Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!uflorida!gatech!kong!emory!stiatl!john From: john@stiatl.UUCP (John DeArmond) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans Subject: Re: NETWARE 2.1 vs. VINES Keywords: LAN WAN Networking Unix Message-ID: <1562@stiatl.UUCP> Date: 16 Nov 88 15:35:01 GMT References: <238@daitc.daitc.mil> Reply-To: john@stiatl.UUCP (John DeArmond) Organization: Sales Technologies Inc., Atlanta, GA Lines: 186 In article <238@daitc.daitc.mil> cschenk@daitc.daitc.mil (Cliff Schenk) writes: >Has anyone had any experience with Banyon VINES (Virtual Networking System). >How does it stack up against NetWare 2.1? > >I am impressed with some of Banyon's design strategies and guidelines. >It appears to be a nice implementation of the seven-layer ISO model and >the fact that it was developed and runs on a real operating system (UNIX), >is favorable (no flames please). Future ports are planned for DEC's VAX >using VMS, and IBM's 9370 running under VM. They reportedly have a >version running internally on a VAX running BSD 4.3. > >Of intrest are its asynchronous remote bridging capabilities and customer >service. How do the security features compare with NetWare 2.1. > >Comments from anyone who uses VINES would be very helpful. > >Thanks in advance, >Cliff > >-- >Disclaimer: These views are my own and in no way represent that of CDC or > The Defense Applied Information Center (DAITC). > >Cliff Schenk DOMAIN cschenk@daitc.daitc.mil >Control Data Corporation PATH ..!uunet!daitc!cschenk >Defense Applied Information Technology Center Phone 703/998-3481 Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans Subject: Re: NETWARE 2.1 vs. VINES Summary: Expires: References: <238@daitc.daitc.mil> Sender: Reply-To: john@stiatl.UUCP (John DeArmond) Followup-To: Distribution: Organization: Sales Technologies Inc., Atlanta, GA Keywords: LAN WAN Networking Unix In article <238@daitc.daitc.mil> cschenk@daitc.daitc.mil (Cliff Schenk) writes: >Has anyone had any experience with Banyon VINES (Virtual Networking System). >How does it stack up against NetWare 2.1? > I have an extensive amount of experience with Novell as a user and as a developer and a significant amount of experience with Vines. From my vantagepoint, Vines is not even in the same league with Novell. I'm afraid that the fact that Vines uses a unix system as a server blinds many people. The fact of the matter is, it does not really matter what hardware platform is used for a server as long as it's performance is adequate and it is reliable. I've found that an 8 mhz AT is more than fast enough to handle a single port (by that i mean one network port on the server) LAN and a 386 class box is more than enough to handle multiport LANS with bridges (novell). Lets look at a few differences between Vines and Novell. PC memory usage: Vines needs about 150k (>200k with their terminal emulator) Novell needs about 40k. Spooler control. Vines pipes to the unix lp server which means that only the superuser can kill a job once it's spooled. Novell has a nice full screen queue manager that any user can access. if the user has supervisor security, he can manipulate any user's queue. Access control. vines uses the unix file system pretty well intact so it is open to all the known (and unknown) methods of hacking. I consider it very insecure from this point of view. Novell uses a proprietary server disk format. DOS cannot access it. If additional security is needed, remove the floppy drive from the server. There are utilities that will allow dos to access the novell file system but they must be run from the server which requires physical access - a pretty good security barrier. File security Vines provides standard DOS file security (I make this statement with some hesitation because I'm not real sure. The docs are so poor I have not found much of anything on the subject.) Novell provides much finer granularity and detailed security including write only read only create (does not imply read or write) search directory overwrite delete parental rights (do these priviledges apply to subdirectories.) The supervisor supplies a default mask that determines how a file is created using DOS calls. These can be changed either by a Novell utility or by an extended Novell system call. Network Media support Banyon runs on Ethernet (and not all adaptor cards) Novell supports all network hardware available for the PC including dialup asynch services. Up to 4 network adaptors can be placed in a server. Mix or match. Stability Vines (at least the version we have here) is very unstable. It "looses" files on the pc drive. These magically reappear when the network server is stopped and restarted but it interrupts all network activity. Happens a couple of times a day around here. In any event, the file system is subject to all the known unix weaknesses. I have never personally seen a Novell server malfunction, though I know others that have. It is a VERY rare occasion. The system has many safeguards such as cache flushing which provide a reasonable probability that the system will survive even an arbitrary powerdown. Fault tolerant Vines has none I'm aware of. Novell SFT (system fault tolerant) provides a fault tolerant transaction based system that is extremely secure. You can mirror the file system on 2 drives or across 2 servers. There is full transaction control facilities including integrety checks and backouts. There is an interface to a UPS so the system can auto shutdown when the UPS low battery alarm goes off. Novell had some teething problems with this product and there are some bugs still but it's a good product. Support Vines has minimal that I've seen. (these comments are strictly from a user viewpoint not an administrator). Last summer Banyon sent us an update tape that had some kind of copy protection on it. When the tape was installed, it took the server down. It stayed down for 2 WEEKS. I'm not particularly aware of the dirty details but neither did I see many frantically waving arms belonging to Banyon people as I would expect under such disaster condx. The novell bunch are somewhat a bunch of pricks to deal with but when you do get support, it is excellent. As an enduser, you must pay 50 bux per 15 minutes of support. A dealer or ISV gets good, free support. Novell has dropped the hardware copy protection scheme for it's server software so the system should have no copy-protection related problems. Documentation The Vines documentation I've seen around here is sparse and obscure. They are caught up in using cutsie names like StreeTalk for services instead of naming them for what they do. Novell comes with about 10 pounds of relativly good docs PLUS a "guide to documentation" book that servers as kinda a dispatch table to other manuals. Nice. Market share (important because it is an indicator of 3rd party support) Novell claims about 70% of the PC networking market. I have no idea about Banyon. Cost Novell software costs in the vicinity of $2,000 or so depending on how you get it and what options you get. A fast AT-based server platform can be configured for less than $3,000. There are no restrictions on number of users other than a server limit of 100 per subnet. I don't know the pricing of Vines but I'd expect the software to be more expensive - Unix software almost always is. Then consider that you must have a fast Unix box to run it on (at least if you want the unix side to remain useful) so figure maybe 20 grand for that. I have no facts but I've heard that there are user restrictions on Vines. Summary Vines DOES provide a couple of functions that are nice, such as a fairly poor terminal emulator for Unix but on the whole, Novell has it beat on all fronts. Just to bare my biases . I've sold Novell for many years as a network consultant. I arrived at Novell after looking at what's out there. I have to remain fairly current in others' products in order to justify Novell. I do like other networks such as TCP/IP or ViaNet but I promote Novell when the service is severe and reliability is paramount. I particularly do not like Vines. It's been interesting comming into a Vines environment and working here for the last 6 months. I have been able to look at Vines with a background of knowing the features of competitors' products. From this point of view, Vines is very lacking. Please also note that these are personal opinions totally separate from my work here at Sales Technologies. John John De Armond Sales Technologies, Inc. Atlanta, GA ...!gatech!stiatl!john