kusumoto@chsun1.uchicago.edu (Bob Kusumoto) (08/07/90)
I'm thinking of adding a mac network here at work sometime in the near future
and I was wondering about a bunch of things:
a) Am I wrong to choose Appletalk Phase 2 for this network? I'm not sure if
this is wise, considering the UofC already has a large mac network out here.
(I believe its still Phase 1 appletalk.) The other questions are, who should
I buy my gateway from? Shiva (now that they license the Kinetics stuff)?
Should I go with Cayman gatorboxes instead? I plan this network to be in
a zone on its own.
b) Will I have problems getting CAP and KIP to work so I can have stuff from
our sun to print on our appletalked printer? Given the above (a network of
macs using appletalk with a gateway to the Ethernet), am I going to run into
problems software- or hardware-wise?
Thanks in advance,
Bob
Bob Kusumoto | Find the electric messiah.
Internet: kusumoto@chsun1.uchicago.edu | The AC-DC God.
Bitnet: kusumoto@chsun1.uchicago.bitnet | --- My Life with the Thrill Kill
UUCP: ...!{oddjob,gargoyle}!chsun1!kusumoto | Kult, "Kooler than Jesus"CLAUSS1@applelink.apple.com (Clauss, Chris) (08/07/90)
Hi Folks,
WARNING: I as an Apple employee have biases!
> Am I wrong to choose Appletalk Phase 2 for this network? I'm not sure if
> this is wise, considering the UofC already has a large mac network out here.
> (I believe its still Phase 1 appletalk.)
It is my belief that any new networks should be AppleTalk phase 2 (and
existing networks should be moved to Phase 2 ASAP). Phase 2 has many major
improvements over Phase 1. Most routers can act as Phase 1 to Phase 2
"transition routers" allowing Phase 1 nodes and Phase 2 nodes to completely
interoperate on an AppleTalk internet. Novell has now gone Phase 2 with
NetWare completeing the move of major vendors from Phase 1 to Phase 2.
> Will I have problems getting CAP and KIP to work... ?
KIP and CAP are still AppleTalk Phase 1! This is not a problem if we have
some router (FastPath, GatorBox, AppleTalk InterNet Router, etc.) that is
acting as a Phase 1 to Phase 2 "transition router". But it seems to me that
one of the weakest parts of the KIP and CAP setup is that it is still Phase 1.
I hope that one of you CAP geniuses will be able to make CAP into a Phase 2
product. Apple will now sell the source for a UNIX-based, polished CAP-like
package for $40,000 + $500/yr but that is a bit much! What we need is a
version of CAP which is ready for the 90's. Anybody trying to do this???
Take care,
Chris Clauss
Apple Computer, Inc.
Clauss1@AppleLink.Apple.Com
<<< I speak for Chris Clauss, NOT Apple Computer, Inc. >>>
liam@cs.qmw.ac.uk (William Roberts) (08/09/90)
In <2687293@AppleLink.Apple.COM> CLAUSS1@applelink.apple.com (Clauss, Chris) writes: > KIP and CAP are still AppleTalk Phase 1! This is not a problem if we have >some router (FastPath, GatorBox, AppleTalk InterNet Router, etc.) that is >acting as a Phase 1 to Phase 2 "transition router". But it seems to me that >one of the weakest parts of the KIP and CAP setup is that it is still Phase 1. >I hope that one of you CAP geniuses will be able to make CAP into a Phase 2 >product. Apple will now sell the source for a UNIX-based, polished CAP-like >package for $40,000 + $500/yr but that is a bit much! What we need is a >version of CAP which is ready for the 90's. Anybody trying to do this??? Sorry Chris, but you don't know what you are talking about. The KIP stuff is about shipping DDP packets around on IP networks, encapsulated in UDP datagrams. The Phase1/Phase2 issues are mostly below this level, though it does affect the Zone Information Protocol. The translation between KIP and LocalTalk (still Phase1 we note, no sense in upsetting those LaserWriter owners...) or EtherTalk is done in a machine such as a FastPath: this could be the KIP code but the Phase2 changes to a router are distinctly non-trivial. You were wrong about the FDDI complaint as well: the Phase2 stuff doesn't get modified by Ethernet/FDDI bridges. The complaint is that Apple goofed badly in chosing the format for the AARP such that it won't travel well in bridged Ethernet/FDDI environments. -- William Roberts ARPA: liam@cs.qmw.ac.uk Queen Mary & Westfield College UUCP: liam@qmw-cs.UUCP Mile End Road AppleLink: UK0087 LONDON, E1 4NS, UK Tel: 071-975 5250 (Fax: 081-980 6533)
