Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!XLNVAX!LLOYD From: lloyd@XLNVAX.EXCELAN.COM (Lloyd Spencer) Newsgroups: bit.listserv.novell Subject: Re: Re: OSI "Needs and Wants" Message-ID: <9001182128.AA25482@na.excelan.com> Date: 18 Jan 90 21:28:47 GMT Sender: Novell LAN Interest Group Reply-To: Novell LAN Interest Group Lines: 75 Approved: NETNEWS@PSUVM Gateway X-To: NOVELL@SUVM.ACS.SYR.EDU Thanks for your comments. I have some brief responses to some of your questions that Novell has already addressed, however I don't think the message was delivered to the NetWare community-at-large as clearly or widely as it should have been. ----- > > - X.400 e-mail > > very important. We've been waiting for X.400 mail to really go big guns > into electronic mail. The more seemless the X.400 Netware mail seems, the > greater the possibility that we'll continue to use netware in the long run. > Novell has made a strong commitment to support X.400 mail services on the NetWare 386 platform. Unfortunately, I cannot comment on the details or the release timeframe for Novell's X.400-based mail products. > > - FTAM file services > > FTAM is essentially a type of OSI client access (right?) so it will be > useful. At this point we don't have plans to use netware file servers for > "non personal computers". FTAM would be useful for file exchanges. > FTAM is essentially an OSI-based file transfer protocol. Although FTAM does provide record level access to files, many implementations only provide simple file transfer capabilities. Given that OSI-based networks and solutions are still in their early phases of establishment, this is not really a limitation at this time. > > - directory services > > If novell's directory services were OSI compliant (thats X.500 I think), > it might change the prevailing opinion here, that being that netware > servers are ok for PCs, but won't be of much use for Unix workstations. > Novell has also made a strong commitment to support X.500 directory services on the NetWare 386 platform. Once again, I cannot comment on the details or the release timeframe for Novell's X.500-based directory service product(s) at this time. > > - IPX over CLNP (connectionless network protocol) routing > > CLNP support will likely be important. Our campus is considering FDDI > networks on which native IPX probably wouldn't be allowed. I would guess > CLNP will be allowed. > Many corporate facilities are either planning or considering the use of OSI (and hence CLNP) over FDDI to interconnect their multi-campus LANs. > One of the things that makes netware hard to sell around here is it's > present poor (in my opinion) support for TCP/IP. > Please direct your concerns over TCP/IP to Rick Bohdanowicz; his internet mail address is 'rick@novell.com'. At any rate, I will be sure to pass your comment onto Rick. ----- As a final note, nearly all of the info above was previously delivered in Washington, DC and Western Europe in October '89 when Novell announced its OSI Strategy to trade press, industry analysts and "major account" representatives. To get a pretty good high-level summary of the OSI announcement, I can send you a copy of 'Novell's OSI Strategy'; to get a pretty reasonable summary of currently relevant OSI technologies, I can send you our 'OSI Technology Overview' document or 'OSI Tutorial' (Macintosh hypercard stack). Thanks, Lloyd ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Lloyd T. Spencer Phone : (408) 473-8242 Novell, Inc. FAX : (408) 433-0775 Product Marketing Internet : lloyd@novell.com 2180 Fortune Drive CompuServe : 70020,1045 San Jose, CA 95131 -----------------------------------------------------------------------