RAF@CU.NIH.GOV (Roger Fajman) (05/21/91)
Is there anyone out there sucessfully running 3Com 3+Open or Microsoft LAN Manager over TCP/IP? I'm especially interested if you are internetworking it with routers. What TCP/IP implementation are you using? We already have PC/TCP from FTP Software. Also, are you using a mail package such as cc:Mail or Microsoft Mail (formerly Network Courier) instead of or in addition to SMTP or POP? We are heavy users of 3Com 3+Share and need to move to something else, for obvious reasons. I am also interested if anyone is using TCP/IP protocols such as NFS, SMTP, and POP in place of PC LAN operating systems such as Novell, Microsoft LAN Manager, and Banyan Vines. Has anyone done it in a PC-based environment without Unix servers? I doubt that a lot of our 3+Share LAN administrators would take kindly to a suggestion that they also must learn Unix in addition to DOS and OS/2, even if that is technically the most sensible thing to do. We do have a large central Unix machine, but it's not really prepared to take on the job of replacing hundreds of 3+Share servers.
mshiels@tmsoft (Michael A. Shiels) (05/21/91)
I was on the LAN Reseller Authorization Courses and we used a 3com/HP TCP/IP stack to talk from LAN Manager 2.0 servers (as workstations) to a LM/X unix
richi@hpopd.pwd.hp.com (Richard Jennings) (05/21/91)
/ hpopd:comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc / RAF@CU.NIH.GOV (Roger Fajman) /
12:22 am May 21, 1991 / Is there anyone out there sucessfully running
3Com 3+Open or Microsoft LAN Manager over TCP/IP? I'm especially
interested if you are internetworking it with routers. What TCP/IP
implementation are you using? We already have PC/TCP from FTP Software.
Also, are you using a mail package such as cc:Mail or Microsoft Mail
(formerly Network Courier) instead of or in addition to SMTP or POP? We
are heavy users of 3Com 3+Share and need to move to something else, for
obvious reasons.
----------
We widely use the TCP/IP stack written by Hewlett-Packard (for obvious
reasons). It is my understanding (and this of course has to be an
unofficial, personal statement etc.) that we have licensed the stack to
Microsoft, who plan to include it in DOS LM clients from now on.
Yes, it internets. HP has the largest private IP network in the world
(we are network 15). I regularly browse an LM/X drive in Santa Clara,
CA from over here in the UK.
And yes, we use it for mail. This site manufactures two mail clients:
NewWave Mail and AdvanceMail. Both are wide-area (today's buzzword is
``enterprise-wide'') mail systems, that talk to servers, either
proprietry (HP3000) or open (HP9000 HP-UX or Intel SCO UnixV or IBM ???
or DEC ??? or...). The HP catch-all name for this capability is
``NewWave Office''.
Hope This Helps,
richi.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
Richard Jennings, Software Development Engineer
Pinewood Information Systems Division, the home of HP's Advanced
----------------------------------------- Image Management System (HP AIMS),
AdvanceLink, OpenMail and Multi-media communications
Hewlett-Packard --------------------------------------
Nine Mile Ride Voice: (+44)/(0) 344 763738 ADMD=GOLD 400 C=GB
Wokingham Fax: (+44)/(0) 344 763526 OU1=Pinewood ORG=hp
Berkshire RG11 3LL E-mail: richi@hpopd.pwd.hp.com GN=Richard PRMD=hp
England or: richi@hpopd.pwd.hp.co.uk SN=Jennings
--
>> Of course, I don't speak for Hewlett-Packard <<CCECL@NUSVM.BITNET ("L. Chandra") (05/22/91)
We are trying 3+Open TCP (from HP) here. It has an utility to poke the local NetBios cache to add a remote NetBios name, so that a workstation can locate a server across routers. It works much like 3+Open XNS's REMSERVE/3NB. Currently the utility (Addname) allows you to add up to 4 remote NetBios names, this is still better than 3NB which can only REG one name at a time. I am told that PC/TCP's NetBios interoperates with LAN Manager but it does not have any utility to allow "Internet NetBios". There are some problems which we need to resolve: 1. 3+Open TCP stack is much fatter than 3Com's NBP stack. On a 286 PC with Himem.sys we get about 460k of free memory. This is slightly better than 435k of 3+Open XNS. But 460k is still not good enough for some RAM hungry DOS applications. 3+Open TCP is able to take advantage of shadow RAM, expanded memory, etc. But our 286 PC's do not have these. On a 386 PC, with the help of a 386 memory manager (such as 3COMEMM), memory is not a problem. PC/TCP NetBios is slightly fatter than 3+Open TCP (by 10-20k) and does not know shadow RAM and expanded memory. I am told that it can be loaded high on a 386 but I have not tried that. 2. Assigning an unique IP address to each PC is a pain. PC/TCP has Bootp client. 3+Open does not. We tried to implement a Bootp client but there isn't any IFCONFIG utility to assign IP address on the fly. Bootp client would have to modify PROTOCOL.INI (the ip address is hardcoded there), unload the TCP stack, reload the stack to reread PROTOCOL.INI. It's quite a pain. It also slow down the boot time, especially if you boot from a floopy disk. As it is, LAN Manager boot up time is already very slow as compared to Novell Netware. 3. Performance of 3+Open TCP is not as good as NBP. We ran PC Magazine LAN Benchmark to compare 3+Open TCP vs NBP using 8MHz 286 PC, I do not have the figure in front of me but I recall in certain test, that speed of TCP workstation is about 30-40% that of NBP. It is not so bad if the workstations are fast 386's. I did not test the performance of PC/TCP. 4. If you use 3+Open TCP, you lost the ability to run PC/TCP, CUTCP, ka9q... and the applications which come with 3+Open TCP is not that fantastic. Big *sigh*. -Chandra Liem <ccecl@nusvm.Bitnet>