wnn@ornl.gov (Wolfgang N. Naegeli) (08/09/90)
In article <2687293@AppleLink.Apple.COM> CLAUSS1@applelink.apple.com (Clauss, Chris) writes: > Apple will now sell the source for a UNIX-based, polished CAP-like > package for $40,000 + $500/yr Is that intended for OEMs/VARs to allow them to bundle a binary version with their wares or to sell AppleShare serving software as an option? Can we expect such products to appear on the market at a reasonable price? and when? WIth everyone raving about how well a IIfx with its I/O processors would be suited as a network server, can we expect Apple to come out with multi-threaded AppleShare server software any time soon? Perhaps running under A/UX??? And there is another missing link: TCP/IP routing and AppleTalk in UDP tunneling support by the Apple Internet Router! I'd be interested to hear what comments the speaker for Chris Clauss or anyone else would have on these issues. Wolfgang N. Naegeli Internet: wnn@ornl.gov Bitnet: wnn@ornlstc Phone: 615-574-6143 Fax: 615-574-6141 (MacFax) QuickMail (QM-QM): Wolfgang Naegeli @ 615-574-4510 Snail: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6206
wcc@cup.portal.com (wcc - usa) (08/10/90)
Chris Clauss (Clauss1@AppleLink.Apple.Com) writes: > > Will I have problems getting CAP and KIP to work... ? > > KIP and CAP are still AppleTalk Phase 1! ... > But it seems to me that > one of the weakest parts of the KIP and > CAP setup is that it is still Phase 1. The "KIP and CAP setup" (also called IPTalk in some places) consists of two separable parts. One is indeed "Phase 2 Compatible" and the other isn't. Mac HOSTS on LocalTalk didn't notice any change with Phase 2. This is because LocalTalk is designated as a "Non-Extended" Network. None of the Zone and Network extensions apply. IPTalk (as practiced between routers and hosts) is also a Non-Extended Network. No change needed for Phase 2. There may be a small requirement for ATIS to now check the Zone name before answering NBP LookUps, but that's someone else's field. Talking to CAP hosts should still work on AppleTalk Phase 2 internets. ROUTERS on LocalTalk (all networks, not just extended ones) did have to change in order to be able to handle the new routing information. Thus the ROUTING part of IPTalk (that part that gets you from one AppleTalk network to another via IP) won't work with an AppleTalk Phase 2 network which is using the extensions. It should still work if the AppleTalk network is still in "Phase 1 Compatability" mode - which you have to do if running both Phase 1 and 2 together anyway. > I hope that one of you CAP geniuses will be able to make CAP into a Phase 2 > product. CAP doesn't care. The router-related stuff does. There are proposals afloat. > Apple will now sell the source for a UNIX-based, polished CAP-like > package for $40,000 + $500/yr but that is a bit much! Probably running native EtherTalk rather than IPTalk maybe (for A/UX)? Tom Evans, wcc@cup.portal.com (until 18th. August) Webster Computer Corporation 2109 O'Toole Ave. San Jose, California, 95131-1303 Phone (408) 954-8054, FAX ... 1832 Head Office, tom@wcc.oz.au, multigate@wcc.oz.au 1270 Ferntree Gully Rd. Scoresby, 3179, Australia
dplatt@coherent.com (Dave Platt) (08/10/90)
In article <1990Aug9.134900.215@cs.utk.edu> wnn@ornl.gov (Wolfgang N. Naegeli) writes: > Is that intended for OEMs/VARs to allow them to bundle a binary version > with their wares or to sell AppleShare serving software as an option? Either is permissible, said the Apple folks at the announcement of this program back at the WWDC in May. However, Apple will give a substantial discount (50%, I think) if the OEM/VAR agrees to bundle AppleTalk support as a standard part of the system. > And there is another missing link: TCP/IP routing and AppleTalk in UDP > tunneling support by the Apple Internet Router! The Apple folks who discussed the Internet Router at the WWDC were asked about this. Their response was along the lines of "No... the Apple Internet Router is designed as a basic, limited-throughput router to get people started. We view tunnelling, high-throughput dedicated routers, and so forth as appropriate markets for third-party developers."
