Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!husc6!harvard!caip!seismo!umcp-cs!chris
From: chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: net.dcom,net.lan
Subject: Re: Digital LANBridge-100 survey results
Message-ID: <1706@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 27-May-86 00:37:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1706
Posted: Tue May 27 00:37:37 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 28-May-86 02:05:45 EDT
References: <264@cucca.UUCP> <11798@amdcad.UUCP>
Organization: Computer Sci. Dept, U of Maryland, College Park, MD
Lines: 20
Keywords: ethernet
Xref: watmath net.dcom:1951 net.lan:1523
Summary: Vitalink vs. Xerox

Incidentally, while I cannot confirm this, I believe that the
Vitalink boxes use Xerox NS protocols to handle routing information
between themselves.  They broadcast this over the Ethernet looking
for more Vitalinks.  This is all well and good until you put a
Xerox Inter-Network Router (INR) onto your cable.  The Xerox box crashes
unless all directly reachable XNS routers all claim to have the
same network number.  At this point you have to either convince
the Vitalink to use your Xerox-assigned network number, change your
network number to match the Vitalink's and hope that everything
still works, or separate the cables.

All we know for certain is that our own Xerox boxes running INR
software were crashing because someone was claiming to be on
network 1.  We simply stopped running INR service, as there were
no other networks for the Xerox machines to connect anyway, but
this could be a problem for others.
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 1516)
UUCP:	seismo!umcp-cs!chris
CSNet:	chris@umcp-cs		ARPA:	chris@mimsy.umd.edu