[comp.unix.xenix.sco] Lan Manager/X

jim@tiamat.fsc.com (Jim O'Connor) (01/25/91)

There has been some talk recently of DOS/Unix networking products, and
someone mentioned LM/X.  We have HP's LM/X running on an HP 9000 model
800 machine, but I'd love to be able to use an SCO Unix 386 or SCO Xenix
386 machine as an LM/X server, also.  Is there an LM/X server product available
for either of these systems, and who supplies it?

Thanks for any info.

--jim
------------- 
James B. O'Connor			jim@tiamat.fsc.com
Ahlstrom Filtration, Inc.		615/821-4022 x. 651

paul@actrix.gen.nz (Paul Gillingwater) (01/28/91)

In article <783@tiamat.fsc.com> jim@tiamat.fsc.com (Jim O'Connor) writes:
> There has been some talk recently of DOS/Unix networking products, and
> someone mentioned LM/X.  We have HP's LM/X running on an HP 9000 model
> 800 machine, but I'd love to be able to use an SCO Unix 386 or SCO Xenix
> 386 machine as an LM/X server, also.  Is there an LM/X server product 
> available for either of these systems, and who supplies it?

Would you believe --- Hewlett Packard!!!!  Strange but true.  Nice
products, pity about their marketing.  Your SR must have really
screwed up in not trying to sell it to you for 386 platforms too.
-- 
Paul Gillingwater, paul@actrix.gen.nz

martino@logitek.co.uk (Martin O'Nions) (01/28/91)

jim@tiamat.fsc.com (Jim O'Connor) writes:

>There has been some talk recently of DOS/Unix networking products, and
>someone mentioned LM/X.  We have HP's LM/X running on an HP 9000 model
>800 machine, but I'd love to be able to use an SCO Unix 386 or SCO Xenix
>386 machine as an LM/X server, also.  Is there an LM/X server product available
>for either of these systems, and who supplies it?

>Thanks for any info.

>--jim
>------------- 
>James B. O'Connor			jim@tiamat.fsc.com
>Ahlstrom Filtration, Inc.		615/821-4022 x. 651

SCO are 'in discussion' over a native version, but one of my previous postings
to this effect elicited a response that HP are already shipping an LM/X server
for SCO (no, I don't know why).

Check with your HP rep., and either mail me, or post back to the group if its
a wicked rumour.

Thanks

Martin

--
DISCLAIMER: All My Own Work (Unless stated otherwise)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin O'Nions            Logitek Group Support      martino@logitek.co.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Down the drinking well / Which the plumber built her
             Aunt Mathilda fell / - We should buy a filter....
         (Harry Graham - Ruthless Rhymes for Heartless Homes)

jim@tiamat.fsc.com (Jim O'Connor) (01/29/91)

In article <1991Jan27.220253.24498@actrix.gen.nz>, paul@actrix.gen.nz (Paul Gillingwater) writes:
> > 386 machine as an LM/X server, also.  Is there an LM/X server product 
> > available for either of these systems, and who supplies it?
> 
> Would you believe --- Hewlett Packard!!!!  Strange but true.  Nice
> products, pity about their marketing.  Your SR must have really
> screwed up in not trying to sell it to you for 386 platforms too.

In defense of our SR, she probably didn't know I was thinking about LM/X
for 386 Unix.  However, someone at HP is probably at fault for why I didn't
ask her ealier, i.e. there was no mention of LM/X for 386 Unix in any of
the HP literature (price lists, product lists, magazines, etc) I've seen in the
past 6 months.  Therefore, I just assumed they didn't have it.

Oh well, I guess this just goes to show - you'll never know if you don't ask.

Thanks for the info.

--jim


P.S.  I've received several requests for opinions on LM/X on the HP 9000.  We
will be using it more extensively over the next few weeks, so at that time,
I'll post an article with any opinions/information that I have.
------------- 
James B. O'Connor			jim@tiamat.fsc.com
Ahlstrom Filtration, Inc.		615/821-4022 x. 651

dionj@netcom.UUCP (Dion Johnson) (01/30/91)