billkatt@mondo.engin.umich.edu (billkatt) (08/11/90)
In article <32629@cup.portal.com> wcc@cup.portal.com (wcc - usa) writes: >Chris Clauss (Clauss1@AppleLink.Apple.Com) writes: > >> > Will I have problems getting CAP and KIP to work... ? >> >> KIP and CAP are still AppleTalk Phase 1! ... >> But it seems to me that > one of the weakest parts of the KIP and >> CAP setup is that it is still Phase 1. > >The "KIP and CAP setup" (also called IPTalk in some places) consists of >two separable parts. One is indeed "Phase 2 Compatible" and the other isn't. > buzzzz... Sorry, wrong answer Hans. >Mac HOSTS on LocalTalk didn't notice any change with Phase 2. This is because >LocalTalk is designated as a "Non-Extended" Network. None of the Zone and >Network extensions apply. IPTalk (as practiced between routers and hosts) >is also a Non-Extended Network. No change needed for Phase 2. There may be >a small requirement for ATIS to now check the Zone name before answering >NBP LookUps, but that's someone else's field. Talking to CAP hosts >should still work on AppleTalk Phase 2 internets. Hosts need a facility for maintaining a best router cache. This is a significant part of Phase II, since it speeds up internet access buy a LOT!! Also, hosts need the ability to select which net they are in on an extended network. Since IPTalk isn't an extended network (although that may also be what Chris Clauss was getting at), you don't need that. > >ROUTERS on LocalTalk (all networks, not just extended ones) did have to >change in order to be able to handle the new routing information. Thus the >ROUTING part of IPTalk (that part that gets you from one AppleTalk network >to another via IP) won't work with an AppleTalk Phase 2 network which is >using the extensions. It should still work if the AppleTalk network is >still in "Phase 1 Compatability" mode - which you have to do if running >both Phase 1 and 2 together anyway. Good point, trivial hack, though. > >> I hope that one of you CAP geniuses will be able to make CAP into a Phase 2 >> product. > CAP will have at least two major competitors (if free software can truly compete with other free software) within a year. And don't bug me about details, you'll know it when you see it. ============================================================================= Steve Bollinger ____/| 909 Church St. Apt C \ o.O| Ann Arbor, Mi. 48104 =(_)= (313)-662-4073 -home (313)-763-3070 -work U billkatt@mondo.engin.umich.edu -ACK ACK ACK ACK! "thhhhppppttt!"
wnn@ornl.gov (Wolfgang N. Naegeli) (08/17/90)
In article <66709@coherent.coherent.com> dplatt@coherent.com (Dave Platt) writes: > In article <1990Aug9.134900.215@cs.utk.edu> wnn@ornl.gov (Wolfgang N. Naegeli) writes: > > > And there is another missing link: TCP/IP routing and AppleTalk in UDP > > tunneling support by the Apple Internet Router! > > The Apple folks who discussed the Internet Router at the WWDC were asked > about this. Their response was along the lines of "No... the Apple > Internet Router is designed as a basic, limited-throughput router to get > people started. We view tunnelling, high-throughput dedicated routers, > and so forth as appropriate markets for third-party developers." How limited is the throughput if I run it on a IIfx? I suspect it might beat a FastPath, GatorBox, or MultiGate. None of which can handle more than one Ethernet cable or route between Ethernet and Tokenring. I might still prefer to use a dedicated hardware box for cost-effective high-throughput in many situations, but if I already have a Apple Internet Router and there is only one or two users on the LocalTalk side who need TCP/IP, spending some $2000 for a hardware box would seem excessive and overkill. Wolfgang N. Naegeli Internet: wnn@ornl.gov Bitnet: wnn@ornlstc Phone: 615-574-6143 Fax: 615-574-6141 QuickMail (QM-QM): Wolfgang Naegeli @ 615-574-4510 Snail: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6206
Jim.Matthews@dartmouth.edu (Jim Matthews) (08/17/90)
In article <1990Aug9.134900.215@cs.utk.edu> wnn@ornl.gov (Wolfgang N. Naegeli) w rites: > And there is another missing link: TCP/IP routing and AppleTalk in UDP > tunneling support by the Apple Internet Router! At Boston MacWorld Network Resources Corp. was showing MultiGate Mac, a software router/gateway that does AT and IP routing, IP-in-DDP (KIP), and DDP-in-UDP (IPTalk). Like the Internet Router it runs in the background. NRC's phone number is 408-263-8100. Jim Matthews Dartmouth Software Development Claimer: MultiGate Mac is based on software developed at Dartmouth, and is no relation to the Webster Computer Corp. MultiGate.--