--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 193 LAN Ref: DFJ00010 Date: 11/08/96 From: TY ROWE Time: 09:11pm \/To: ALL (Read 8 times) Subj: Problem Is there anyway to make my crappy modem program accept ASCII comands? TY --- Maximus 2.02 * Origin: View of the Rockies 403-291-6721 Calgary AB (1:134/125) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 193 LAN Ref: DFJ00011 Date: 11/08/96 From: SJOERD SCHAAFSMA Time: 07:24pm \/To: MIKE BILOW (Read 8 times) Subj: Cheap net Howdy Mike MB> Sjoerd Schaafsma wrote in a message to Abel Barbero: AB>> If all you want to do is share disks and the printer with 2 AB>> machines via a serial or parallel cable its cheaper to get AB>> win-95, (it includes the right program) than buying NICs and AB>> cables. (of course it wont be so fast, but it works fine). SS>> Alas, only if you are running machines that are happy with SS>> Win 95. I have a 386 running DOS much of the time which I SS>> don't want to bog down with Win 95. MB> For raw DOS, you can use either the free client-only Microsoft MB> Client for DOS or the client-and-peer-server Microsoft MB> Workgroup Add-On for DOS, which costs about $50. These are MB> interoperable with standard NetBIOS networks, including OS/2 MB> Warp, Windows for Workgroups, Windows 95, Windows NT, and Unix Thanks Mike, I may look into this. I'd never heard of the Workgroup add-on for DOS. Sjoerd ... Let him who is stoned cast the first sin. --- RA2.5/FD2.20/GEcho * Origin: The TERMINAL BBS (403)327-9731 Lethbridge,AB,Canada (1:358/1) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 193 LAN Ref: DFJ00012 Date: 11/09/96 From: DAVE PETRUCCI Time: 11:36am \/To: RICHARD COFFEE (Read 8 times) Subj: Re: Little Big Lan >All, >Is LittleBig Lan still around? Richard, Yes it is... Dave P. --- SLMAIL v4.5a (#1079) * Origin: The Rocket Shop BBS -=|Dover,DE|=- 302-674-4839 (1:2600/161) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 193 LAN Ref: DFJ00013 Date: 11/10/96 From: JOHN MUDGE Time: 04:22am \/To: ALL (Read 8 times) Subj: Attachmate Cards Hello All! I have several network cards made by Attachmate of Bellevue, WA. Each has a paper sticker on the back side saying 711-00406. Each has a BNC connector and an RJ11 (Not RJ45) connector on it. They seem to be ISA Bus 8-bit cards. What are they? John Mudge [jmudge@ptmudge.westsound.com] --- * Origin: point MUDGE bbs * 1-360-427-0407 * Shelton, WA USA (1:352/111) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 193 LAN Ref: DFJ00014 Date: 11/08/96 From: JONATHAN HUNTER Time: 12:37pm \/To: ALL (Read 8 times) Subj: IPX over dialup? * Crossposted in NOVELL * Crossposted in LAN * Crossposted in LINUX_UK Hello All! I wonder if you can help me set up a (very complicated!) dialup? LM> ipx internal net 1 My university provides dialup Internet access to students. Each Uni department has its own Netware server (they are now upgrading to 4.1), which is obviously difficult to access over a simple TCP/IP link. I have since found out that the annex dialup also supports IPX (over PPP, not SLIP!). My question is - if I were to dial up (using my Linux box) enabling IPX as well as IP, what would I need to do? My current setup is: Netware server and Linux server on Ethernet with local workstations. Linux server currently connects to dialup and provides IP masquerading to allow workstations to "surf". Problems I forsee: My Novell internal net number is currently 1. Is this really internal, or would I need to change it to something unique so it does not clash with anything at Uni? From reading various HOWTOs, it looks like I will need to run ripd (ipxripd?) on my Linux box. I have ncpfs and the 2.0.9 kernels, but I've not been able to find any such daemon - where can I get it from?! I am currently using DIP to dial up (with SLIP), and I will obviously need to switch to pppd to use PPP. The problem is, the Linux machine is also used for dial-in access, and so I can't include things like "defaultroute" in the ppp/options file, or dialup users would find themselves being a default route! Can I include these options on the pppd commandline? Jonathan ... Time is the best teacher, but it kills all its students. --- FMail 1.02 * Origin: The Ninja BBS - +44 (0)161 283 1098 - <> (2:250/182) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 193 LAN Ref: DFJ00015 Date: 11/09/96 From: MIKE BILOW Time: 11:01pm \/To: MARK WRIGHT (Read 8 times) Subj: Knowlidge needed Mark Wright wrote in a message to Mike Bilow: MW> Personally the move to video/printer(GUI) running at ring 0 MW> is a problem looking for a place to happen. I am astounded MW> that MS chose this in 4.0 as it compromises the integrity MW> previously found in 3.??. Running each task in separate MW> space, avoiding ring 