gamiddleton@watmath.waterloo.edu (Guy Middleton) (05/19/88)
Does anybody know whether the Sequent's version of Unix (called "Dynix", I think), supports subnetting yet?
hakanson@mist.cs.orst.edu (Marion Hakanson) (05/26/88)
I hope this is of general interest....
We are running DYNIX 3.0.4 on a Sequent B21, and it does indeed
support subnets (and a settable broadcast address). According to
the people at Sequent, they put in the 4.3bsd IP networking code,
but are still running the 4.2bsd TCP code (why, I don't know). This
means that any 4.3bsd systems you have must be configured with the
TCP_COMPAT_42 hack (TCP sequence number bug). It also includes the
4.3bsd routed and RIP code.
Other than the fact that DYNIX 3.0 does not include a nameserver (or
MX-speaking sendmail), and that it still runs the buggy 4.2bsd ftp,
telnet and rlogin implementations, along with the other 4.2bsd TCP
performance bugs, our Sequent functions adequately as an Internet site
(behind a Cisco router). The only annoyance I really notice is that
sendmail has the "loop on EOF" bug if an Internet SMTP connection is
lost during a mail transfer (this can be fixed when we port the 4.3bsd
sendmail.MX).
Rick Adams at UUNET may be of help to you, as well. The UUNET machine
is also a Sequent B21 running DYNIX 3.0. Don't let my criticisms put
you completely off of the machine. It is very solid, no crashes, and
has a tremendous amount of CPU bandwidth (by that, I meant it's very
hard to slow the thing down, especially if you have enough RAM). But
if we didn't have a 4.3bsd machine to handle nameservice and mail
routing, we'd be up a creek. In short, it ain't 4.3.
--
Marion Hakanson Domain: hakanson@cs.orst.edu
CSNET : hakanson%cs.orst.edu@relay.cs.net
UUCP : {hp-pcd,tektronix}!orstcs!hakansonrick@SEISMO.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) (05/26/88)
If you bitch and scream loudly enough, Sequent will send you a special version of TCP. Its not as good as the latest Jacobsen/Karels TCP, but it is a tremendous improvement over what they were shipping. I think it will be included as part of the next real release. They do still ship the broken 4.2bsd user programs and don't seem to care. The good news is that the 4.3bsd source programs port rather easily. We are running the latest bind and sendmail on our Sequent and it performs quite well. It is important to keep yelling at Sequent until they fix it. They think that their customers don't care about things like high performance networking. If enough sites keep complaining, they might finally fix things. --rick
abe@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Vic Abell) (05/27/88)
In article <8805261504.AA27649@beno.CSS.GOV>, rick@SEISMO.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) writes: > If you bitch and scream loudly enough, Sequent will send you a > special version of TCP. . . . > It is important to keep yelling at Sequent until they fix it. They > think that their customers don't care about things like > high performance networking. If enough sites keep complaining, they > might finally fix things. > > --rick This is completely different from our experience with Sequent. They do care, they do respond -- to polite and informed requests. Vic Abell
rick@SEISMO.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) (05/31/88)
When I politely asked Sequent to provide better TCP support and SLIP support I was told "the customers dont want it, so we wont waste time providing it". When I bitched loudly and publically about it, I got a fixed TCP. Draw your own conclusions. --rick