Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!mcsun!ukc!icdoc!qmw-cs!liam
From: liam@cs.qmw.ac.uk (William Roberts)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
Subject: Re: uab question
Keywords: uab Ethertalk
Message-ID: <1795@sequent.cs.qmw.ac.uk>
Date: 19 Mar 90 12:59:15 GMT
References: <13410@cgl.ucsf.EDU>
Reply-To: liam@cs.qmw.ac.uk (William Roberts)
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.
Lines: 24
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:

In article <13410@cgl.ucsf.EDU> mday@pollack.mmwb.ucsf.edu (Mark Day) writes:
>My interpretation is that uab allows your UNIX host to communicate
>with an Ethernet connected Mac directly using Ethertalk as the
>protocol, no UDP encapsulation, no muss, no fuss.
>Is my interpretation correct?

Yes, that's right. It uses the facilities available on a few
UNIX boxes to get at raw Ethernet frames.

>Since there is only one Mac on the far side, we don't want to spring
>for yet another K-box, if we can get away with a cheaper solution.
>Is there any way to get the AppleTalk through that is more cost effective
>that buying a K-box?

You could buy an EThernet interface for your Mac - that's
cheaper than a KBox in the short term, but works out expensive
if you buy some more Macs. Can't you trade-in your Proteon box
if it isn't actually doing what you want it to do?
-- 

William Roberts                 ARPA: liam@cs.qmw.ac.uk
Queen Mary & Westfield College  UUCP: liam@qmw-cs.UUCP
Mile End Road                   AppleLink: UK0087
LONDON, E1 4NS, UK              Tel:  01-975 5250 (Fax: 01-980 6533)