Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!munnari!vuwcomp!newbery
From: newbery@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Michael Newbery)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: TCP/IP on IBM (was Re: BITNET)
Message-ID: <13343@comp.vuw.ac.nz>
Date: 10 Mar 88 23:58:58 GMT
References: <7136@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu< <1619@tulum.UUCP> <1615@uoregon.UUCP> <1624@uoregon.UUCP> <17222@watmath.waterloo.edu> <1639@uoregon.UUCP> <18582@topaz.rutgers.edu>
Reply-To: newbery@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Michael Newbery)
Followup-To: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Organization: Computing Serv. Ctr, Victoria Uni., Wellington, New Zealand
Lines: 17
Summary: Info wanted on 8232

In article <18582@topaz.rutgers.edu> ron@topaz.rutgers.edu (Ron Natalie) writes:
>IBM was never happy with the 7170 (DACU) approach and now has a
>new kludge (8232).
Can anyone provide details on how well/badly this works? Also costs? IBM
would maybe like to sell us one and I would like to know how much of a markup
the local arm is making - or even if it is worth pursuing at all.
We have a 4381 with VM (no VSE, MVS or VTAM thankyou) We would like to
upgrade from our bisync line running thru a 3704 (yep, I kid you not, but
then it thinks it's a 2770 anyway :-() and TCP/IP to the VMS and Unix
boxes rather than jNet/UREP.

Thanks.
-- 
Michael Newbery

Internet: newbery@comp.vuw.ac.nz
Une boule qui roule tue les poules.		(Landslides kill chickens)