ant@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au (Anthony Murdoch) (05/29/91)
Hi Netters,
Sorry about the cross-posting of this article, but the questions I want to
ask cover the realms of a few news groups and there doesn't appear to be
any general lan newsgroup or and group for MS LAN MANAGER.
We are looking into providing support for a LAN package and I have been
made part of an effort to decide which LAN package would be the best to
support. We already support DEC's PCSA here to provide PC connectivity
to our VAX's, but we are interested in providing connectivity to our other
machines as well as supporting a true LAN (I don't consider PCSA a true
LAN).
Our first consideration was PC/NFS (again not a true LAN), but I have been
recently given some information on Microsofts LAN Manager and it has my
interest arroused. But the presentation I have leaves some holes
(questions) that I would like answered before I consider it further. If
someone out there with LAN manager experience, or possibly even someone
from Microsoft, could answer some of these questions, I would be very
appreciative.
1> Is it absolutely necessary to have an OS/2 server to run LAN manager ?
We would prefer to be able to run with our UNIX box (SUN 470) as the
main server. This isn't a major point though so if there are a lot of
other advantages we will run with it :)
2> Which ethernet cards are supported by LM ? Or is that, which ethernet
cards support LM ? :) Particulary, are any of DEC's ethernet cards
supported. We have a large number of DEPCA Turbo ethernet boards (for
PCSA) and so having support for them would be advantage.
3> Is there any packages (Comercial/Shareware/Freeware) that provide
TCP/IP over LAN manager ?
4> Does LAN manager provide file services to UNIX boxes via NFS or does
it implement its own protocol ? I'm not sure which of these would be
preferable, perhaps you can offer some opinion ?
5> How does the allocation of resources work ? Does LM allow any user to
access any resource on any machine so long as the user has the
permissions ? If so, then does this include DOS machines ? I can see
it working with an OS/2 machine, but does it allow a DOS machines
resourses (printers etc) to be accessable by others without
interupting the user on that DOS machine ?
Does LM allow access to printers on remote UNIX/VMS machines ?
The kind of situation that we are looking at initially is where a site
wants to use our UNIX box for some of its file services, but still be
able to access its own printers etc. The site is not technically
orientated and so they want us to handle ALL server maintenance. Will
we be able to keep the server on our site or will there have to be a
duplicate server (or something) at their site to handle all their
printers etc ?
6> How good are the mail facilities ? Is it possible to send mail
to/from internet machines ?
7> Is it possible to connect to the LAN from a terminal ? How would this
be set up ? Is it possible to connect to the LAN through TCP/IP
(telnet) ? These are picky questions and not that important :)
8> What is the availability of sercer/connection software for
- Sun SPARCservers
- DEC VMS VAXes
- IBM VM Mainframes
Who sells/supports each of these ?
Well, I think that's all the questions I have. My thanks go in advance to
anyone who is willing to provide me any of the answers I need.
ant
V ant "I killed Laura Palmer"
\o/ ant@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au
-O- Anthony Murdoch Prentice Centre
/0\ Phone (07) 36 54078 University of Qldrbn@ralph.uucp (Bob Boyd) (05/29/91)
I'm curious. The original poster on this claimed that PCSA and PC/NFS aren't "True LAN" implementations. What are the characteristics of a network client/server/peer architecture that you believe make it a "True" LAN implementation? What about these 2 (and others) that you find limiting would have to be improved on to make them "True"? What is missing in your opinion? Which features do they have that others are missing? One of the most limiting features of most architectures/implementations that I've been exposed to is the heroic amount of effort required to establish "transparent" interoperability with other solutions. -- Bob rbn@epavax.rtpnc.epa.gov Unisys/EPA
ccmk@lure.latrobe.edu.au (05/29/91)
