eda@vse.cs (Eda Vopicka) (05/18/91)
Please is there anybody with working SLIP connection between two
386/486 computers (hardwired connection, e.g. no modems) with SCO
UNIX V3.2.2 and SCO TCP/IP 1.1.1?
We cannot get it working anyway. We have checked our hardware with
diagnostics and then with KERMIT, it seems to be OK. We believe
we have followed the manuals correctly (TCP installed, then mkdev wdn,
mkdev slip, mkdev TCP, re-linked system, reboot). There are no problems
with Ethernet connection, but the SLIP connection seems not to work.
Our "best result" with SLIP was "NOTICE: TCP sum ..." on the system
console. We believe that the line and ports are OK (programs like
KERMIT or other communication packages have no problems on this line)
and we have checked almost all speeds between 75 and 9600 baud on this
line with SLIP, but no fun.
I am experienced system guru, but have only a little practice on UNIX.
Thank you for your help.
===========================================================================
Eduard Vopicka, EUnet: eda@vse.cs, eda@vse.UUCP
BITNET: EDA@CSPGEU11
Prague School of Economics, Winston Churchill square 4
CS 130 67 Prague 3, Czechoslovakia, Europe
===========================================================================sl@wimsey.bc.ca (Stuart Lynne) (05/18/91)
In article <26928@adm.brl.mil> eda@vse.cs (Eda Vopicka) writes: > >Please is there anybody with working SLIP connection between two >386/486 computers (hardwired connection, e.g. no modems) with SCO >UNIX V3.2.2 and SCO TCP/IP 1.1.1? > >We cannot get it working anyway. We have checked our hardware with We gave up on SCO based slip over a year ago. It probably does work better now with TCP/IP 1.1.1 under UNIX than it used to with TCP 1.0 under XENIX. But I would still recommend that you look at KA9Q on a pair of cheap PC's. It's - faster (Van Jacobsen header compression) - more robust (PPP vs. SLIP) - easier to setup and configure There are other advantages as well if you have more than one machine on your network. For example the router keeps routing even when the machine your where going to run SLIP on is down. When you change your main machine you just leave the router in the corner doing it's thing. You probably won't need to worry about reconfiguring it. We ran SLIP for about a year before going to PPP. I would NOT go back to a host based SLIP given the low cost of KA9Q on a PC. I might be persuaded to move up to a Netblazer or even a Real*TM router, but I wouldn't go backwards. What I'd really like to do is get a pair of microwave modems. By line of sight I'm only about two miles from a potential Internet connect point. Unfortunately by telephone rules it's about 15 miles which makes a leased line cost a fair bit. Maybe next year ;-) -- Stuart Lynne Computer Signal Corporation, Canada ...!van-bc!sl 604-937-7785 604-937-7718(fax) sl@wimsey.bc.ca
neal@mnopltd.UUCP (05/29/91)
->
->Please is there anybody with working SLIP connection between two
->386/486 computers (hardwired connection, e.g. no modems) with SCO
->UNIX V3.2.2 and SCO TCP/IP 1.1.1?
->
Yup. We couldn't get ping to do anything using the straight COM1 board,
but then found it worked great on a Digi-board port. At 57.6 even.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neal Rhodes MNOP Ltd (404)- 972-5430
President Lilburn (atlanta) GA 30247 Fax: 978-4741
emory!mnopltd!neal
gatech!emory!mnopltd!neal
------------------------------------------------------------------------------