[mod.protocols.tcp-ip] nsfnet

JARRELLRA@VTVAX3.BITNET (Ronald A. Jarrell) (09/04/86)

We plan on hooking to nsfnet in the near future, probably through a sattelite
link and an imp.  We were going to be running Wollongong's WIN on the Vaxes,
but I've been told we are going to have a horrible time with it, that it
wouldn't work with out a lot of kluding.. Anyone have suggestions as to a
good, full-function, tcpip package to use in this situation?  It would
need ddn protocol support, and be able to talk to unix flavor systems.

Please also mention whether or not it would require new hardware, or if
we could share the deuna we currently have for decnet and lat.


Also, while I'm thinking of it, anyone have PD or non-PD code for domain
support for a VMS system?

-Ron

steve@BRL.ARPA (Stephen Wolff) (09/04/86)

I've been told SRI  markets a competitive package, but I've lost the
reference.  Help, someone?		-s

cetron@UTAH-CS.ARPA (Edward J Cetron) (09/06/86)

-------------------------- the standard sacrificial line

	We have been using the Tektronix tcp/ip package for quite a
few months and have found it extremely useful... A quick summary:

	Advantages (especially vs. WIN/VX)

	1. you are given ALL of the source code (albeit in bliss)
	2. the code is NATIVE-style NOT a unix port
	3. it has proved to be very reliable, easy to modify for local
		hacks/improvements
	4. with very few exceptions, it is very clean, readable code which
		tends to follow the tcp mil-std very well....
	5. with the software tools message system (public domain from lbl)
		it also will support smtp as per rfc 822, 821....
	6. it is virtually free for an educational institutional site license.

	Disadvantages:

	1. It is available currently only to educational institutions (but
		some commercial sites HAVE gotten access to it).
	2. it currently only supports telnet, ftp, 3com ftp, and smtp
	3. there is no support (but then i understand the Wollongong doesn't
		support there product either in reality)
	4. it does not yet support nameservers, >255 hosts, and anything other
		than in its fixed host table (however; we are currently fixing
		these problems and hope to have them resolved within 2 months)


	All in all, compared to WIN/VX (which i HAVE used) i feel that it is
infinitely superior (and much cheaper).  While it isn't perfect (yet) you have
the code to fix whatever ails it.  One of our sites has been using it for 3
months with NO MAJOR COMPLAINTS  except when the WIN/VX site that they talk
to screws up.

	I would be happy to answer any further questions or supply details
if people would like...

-ed cetron
center for engineering design
Univ. of Utah

cetron%utah-cbd@utah-cs.arpa