nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) (12/07/90)
Hi, all. I've been talking with Don Jindra of Information Modes. They're working on a network that will cost $75 for all the software needed for the whole network. That's for the *whole* network, not per-node. Anyway, it's first going to run over serial ports and ARCNET, and then he's going to work on an Ethernet version. So I asked him if he asked Datapoint for an ARCNET type code, or the IEEE for an Ethernet type code, and he says "Nawwww, I don't bother much with those standards. They're all designed by committee, and they've got these huge headers that just slow you down." He *did*, however, say that he would consider using a type code, but he didn't think it was going to be a problem because he didn't think "the big guys" were part of his market. He (rightly) points out that Artisoft (LANtastic) and Novell don't pay much attention to standards either. That's more of the the-world's-an-ibm-pc-running-netbios syndrome that Otto pointed out recently. I think that if a sufficient quantity of people call him and scream at him about the necessity for interoperability and the user of type codes, that he might get the message. Their phone number is 817-387-3339, address is Information Modes P.O. Drawer F Denton, TX 76202 -- --russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) FAX 315-268-7600 It's better to get mugged than to live a life of fear -- Freeman Dyson I joined the League for Programming Freedom, and I hope you'll join too.
Tim.Radbourne@p5.f60.n140.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Tim Radbourne) (12/12/90)
> From: nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) > Organization: Clarkson University, Potsdam NY > > Hi, all. I've been talking with Don Jindra of Information Modes. They're > working on a network that will cost $75 for all the software needed for > the whole network. That's for the *whole* network, not per-node. Anyway, > it's first going to run over serial ports and ARCNET, and then he's going > to work on an Ethernet version. > > So I asked him if he asked Datapoint for an ARCNET type code, or the > IEEE for an Ethernet type code, and he says "Nawwww, I don't bother > much with those standards. They're all designed by committee, and > they've got these huge headers that just slow you down." He *did*, > however, say that he would consider using a type code, but he didn't > think it was going to be a problem because he didn't think "the big > guys" were part of his market. > > He (rightly) points out that Artisoft (LANtastic) and Novell don't pay > much attention to standards either. That's more of the > the-world's-an-ibm-pc-running-netbios syndrome that Otto pointed out > recently. > > I think that if a sufficient quantity of people call him and scream at him > about the necessity for interoperability and the user of type codes, that > he might get the message. > > Their phone number is 817-387-3339, address is > Information Modes > P.O. Drawer F > Denton, TX 76202 Don't mess with him! We need someone to take on Lantastic right now that they have changed their policy from selling their adapter independent NOS at $600 to wanting to licence their adapter independent operating system at $199 per node for software only. Like he says... Lantastic didn't worry about the standards and it works quite well. Lets get rid of the beaurucratic baggage where it is unnecessary. -- Tim Radbourne - via FidoNet node 1:140/22 UUCP: ...!herald!weyr!60.5!Tim.Radbourne Domain: Tim.Radbourne@p5.f60.n140.z1.FIDONET.ORG Standard Disclaimers Apply...
nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) (12/13/90)
In article <NELSON.90Dec6103447@image.clarkson.edu> nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) writes:
So I asked him if he asked Datapoint for an ARCNET type code, or the
IEEE for an Ethernet type code, and he says "Nawwww, I don't bother
much with those standards. ...
Well, I talked to Datapoint, and they said that it was perfectly acceptable to
NOT use an ARCNET type code if you don't want to be interoperable.
For my purposes, I want our office to be able to share our laser printer, so
I need interoperability on a wire with TCP/IP, Chaos, and Novell.
