[net.unix-wizards] what's wrong with microVax II?

preece@ccvaxa.UUCP (08/21/85)

According to Electronics, DEC has stopped shipping microVax IIs
with Ultrix because of an unspecified problem with the operating
system.  Are there any of you out there who know what the problem
is?

The article was interesting on a number of fronts.  Apparently a
large factor in pushing Ultrix out the door at first ship was
a large GM RFQ for Unix-based workstations.  According to the
article, the mVax II was disqualified on that bid because it
was not "Unix-based" but was optimized for VMS and had Ultrix
grafted on.  This seemed somewhat curious, since Apollo was one
of the qualifying bidders, and their Unix is also an alternative,
rather than principal, operating system offering (though Aegis
may be closer to Unix than VMS).  I wonder how GM defined "Unix-based."

-- 
scott preece
gould/csd - urbana
ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece

[Disclaimer: it's not impossible that Gould bid on that GM contract;
if so, this should not be construed as a request for information
that bidders shouldn't be allowed to hear or as carping at the
competition, but rather as the idle curiosity of a Unix person
in no way representing himself as an official manifestation of
Gould Electronics Computer Systems Division...]

gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn <gwyn>) (08/23/85)

> According to Electronics, DEC has stopped shipping microVax IIs
> with Ultrix because of an unspecified problem with the operating
> system.

I don't know if this is related, but I heard today that the
latest release of Ultrix-32 (with DECnet support) has totally
broken TCP/IP.  This is second-hand info, so if it matters to
you, check for yourself.  Maybe someone from DEC could comment.

avie@cmu-cs-wb1.ARPA (Avadis Tevanian) (08/23/85)

>According to Electronics, DEC has stopped shipping microVax IIs
>with Ultrix because of an unspecified problem with the operating
>system.  Are there any of you out there who know what the problem
>is?

As far as I know (and I may be completely wrong), there is no problem with
Ultrix.  The problem is the hardware.  It seems that DEC has experienced some
memory problems.  As it turns out, the "bad" addresses usually show up in the
lower ranges... right where Unix lives.  Apparently, VMS runs in high memory,
so the problem only affects poor little user processes (a situation that they
are willing to live with).

Supposedly, a significant number of beta sites have reported this problem.
Our MicroVax II hasn't had this problem, though.  In fact, in several months
use, I've seen only one crash caused by hardware (a machine check).

sdyer@bbncc5.UUCP (Steve Dyer) (08/23/85)

> I don't know if this is related, but I heard today that the
> latest release of Ultrix-32 (with DECnet support) has totally
> broken TCP/IP.  This is second-hand info, so if it matters to
> you, check for yourself.  Maybe someone from DEC could comment.

Here at BBN, we actually returned a LH/DH-11 to ACC on the belief
that it was broken--this was a new machine supporting an 1822 Arpanet
interface and running Ultrix 1.1 (1.1 being needed because of DMZ-32
hardware on this machine.)   Naturally, we foolishly didn't suspect
the software--I mean, DEC doesn't even officially support the non-DEC
peripherals, so one wouldn't expect the IMP software to change.
Ultrix 1.0 (sans DECnet) works fine.

Turns out that the changes needed for DECnet did indeed "break" 1822
support (and maybe other devices--I haven't tried anything but DEUNA and
1822)--TCP/IP over the DEUNA works fine.  We spoke to Ultrix engineering,
and volunteered to help them fix this problem, since we knew that if we
wanted our machines up and running quickly, this would be the only way to
ensure that, since DEC does not have an Arpanet-style connection to any of
its engineering VAXes.  We have both running now, under a quick-and-dirty
fix, and should have a DECnet-compatible fix which can be tested at DEC in
a few more days.  I can't comment on when it will be available from DEC.

I might mention that DEC has been extremely responsive to this problem--
we've had the pleasure to speak with people who really know their stuff.  I
think their Ultrix software support system and the communication between
support and engineering has improved by several orders of magnitude from
our earlier experiences of a year ago, to the extent that I am quite
happy to recommend their support service.
-- 
/Steve Dyer
{harvard,seismo}!bbnccv!bbncc5!sdyer
sdyer@bbncc5.ARPA