[comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc] Is anyone using 3+open Lan Manager & Interdrive together?

rick@kimbal.lynn.ma.us (Rick Kimball) (08/11/90)

In the application I'm developing I want to have both Lan Manager
disk and NFS disks mounted at the same time.  On the Lan Manager
side we are using 3+OPEN verison 1.1, on the NFS side I have tried
FTP's Interdrive, Beam & Whiteside NFS.  

NONE of these work concurrently together.  I have reported
my problem to all vendors involved.  Basically none of them
give a sh** that don't work together. 

You may ask why I don't pick one way or another. It purely
political and I can't change it without leaving.


Rick Kimball  |  INTERNET: rick@kimbal.lynn.ma.us
              |      UUCP: ...!spdcc!kimbal!rick, ...!spt!kimbal!rick
              |      POTS: (617) 599-8864

beame@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Carl Beame) (08/13/90)

In article <1153@kimbal.lynn.ma.us> rick@kimbal.lynn.ma.us (Rick Kimball) writes:
>In the application I'm developing I want to have both Lan Manager
>disk and NFS disks mounted at the same time.  On the Lan Manager
>side we are using 3+OPEN verison 1.1, on the NFS side I have tried
>FTP's Interdrive, Beam & Whiteside NFS.  
>
>NONE of these work concurrently together.  I have reported
>my problem to all vendors involved.  Basically none of them
>give a sh** that don't work together. 
>
>You may ask why I don't pick one way or another. It purely
>political and I can't change it without leaving.
>
>
>Rick Kimball  |  INTERNET: rick@kimbal.lynn.ma.us
>              |      UUCP: ...!spdcc!kimbal!rick, ...!spt!kimbal!rick
>              |      POTS: (617) 599-8864

	I do give a sh** and I am sure that FTP also does. Be aware that
3+OPEN, FTP's Interdrive, Beame & Whiteside's BWNFS ALL use the INT 2F
interface from DOS for the redirection of drives. This interface is 
designed for one and only ONE redirector. Just like you can only run one
vendor's TCP/IP, you can only run one redirector that uses the INT 2F
interface under DOS. 

	You can run Novell NetWare and BWNFS together, because Netware does
not use the INT 2F interface.

	Please try to distinguish a vendor saying that a problem is
either technically impossible or not marketable from he/she not giving a sh**.

	- Carl Beame
	President
	Beame & Whiteside Software LTD.

mshiels@tmsoft.uucp (Michael A. Shiels) (08/14/90)

If only one program can take over the INT2F functions how do you explain
the ability to install a network and a CD-ROM (which both use INT2F hooks)?

I know if you use DOS 4.x+ it has a different interface networks are supposed
to use called IFSFUNC.

ddl@husc6.harvard.edu (Dan Lanciani) (08/15/90)

In article <26C5F881.15729@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca>, beame@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Carl Beame) writes:
| 	I do give a sh** and I am sure that FTP also does. Be aware that
| 3+OPEN, FTP's Interdrive, Beame & Whiteside's BWNFS ALL use the INT 2F
| interface from DOS for the redirection of drives. This interface is 
| designed for one and only ONE redirector. Just like you can only run one
| vendor's TCP/IP, you can only run one redirector that uses the INT 2F
| interface under DOS. 

	While it is clear that the 2f redirector interface was not designed
for multiple redirectors, it is not strictly true that the restriction cannot
be overcome.  For most 2f redirector hooks, it is possible to determine
whether the call is really for "this" redirector and to pass it along if
it is not.  The main disadvantage is that, if a function is passed
along to the "next" redirector, and if there is no "next" redirector,
a non-specific error will be returned to the application.  Another
pitfall is that strict implementation of the 2f functions related
to the INT 21 redirect-device call precludes coexistence.
	If we define a well-behaved redirector as one which passes
all unrecognized requests along to the "next" redirector then
it is possible to have any number of well-behaved redirectors and at
most one il-behaved redirector running together.  The il-behaved
redirector must be loaded first, of course.  The MS-networks (and
hence IBM PC Lan program) redirector is il-behaved by this definition.
I haven't looked at 3+Open but I assume it is similar.
	The redirector used in FTP's Interdrive and in my own SMB
products is capable of being well-behaved with sufficient cooperation
from the protocol code with which it is linked.  At one point I believe
Interdrive ran concurrently with the PC Lan program but, possibly
because of the non-specific error problem, it may no longer do so.
Similarly, one version of my SMB client is completely well-behaved
but another, designed to exactly replace the PC Lan program, never
passes along functions related to the INT 21 redirect-device call.
The former coexists with Interdrive or even with the PC Lan program
itself (for a very odd combination).
	In conclusion I don't think the situation is completely
hopeless but it is beginning to look a little kludgy...

[Disclaimer:  All redirector-related information is derived strictly
by guesswork and may represent a complete misinterpretation of
the situation.  Information about specific products may be out-of-date
or just plain wrong.]

				Dan Lanciani
				ddl@harvard.*

ljm@OBELIX.TWG.COM (08/16/90)

>In the application I'm developing I want to have both Lan Manager
>disk and NFS disks mounted at the same time.  On the Lan Manager
>side we are using 3+OPEN verison 1.1, on the NFS side I have tried
>FTP's Interdrive, Beam & Whiteside NFS.

Wollongong's PathWay Client NFS for DOS works with LAN Manager.

As others have been pointing out, two INT 2F redirectors cannot
co-exist unless one of them passes redirector requests along.

enjoy,
leo j mclaughlin iii
The Wollongong Group
ljm@twg.com