In article <1991May29.062359.29481@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au>, ant@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au (Anthony Murdoch) writes: >...We already support DEC's PCSA here to provide PC connectivity > to our VAX's, but we are interested in providing connectivity to our other > machines as well as supporting a true LAN (I don't consider PCSA a true > LAN). How do you define a true LAN? A local area network is just as it says, and PCSA can be the glue that makes it, just as Novell can, etc. > 1> Is it absolutely necessary to have an OS/2 server to run LAN manager ? > We would prefer to be able to run with our UNIX box (SUN 470) as the > main server. This isn't a major point though so if there are a lot of > other advantages we will run with it :) Lan Manager/X, i.e. lan manager for Unix, has either been released or will be soon. Don't know which platforms are supported. > 2> Which ethernet cards are supported by LM ? Or is that, which ethernet > cards support LM ? :) Particulary, are any of DEC's ethernet cards > supported. Lan Manager is a base from which network programs, such as PCSA, 3+Open, etc, work from. The individual software house determines such mundane issues, but more often than not NDIS drivers are supported, which means the DEC ethernet boards are okay. > 3> Is there any packages (Comercial/Shareware/Freeware) that provide > TCP/IP over LAN manager ? Again, Lan Man doesn't bother with the details, so PCSA works over DECnet, IBM might use Token Ring, etc. Obviously, if you use LM/X then TCP/IP might be the transport. Or, you can go for the many public domain (such as NCSA Telnet) or commercial packages (such as FTP's PC/TCP, etc). Often, when using NDIS, multiple protocols can be supported on s single workstation. > 4> Does LAN manager provide file services to UNIX boxes via NFS or does > it implement its own protocol ? I'm not sure which of these would be > preferable, perhaps you can offer some opinion ? Don't know. I guess NFS is a different ballgame, and would not be supported by LM. > 5> How does the allocation of resources work ? Does LM allow any user to > access any resource on any machine so long as the user has the > permissions ? Yes, provided the server is OS/2 or Unix, etc. > If so, then does this include DOS machines ? I can see > it working with an OS/2 machine, but does it allow a DOS machines > resourses (printers etc) to be accessable by others without > interupting the user on that DOS machine ? The limitations of DOS doesn't really allow that sort of resource sharing. > Does LM allow access to printers on remote UNIX/VMS machines ? PathWORKS for DOS uses LM. LM/X gives the same functionality on Unix. See also DEC's PathWORKS for Ultrix. > The kind of situation that we are looking at initially is where a site > wants to use our UNIX box for some of its file services, but still be > able to access its own printers etc. The site is not technically > orientated and so they want us to handle ALL server maintenance. Will > we be able to keep the server on our site or will there have to be a > duplicate server (or something) at their site to handle all their > printers etc ? > > 6> How good are the mail facilities ? Is it possible to send mail > to/from internet machines ? > > 7> Is it possible to connect to the LAN from a terminal ? How would this > be set up ? Is it possible to connect to the LAN through TCP/IP > (telnet) ? These are picky questions and not that important :) Don't really know about above. > 8> What is the availability of sercer/connection software for > - Sun SPARCservers > - DEC VMS VAXes > - IBM VM Mainframes > Who sells/supports each of these ? See my comments above re: LM/X, PathWORKS for VMS, Ultrix, OS/2 and/or DOS. Dr Mark Kosten, phone: +61 3 479-2767 Computer Centre, AARNet (internet): ccmk@lure.latrobe.edu.au La Trobe University, X.25 (PSI): 05052347300000::ccmk Bundoora, 3083 Australia
kozowski@ohsu3b2.ohsu.EDU (Eric Kozowski) (05/29/91)
In article <1991May29.062359.29481@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au> ant@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au (Anthony Murdoch) writes: >1> Is it absolutely necessary to have an OS/2 server to run LAN manager ? > We would prefer to be able to run with our UNIX box (SUN 470) as the > main server. This isn't a major point though so if there are a lot of > other advantages we will run with it :) No. LanMan has been ported by several vendors to run on UNIX and DOS as well as OS/2. > >2> Which ethernet cards are supported by LM ? Or is that, which ethernet > cards support LM ? :) Particulary, are any of DEC's ethernet cards > supported. We have a large number of DEPCA Turbo ethernet boards (for > PCSA) and so having support for them would be advantage. It depends on what the vendor decided to support. > >3> Is there any packages (Comercial/Shareware/Freeware) that provide > TCP/IP over LAN manager ? Most vendors have some sort of LanMan - TCP gateway available. TCP/IP and LanMan can run concurrently over the same network (both CSMA/CD). > >4> Does LAN manager provide file services to UNIX boxes via NFS or does > it implement its own protocol ? I'm not sure which of these would be > preferable, perhaps you can offer some opinion ? LanMan uses ISO/OSI protocols. Most large network envorionments currently use TCP/IP but the trend is toward shifting to ISO/OSI (the gov't has adopted ISO/OSI). > >5> How does the allocation of resources work ? Does LM allow any user to > access any resource on any machine so long as the user has the > permissions ? If so, then does this include DOS machines ? I can see > it working with an OS/2 machine, but does it allow a DOS machines > resourses (printers etc) to be accessable by others without > interupting the user on that DOS machine ? Yes. Yes. Sort of. RE: the last question -- It can be done but is quirky sometimes. > > Does LM allow access to printers on remote UNIX/VMS machines ? If the remote machine is part of the network (don't think VMS is supported by anyone yet, though). > > The kind of situation that we are looking at initially is where a site > wants to use our UNIX box for some of its file services, but still be > able to access its own printers etc. The site is not technically > orientated and so they want us to handle ALL server maintenance. Will > we be able to keep the server on our site or will there have to be a > duplicate server (or something) at their site to handle all their > printers etc ? As far as I know you would net to have some sort of server on their site for the printers. I could be wrong though. > >6> How good are the mail facilities ? Is it possible to send mail > to/from internet machines ? Answer to both questions: It depends on what the vendor provides for a mail package. LanMan doesn't have a standardized mail package that I know of. At our site we can mail to the Internet and vice-versa. > >7> Is it possible to connect to the LAN from a terminal ? How would this > be set up ? Is it possible to connect to the LAN through TCP/IP > (telnet) ? These are picky questions and not that important :) Not that I know of. Not really. It depends on what you mean by "connect to the LAN". > >8> What is the availability of sercer/connection software for > - Sun SPARCservers > - DEC VMS VAXes > - IBM VM Mainframes > Who sells/supports each of these ? I have'nt heard of anyone porting LanMan to Any of these machines but maybe someone has. If you have anymore questions, feel free to drop me some email. -- Eric Kozowski kozowski@ohsu.edu Networks & Computing Dept. Oregon Health Sciences University
R.J.Letts@sysc.salford.ac.uk (05/30/91)
> I'm curious. The original poster on this claimed that PCSA and PC/NFS > aren't "True LAN" implementations. Not Suitable for serving PC's would have been better > What are the characteristics of a network client/server/peer architecture > that you believe make it a "True" LAN implementation? 1. Fileserver efficiency. Use of PC-NFS on a non-dedicated server is asking for trouble; a heavy user of the system will cause DOS clients to time-out producing error messages on the clients - not very good. 2. Workstation efficiency Use of PC-NFS or PCSA requires VAST amounts of memory; it may not be a problem if you high-load the device drivers, but this isn't much use on an IBM XT with 640k of memory 3. Security Novell offers you a much richer access rights scheme than NFS - Read write Create [New files/directories] Open [existing files] Search [directories] Execute-Only In addition rights can be set by user and group, not The Owner His/Her group Everyone else Also PC-NFS is stateless, so if you reboot the server users don't necessarily loose their connection - not very good if you are trying to get rid of a hacker from your system. PC hardware is often more reliable than mini-computer hardware (None on my Novell fileservers have crashed over the past year, I have lost one SUN CPU board, and more pieces of the PRIME's than I care to remember) 4. Remote Booting Can you remote boot a PC without a hard or a floppy disk using PCSA, or PC-NFS. [you can with PCSA if you have the right sort of DEC ethernet cards].# 5. Price/Performance compare the cost of a pc-based fileserver with the cost of a PC-NFS or PCSA fileserver. ------------------------------------- Basically I think TCP/IP is NOT good for fileserving, but is good for other things : Electronic Mail (POP, SMTP etc) Remote Login (Telent, though I prefer X.29 as this is Uk.Ac) :-) any one disagree ? Richard Letts Network Manager Salford University Great Britain These are my own views; Not those of my employer.
jbvb@FTP.COM ("James B. Van Bokkelen") (05/30/91)
>2> Which ethernet cards are supported by LM ? By default, LM for DOS and OS/2 works on any NDIS driver (ask your board vendor for one). >3> Is there any packages (Comercial/Shareware/Freeware) that provide > TCP/IP over LAN manager ? Most DOS and OS/2 TCP/IP packages can share the NDIS driver with LM. >4> Does LAN manager provide file services to UNIX boxes via NFS or does > it implement its own protocol ? I'm not sure which of these would be > preferable, perhaps you can offer some opinion ? LanMan uses ISO/OSI protocols. LM uses NETBIOS at the session layer as its network interface. NETBIOS can run on TCP/IP, or OSI, or XNS, but most frequently uses LLC2 (ISO logical link layer, usually called 'netbeui'). James B. VanBokkelen 26 Princess St., Wakefield, MA 01880 FTP Software Inc. voice: (617) 246-0900 fax: (617) 246-0901
geoff@hinode.East.Sun.COM (Geoff Arnold @ Sun BOS - R.H. coast near the top) (05/30/91)
Quoth R.J.Letts@sysc.salford.ac.uk (in <29.May.91.20:49:08.A106FA@UK.AC.SALF.C>): #> I'm curious. The original poster on this claimed that PCSA and PC/NFS #> aren't "True LAN" implementations. #Not Suitable for serving PC's would have been better # #> What are the characteristics of a network client/server/peer architecture #> that you believe make it a "True" LAN implementation? # #1. Fileserver efficiency. # Use of PC-NFS on a non-dedicated server is asking for trouble; a heavy #user of the system will cause DOS clients to time-out producing error messages #on the clients - not very good. Good grief, what are you using as a server? I can run for days at a time accessing a system that is serving dozens of Suns and PC and is also running OpenLook (talk about a cycle stealer) without any significant level of retransmissions. Furthermore if it's really a problem you can always configure the number of retries before an error is reported - setting it to 0 (infinite) means I can rebuild all of PC-NFS overnight and not worry if somebody takes down the server for backup. #2. Workstation efficiency # Use of PC-NFS or PCSA requires VAST amounts of memory; it may not be a #problem if you high-load the device drivers, but this isn't much use on an #IBM XT with 640k of memory I believe that PCSA is on the bloated side, but PC-NFS has always been around 80K, which is right in the middle of the field when it comes to size. # #3. Security #Novell offers you a much richer access rights scheme than NFS - #Read #write #Create [New files/directories] #Open [existing files] #Search [directories] #Execute-Only ???? How is this different from and Unix server??? #In addition rights can be set by user and group, not # The Owner # His/Her group # Everyone else Yes, we all know Unix needs ACLs. One day. #Also PC-NFS is stateless, so if you reboot the server users don't #necessarily loose their connection - not very good if you are trying to get #rid of a hacker from your system. PC hardware is often more reliable than #mini-computer hardware (None on my Novell fileservers have crashed over the #past year, I have lost one SUN CPU board, and more pieces of the PRIME's #than I care to remember) Most people regard the statelessness as a rather useful attribute, as I noted above. If you need to eject a hacker, there are more issues than simply rebooting the server, and more solutions too. (Hint: try "man fsirand".) # 5. Price/Performance #compare the cost of a pc-based fileserver with the cost of a PC-NFS or #PCSA fileserver. Hmmm. I'll bite. Here's a sample configuration for a server and software for 10 client PC's: SPARCstation SLC 4/20FM-8 List $4,995 - 12 MIPS - 8 MB RAM - Mono - Diskless File server option X2001Z $9,600 - 669MB disk - 2.3Gbyte 8mm tape - 644Mbyte CD ROM drive SunOS on CD-ROM SX-21 $ 300 PC-NFS Documentation $ 75 PC-NFS RTU, media, no doc at 5-24 discount $ 245 x 10 = $2,450 Total: $17,420 I could get it cheaper using a 486 clone with a clone SVR4, but performance would probably be inadequate. Can someone give me the equivalent for a name-brand NetWare server system. Don't forget to include all software, the mouse, tape, CD, etc. #------------------------------------- #Basically I think TCP/IP is NOT good for fileserving, but is good for #other things : # Electronic Mail (POP, SMTP etc) # Remote Login (Telent, though I prefer X.29 as this is Uk.Ac) The problem here is the confusion and manageability of maintaining multiple name spaces, administration spaces, routing structures, etc. Suppose (hypothetically) that I run NetWare on my PC for file access and TCP-based stuff for the rest. Oops - we use Unix boxes as routers, and they won't route IPX, so now I'm limited to my local LAN for file sharing. What's my PC's name? Is it the same in the TCP/IP and NetWare worlds? There's a printer on another PC I want to use, which name should I use? Which stack? Management wants to manage the net with SNMP. How does NetWare fit in here? And so on. -- Geoff Arnold, PC-NFS architect, Sun Microsystems. (geoff@East.Sun.COM) -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- Sun Microsystems PC Distributed Systems ... -- -- ... soon to be a part of SunTech (stay tuned for details) --
mshiels@tmsoft (Michael A. Shiels) (05/31/91)
1> Is it absolutely necessary to have an OS/2 server to run LAN manager ?
We would prefer to be able to run with our UNIX box (SUN 470) as the
main server. This isn't a major point though so if there are a lot of
other advantages we will run with it :)
Answer: AT&T/SCO and Microsoft (plus others!) have a working LAN Manager/X
which is LAN Manager for Unix. There are other platforms that LAN
Manager is being ported too as well.
2> Which ethernet cards are supported by LM ? Or is that, which ethernet
cards support LM ? :) Particulary, are any of DEC's ethernet cards
supported. We have a large number of DEPCA Turbo ethernet boards (for
PCSA) and so having support for them would be advantage.
Answer: Any card with an NDIS specification driver will work. This includes
some of the DEC cards, 3com, Western Digital, Racal ......
3> Is there any packages (Comercial/Shareware/Freeware) that provide
TCP/IP over LAN manager ?
Answer: There are TCP/IP packages for OS/2 (which will co-exist with LAN
Manager) from IBM, Essex, FTP software etc. Some have a NetBIOS over
TCP/IP layer which will then allow you to run LAN Manager ontop of
TCP/IP.
4> Does LAN manager provide file services to UNIX boxes via NFS or does
it implement its own protocol ? I'm not sure which of these would be
preferable, perhaps you can offer some opinion ?
Answer: You can use LAN Manager/X Client for Unix to access OS/2 servers or
you could see if there is an NFS server out from any of the TCP/IP
vendors.
5> How does the allocation of resources work ? Does LM allow any user to
access any resource on any machine so long as the user has the
permissions ? If so, then does this include DOS machines ? I can see
it working with an OS/2 machine, but does it allow a DOS machines
resourses (printers etc) to be accessable by others without
interupting the user on that DOS machine ?
Answer: DOS machines can only be clients not servers.
Does LM allow access to printers on remote UNIX/VMS machines ?
Answer: Not right now but there are people working on that.
The kind of situation that we are looking at initially is where a site
wants to use our UNIX box for some of its file services, but still be
able to access its own printers etc. The site is not technically
orientated and so they want us to handle ALL server maintenance. Will
we be able to keep the server on our site or will there have to be a
duplicate server (or something) at their site to handle all their
printers etc ?
6> How good are the mail facilities ? Is it possible to send mail
to/from internet machines ?
Answer: Microsoft Mail has just been announced and includes gateways to SMTP,
X.400 etc.
7> Is it possible to connect to the LAN from a terminal ? How would this
be set up ? Is it possible to connect to the LAN through TCP/IP
(telnet) ? These are picky questions and not that important :)
Answer: Not really.
8> What is the availability of sercer/connection software for
- Sun SPARCservers
- DEC VMS VAXes
- IBM VM Mainframes
Who sells/supports each of these ?
Well, I think that's all the questions I have. My thanks go in advance to
anyone who is willing to provide me any of the answers I need.
ant
V ant "I killed Laura Palmer"
\o/ ant@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au
-O- Anthony Murdoch Prentice Centre
/0\ Phone (07) 36 54078 University of Qldant@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au (Anthony Murdoch) (05/31/91)
rbn@ralph.uucp (Bob Boyd) writes: >I'm curious. The original poster on this claimed that PCSA and PC/NFS >aren't "True LAN" implementations. >What are the characteristics of a network client/server/peer architecture >that you believe make it a "True" LAN implementation? I guess it depends on what you expect out of a LAN. Things like PCSA and PCNFS are designed to provide connectivity from you PC to some non-PC (ie mini or above) computer (ie PCNFS to UNIX host/servers and PCSA to VMS host/servers) I see a LAN as something that provides PC-PC connectivity, as well as PC-(big machine) connectivity. I guess my ideals are approaching a distributed network (everyone can access everything). I have to thank everyone for the answers provided, though one thing worries me. Some of the answers have completely different answers. ant V ant "I killed Laura Palmer" \o/ ant@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au -O- Anthony Murdoch Prentice Centre /0\ Phone (07) 36 54078 University of Qld
R.J.Letts@sysc.salford.ac.uk (05/31/91)
#> I'm curious. The original poster on this claimed that PCSA and PC/NFS #> aren't "True LAN" implementations. #1. Fileserver efficiency. # Use of PC-NFS on a non-dedicated server is asking for trouble; a heavy #user of the system will cause DOS clients to time-out producing error messages #on the clients - not very good. > Good grief, what are you using as a server? I can run for days at a time > accessing a system that is serving dozens of Suns and PC and is also > running OpenLook (talk about a cycle stealer) without any significant level > of retransmissions. Furthermore if it's really a problem you can always > configure the number of retries before an error is reported - setting it to > 0 (infinite) means I can rebuild all of PC-NFS overnight and not worry > if somebody takes down the server for backup. A SUN3/180 was being used as the server [not in my department]; I belive it was the fastest machine SUN made at the time. Ok, you can set retries to infinity, but that is ok for running overnight. In a LAB environment locking a PC up does not go down very well. #3. Security #Novell offers you a much richer access rights scheme than NFS - #Read #write #Create [New files/directories] #Open [existing files] #Search [directories] #Execute-Only > ???? How is this different from and Unix server??? on unix you cannot set execute-only on a file to prvent the undergraduates from ripping the software off [this prevents 'ordinary' reading of the file] You cannot create a file to which users can only append, not overwrite > Most people regard the statelessness as a rather useful attribute, OK, statelessness is not really an issue, but machine reliablity is # 5. Price/Performance #compare the cost of a pc-based fileserver with the cost of a PC-NFS or #PCSA fileserver. > Hmmm. I'll bite. Here's a sample configuration for a server > and software for 10 client PC's: who builds networks this small ? for this sort of configuration I'd probably go for LAN MANAGER, but I have the prices for pre-installed server configuations to hand for NetWare 3.11 > SPARCstation SLC 4/20FM-8 $4,995 > File server option X2001Z $9,600 > SunOS on CD-ROM SX-21 $ 300 > PC-NFS Documentation $ 75 > PC-NFS RTU, no doc at 5-24 discount $ 245 x 10 = $2,450 > > Total:$17 420 for a 100 station network this works out at $39,470 > I could get it cheaper using a 486 clone with a clone SVR4, but > performance would probably be inadequate. Can someone give me the > equivalent for a name-brand NetWare server system. Don't forget to > include all software, the mouse, tape, CD, etc. why a mouse and CD? just because the SUN needs tham a fileserver doesn't. why brand-named? Elonex Fileserver [we have eight of these, one running for almost 3 years] - 1GB disk, - 16MB memory, - 20 user Netware 386 3.11 [installed & ready to go] - display, mouse [who needs a mouse on a server ?] - documentation - 3 1/2" disk drive - 32-bit EISA ethernet adapter - 128kbyte cache - 80486/33Mhz processor $12 496 Backup system $ 4 000 [a guess at this as I don't have prices to hand, probably far too high] total $16 500 ============= ie comparable to the system above however for more users: If I want to support 100 users the total is (approx) $18 500 250 users the total is (approx) $24 500 > The problem here is the confusion and manageability of maintaining > multiple name spaces, administration spaces, routing structures, etc. > Suppose (hypothetically) that I run NetWare on my PC for file access > and TCP-based stuff for the rest. Oops - we use Unix boxes as routers, > and they won't route IPX, so now I'm limited to my local LAN for file > sharing. What's my PC's name? Is it the same in the TCP/IP and NetWare > worlds? There's a printer on another PC I want to use, which name > should I use? Which stack? Management wants to manage the net with > SNMP. How does NetWare fit in here? And so on. You use IPX-IP encapulation, the workstation encapulates the IPX in IP and sends it through the network. [Lan workplace for DOS] If you don't want to fork out more money for LAN workplace for DOS use the local fileserver to encapsulate the IPX in IP for you Alternatively you reverse the network structure and use NW3.11 fileservers as the IP and IPX routers. Netware does not 'name' the PC's instead it uses the MAC address, and 'connection' number to identify them so name management is not a problem in the NetWare domain... The printer is not such a 'heavy' problem. Without a complete map of your network it would be impossible for me to 'guess' at how you would want to arrange the printers so here are the components : Novell's NFS support includes LPD NW3.xx PrintServer allows printing to pc's attached to workstations. Assuming you already have printers attached to PC's you carry on using them in the same manner. Novell's NFS includes a LPD to service printers. Novell include a SNMP agent with the TCP/IP support in NW3.11 > -- Geoff Arnold, PC-NFS architect, Sun Microsystems. (geoff@East.Sun.COM) -- Richard Letts Network Manager University of Salford Great Britain
bunten@hpcndaw.CND.HP.COM (Steve Bunten) (05/31/91)
> >2> Which ethernet cards are supported by LM ? >By default, LM for DOS and OS/2 works on any NDIS driver (ask your board >vendor for one). Many LM vendors would ship several of the more common NDIS drivers with their package (e.g. 3Com & HP shipped 3Com drivers, Western Digital drivers, IBM TR driver, and HP drivers). Other NDIS drivers would have to be hand installed into protocol.ini, etc. > >3> Is there any packages (Comercial/Shareware/Freeware) that provide > > TCP/IP over LAN manager ? >Most DOS and OS/2 TCP/IP packages can share the NDIS driver with LM. HP offers both LAN Mgr OS/2 & LMX over TCP. Ungermann-Bass has LM OS/2 over a TCP transport. Later this year Microsoft is expected to offer LM 2.0 over TCP. > >4> Does LAN manager provide file services to UNIX boxes via NFS or does > > it implement its own protocol ? I'm not sure which of these would be > > preferable, perhaps you can offer some opinion ? > LanMan uses ISO/OSI protocols. >LM uses NETBIOS at the session layer as its network interface. NETBIOS can >run on TCP/IP, or OSI, or XNS, but most frequently uses LLC2 (ISO logical >link layer, usually called 'netbeui'). As James says above LAN Mgr can run over many different protocols. That does obviously cause interoperability problems. AT&T is the only vendor that I know of who is presently shipping a LM product that uses OSI. DEC in their new products primarily uses DECNet although they offer some TCP connection. Most of the LM OS/2 vendors offer XNS or NetBEUI although UB has TCP. HP supports TCP. Some day the number of protocols out there may shrink so that interoperability will be easy. >James B. VanBokkelen 26 Princess St., Wakefield, MA 01880 >FTP Software Inc. voice: (617) 246-0900 fax: (617) 246-0901 Steve Bunten Colorado Networks Division Hewlett-Packard Company ----------
d9mikael@dtek.chalmers.se (Mikael Wahlgren) (06/01/91)
In article <m4bgf8cq0@tmsoft> mshiels@tmsoft (Michael A. Shiels) writes: >7> Is it possible to connect to the LAN from a terminal ? How would this > be set up ? Is it possible to connect to the LAN through TCP/IP > (telnet) ? These are picky questions and not that important :) >Answer: Not really. It is possible to connect to an OS/2 full screen session with a terminal, by using Os2You (shareware). The solution is to install Os2You on one of the servers/requesters on the LAN, and you would be able to connect to an OS/2 full screen session via async. line (modem or cable). It works quite like the dial in unix machine I am running now. Mikael Wahlgren d9mikael@dtek.chalmers.se
d9mikael@dtek.chalmers.se (Mikael Wahlgren) (06/02/91)
In article <m4bgf8cq0@tmsoft> mshiels@tmsoft (Michael A. Shiels) writes: >7> Is it possible to connect to the LAN from a terminal ? How would this > be set up ? Is it possible to connect to the LAN through TCP/IP > (telnet) ? These are picky questions and not that important :) >Answer: Not really. It is possible to connect to an OS/2 full screen session, by using the program Os2You (shareware). The solution is to install Os2You on a server or requester and Os2You will let you access an OS/2 full screen session via an asynchronous terminal via cable or modem. It works just like the dial in unix machine I am running now. Mikael Wahlgren d9mikael@dtek.chalmers.se
d9mikael@dtek.chalmers.se (Mikael Wahlgren) (06/02/91)
In article <1991Jun1.090049.8256@mathrt0.math.chalmers.se> d9mikael@dtek.chalmers.se (Mikael Wahlgren) writes: >It is possible to connect to an OS/2 full screen session with a terminal, >by using Os2You (shareware). The solution is to install Os2You on one Sorry if this showed up repeatedly. I wasn't aware that the message made it through, as it certainly didn't look like that when I sent it. Mikael Wahlgren d9mikael@dtek.chalmers.se
qseclrb@prism.gatech.EDU (BOB BAGGERMAN) (06/05/91)
In article <1991May29.151027.27342@ohsu.edu>, kozowski@ohsu3b2.ohsu.EDU (Eric Kozowski) writes: > > We have a large number of DEPCA Turbo ethernet boards (for > > PCSA) and so having support for them would be advantage. > It depends on what the vendor decided to support. LanMan Client (and Server) 'talk' to the NDIS driver. NDIS drivers are available almost all e-net boards, even the newer DEC ones. > > > >3> Is there any packages (Comercial/Shareware/Freeware) that provide > > TCP/IP over LAN manager ? > Most vendors have some sort of LanMan - TCP gateway available. TCP/IP > and LanMan can run concurrently over the same network (both CSMA/CD). With NDIS you can run multiple protocols over the same interface. The setup I use (which I think works pretty spiffy) is to use Microsofts NetBEUI protocol to do LanMan stuff, load and bind the NDIS to Packet driver interface, and then use packet driver based TCP/IP software (like PC/TCP or CUTCP) to do TCP/IP kinds of stuff. > >4> Does LAN manager provide file services to UNIX boxes via NFS or does > > it implement its own protocol ? I'm not sure which of these would be > > preferable, perhaps you can offer some opinion ? > LanMan uses ISO/OSI protocols. Huh? Actually