harish@guille.ece.orst.edu (Harish Pillay) (09/11/89)
The RFCs 1001 and 1002 define using TCP/IP over NetBIOS systems. After reading the RFCs, I'm confused over one point. Assuming an implementation of TCP/IP over NetBIOS, can a user on a Unix box say ftp into the PC (assuming a ftp server is running in the PC)? My understanding is that the user on the Unix box has to have a NetBIOS-specific TCP/IP implementation. Is that right? If not, it is unclear to me how that user can ftp from the pc. Conversely, can we ftp etc from the same PC to other Unix boxes who *don't* have the NetBIOS stuff? I think I'm missing something here and would appreciate any hints and pointers. I hope this is not a RTFM-type of question :-). While on the same subject, is there any PD implementations of TCP/IP over NetBIOS systems? Thanks. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Harish Pillay Internet: harish@ece.orst.edu Electrical and Computer Engineering UUCP: uunet!ece.orst.edu!harish Oregon State University MaBell: 503-758-1389 (home) Corvallis, Oregon 97331 503-737-2554 (office) United States of America ======== 'Give a man a fish, and he'll starve for life, ======== ======== Show him how to fish, and he'll feed himself for life.' ======== ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
jbvb@VAX.FTP.COM (James Van Bokkelen) (09/11/89)
RFC 1001/1002 NETBIOS (NETBIOS over TCP/IP) is a "session layer" provided on top of a completely normal TCP/IP protocol stack (which comes up to the "transport layer" but no farther). RFC NETBIOS only uses TCP port 139, so all the other TCP services can co-exist on the same client or server. Our FTP, Telnet and so forth can be used while our PC is running NETBIOS, and the Unix SMB products can be used simultaneously with other Unix TCP/IP applications. In your posting, you also mention "TCP/IP over NETBIOS", implying that it is specified by RFCs 1001/1002. This is incorrect. Wollongong defined "TCP/IP over NETBIOS" in another pair of RFCs, and it is completely different in fuction and intent. The idea with this is that NETBIOS (using an un- specified transport layer of its own) can transport IP datagrams from a PC to a router, which forwards them to non-NETBIOS-using systems in the conventional IP encapsulation. The two specifications are so different that you could in fact run RFC NETBIOS on top of a TCP/IP layer which was using some other NETBIOS to forward its IP datagrams (using two different LANA numbers, of course). James B. VanBokkelen 26 Princess St., Wakefield, MA 01880 FTP Software Inc. voice: (617) 246-0900 fax: (617) 246-0901
prc@erbe.se (Robert Claeson) (09/12/89)
In article <8909111511.AA02759@vax.ftp.com> jbvb@VAX.FTP.COM (James Van Bokkelen) writes: >... Our FTP, Telnet and so forth can be used while >our PC is running NETBIOS, and the Unix SMB products can be used >simultaneously with other Unix TCP/IP applications. Are there really any UNIX SMB products out there? If so, where are they? I've been looking for them for months. -- Robert Claeson E-mail: rclaeson@erbe.se ERBE DATA AB
jbvb@VAX.FTP.COM (James Van Bokkelen) (09/12/89)
Unix SMB servers that I know of: Syntax Corp (Kent, WA), SCO Xenix-Net, NCR has one for the Tower. Both of these have support for RFC 1001/1002 NETBIOS over TCP/IP (although both vendors also offer products that use other transport layers below NETBIOS/SMB). James B. VanBokkelen 26 Princess St., Wakefield, MA 01880 FTP Software Inc. voice: (617) 246-0900 fax: (617) 246-0901
pnessutt@dmshq.mn.org (Bob Monio) (09/13/89)
In article <8909121318.AA04771@vax.ftp.com> jbvb@VAX.FTP.COM (James Van Bokkelen) writes: >Unix SMB servers that I know of: Syntax Corp (Kent, WA), SCO >Xenix-Net, NCR has one for the Tower. Both of these have support for >RFC 1001/1002 NETBIOS over TCP/IP (although both vendors also offer >products that use other transport layers below NETBIOS/SMB). Which SMB product are you refering to in NCR's case, James? Other than Towernet, the only other one that I was aware of Syntax's product. Is there another that you are referring to or are you speaking of Towernet? I guess I'm curious because we've spent some time researching File Server products for our Tower machines and we've only managed to find companies (like Syntax) who vendor SMB servers. Has anyone else done similar research in this area and would they be willing to share some email with me concerning it? Thanks. -Bob -- Robert A. Monio National Information Services, Inc. "The beauty of competition is that pnessutt@dmshq.mn.org it makes everyone honest." ..uunet!rosevax!nis!dmshq!pnessutt -- Jeff Anderson, MIPS Inc.
