generous@daitc.ARPA (Curtis Generous) (07/12/88)
Is there a version of Dynix out there that supports the internet domain name
server and the resolver routines? Any info is appreciated.
--curtis
Curtis C. Generous
Defense Applied Information Technology Center (DAITC)
ARPA: generous@daitc.ARPA OR generous@osd.tis.llnl.gov
UUCP: {uunet,vrdxhq,lll-tis}!daitc!generousfletcher@cs.utexas.edu (Fletcher Mattox) (07/13/88)
In article <143@daitc.ARPA> generous@daitc.ARPA (Curtis Generous) writes: >Is there a version of Dynix out there that supports the internet domain name >server and the resolver routines? Any info is appreciated. I think the answer is "Not Yet". From the 3.0.4 netdb.h: struct hostent { char *h_name; /* official name of host */ char **h_aliases; /* alias list */ int h_addrtype; /* host address type */ int h_length; /* length of address */ #ifdef notyet char **h_addr_list; /* list of addresses from name server */ #define h_addr h_addr_list[0] /* address, for backward compatiblity */ #else char *h_addr; /* address */ #endif notyet }; We brought up BIND 4.8 under 3.0.4 without any trouble. However, one needs DYNIX sources to relink the utilities with the resolver. I really hope the next DYNIX release supports the nameserver; the static host table routines aren't terribly useful these days. -- Fletcher Mattox fletcher@cs.utexas.edu
rich@oxtrap (K. Richard Magill) (07/14/88)
In article <2961@cs.utexas.edu>, fletcher@cs (Fletcher Mattox) writes: >In article <143@daitc.ARPA> generous@daitc.ARPA (Curtis Generous) writes: >>Is there a version of Dynix out there that supports the internet domain name >>server and the resolver routines? Any info is appreciated. > >I think the answer is "Not Yet". From the 3.0.4 netdb.h: But talk to the uunet people who must be using something... rich. --
rsk@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Rich Kulawiec) (07/14/88)
In article <143@daitc.ARPA> generous@daitc.ARPA (Curtis Generous) writes: >Is there a version of Dynix out there that supports the internet domain name >server and the resolver routines? Any info is appreciated. We have them running under 2.1 and (will soon) under 3.0; but I am all but certain that we can't release the sources without violating our license. If you have a BSD source license, you'll find that these are not difficult to port. If you don't, I'm not sure how hard it will be. ---Rsk
gh3@s.cc.purdue.edu (Gerrit) (07/15/88)
In article <264@mace.cc.purdue.edu> rsk@mace.cc.purdue.edu.UUCP (Rich Kulawiec) writes: >In article <143@daitc.ARPA> generous@daitc.ARPA (Curtis Generous) writes: >>Is there a version of Dynix out there that supports the internet domain name >>server and the resolver routines? Any info is appreciated. > >We have them running under 2.1 and (will soon) under 3.0; but I am all >but certain that we can't release the sources without violating our license. >If you have a BSD source license, you'll find that these are not difficult >to port. If you don't, I'm not sure how hard it will be. I just added the support to the Dynix 3.0.8 kernel to support the last bits of the 1 or 2 ioctl's that Sequent hasn't completed. They have all the guts in place, but they haven't yet put in the hooks. Without kernel source, there isn't much you can do as yet. Gerrit Huizenga (gh3@s.cc.purdue.edu)
rick@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) (07/15/88)
You haven't lived until you've had to wait for a NS32032 processor (even if you have 14 of them, some things don't work in parallel) do a linear search on a 6,500 line /etc/hosts (thats how big the arpanet host table is today). Ignoring the issue of not being able to connect to sites not in the host tables, the speed alone is enough reason to scrap the current implementation (I'm sure that it runs fine on their 40 line host file for their local ethernet). It's so bad that I've been begging them to send us NFS so we can use the yellow pages! (I loathe the yellow pages. The yellow pages are a wonderful example of how a good idea can be destroyed by a bad design and a worse implementation) Our "solution" was the obvious one. For critical programs like sendmail, we totally scrap what Sequent delivers and install a version that uses bind. For things like ftp or telnet, we have a small program that uses bind to turn a hostname into an ip address. Then we ftp to the address. The Sequent could be a wonderful networking machine if they would let the engineers keep the networking software within 3-4 years of current technology. Sequent has a very nice hardware base, but I really wish I could call the software something better than "adequate". (We've had ZERO hardware downtime in 16 months if you need an example of how the hardware works.) --rick
lyndon@ncc.Nexus.CA (Lyndon Nerenberg) (07/18/88)
In article <44375@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV> rick@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) writes: >The Sequent could be a wonderful networking machine if they would let >the engineers keep the networking software within 3-4 years of current >technology. > >Sequent has a very nice hardware base, but I really wish I could >call the software something better than "adequate". What was the criteria used to select the system that would run uunet? It seems to me that a reliable and complete set of networking tools would be of prime importance in this application. -- {alberta,pyramid,uunet}!ncc!lyndon lyndon@Nexus.CA
rick@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) (07/19/88)
The selection criteria for uunet included the ability to run a minimum of 50 simultaneous uucicos; to support at least 2 56kbps X.25 lines; and to support at least 4 16 port multiplexors. The networking code is adequate. However, TCP/IP is not a large portion of the use of the machine. ---rick