0, and local management are the reasons MW> I have supported NT's efforts, until now. True there were MW> performance penalties, but with the prices now for hardware MW> that issue is easily solved. I wish MS would actually MW> produce a seperate server version, and workstation version, MW> not a "change 2 entries" difference. I think you and I are actually in surprisingly close technical agreement. I can respect your argument, which admits the trade-off between performance and robustness. My real problem is with people who refuse to accept that these sorts of design compromises are present in NT -- and in every other operating system of necessity. It has been said that engineering is the science of being "close enough." As such, I have come to the opinion that a mature engineering system has such trade-offs in finely tuned balance, and that the only way to achieve such balance is through experience. This is partly why I have high regard for Unix and why I find it absurd for people to claim that NT will replace Unix. My expectation is that NT will become more Unix-like as it progresses. Your point about the difficulty of having a one-size-fits-all NT is an important issue, since some situations call for superior performance, others call for superior robustness, and still others call for superior security. These are all, to some extent, mutually exclusive. Unix has been very effective at developing differring personalities to serve differring needs. Putting video in Ring 0 was, I think, a clear mistake for NT. OS/2 and Unix, which have always run file systems in Ring 0, never contemplated running video in Ring 0. Both OS/2 and Unix also get a resulting benefit of strict isolation between the core OS and the GUI, and both can easily be booted and run with no GUI at all. Especially for network server applications, a Ring 0 GUI is a pure loss. -- Mike --- * Origin: N1BEE BBS +1 401 944 8498 V.34/V.FC/V.32bis/HST16.8 (1:323/107) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 193 LAN Ref: DFJ00016 Date: 11/09/96 From: MIKE BILOW Time: 11:14pm \/To: SCOTT PARKS (Read 8 times) Subj: Exchange/NT/Netware Scott Parks wrote in a message to all: SP> Our school district has plans to switch our mail system to SP> Exchange which will require running NT as our mail servers. SP> Anyone have experience running this setup along side of SP> Netware? Netware versions 3.11-4.1x SP> Any comments welcome (clients, attaches, migration ... etc) Why did you decide to go to Exchange if your network is NetWare? What are you using now? Pegasus is an excellent freeware MHS mail system, ideal for a school. What benefit will you get from Exchange? -- Mike --- * Origin: N1BEE BBS +1 401 944 8498 V.34/V.FC/V.32bis/HST16.8 (1:323/107) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 193 LAN Ref: DFJ00017 Date: 11/09/96 From: MIKE BILOW Time: 11:17pm \/To: ERIC SMITH (Read 8 times) Subj: new lan manager... Eric Smith wrote in a message to Mike Bilow: MB>This sort of "token ring" is contrasted with a "token bus" system such as >ARCnet, where there is only a single pair used for flow in both irections. >The advantage to having a real ring is that there is theoretically no imit >the size of the ring or distance between nodes. ES> I'm afraid thats not exactly true. You are always limited in ES> distance due to db loss, and signal strength. I believe ES> normal rings start to have some problems after 63 nodes. I said "theoretically" because each node on the ring functions as a repeater, making signal loss insignificant. Unlike Ethernet, where adding repeaters stops working because it eventually breaks the collision detection mechanism, token ring has no inherent limit on the number of nodes/repeaters which can be used. In practice, of course, adding too many nodes into the ring will force the token loss timeout and the normal token transit time to increase, and this will hurt both efficiency and performance. Token ring will show only slow degradation because of excessive nodes, but Ethernet will fall of a cliff. -- Mike --- * Origin: N1BEE BBS +1 401 944 8498 V.34/V.FC/V.32bis/HST16.8 (1:323/107) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 193 LAN Ref: DFJ00018 Date: 11/09/96 From: MIKE BILOW Time: 11:23pm \/To: ERIC SMITH (Read 8 times) Subj: Mac SE to ethernet Eric Smith wrote in a message to Mike Bilow: MB> KD> WANs by definition are any computer network that span over 60 > KD> Miles in radius. ES> Not quite. I'm not sure why you addressed this message to me. The line above was in my reply quoting KD, as shown by the initials. ES> LAN - Local Area Network. This is a network where all the ES> nodes are contained in a single building or tight building ES> complex. ES> MAN - Metropolitan Area Network. This