syackey@secola.Columbia.NCR.COM (Steve Yackey) (09/13/89)
In article <7336@dmshq.mn.org> pnessutt@dmshq.mn.org (Bob Monio) writes: >In article <8909121318.AA04771@vax.ftp.com> jbvb@VAX.FTP.COM (James Van Bokkelen) writes: >>Unix SMB servers that I know of: Syntax Corp (Kent, WA), SCO >>Xenix-Net, NCR has one for the Tower. Both of these have support for >>RFC 1001/1002 NETBIOS over TCP/IP (although both vendors also offer >>products that use other transport layers below NETBIOS/SMB). > >Which SMB product are you refering to in NCR's case, James? Other >than Towernet, the only other one that I was aware of Syntax's >product. Is there another that you are referring to or are you >speaking of Towernet? >Thanks. > > -Bob The SMB file server for the Tower is called Tower File Server (TFS). TFS allows the Tower to be a server and/or client and supports both the core and extended file sharing dialects of the SMB protocol. TFS is independent of the underlying transport(s). TFS can utilize the XNS protocol suite (provided by, but a small portion of, Towernet), Netbios formats and protocols (provided by, but a small portion of, Tower Netbios) or TCP (provided by, but a small portion of, Tower WIN/TCP). The XNS version is fully compatible with vanilla NET/1 from Ungermann-Bass, 3+ Share from 3-Com and/or PC File Server (the NCR marketed PC side). The Netbios version if fully compatible with IBM products, PC LAN Program, and NCR PC LAN program. The TCP version can utilize the TCP transport provided by, for example, FTP software, and the MS-Net stuff included with PC File Server. TFS serves/consumes from multiple PC vendor products (UB, 3Com, NCR, IBM) using multiple transport protocols (XNS, Netbios), concurrently. yackman
harish@guille.ece.orst.edu (Harish Pillay) (09/14/89)
Thanks you all for the information you gave on my query on the NetBIOS RFC. However, there are still some aspects that are unclear. It still isn't obvious to me how a NetBIOS over TCP/IP system would say be able to talk at all to a non-NetBIOS TCP/IP system. I know my question is still vague, and would appreciate any suggestions to documents/publications I can refer to other than RFC 1001 and 1002. Once I get a good enough bit of information, I'll post a summary. Thanks again. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Harish Pillay Internet: harish@ece.orst.edu Electrical and Computer Engineering UUCP: uunet!ece.orst.edu!harish Oregon State University MaBell: 503-758-1389 (home) Corvallis, Oregon 97331 503-737-2554 (office) United States of America ======== 'Give a man a fish, and he'll starve for life, ======== ======== Show him how to fish, and he'll feed himself for life.' ======== ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
romkey@asylum.sf.ca.us (John Romkey) (09/14/89)
>It still isn't obvious to me how a NetBIOS over TCP/IP system would >say be able to talk at all to a non-NetBIOS TCP/IP system. Ah. Well, you can't, anymore than you can get a NetBIOS over DECNet to talk to a NetBIOS over TCP to a NetBIOS over OSI to a NetBIOS over (3COM-Novell-Banyan-...). There's the rub. I suppose you could create some kind of NetBIOS translator to bridge underlying transport protocols, but nobody (to my knowledge) has. - john romkey USENET/UUCP: romkey@asylum.sf.ca.us Internet: romkey@ftp.com "God is good, God is great, God's a big inverterbrate." - Boiled In Lead
jeffr@sco.COM (Jeff Radick) (09/16/89)
In article <12445@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU> harish@guille.ECE.ORST.EDU (Harish Pillay) writes:
+The RFCs 1001 and 1002 define using TCP/IP over NetBIOS systems. After
+reading the RFCs, I'm confused over one point. Assuming an implementation
+of TCP/IP over NetBIOS, can a user on a Unix box say ftp into the PC (assuming
+a ftp server is running in the PC)? My understanding is that the user on the
+Unix box has to have a NetBIOS-specific TCP/IP implementation. Is that right?
