absent for Alpha.
    >
    > Why are all these things missing from the Alpha version? Are people
    > just expected to use Phase V and if so, does it have all these things
    > missing from Phase IV for Alpha?
    >
    > Thanks!
    >
    > AEF
    >

    I think the reason has to do with DEC's push of the OSI protocol stack.
    Routers were(are) stand alone boxes and Alphas were always considered
    end systems.

    Jeff

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  12. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on Alpha?

    AEF writes:

    >[ON TOPIC!!!]


    >VAX can do DDCMP circuits. Alpha can't.


    At the time Alphas were new, certain DECserver boxes could do DDCMP
    for the few places still using it.

    >From the DECnet for OpenVMS Networking Manual:


    >"On AXP systems, Digital supports level 1 routing only for nodes
    >acting as routers for a cluster alias. Digital does not support level
    >2 routing or routing between multiple circuits."


    >It looks like routing control is also limited on Alpha.


    They had DECserver type boxes that did that as well.

    I guess the logic was that type of overhead wasn't for main computers
    but for peripheral type devices.


  13. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on Alpha?

    "Richard B. Gilbert" wrote in message news:4730C598.2030902@comcast.net...
    > Well, I spent about 20 years in the VAX/Alpha VMS world and NEVER
    > encountered DDCMP! Perhaps the fact that DDCMP is almost unknown might
    > have something to do with it. Even if DEC supported DDCMP, did anyone
    > else???? It seems to me that there were a lot of LAN/WAN protocols that
    > never really achieved general acceptance!


    In the early eighties, before Ethernet was used, we used DDCMP to connect
    several VAX and PDP 11 systems. Some of them were in the building,
    others were in a different building a few kilometers further. In the latter
    cases a modem was needed. Modems had a speed of 1200 baud at that time.

  14. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on Alpha?

    >Why are all these things missing from the Alpha version?

    Don't think there were many customer left using DDCMP, so I guess it was

    not considered useful and there was no need or request to port this to

    the OpenVMS Alpha implementation of DECnet Phase IV.

    The same goes goes for DECnet on the CI, as Keith explained.



    To offload the OpenVMS-systems (and other host based DECnet-nodes),
    dedicated

    routers (like DECrouters on Microserver,DEMSA/B, DECnis and CISCO-routers)

    were introduced and available, so host based routing functionality was not

    strictly necessary anymore.



    >Are peoplejust expected to use Phase V and if so,


    >does it have all these things missing from Phase IV for Alpha?




    Do you have a special need for DECnet-routing in your network ?



    One option is to use a CISCO or other router, which implements the DECnet-

    routing protocol. You will need to a special license/version, not just a

    regular CISCO IP-router.



    With the initial introduction of DECnet-OSI (now called DECnet-Plus, aka

    DECnet Phase V) Host Based routing functionality was not implemented.

    Some time later, this has become available in the DECnet-Plus implementation

    on OpenVMS Alpha and Integrity.



    DECdns client/clerk was implemented from the beginning on Alpha and

    later on the DECdns server functionality has also been made available.

    If all your DECnet-nodes are in the same LAN/Broadcast domain,

    your DECnet (-Plus) end-nodes/systems can directly communicate

    using the DECnet-protocol without the need for a router.



    DECnet-PLus also implements DECnet-over-IP, which makes it possible to

    transparantly use IP as the transport for your DECnet communication

    between nodes/hosts in your network, thereby utilizing the IP-backbone

    for routing.



    Hope this helps.



    Regards, /\Pim.



  15. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on Alpha?

    In article , "Pim van Velzen" writes:

    > DECnet-PLus also implements DECnet-over-IP, which makes it possible to
    > transparantly use IP as the transport for your DECnet communication
    > between nodes/hosts in your network, thereby utilizing the IP-backbone
    > for routing.


    But Multinet provides Phase-IP, which allows one to transport DECnet
    Phase IV over IP, so one does not have to give up the DECnet security
    features that were omitted from DECnet Phase V (can you say SET EXECUTOR
    DEFAULT ACCESS NONE, as in NIST 800-53 SC-7 (5) ?).

  16. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on Alpha?

    On Nov 7, 6:04 am, "Pim van Velzen" wrote:
    > >Why are all these things missing from the Alpha version?

    >
    > Don't think there were many customer left using DDCMP, so I guess it was
    >
    > not considered useful and there was no need or request to port this to
    >
    > the OpenVMS Alpha implementation of DECnet Phase IV.
    >
    > The same goes goes for DECnet on the CI, as Keith explained.
    >
    > To offload the OpenVMS-systems (and other host based DECnet-nodes),
    > dedicated
    >
    > routers (like DECrouters on Microserver,DEMSA/B, DECnis and CISCO-routers)
    >
    > were introduced and available, so host based routing functionality was not
    >
    > strictly necessary anymore.
    >
    > >Are peoplejust expected to use Phase V and if so,
    > >does it have all these things missing from Phase IV for Alpha?

    >
    > Do you have a special need for DECnet-routing in your network ?


    DNIP to get from NYC to London and HK.

