Xref: utzoo comp.sys.att:2746 comp.dcom.lans:1117
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!nrl-cmf!ames!ucsd!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!jack!nusdhub!rwhite
From: rwhite@nusdhub.UUCP (Robert C. White Jr.)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.att,comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: Starlan Monitor Wanted
Message-ID: <925@nusdhub.UUCP>
Date: 10 Mar 88 22:03:36 GMT
References: <120@westmark.UUCP>
Organization: National University, San Diego
Lines: 51
Summary: Starlan Monitors not really needed
	 or available yet.

In article <120@westmark.UUCP>, dave@westmark.UUCP (Dave Levenson) writes:
> ... connected by Starlan, and running MS-DOS. ...
> I've heard of test equipment that monitors a lan and records or
> displays the traffic, and performs analysis, etc.  They tend to
> be rather expensive, given that I'll probably only need it once.

	I am using Starlan quite extensively, and had the same
intrest some months back.  Being a member of TCA [Telecommunications
Association] I ravaged the convention looking for someone who
was selling a starlan protocol analizer.  The most positive
response I got is "We are planning to develop one for the faster
implementation [due in june] when it comes out."

> I can probably monitor the net from one of the workstations, using
> the Starlan board already provided, and some software that listens
> and records what it hears without transmitting.  Does anyone know
> of any software for this purpose?  Does anyone have any suggestions
> on this?  Am I crazy to even think of doing such a thing?  Is it
> worth the effort?

I never found any software which could monitor the network reasonably.
It would seem doable, byt I don't think anybody has bothered to try
it.  I think you will find that the network is very binary, that is
it either all works, or none of it does.  The only problem I have
had to date happened when someone went and re-aranged one of our
labs.  The plugged a long "leash to nowhere" into the system which
scrabled everything.  [Long wires act like an antena sometimes, which
can introduce unaccptable noise on the LAN making it look "always
busy"]  Other than this catstrophic type of failure I havn't had
any problems, and a protocol analizer wouldn't have helped at all.

Working with Starlan, the most useful accessory is a map of the
physical routing.  The second most useful accessory is a server
implemented under UNIX, as you can often find things out from
the unix behavior, while the MS-DOS systems mostly go " 't don
work.. " which is of little help.

Durring instalation "netstat /name=<remote name> /cont" will be
your best friend.


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
<<  All the STREAM is but a page,<<|>>	Robert C. White Jr.		   <<
<<  and we are merely layers,	 <<|>>	nusdhub!rwhite  nusdhub!usenet	   <<
<<  port owners and port payers, <<|>>>>>>>>"The Avitar of Chaos"<<<<<<<<<<<<
<<  each an others audit fence,	 <<|>>	Network tech,  Gamer, Anti-christ, <<
<<  approaching the sum reel.	 <<|>>	Voter, and General bad influence.  <<
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
##  Disclaimer:  You thought I was serious???......  Really????		   ##
##  Interogative:  So... what _is_ your point?			    ;-)	   ##
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^