Xref: utzoo comp.sys.novell:1758 comp.dcom.lans:8269
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!bcm!tmc.edu!sob
From: sob@tmc.edu (Stan Barber)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.novell,comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: Netware 386 NFS capabilities
Message-ID: <5805@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu>
Date: 2 Jun 91 04:09:11 GMT
References: <1991May10.142129.18462@jhereg.osa.com> <5744@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> <1991May29.162513.10529@amd.com>
Sender: usenet@bcm.tmc.edu
Followup-To: comp.sys.novell
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
Lines: 24
Nntp-Posting-Host: tmc.edu

In article <1991May29.162513.10529@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes:
>sob@tmc.edu (Stan Barber) writes:
>But we do have a multiprotocol network. We run TCP/IP and DECNET. My
>theory is that staff here feel VAXes and Suns are "real computers" and
>thus allowed to use their native protocols. But PCs are toys and
>anything invented in the PC world like IPX must be bad, let's ban it.
>Never mind the thousands of office workers who use PCs. Never mind
>its overwhelming popularity in the PC market. In fact, that's probably
>a strike against it. It must be too easy to use.

Comments I made related to the MANAGEMENT of the network. Let's assume
you have a network the size of the internet running IPX. How would you
propose to manage that?

Now that Novell can use TCP/IP as the native network transport (instead
of IPX), you can have the ease of use you want and I can have the network
management capabilities I need.

Sound like a win-win to me.

-- 
Stan           internet: sob@bcm.tmc.edu         Director, Networking 
Olan           uucp: rutgers!bcm!sob             and Systems Support
Barber         Opinions expressed are only mine. Baylor College of Medicine