    Also, I was told that our app needs its "market" systems have to be
    routers, though that might just be for DNIP tunnels. (Our app consists
    of a central "market system" communicates with "update nodes". The
    users front-end app connects to the update nodes.)

    [BTW, your post showed up on Google Groups double spaced, as you can
    tell reading this.]

    > One option is to use a CISCO or other router, which implements the DECnet-
    >
    > routing protocol. You will need to a special license/version, not just a
    >
    > regular CISCO IP-router.


    Thanks for the advice, but I'm not upgrading to Alpha (not that you
    shouldn't have added that). I've just been reading through the DECnet
    manuals and was just wondering why all the limitations on the Alphas.
    Posts in this thread, including this one, have been very helpful.

    > With the initial introduction of DECnet-OSI (now called DECnet-Plus, aka
    >
    > DECnet Phase V) Host Based routing functionality was not implemented.
    >
    > Some time later, this has become available in the DECnet-Plus implementation
    >
    > on OpenVMS Alpha and Integrity.
    >
    > DECdns client/clerk was implemented from the beginning on Alpha and
    >
    > later on the DECdns server functionality has also been made available.
    >
    > If all your DECnet-nodes are in the same LAN/Broadcast domain,
    >
    > your DECnet (-Plus) end-nodes/systems can directly communicate
    >
    > using the DECnet-protocol without the need for a router.
    >
    > DECnet-PLus also implements DECnet-over-IP, which makes it possible to
    >
    > transparantly use IP as the transport for your DECnet communication
    >
    > between nodes/hosts in your network, thereby utilizing the IP-backbone
    >
    > for routing.
    >
    > Hope this helps.
    >
    > Regards, /\Pim.


    AEF


  17. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on

    In article <4730C598.2030902@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert" writes:
    >
    > Well, I spent about 20 years in the VAX/Alpha VMS world and NEVER
    > encountered DDCMP! Perhaps the fact that DDCMP is almost unknown might
    > have something to do with it. Even if DEC supported DDCMP, did anyone
    > else???? It seems to me that there were a lot of LAN/WAN protocols that
    > never really achieved general acceptance!


    DDCMP was pretty much DECnet specific. You could, in principle,
    design something else that ran over DDCMP, but I'm not sure you
    could do TCP/IP or ISO/OSI.

    >
    > There was a big fuss about DECnet Phase V and ISO protocols a back in
    > the 90's but who uses them now? TCP/IP has, for practical purposes,
    > conquered the world!


    Some folks think Microsoft has conquered the world, but as long as us
    heritics hold out there is some hope.


  18. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on

    In article <2ab7d$4730cc89$cef8887a$3152@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei writes:
    >
    > (For those who don't know, DDMCP is decnet over a serial line).


    DDCMP is a line level protocol over synchronous serial lines. You
    could, in principle, put something other than DECnet on top of it.
    It is not DECnet over asynchronous serial lines.


  19. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on Alpha?

    In article , no.spam@no.uce.bellatlantic.net writes:
    >
    > It was widely used between PDP-11s and VAXen in lab settings. The
    > DDCMP is good point to point but the media was range limited even with
    > SYNC modems which often only ran at 9600 baud. The latter is the big
    > issue as it was rare thing to see it used with a serial line faster
    > than 64kbaud. Even Ethernet 10mb beats that hands down but
    > then Ethernet was far more costly than a serial line.


    Ethernet is a LAN protocol. DDCMP is a WAN protocol, although I saw
    it used locally prior to the introduction of Ethernet. We used to
    have local lines (in the building) using 9600 baud modems, shorter
    lines (in one room) using coax cable, and long distance (East coast
    to Mississippi river) lines on 56K modems.

    Those short coax lines were faster than the modems, but I don't
    recall the speed.


  20. Re: Why does DECnet Phase IV have more capabilities on VAX than on

    In article <0bM1Hbh$pKpA@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
    koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
    > In article <4730C598.2030902@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert" writes:
    >>
    >> Well, I spent about 20 years in the VAX/Alpha VMS world and NEVER
    >> encountered DDCMP! Perhaps the fact that DDCMP is almost unknown might
    >> have something to do with it. Even if DEC supported DDCMP, did anyone
    >> else???? It seems to me that there were a lot of LAN/WAN protocols that
    >> never really achieved general acceptance!

    >
    > DDCMP was pretty much DECnet specific. You could, in principle,
    > design something else that ran over DDCMP, but I'm not sure you
    > could do TCP/IP or ISO/OSI.
    >
    >>
    >> There was a big fuss about DECnet Phase V and ISO protocols a back in
    >> the 90's but who uses them now? TCP/IP has, for practical purposes,
    >> conquered the world!

    >
    > Some folks think Microsoft has conquered the world, but as long as us
    > heritics hold out there is some hope.


    Microsoft was able to conquer the world because their product ran
    on stand alone systems that did not require co-operation with other
    systems in order to grow. Networking doesn't work like that. Like
    it or not, TCP/IP has taken over the networking world and there is
    no attempt being made to build a parallel network that relies on a
    different protocol set in order to supplant TCP/IP's postion.

    bill

    --
    Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    University of Scranton |
    Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast