wdw@aucs.UUCP (03/01/87)
We are about to install a small LAN in our Computer Center. We will be
using Novell Advanced Netware 286 (v. 2.0a) installed on an IBM AT file
server. We would like to attach a spooled printer to one of the server's
serial ports. The installation process allows us to specify whether the
printer will use the XON/XOFF protocol. My question is this: if we say NO
to XON/XOFF would the spooled printer driver adhere to DTR protocol instead?
BTW - where might be the best newsgroup and or mailing list to discuss Novell's
Netware?
If possible would you please send replies by mail. Our news feed seems to
be quite intermittent these days.
Many thanks.
--
UUCP: {seismo|watmath|utai|garfield}!dalcs!aucs!wdw
BITNET: {wdwvax|wdw}@Acadia
Internet: {wdwvax|wdw}%Acadia.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDUlau@ubc-ean.UUCP (03/11/87)
In article <292@aucs.UUCP> wdw@aucs.UUCP (Bill Wilder) writes: >We are about to install a small LAN in our Computer Center. We will be >using Novell Advanced Netware 286 (v. 2.0a) installed on an IBM AT file >server. We would like to attach a spooled printer to one of the server's >serial ports. The installation process allows us to specify whether the >printer will use the XON/XOFF protocol. My question is this: if we say NO >to XON/XOFF would the spooled printer driver adhere to DTR protocol instead? I can't help you with your problem, but I would like to know what you think of Netware 286. Right now, I have been running AT with Netware 86. Are you using any above boards for more memory. Specifically, what I want to know is, with Netware 286 and above boards, can you increase the local DOS size on the file server by moving all cacheing and etc above the 640 boundary. Thank you.
j-brown@utah-cs.UUCP (03/12/87)
In article <1787@ubc-ean.UUCP> lau@ubc-ean.UUCP (Etienne Lau) writes: >In article <292@aucs.UUCP> wdw@aucs.UUCP (Bill Wilder) writes: >>We are about to install a small LAN in our Computer Center. We will be >>using Novell Advanced Netware 286 (v. 2.0a) installed on an IBM AT file >>server. We would like to attach a spooled printer to one of the server's >>serial ports. The installation process allows us to specify whether the >>printer will use the XON/XOFF protocol. My question is this: if we say NO >>to XON/XOFF would the spooled printer driver adhere to DTR protocol instead? > I am not positive, but I BELIEVE it follows DTR protocol. We have 3 LaserJets connected via RS232 ports. I am not sure because I was testing net con- nections when the printer cables were made. >I can't help you with your problem, but I would like to know what you think of >Netware 286. Right now, I have been running AT with Netware 86. Are you >using any above boards for more memory. Specifically, what I want to know is, >with Netware 286 and above boards, can you increase the local DOS size on the >file server by moving all cacheing and etc above the 640 boundary. >Thank you. Our net at the college of law is using 286 v2.0a SFT Level 1. The file server is a Sperry IT with 4M of memory and Novell's disk coprocessor controlling an Adaptec 4070 RLL disk controller. The system has performed flawlessly now for 9 months, handling almost 60 networked PC's. The SFT stuff is really nice in that the OS can detect disk errors (we have a MAXTOR 1140 that formats up to 176M because of the RLL controller) on the media, flag the bad areas, and redirect the file to another spot on the disk. It also does read-after-write verify, and can shadow the disk. Also, the extra memory really helps move stuff along, because it can be used for extra directory and file caching. Right now we have about 10,000 file slots, with 8500 in use, all of which are in the server's memory. Jeff Brown j-brown@cs.utah.edu
mobo@sphinx.UUCP (03/13/87)
In article <4372@utah-cs.UUCP> j-brown@CS.UTAH.EDU (Jeffrey L. Brown) writes: >In article <1787@ubc-ean.UUCP> lau@ubc-ean.UUCP (Etienne Lau) writes: >>In article <292@aucs.UUCP> wdw@aucs.UUCP (Bill Wilder) writes: > >>I can't help you with your problem, but I would like to know what you think of >>Netware 286. Specifically, what I want to know is, >>with Netware 286 and above boards, can you increase the local DOS size on the >>file server by moving all cacheing and etc above the 640 boundary. > >Our net at the college of law is using 286 v2.0a SFT Level 1. The file server >is a Sperry IT with 4M of memory and Novell's disk coprocessor controlling an >Adaptec 4070 RLL disk controller. The system has performed flawlessly now for >9 months, handling almost 60 networked PC's. >j-brown@cs.utah.edu And now check out a new Novell thing called Non-dedicated /286 Netware. It runs Netware in extended memory > 640K (we have a cheapo and highly recommendable board called a Chess-board with 4Meg in it). The DOS process [because if you scratch NOVELL too deeply you find unix] runs in real mode and the 640 stuff in protected mode. And it actually works. I have speedup.com, sidekick, carbon copy and a bunch of resident stuff running and the thing miraculously functions. And it goes even faster than a normal AT would: if you save a 1 meg file, it immediately claims that it is finished (caching the stuff in the 4 meg available) and waits for the processor to be idle, then switches to protected mode (presumably) and saves it. Now for the miracle of miracles. I PKXARC-ed a 4 meg archive that had been semi-trashed, and when it got to the trashed part, it hung the machine. I sat and pounded the keyboard for a while, filled the keyboard buffer and beeped for a while. But the disk was still flashing every once and a while. Nobody on the network knew that I had crashed the file server. I had crashed the process, and Netware was happily running away in protected mode. Samuel Wilson ..ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!mobo FOTMOBO@UCHMVS1.Bitnet University of Chicago, Division of Social Sciences