+If not, it is unclear to me how that user can ftp from the pc. Conversely, can
+we ftp etc from the same PC to other Unix boxes who *don't* have the NetBIOS
+stuff? I think I'm missing something here and would appreciate any hints and
+pointers. I hope this is not a RTFM-type of question :-).
You are confused. RFCs 1001 and 1002 define an standardized way for
systems to provide the NetBIOS services on top of TCP/IP, not the
other way around. RFC 1001 defines general concepts about how this
works, and RFC1002 defines the protocol to be used between the machines
providing this service.
Thus a system that has this service has TCP/IP as an underlying mechanism
in the same way TCP/IP is there as an underlying mechanism for, say,
FTP. If your TCP/IP software has these other utilties then the NetBIOS
stuff will appear essentially to be just another service like FTP or
TELNET, except that NetBIOS uses both TCP and UDP in a certain coordinated
way as defined in the RFCs. (This is an oversimplification, but essentially
correct.) NetBIOS therefore should not interfere with the operation of
FTP or any of your other ordinary TCP/IP-related services, except perhaps
by virtue of resource usage, which is completely dependent upon implementation
and system usage.
More particularly in response to your question, FTP on a system with
NetBIOS will operate exactly like FTP on a system without NetBIOS,
and interoperability should not be a problem.
There are, I believe, TCP/IP implementations
on top of NetBIOS, but this is not what these RFCs are about, and in my
opinion such an idea is mostly bogus since NetBIOS presumes the existence
of some underlying mechanism such as TCP/IP for conveying information
between systems, so that putting TCP/IP on top of that would be largely
redundant if not completely bizarre.
+
+While on the same subject, is there any PD implementations of TCP/IP over
+NetBIOS systems?
+
+ ...
Assuming what you mean is NetBIOS over TCP/IP and not vice versa:
unfortunately I don't know the answer to this question. I know it has
been asked before in this newsgroup, perhaps one of the people who
has gotten a response (or a lack thereof) can answer.
Of course I should mention that SCO's TCP/IP product (not the so-called
controlled release), as well as others, such as Excelan's, includes
a NetBIOS module as part of the standard product. If you are not using
one of these then of course you will want a PD implementation.
Jeff Radick
The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
jeffr@sco.COM or ucscc!sco!jeffr or uunet!sco!jeffr or just sco!jeffrljm@TWG.COM (Leo J McLaughlin) (09/16/89)
>>It still isn't obvious to me how a NetBIOS over TCP/IP system would >>say be able to talk at all to a non-NetBIOS TCP/IP system. >Ah. Well, you can't, anymore than you can get a NetBIOS over DECNet to >talk to a NetBIOS over TCP to a NetBIOS over OSI to a NetBIOS over >(3COM-Novell-Banyan-...). >There's the rub. I suppose you could create some kind of NetBIOS >translator to bridge underlying transport protocols, but nobody (to my >knowledge) has. Performance Technology has been selling a product called PowerBRIDGE for some time. It bridges differing protocol implementations of NetBIOS. There are two caveats. One, that because naming resolution is invisible to NetBIOS applications, an very small extra piece of DOS software must be added to each host wishing to participate -- a problem for UNIX or VMS NetBIOS hosts. Two, the NetBIOSs must support different LANA numbers (just how good is that NetBIOS implementation you bought?). enjoy, leo j mclaughlin iii The Wollongong Group ljm@twg.com
ljm@TWG.COM (Leo J McLaughlin) (09/21/89)
>There are, I believe, TCP/IP implementations on top of NetBIOS, but this is >not what these RFCs are about, and in my opinion such an idea is mostly bogus >since NetBIOS presumes the existence of some underlying mechanism such as >TCP/IP for conveying information between systems, so that putting TCP/IP on >top of that would be largely redundant if not completely bizarre. Unfortunately, it is very easy for those of us on the warm, cheery Internet to forget that the vast and overwhelming majority of hosts networked today are connected in their own proprietary fashion over a plethora of differing protocols and hardware. NetBIOS is the only unifying theme in this discord. enjoy, leo j mclaughlin iii The Wollongong Group ljm@twg.com