rcsmith@anagld.UUCP (Ray Smith) (11/17/88)
I am looking for information regarding the implementation of the Sun RPC
environment on IBM PC's. I know of Sun's PC-NFS, which includes RPC
support, but I would like to find out if there are any other packages.
Also if you have any comments regarding PC-NFS from a programming
standpoint, I would be interested in hearing them.
Thanks in advance,
Ray
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ray Smith | ...!uunet!mimsy!aplcen!\
Analytics, Inc. | ...!netsys!---anagld!rcsmith
Suite 200 | ...!ethos! /
9891 Broken Land Parkway |
Columbia, MD 21046 | Voice: (301) 381-4300 Fax: (301) 381-5173
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=golds@rlgvax.UUCP (Rich Goldschmidt) (11/23/88)
Applications built with the PC-NFS Toolkit will not work with Microsoft Windows. They both need the timer interrupt, and this causes problems. Also, when PC-NFS is running, you cannot run COMMAND.COM or .BAT (batch) files in a window or it will crash your PC. PC-NFS also requires a large amount of memory (>100K). Sun knows about these problems and is unresponsive. I wrote a version of RPC which is not Sun compliant for an Excelan card when I worked with MITRE. I have talked with my former department head there and it may be possible for MITRE to release this code under copyright. He asked that I document it first, which I have not had time to do yet (I am getting paid to do other things now...). If there is a great demand for a version of RPC which will not work with Sun, I might be persuaded to do what needs to be done to make this stuff available. I would be especially motivated if someone agreed to make the changes needed to make it Sun compliant, and to make that new version available. Rich Goldschmidt CCI Computers uunet!rlgvax!golds sun!sundc!rlgvax!golds (west coast) rlgvax!golds@uunet.uu.net (ARPA)
geoff@eagle_snax.UUCP ( R.H. coast near the top) (11/30/88)
In article <1041@rlgvax.UUCP> golds@rlgvax.UUCP (Rich Goldschmidt) writes: >Applications built with the PC-NFS Toolkit will not work with Microsoft >Windows. They both need the timer interrupt, and this causes problems. >Also, when PC-NFS is running, you cannot run COMMAND.COM or .BAT (batch) >files in a window or it will crash your PC. PC-NFS also requires a large >amount of memory (>100K). Sun knows about these problems and is >unresponsive. A couple of comments. First, the amount of memory occupied by PC-NFS is not generally ">100K": the size depends on the configuration and Ethernet driver you choose. [For example, on my Wyse 386 with a 3C501, PC-NFS and DOS together occupy less than 100% - see below.] The only driver with a real memory problem is the 3C505, and that's because of the amount of code needed to support co-residence with 3+.... Secondly, it's not clear exactly how responsive you expect us to be. PC-NFS was designed to extremely tight memory occupancy requirements, so that we could fit into DOS's 640K with large applications such as AutoCAD, and in the process we elected to bind the TCP/UDP code to the application rather than having it resident in memory. Since the TCP code (obviously) needs timer services, and since Windows breaks the old "DOS standard" way of doing this, we were clearly faced with the need to redesign this area of the product if we wanted to have Toolkit applications run under Windows. If and when (note the careful disclaimer) we release a new Toolkit which supports Windows, it will be beta tested and announced in the usual way. Note that such a move is NOT a given, though: we have to examine the tradeoffs very carefully, particularly if it means that we'll occupy more memory. If you feel that it's important to discuss this stuff, there's always comp.protocols.nfs as well as this group. Plus I don't exactly keep a low profile on the net :-) As far as the bug in running a batch file from Windows is concerned, I've logged it and we'll look at it. I have no record of a bug report being filed on this, though, so I'm not sure who in Sun "knows about these problems." Please follow up via email. >I wrote a version of RPC which is not Sun compliant for an Excelan card >when I worked with MITRE. I have talked with my former department head >there and it may be possible for MITRE to release this code under copyright. Do you mean a distinct remote procedure call protocol (i.e. not RFC 1057) or a version of Sun's RPC which is broken in some respect so that it is no longer Sun compliant? There are actually a lot of ports of the Sun public domain RPC source to PC TCP/IP toolkits, and some companies are actually offering products based on such ports (and not on the PC-NFS Programmer's Toolkit). That's what it's there for. >He asked that I document it first, which I have not had time to do yet >(I am getting paid to do other things now...). If there is a great demand >for a version of RPC which will not work with Sun, I might be persuaded to >do what needs to be done to make this stuff available. Now I'm really confused. If it's a version of Sun's RPC (RFC 1057), why would anyone want a non-interoperable version? If it's original work, presumably it needs to get ported to a variety of platforms (including Sun's) to be useful to anyone. > I would be especially >motivated if someone agreed to make the changes needed to make it Sun >compliant, and to make that new version available. Still confused. Geoff =================================================================== Output from RYBS "sysmap/v": Allocated Memory Map - by RYBS Electronics Inc. (verbose) PSP MCB files bytes owner command line hooked vectors ---- ---- ----- ----- -------- ------------- ----------------------------- 0008 09F1 0 94096 config 20EC 20EB 1 3120 command /v 22 24 2E 20EC 21AF 1 2048 command /v 2367 2230 1 336 free /v 2247 2246 1 4592 N/A * 09 17 28 2367 2366 1 510352 free 00 23 30 CE D4 D9 DF F2 FB FC FE --------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Geoff Arnold, Sun Microsystems Inc. +--------------------------------------+ PC Dist. Sys. Group (home of PC-NFS) |When you're fresh out of lawyers, you | UUCP: {hplabs,decwrl...}!sun!garnold |don't know how good it's going to feel| ARPA: garnold@sun.com +--------------------------------------+
ddl@husc6.harvard.edu (Dan Lanciani) (12/03/88)
In article <410@eagle_snax.UUCP>, geoff@eagle_snax.UUCP ( R.H. coast near the top) writes: | There are actually a lot of ports of the | Sun public domain RPC source to PC TCP/IP toolkits, and some companies | are actually offering products based on such ports (and not on the | PC-NFS Programmer's Toolkit). That's what it's there for. Where can one get Sun public domain RPC sources? All versions that I have seen are copyrighted by Sun with various (though minor) distribution restrictions. Dan Lanciani ddl@harvard.*
boyter@bimbo.UUCP (Maj Brian Boyter) (12/03/88)
In article <410@eagle_snax.UUCP>, geoff@eagle_snax.UUCP ( R.H. coast near the top) writes: > In article <1041@rlgvax.UUCP> golds@rlgvax.UUCP (Rich Goldschmidt) writes: > >PC-NFS also requires a large > >amount of memory (>100K). Sun knows about these problems and is > >unresponsive. > Let me start off by saying that I am a very satisfied customer of PC-NFS.... However, I also noticed some definite memory shortages at our site.... In particular, using an AT with a 3C503 card, PC-NFS, and PROTEC (a security package required at our site), the PC-LIFELINE (from SUN) will not run.... -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Maj. Brian A Boyter US Army Foreign Science & Technology Center Charlottesville, Va 22901 __ off: (804)980-7362 ( ) home: 973-9440 { } boyter%bimbo.uucp@virginia.acc.virginia.edu ( ) || Nuke'm 'till they glow || ...Then shoot'm in the dark ________< >_______