From article <785@tiamat.fsc.com-, by jim@tiamat.fsc.com (Jim O'Connor):
- In article <1991Jan27.220253.24498@actrix.gen.nz>, paul@actrix.gen.nz (Paul Gillingwater) writes:
-> > 386 machine as an LM/X server, also.  Is there an LM/X server product 
-> > available for either of these systems, and who supplies it?
-> 
-> Would you believe --- Hewlett Packard!!!!  Strange but true.  Nice
-> products, pity about their marketing.  Your SR must have really
-> screwed up in not trying to sell it to you for 386 platforms too.
- 
- In defense of our SR, she probably didn't know I was thinking about LM/X
- for 386 Unix.  However, someone at HP is probably at fault for why I didn't
- ask her ealier, i.e. there was no mention of LM/X for 386 Unix in any of
- the HP literature (price lists, product lists, magazines, etc) I've seen in the
- past 6 months.  Therefore, I just assumed they didn't have it.
- 
- Oh well, I guess this just goes to show - you'll never know if you don't ask.
- 
- Thanks for the info.
- 
- --jim
- 
- P.S.  I've received several requests for opinions on LM/X on the HP 9000.  We
- will be using it more extensively over the next few weeks, so at that time,
- I'll post an article with any opinions/information that I have.
- ------------- 
- James B. O'Connor			jim@tiamat.fsc.com
- Ahlstrom Filtration, Inc.		615/821-4022 x. 651

Lan Manager for SCO UNIX was announced at Uniforum last week.
Some info was posted to sco-list and sco.opendesktop newsgroup.  If you
want details, contact your friendly SCO reseller, or email to info@sco.com
-- 
Dion L. Johnson  -- the material above is my personal opinion, and has no
official sanction or relevance to any corporate position or policies of
The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. 

paul@actrix.gen.nz (Paul Gillingwater) (01/30/91)

In article <785@tiamat.fsc.com> jim@tiamat.fsc.com (Jim O'Connor) writes:
> In defense of our SR, she probably didn't know I was thinking about LM/X
> for 386 Unix.  However, someone at HP is probably at fault for why I didn't
> ask her ealier, i.e. there was no mention of LM/X for 386 Unix in any of
> the HP literature (price lists, product lists, magazines, etc) I've seen in 
> the past 6 months.  Therefore, I just assumed they didn't have it.

Actually, I believe HP developed it!  Yes, HP and Microsoft were
co-developers of LM/X, and HP OEM'ed LM for MS-DOS and OS/2 from
3COM.  Pity HP isn't very good at blowing its own trumpet.

I think i've found the reason why HP may not have mentioned it.  It
seems that both HP and 3COM are getting out of selling LM DOS
clients  -- because of Microsoft's better distribution channels, and
the huge investment they are making, I think both HP and 3COM (and
maybe IBM soon) will be telling people to buy direct from MS, just
like with Windows.  MS will no doubt have to roll in the HP TCP/IP
demand-loadable protocol stack into the standard release, which
seems like a pretty good idea.

As for LM/X for 386 platforms, I believe that SCO will be bundling
this with future releases, letting HP concentrate on LM/X for its
HP-UX and MPE/XL platforms. 

The other factor is that LM/X is now officially in OSF/1 (Operating
System of the Future? :-), which makes a lot of sense.

> Oh well, I guess this just goes to show - you'll never know if you don't ask.

True.  You might try asking a bit harder next time!  Why, they even
do site wiring, PC LAN cards, 10-Base-T test equipment, SNMP
LANalysers, and all sorts of nice goodies!

> Thanks for the info.

Welcome.
 
> P.S.  I've received several requests for opinions on LM/X on the HP 9000.  We
> will be using it more extensively over the next few weeks, so at that time,
> I'll post an article with any opinions/information that I have.

I've been using LM/X quite a bit.  I like the HP_UX end, but the PC
end sucks, due to memory limitations.  I believe this will be fixed
in the LOOOONG awaited next release (LM 1.1?)
-- 
Paul Gillingwater, paul@actrix.gen.nz

darrells@cpqhou.uucp (Darrell Starnes) (01/30/91)

in article <martino.665054129@krypton>, martino@logitek.co.uk (Martin O'Nions) says:
> 
> jim@tiamat.fsc.com (Jim O'Connor) writes:
> 
>>There has been some talk recently of DOS/Unix networking products, and
>>someone mentioned LM/X.  We have HP's LM/X running on an HP 9000 model
>>800 machine, but I'd love to be able to use an SCO Unix 386 or SCO Xenix
>>386 machine as an LM/X server, also.  Is there an LM/X server product available
>>for either of these systems, and who supplies it?
> 
>>Thanks for any info.
> 
>>--jim
>>------------- 
>>James B. O'Connor			jim@tiamat.fsc.com
>>Ahlstrom Filtration, Inc.		615/821-4022 x. 651
> 

SCO announced Lan Manager for UNIX at UNIFORUM in Dallas last week. We
actually showed it in our booth running on a dual processor 386/33
SYSTEMPRO. It is supported on the SVR3.2 UNIX. It is due to ship
in March. If you have any questions, contact SCO.

