Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!apollo!mishkin
From: mishkin@apollo.uucp (Nathaniel Mishkin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo
Subject: Re: NCS vs NFS+rpc (In Japanese/Kanji)
Message-ID: <3b57a3de.13422@apollo.uucp>
Date: 8 Apr 88 17:20:00 GMT
References: <7075@etlcom.etl.JUNET>
Reply-To: mishkin@apollo.UUCP (Nathaniel Mishkin)
Organization: Apollo Computer, Chelmsford, MA
Lines: 34

In article <7075@etlcom.etl.JUNET> kato%etl.jp@relay.cs.net writes:
>[1] NCS (Network Computing System)
>
>Does anyone know the current status of NCS implementation on 
>several kinds of machines?
>I've heard that third parties have decided to do on Sun, Vax, 
>Cray, etc., but I don't know the current status.
>From when will they be available?

NCS has run on a variety of 4.2 and 4.3 machines (including Sun, VAX,
Alliant, Multiflow), System V (R2 and R3, with BSD sockets) (including
Unicos) MS/DOS, and VMS.  We expect that support for NCS binaries will
come from both Apollo and 3rd parties.  (Sorry, I really don't know what
I'm "allowed" to say.)  The source to NCS is available to universities
under license for a nominal fee.

>[2] NCS vs NFS+rpc
>
>What is the difference of NCS and the combination of NFS (Network 
>File System) with rpc (remote procedure call)?
>Which is more powerful and easy to builtin to application programs?

Obviously, I'm biased, but I think it's pretty clear that as a suite of
tools for developing distributed applications (especially ones with
demands more complicated than distributed file system applications
tend to have), NCS is both more powerful and easy to use.  The features
of NCS were described in a paper in the Summer '87 Usenix.

You can send me mail if you want more information.
-- 
                    -- Nat Mishkin
                       Apollo Computer Inc.
                       Chelmsford, MA
                       {decvax,mit-eddie,umix}!apollo!mishkin