PETEHIC@UOTTAWA.BITNET (Pete Hickey) (01/13/90)
Hi, Sorry for what is a basic question, but I'm new with TCP in the IBM world. I'm looking at both FAL and KNET. From the software side of things, how similar are these two products. Can an application that talks to one of their TCP/IP virtual machines talk to the other (I.E is the interface the same). Can the new BITNET II run with KNET? Thanks Pete ======================================================================= Pete Hickey | Convention says that something funny University of Ottawa | goes here. Its blank because I have Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA | funny to say. (613) 564-7646 |_____________________________________ petehic@uotacdvm.uottawa.CA PETEHIC@UOTTAWA.BITNET
SMITH@GECRDVM1.BITNET (Don Smith) (01/13/90)
On Fri, 12 Jan 90 14:44:21 EST Pete Hickey said: >Hi, > >Sorry for what is a basic question, but I'm new with TCP in the IBM >world. > >I'm looking at both FAL and KNET. From the software side of things, how >similar are these two products. Can an application that talks to one >of their TCP/IP virtual machines talk to the other (I.E is the interface >the same). Can the new BITNET II run with KNET? > >Thanks > Pete I would refer you to the index of this list.. We started with the IBM TCP/IP IUP from Wisconson Univ...then replaced it with KNET/K200 then added IBM -VM-TCP/IP with the BTI, then added IBM-TCP/IP with the SNALINK...IBM seems to be a SERIOUS player in TCP/IP.. Currently we have VM-KNET,,IBM-VM FAL,,,IBM-MVS-TCP/IP,,,we will be dropping one of the VM TCP/IP products...and we will be keeping the TCP/IP over SNA capability..... *********************************************************************** Don Smith Senior Software Engineer--Communication Systems General Electric Company CIT/Corporate Research and Development Processing ______ BITNET: SMITH@GECRDVM1 / | INTERNET: SMITH%GECRDVM1@crd.ge.com | | * _________/ | GEMS: GECRDVM1(SMITH) > 0 | DIALCOMM 8-235-1946 / | AT&TNET: 1-(518)-385-1946 |______________ | SNEAKERNET:General Electric Company `_ | Corporate Information Technology `__| 2500 Cambridge Road 2nd Floor East Wing Schenectady New York, 12345 FAX: 1-518-385-0654
LVARIAN@PUCC.BITNET (Lee C. Varian) (01/14/90)
On Fri, 12 Jan 90 14:44:21 EST Pete Hickey said: >I'm looking at both FAL and KNET. From the software side of things, how >similar are these two products. Can an application that talks to one >of their TCP/IP virtual machines talk to the other (I.E is the interface >the same). Can the new BITNET II run with KNET? Pete, We began our VM use of the TCP/IP protocols just five years ago this month, using two Spartacus K200 Ethernet controllers and the KNET software. We now have a total of four Ethernet controllers for IBM systems: the original two Spartacus K200's plus two newer (and faster) BTI ELC's. We began experimenting with the Wisconsin WISCNET TCP/IP code when it became available to universities and converted over entirely to the use of the IBM TCP/IP for VM (FAL) product when it replaced WISCNET. We had come to the conclusion then (mid 1987) that the KNET software was going to continue to operate in catch-up mode, always a little (or a lot) behind FAL in function, reliability, and adherence to the evolving Internet standards. We have not regretted that decision. We are now happily running the FAL code on our four non-IBM Ethernet controllers. (Our decision to buy those controllers for their much better price and performance than the original IBM DACU and newer 8232 controllers is another one we have not regretted, in spite of the fact that we have to run non-IBM drivers for them in FAL.) We developed the VMNET (BITNET II for VM) program. The field tests of that program were done with some sites running FAL, WISCNET, and KNET (and all interoperating satisfactorily). Our distributed and supported version of VMNET, however, supports only FAL. Lee Varian Princeton University
BRUCE@UMDD.BITNET (Bruce Crabill) (01/14/90)
I'd go with FAL, if I was you. There are some rumors that the KNET people may be starting to do some work on their product again, but it has been a long time since they have done much with it. Applications are not directly portable between each. I think Princeton's VMNET originally supported KNET, but I think they have issued a statement that they would only be supporting FAL. Perhaps KNET can turn around and become a reasonable product, but I think they have some work cut out from them. Disclaimer: I have never used KNET, nor am I positive about their current product state, however I have seen lots of people dropping KNET and picking up FAL and can't say I've ever seen the reverse to be true. Bruce