Darrell Starnes
Systems Engineer
Compaq Computer Corporation
Houston, TX

eli@robechq.UUCP (Eli Levine) (01/31/91)

In article <783@tiamat.fsc.com> jim@tiamat.fsc.com (Jim O'Connor) writes:
>...  We have HP's LM/X running on an HP 9000 model
>800 machine, but I'd love to be able to use an SCO Unix 386 or SCO Xenix
>386 machine as an LM/X server, also.  Is there an LM/X server product available
>for either of these systems, and who supplies it?

SCO, shortly.  They've announced their intention of providing
an LM/X product, with DOS client software, in a few months.
As with all such announcements of future plans, there's no firm
date, but I wouldn't be surprised to see something by June, perhaps
earlier.

Eli Levine @Robec Distributors

brian@edat.UUCP (brian douglass personal account) (01/31/91)

In article <martino.665054129@krypton| martino@logitek.co.uk (Martin O'Nions) writes:
|jim@tiamat.fsc.com (Jim O'Connor) writes:
|
||There has been some talk recently of DOS/Unix networking products, and
||someone mentioned LM/X.  We have HP's LM/X running on an HP 9000 model
||800 machine, but I'd love to be able to use an SCO Unix 386 or SCO Xenix
||386 machine as an LM/X server, also.  Is there an LM/X server product available
||for either of these systems, and who supplies it?
|
||Thanks for any info.
|
||--jim
||------------- 
||James B. O'Connor			jim@tiamat.fsc.com
||Ahlstrom Filtration, Inc.		615/821-4022 x. 651
|
|SCO are 'in discussion' over a native version, but one of my previous postings
|to this effect elicited a response that HP are already shipping an LM/X server
|for SCO (no, I don't know why).
|
|Check with your HP rep., and either mail me, or post back to the group if its
|a wicked rumour.
|
|Thanks
|
|Martin

This is kind of strange, because last week at UniForum, SCO said
they weren't going to be releasing LM/X until March.  I have in
front of me a product overview and technical background paper for
LM/X that is dated Dec 1990, but also says it is preliminary
information.

If LM/X is coming from SCO it looks like you will have to wait
another month.  If LM/X is coming from HP and just being resold by
SCO, then maybe it is available.

Could someone from SCO and/or HP comment?

Brian Douglass			Voice: 702-361-1510 X311
Electronic Data Technologies	FAX #: 702-361-2545
1085 Palms Airport Drive	brian@edat.uucp
Las Vegas, NV 89119-3715
-- 
Brian Douglass			brian@edat.uucp

jim@tiamat.fsc.com (Jim O'Connor) (02/01/91)

In article <1991Jan30.083638.7233@actrix.gen.nz>, paul@actrix.gen.nz (Paul Gillingwater) writes:
> 
> As for LM/X for 386 platforms, I believe that SCO will be bundling
> this with future releases, letting HP concentrate on LM/X for its
> HP-UX and MPE/XL platforms. 

The SCO LM/X has been announced, but somehow I doubt SCO will "bundle" it
with anything, except maybe the ODT Server upgrade, which may begin to
justify the price being charged for it.

> The other factor is that LM/X is now officially in OSF/1 (Operating
> System of the Future? :-), which makes a lot of sense.

That sounds encouraging!

> True.  You might try asking a bit harder next time!  Why, they even
> do site wiring, PC LAN cards, 10-Base-T test equipment, SNMP
> LANalysers, and all sorts of nice goodies!

I knew about most of that other stuff.  One of our Ahlstrom sister companies
(Pyropower in San Diego) just had HP do a brand new building in UTP/10baseT
wiring.  Word is they did a good job, but that it was expensive! Hopefully,
the adage "you get what you pay for" is really true. :-)


> I've been using LM/X quite a bit.  I like the HP_UX end, but the PC
> end sucks, due to memory limitations.  I believe this will be fixed
> in the LOOOONG awaited next release (LM 1.1?)