--
--russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) FAX 315-268-7600
It's better to get mugged than to live a life of fear -- Freeman Dyson
I joined the League for Programming Freedom, and I hope you'll join too.haas%basset.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Walt Haas) (12/13/90)
In article <1008.27671B24@weyr.FIDONET.ORG> Tim.Radbourne@p5.f60.n140.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Tim Radbourne) writes: > > > From: nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) > > Organization: Clarkson University, Potsdam NY > > > > Hi, all. I've been talking with Don Jindra of Information Modes. They're > > working on a network that will cost $75 for all the software needed for > > the whole network. That's for the *whole* network, not per-node.... > > So I asked him if he asked Datapoint for an ARCNET type code, or the > > IEEE for an Ethernet type code, and he says "Nawwww, I don't bother > > much with those standards. They're all designed by committee, and > > they've got these huge headers that just slow you down." He *did*, > > however, say that he would consider using a type code, but he didn't > > think it was going to be a problem because he didn't think "the big > > guys" were part of his market. > > > > He (rightly) points out that Artisoft (LANtastic) and Novell don't pay > > much attention to standards either.... >Don't mess with him! > >We need someone to take on Lantastic right now that they >have changed their policy from selling their adapter >independent NOS at $600 to wanting to licence their adapter >independent operating system at $199 per node for software >only. > >Like he says... Lantastic didn't worry about the standards >and it works quite well. > >Lets get rid of the beaurucratic baggage where it is >unnecessary. The "bureaucratic baggage" becomes quite necessary when you hook your small network into a larger, say University-wide, network. We have had more than one bad experience with departments that wanted connectivity to the rest of the world from their small un-bureaucratic network. In every case the only way we could preserve the functioning of the rest of the University network was to insist that they bring their department network up to standards first. By which I mean at least a proper Ethernet type code. -- Walt Haas haas@ski.utah.edu
pat@hprnd.rose.hp.com (Pat Thaler) (12/14/90)
> > So I asked him if he asked Datapoint for an ARCNET type code, or the > IEEE for an Ethernet type code, and he says "Nawwww, I don't bother ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ IEEE does not assign type codes. Type codes are part of the Ethernet standard developed by DEC, Intel and Xerox. IEEE 802.3 uses 802.2 to perform a function similar to that of type codes. Type code assignments can be obtained from Xerox. Pat Thaler
k2@bl.physik.tu-muenchen.de (Klaus Steinberger) (12/14/90)
Tim.Radbourne@p5.f60.n140.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Tim Radbourne) writes: >Don't mess with him! >We need someone to take on Lantastic right now that they >have changed their policy from selling their adapter >independent NOS at $600 to wanting to licence their adapter >independent operating system at $199 per node for software >only. >Like he says... Lantastic didn't worry about the standards >and it works quite well. >Lets get rid of the beaurucratic baggage where it is >unnecessary. Ethernet type codes aren't "unnecessary beaurucratic baggage"! They are indeed very important, and don't involve additional overhead. The type code field is in the Ethernet header. It's important for distinction between different protocols. If you have many different protocols running on the same network, it's essential! You can't debug your net, you can't correctly setup bridge filtering, you are supposed to blow up other protocols on your net, if you use incorrect type codes !!!!!!!!! It's really no bureaucratic! It's very simple and cheap to get a type code registered. Look into the RFC's for the address of the ISO office. Sincerely, Klaus Steinberger -- Klaus Steinberger Beschleunigerlabor der TU und LMU Muenchen Phone: (+49 89)3209 4287 Hochschulgelaende FAX: (+49 89)3209 4280 D-8046 Garching, Germany BITNET: K2@DGABLG5P Internet: k2@bl.physik.tu-muenchen.de
dougm@ico.isc.com (Doug McCallum) (12/18/90)
In article <1008.27671B24@weyr.FIDONET.ORG> Tim.Radbourne@p5.f60.n140.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Tim Radbourne) writes: ... >Like he says... Lantastic didn't worry about the standards >and it works quite well. > >Lets get rid of the beaurucratic baggage where it is >unnecessary. > I thought Artisoft had seen the light and were moving to following standards? In any case, not following either the Ethernet or IEEE specs on an Ethernet/IEEE802.3 can lead to many, many problems. Following at least the Ethernet spec on these LANs ensures coexistence with any other use and adds no overhead. The type field is there and ought to be used. Even following the 802.3+802.2 specification only adds 3 bytes of overhead and allows other systems to run their own protocols. I've also heard the argument that "that won't ever happen" when pointing out that standards allow for better coexistence when other protocols are added. Typically, networks grow faster than anyone expects and other protocols always get added. When I first came to ISC, they weren't running TCP/IP. We now run TCP/IP, Netware, ISO, AppleTalk, and a few others. Two years ago no one would have believed it.