is a network in a ES> large complex, such as a campus, or one that spans several ES> buildings in a single city. ES> WAN - Wide Area Network. This type of network is one that ES> spans across cities or uses a leased data line such as a T1. ES> The MAN/WAN definitions overlap since many MAN type ES> configurations use a Leased T1 line such as mine does. ES> This information can be confirmed in several sources. The ES> Novell Red test book "Networking Technologies". Or in most any ES> basic networking book, or by most computer dictionaries, or by ES> contacting ISO (International Standards Organization ~ IOS). If you can cite an ISO standard document which defines "LAN," "MAN," and "WAN" in such a way as to clearly distinguish them, I would like to know what it is. I don't mean to go off on you particularly, so please don't take this message in the wrong way, but this issue is a perfect example of what is wrong with the way networking is taught in formal settings. The division of network types is intended as an informal guideline in order to help you think about the different issues which arise when using them. For example, we often use protocols which waste bandwidth, such as RIP, on Ethernet LANs, but we would not use such protocols on WANs because bandwidth is pay-as-you-go. It is never useful to look at a particular network installation and invest time and effort in figuring out whether to label it a "LAN" or a "WAN." In a realistic professional setting, no one will ever care. What will be important is when your boss tells you that you have to spec a link between the New York and San Francisco offices of your company, and you have to develop some basis for deciding between a dial-up modem and a T1. If you tell the boss that this is a WAN so it should have a T1, then he may balk at spending several thousand dollars per month when the real goal is to save the FedEx expenses incurred because the San Francisco office sends a floppy disk to the New York office twice a week. On the other hand, the boss might be irritated with a dial-up link between two desks in the same building when he finds out that an Ethernet cable could solve the whole problem. Terminology of this kind is inherently fuzzy and informal, and there would be no real point to having a committee of people write an ISO standard for it. -- Mike --- * Origin: N1BEE BBS +1 401 944 8498 V.34/V.FC/V.32bis/HST16.8 (1:323/107) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 193 LAN Ref: DFJ00019 Date: 11/09/96 From: MIKE BILOW Time: 11:34pm \/To: GEORGE FLIGER (Read 8 times) Subj: WFWG 3.11 & Novell Network George Fliger wrote in a message to Mike Bilow: JW> How fast is it if I installed WFWG 3.11 to run off the JW> fileserver? Would it be A LOT slower? Would there be any major JW> complications that I should look into? MB> I've done this. Windows does not support such a configuration, MB> but you can do it by manually editing SYSTEM.INI and forcing MB> the issue. You need to define the temporary swap file on a MB> network drive, frequently accessed DLLs will cause serious MB> slowdowns, and any loss of network connection will result in a MB> total crash. Other than this, it can be made to work. GF> Windows DOES support this. A simple SETUP /A will do a GF> Network Administrator's setup on the Netware server. From GF> there, SETUP /N is issued to install the minimal program GF> files on the workstation necessary to access the remaining GF> code that's located on the Netware server. You can also GF> override the default install path in SETUP /N to point the GF> workstation's files to another directory on the Netware GF> server (such as the user's home directory). From this point GF> the only MANUAL item you would need to change (if you decide GF> or need to change it) is to modify the swapfile settings to GF> point, again, to the Netware server. The swapfile would GF> have to be a temporary versus a permanent. I think this is what I said: Windows cannot be automatically installed to run on a diskless workstation with any swapfile in use. If the workstation does not have sufficient memory to run Windows without a swapfile, and few do, then Windows cannot be installed without a manual process. GF> I'll grant you that this makes a very slow and inefficient GF> WFWG network but for those networks with workstations that GF> are only floppy based or diskless, this is a viable GF> solution. Yes, it does work, but it also requires manual editing of SYSTEM.INI. This is exactly what I meant by "does not support." If you try to put a temporary swapfile onto a network volume from Control Panel, Windows will tell you that this is not allowed. -- Mike --- * Origin: N1BEE BBS +1 401 944 8498 V.34/V.FC/V.32bis/HST16.8 (1:323/107)