ljm@TWG.COM (Leo J McLaughlin) (01/17/90)
>>What does netware 386 v3.1 support for TCP/IP really mean? Do it mean: >As I understand it, Netware 386 v 3.1 will not actually include support for >TCP/IP. Rather, it will include hooks so that the TCP/IP NLMs will be able >to be loaded, once they're released later this year. As far as your specific >questions are concerned, I'll speculate based on what I've heard, but if anyone >from Novell is listening, it would be real helpful to hear more specifics on >this issue. >>1) I can FTP to a novell server >I would assume that this would be a fundamental component of any TCP/IP >implementation that they would release. I am less sure. The point of OPT is to allow NetWare to be supported by multiple protocol stacks, in particular TCP/IP, so as to allow Novell to be used within the IPX-phobic UNIX market. FTP access would seem to be less of an issue to Novell -- in any case it is already provided by Interlan, Wollongong, and for some network topologies Excelan and FTP software. >>2) I can Telnet to a novell server and run a DOS session from a VT-100 on >> a terminal server >This is not very likely and if it were implemented, would have a significant >negative impact on server performance. Agreed. >>3) my DOS workstation talk to a novell server with TCP or IP protocols >> rather than IPX, SPX protocols >There has been some talk about a pure IP client, but there are serious problems >in terms of memory overhead. I think Novell would like to see a university >work on this. I disagree strongly. TCP+UDP+IP+ICMP+instrumentation for SNMP all fits within our 17K kernel. Adding about 4K for a driver and subtracting about 10K for TCP and UDP yields a potential 'Novell IP shell' size of about 11K. Furthermore, our current TCP throughput is about 620Kbytes/second. Given adequate protocol implementation, TCP/IP installations are faster and not much (if at all) bigger than IPX installations. Actually, the interesting question is not so much TCP/IP on the Novell workstations as what will happen to all those Novell IPX 'bridges' out there. They don't pass IP traffic and IPX (XNS) addressing doesn't map well to IP addressing, however, Novell relies upon their bridges to provide connectivity between differing physical media for their customers. Moreover, IP routing is a very, very hard problem. Unless they acquire the multi-protocol router expertise of a cisco or Proteon (and perhaps even if they do) it is unclear how Novell can provide the routing technology necessary to support their proposed multi-protocol NetWare workstations and servers. enjoy, leo j mclaughlin iii The Wollongong Group ljm@twg.com