dpl@cisunx.UUCP (03/19/87)
To all who use VMS & ultrix every day (include me), Why hasn't DEC offered a fully-featureded DECnet for ultrix? What I've heard: (a) DEC: 'usually there is a VMS node around, so if you need full routing capability, you can use it. If you need full routing from your ultrix host, you have tc/ip' - customer support in Mass, OCT '86. (b) The VMS-only systems types say: 'unix can't pedal that fast, since its not written in assembler, like VMS; So unix *can't* support full routing DECnet' My theories: (a) unix was designed to support networking of any sort, where VMS was not, so that the relative load of any given networking scheme (e.g. DECnet) would more burden VMS than unix. (b) DEC seems to be displaying a poor commitment to its unix/ultrix users by not offering full DECnet for ultrix - perhaps a marketing decision was made to discourage ultrix use by offering low-quality networking software, thus selling more VMS ... perhaps making support easier, since you have 95% of resources (people) in one area, instead of two... DEC offers many operating systems, so why is ultrix not just another? (even RSX-11M+ has full DECnet (PDP-11), but not ultrix-11 or ultrix-32)... Configuration: 8650 Ultrix-32 V1.2 on ethernet/DECnet to local 3-node VMS cluster, on CCnet (a DECnet with ~400 nodes). What's a good guess as to the real reason? How can I refute the opinion that 'unix can't pedal fast enough' to support DECnet? References to the literature would be appreciated, and I will summarize my work and users' responses to the net. -Dave David P. Lithgow Sr. Systems Analy./Pgmr., Univ. of Pittsburgh USENET: {allegra,bellcore,ihpn4!cadre,decvax!idis,psuvax1}!pitt!cisunx!dpl CCnet(DECnet): CISVM{123}::DPL,CISVXO::DPL (I admit it: I'm a unix and VMS) Bitnet(Jnet): psuvax1!dpl@pittvms.bitnet ( systems programmer too) ARPA: (via UUCP) pitt!cisunx!dpl@cadre.arpa ARPA: (via Bitnet) DPL%PITTVMS.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU CSNET: dpl%pitt@csnet-relay
sytek@tekgen.UUCP (03/24/87)
I've heard from DEC that Ultrix v4.0 now supports a full implementation of DECnet. I don't know if that is also true for Ultrix-11. Michael Ewan Tektronix Inc. (503) 627-6468
tihor@acf4.UUCP (03/25/87)
My guess: End node only Ethernet is pretty simple to write. Is also a cheaper license better suited to market penetration. Also I believe that the Unix world per se is not view as desiring much DECnet support, mostly the other way around.