[comp.protocols.appletalk] Mixing Administered Fastpaths and Unadministered Fastpaths

tom@wcc.oz (Tom Evans) (05/07/90)

In article <2997@stl.stc.co.uk>, shb@stl.stc.co.uk (S.H. Brock) writes:
> I have a number of fastpath 4's under the control of a atalkad running on a
> Sun.  There is also a fastpath 2 running etalk and a fastpath 4 running
> K-Star within the same local part of the internet that are not under the
> control of an atalkad.  Until I can persuade the owners of these boxes to
> use an admin host, will they work with the administered boxes i.e. will the
> zones declared by the unadministered boxes be accessible by the administered 
> boxes?

If they are able to exchange EtherTalk RTMP packets with the
administered boxes, then yes. To be able to do this:

	1. Everybody has EtherTalk enabled and
	2. There are no intervening IP-only gateways.

If there are intervening IP-only gateways (routers) blocking EtherTalk
traffic, then they will be able to see each other if the administered
boxes are running KIP0688, but I suspect not if they are running
KSTAR. KIP uses the "Core" flag (KC) in atalkad. What this means is
that designated "Core" boxes exchange routing packets (aaROUTEQ and
aaROUTE) and keep each other up to date. This way they would exchange
information about the other non-administered boxes and everything
would work.

I don't think KSTAR uses this protocol. I've just been watching KSTAR 8
with tcpdump and it never originates or answers an aaROUTEQ.
Anyone know for sure?
			    ---------
Tom Evans  tom@wcc.oz.au        |
Webster Computer Corp P/L       | "The concept of my
1270 Ferntree Gully Rd          |  existence is an
Scoresby, Melbourne 3179        |  approximation"
Victoria, Australia             |
61-3-764-1100  FAX ...764-1179  |      D. Conway