Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!ucla-cs!zen!ucbvax!QUABBIN.SCRC.SYMBOLICS.COM!DCP From: DCP@QUABBIN.SCRC.SYMBOLICS.COM (David C. Plummer) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: IBM TCP. Message-ID: <870806110524.3.DCP@KOYAANISQATSI.S4CC.Symbolics.COM> Date: Thu, 6-Aug-87 11:05:00 EDT Article-I.D.: KOYAANIS.870806110524.3.DCP Posted: Thu Aug 6 11:05:00 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 8-Aug-87 11:03:08 EDT References: <8708051605.AA25783@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu> <8708051618.AA26134@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu> <8708051624.AA26323@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu> Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Distribution: world Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 57 Date: Wed, 5 Aug 87 11:05:49 CDT From: sandrock@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark Sandrock) Also, I doubt that if "ACME" vendor tries to market a network that conflicts with DECnet that they will have many sales to systems which already have DECnet installed. They would most likely (and deservedly) soon be a defunct company. Well, what if it were UniSYS, IBM or GM? Muscle flexing is a very impolite thing to do anyway, and in open network environments it may achieve a marketing objective at the expense of thwarting the kinds of atmospheres that lead to experimentation and creativity. Date: Wed, 5 Aug 87 11:18:21 CDT From: sandrock@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark Sandrock) Thanks for your message re: DECnet and Ethernet. All of our DECnet addresses here at the University of Illinois are assigned by the PHYSnet management (whoever that is). We have not yet seen the need for multiple areas on this campus. Also, one would expect that DEC might anticipate the need and expand the DECnet addressing scheme to something reasonable in a future version (Phase V?). So Hedrick believes (Phase V). Unfortunately, it sounds like they are going off in another wrong direction. From Hedrick's description, they will in the future be basing DECnet protocol addresses on the Ethernet hardware address. Well, what happens if your Ethernet hardware breaks and you need to replace it? Answer as far as I can tell: you have to force the new Ethernet address to be the same as the old. What happens if you recommision the old board on the same net? Another problem: Does this mean that DECnet Phase V has variable length addresses? What do they do for networks that have a different number of hardware address bytes than the Ethernet has? My belief is that protocol addresses are logically attached to the machine as an entity, that hardware network addresses are attached to hardware interfaces, and that they should not be related because of the current problems with (1) DECnet Phase IV and (2) my understand of Hedrick's description of Phase V. IP, Chaos and PUP (and probably others I don't know about) do it right. Date: Wed, 5 Aug 87 11:24:18 CDT From: sandrock@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark Sandrock) It sounds like you are claiming that DEC preempts Ethernet hardware addresses which have been officially assigned to other vendors, but I have yet to see a specific example of such an address. Is it asking to much either to see an example or else have everyone drop this claim? Sure. There is a Symbolics 3600 at our site that has an Ethernet hardware address of 08-00-05-03-00-38. The 08-00-05- portion was assigned to Symbolics by the Ethernet number Czar for use by Symbolics for its Ethernet interfaces. That is the "official" hardware address of the interface on that machine. That machine also has a DNA address of 41.69. Because of the way DNA works, the booting procedure for the machine changes the Ethernet address of the interface to AA-00-04-00-45-A4. Therefore, DNA has preempted our officially assigned address.