Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!basset.utah.edu!haas From: haas%basset.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Walt Haas) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans Subject: Re: checksumming Novell? Message-ID: <1990Nov15.182140.26786@hellgate.utah.edu> Date: 16 Nov 90 01:21:40 GMT References: <1990Nov15.195319.1321@Eyring.COM> Organization: University of Utah CS Dept Lines: 16 In article <1990Nov15.195319.1321@Eyring.COM> ron@Eyring.COM (Ron Holt) writes: >In article hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick) writes: > >>We've been bitten a few times by corrupted data in files and routing >>updates transmitted by Novell... [war story deleted] >[description of Novell deleted]... NetWare has worked without a checksum >because, in general, hardware is usually reliable and checksums done by >the hardware at link-level are sufficient to catch packets corrupted on >the wire....[more stuff deleted] One of the main reasons Novell can survive without a packet-level checksum is that they usually run on simple networks. Novell is now in the process of trying to build a large internal network for their distributed corporation, and I think they are about to hit a big "oops". -- Walt