Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ncar!boulder!sunybcs!bingvaxu!leah!itsgw!nysernic!rutgers!topaz.rutgers.edu!ron From: ron@topaz.rutgers.edu (Ron Natalie) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans Subject: Re: LAN hardware & software advice Message-ID: Date: 31 Mar 88 03:21:30 GMT References: <956@cfa.cfa.harvard.EDU> Organization: The Office of Mismanagement and Bean Counting Lines: 17 One of the reasons I didn't recommend DECNET is that the requestor didn't indicate that he was running ULTRIX, nor did he indicate that the UNIX machine was a VAX at all. While you can have DECNET for SUNs, it isn't very nice. Second, why bother to mix protocols at all with a gateway, reasonable non-proprietary protocols like TCP/IP exist for VMS, something that DEC seems to be continually unaware of. Second, the smart Ethernet cards are generally not a very satisfactory solution except for terminal traffic. The new 3.0 release on Wollongong seems to work extermely well with our terminal servers, even the BRIDGE ones which have yet to get the protocols straight. The DEUNA/DCLO problem occurs when you put the DEUNA in the small UNIBUS backplane in the CPU cabinet. Having a expansion box for the DEUNA is likely to solve the problem. -Ron