I agree.  We've struggled quite a bit trying to get LM on the PC's and
get enough memory left for the PC to do something besides just talk to
the network. :-)
------------- 
James B. O'Connor			jim@tiamat.fsc.com
Ahlstrom Filtration, Inc.		615/821-4022 x. 651

dmatlock@eecs.cs.pdx.edu (Delbert Matlock) (02/02/91)

What's the word on interoperability between HP-LM/X, SCO-LM/X, and Microsoft
LAN Manager (1.1 & 2.0)?  In particular, what will be the deal with protocol
support?  3Com's NBP protocol easily allows for 521K of available memory on
DOS workstations, so it would be nice to someday see something along the lines
of an NBP protocol in LM/X.  With 3Com's recent change in direction I don't 
know if this will ever be available now.

=============================================================================
Delbert Matlock                         Internet:  dmatlock@eecs.cs.pdx.edu
MicroNet Northwest                      
Voice:  (503)228-3071

bob@rel.mi.org (Bob Leffler) (02/04/91)

In article <1393@pdxgate.UUCP> dmatlock@eecs.cs.pdx.edu (Delbert Matlock) writes:
>What's the word on interoperability between HP-LM/X, SCO-LM/X, and Microsoft
>LAN Manager (1.1 & 2.0)?  In particular, what will be the deal with protocol
>support?  3Com's NBP protocol easily allows for 521K of available memory on
>DOS workstations, so it would be nice to someday see something along the lines
>of an NBP protocol in LM/X.  With 3Com's recent change in direction I don't 

The only common non-proprietary transport that I've seen so far is TCP/IP.
With the additional overhead of 3com's tcp/ip port and the apparent lack
of windows 3.0 support  (the win driver appears to only support 3com's nbp)
I'm not totally sure of the benefit.

If you establish connectivity, but the overhead renders the client useless,
I'm not sure that is a win......

I don't foresee things like Decnet or NBP being adopted on all the LM/X
servers.  Perhaps using TP4 or some similar scheme makes more sense.
I guess only time will tell.

Perhaps there will be some major announcements at the upcoming Networld.

bob


-- 
Bob Leffler, (bob@rel.mi.org), (313) 696-2479               Opinions expressed
Electronic Data Systems, GM Truck & Bus SBU                 may not be those
Systems & Technology, Enterprise Technical Planning         of my employer.
Box 7019, 5555 New King Street, Troy MI. 48007             

jim@tiamat.fsc.com (Jim O'Connor) (02/05/91)

In article <1393@pdxgate.UUCP>, dmatlock@eecs.cs.pdx.edu (Delbert Matlock) writes:
> What's the word on interoperability between HP-LM/X, SCO-LM/X, and Microsoft
> LAN Manager (1.1 & 2.0)?  In particular, what will be the deal with protocol
> support?  3Com's NBP protocol easily allows for 521K of available memory on
> DOS workstations, so it would be nice to someday see something along the lines
> of an NBP protocol in LM/X.  With 3Com's recent change in direction I don't 
> know if this will ever be available now.

The docs for HP-LM/X said that you could use 3Com clients with it only after
3Com introduced a TCP/IP stack for their DOS client software (which was
supposedly in progress at the time - and is definitely available, since HP's
DOS client software uses it).  HP also sells an OS/2 server package which
has TCP/IP capabilities, so you can have HP-UX LM/X servers and OS/2 LM
servers talk to the same clients.

I haven't heard anything about SCO or Microsoft LM/X, but my guess is that
they'll also use TCP/IP, thus requiring TCP/IP capability in the DOS clients.
------------- 
James B. O'Connor			jim@tiamat.fsc.com
Ahlstrom Filtration, Inc.		615/821-4022 x. 651

alexb@cfctech.cfc.com (Alex Beylin) (03/03/91)

In article <1991Jan30.133710.389@cpqhou.uucp> darrells@cpqhou.uucp (Darrell Starnes) writes:
>
>SCO announced Lan Manager for UNIX at UNIFORUM in Dallas last week. We
>actually showed it in our booth running on a dual processor 386/33
>SYSTEMPRO. It is supported on the SVR3.2 UNIX. It is due to ship
>in March. If you have any questions, contact SCO.
>
>Darrell Starnes
>Systems Engineer
>Compaq Computer Corporation
>Houston, TX

Which version of LM/X?  The latest Microsoft code is version 2, but
AT&T have not yet released LM ver. 2 for Unix, as far as I know.

Also, are peer services supported under this version?


 Alex Beylin, Systems Specialist | +1 313 759-7114
 alexb@cfctech.cfc.com           | Chrysler Corp. MIS
 sharkey!cfctech!alexb           | Distributed Systems Group