the modular nature of LanMan allows you to use any one of a number of protocols. The ones I know of are NetBEUI, NBP, XNS, and TCP/IP. > >5> How does the allocation of resources work ? Does LM allow any user to > > access any resource on any machine so long as the user has the > > permissions ? If so, then does this include DOS machines ? LanMan resource serving is done from an OS/2 based system. For now that means that your server runs OS/2. There is third party software available to allow DOS machines to offer disk and printing resources to the rest of the LanMan clients. In the future if and when clients dump DOS and move to OS/2 then LanMan can start to look more and more like a peer to peer network because OS/2 workstations can then act as both a client server. Could be neat! > (don't think VMS is supported by anyone yet, though). > >8> What is the availability of sercer/connection software for > > - Sun SPARCservers > > - DEC VMS VAXes > > - IBM VM Mainframes > > Who sells/supports each of these ? > > I have'nt heard of anyone porting LanMan to Any of these machines but maybe > someone has. Now the real reason I replied to this article (sorry, I always get carried away). I understand that DEC Pathworks 4.0 is based on LanMan 2.0 code. I think it is not a full LM 2.0 implementation but it has been implied that if the TCP/IP transport is chosen for both the VMS side and the PC side then LanMan 2.0 client can connect to VMS Pathworks 4.0 server. I have not tried this but would love to hear from anyone who has. I like the LanMan product and think for larger LANs it has some strong features. It should be interesting to see how the market responds to LM 2.0 especially the Unix ports of LM 2.0 which are now showing up. I wonder if anything can slow the Novell juggernaut. Bob rwb@csdvax.gatech.edu -- Bob Baggerman ! rwb@csdvax.gatech.edu Communications Laboratory ! qseclrb@hydra.gatech.edu Georgia Tech Research Institute ! bbaggerm@gtri01.gatech.edu Atlanta, GA 30332 ! 404-894-3525 or 404-528-7660
jbreeden@netcom.COM (John Breeden) (06/05/91)
In article <30582@hydra.gatech.EDU> qseclrb@prism.gatech.EDU (BOB BAGGERMAN) writes: >Now the real reason I replied to this article (sorry, I always get carried >away). I understand that DEC Pathworks 4.0 is based on LanMan 2.0 code. >I think it is not a full LM 2.0 implementation but it has been implied that >if the TCP/IP transport is chosen for both the VMS side and the PC side then >LanMan 2.0 client can connect to VMS Pathworks 4.0 server. I have not tried >this but would love to hear from anyone who has. I like the LanMan product >and think for larger LANs it has some strong features. It should be >interesting to see how the market responds to LM 2.0 especially the Unix >ports of LM 2.0 which are now showing up. I wonder if anything can slow >the Novell juggernaut. Close. Acually DEC's Pathworks supports two different servers. The PathWorks server for VMS is the same server that they used for PCSA (MS Network over DECNet), so in that respect PathWorks is the same as PCSA when viewed from services provided from a VMS/VAX box (MS Network over DECNet - resource security only, no support for mailslots and named pipes (the 'stuff Lan Man layers on top of SMB). DEC also sells PathWorks for OS/2. This IS Lan Man 2.0 with DECnet as a transport. It also seems to imply that you could take the PathWorks/OS2 DECNet transport driver (decnet.os2?) and run it on an MS Lan Man server giving you PathWorks via MS Lan Man (which is prob. the same as DEC's OS/2 PathWorks - ie: they just repackage MS's Lan Man with a DECNet transport. The NDIS driver that DEC ships with PathWorks is an NDIS to DLL driver (dll.dos & dll.os2). DECnet's transport runs on top of the dll driver. It also means that you can run the OLD PCSA 'stuff on top of this driver (PCSA over NDIS). The only gotcha you need to watch out for is dll.dos and dll.os2 make the "optional" ndis "change hardware address" call - not all NDIS MAC drivers support it at this time. This was the state of PathWorks as of Networld Boston and comes from the DEC engineers. -- John Robert Breeden, jbreeden@netcom.com, apple!netcom!jbreeden, ATTMAIL:!jbreeden ------------------------------------------------------------------- "The nice thing about standards is that you have so many to choose from. If you don't like any of them, you just wait for next year's model."
jsanchez@polari.UUCP (jim sanchez) (06/05/91)
As an aside to this question, does anyone know if there is an archive site with NDIS drivers on it? I am specifically looking for a driver for the DEC (forget the nomenclature) ethernet card. thanks -- Jim Sanchez jim@hls.com Hughes LAN Systems - Bellevue, WA (206)646-4999