Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!DBNGMD21!GRZ027
From: GRZ027@DBNGMD21.BITNET (Peter Sylvester +49 228 8199645)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.nodmgt-l
Subject: Re: :routtab tableformat for NJEF
Message-ID: <"90-02-08-21:02:12.59*GRZ027"@DBNGMD21.BITNET>
Date: 8 Feb 90 22:58:45 GMT
Sender: Node Management Discussion <NODMGT-L@BITNIC>
Reply-To: Node Management Discussion <NODMGT-L@BITNIC>
Lines: 27
Approved: NETNEWS@PSUVM Gateway

There is not much difference between the JES2 node numbers
and the lids. The requirement for JES2 node number is that
they have to be the same from one table to he next. Nobody
forces us to have the same node numbers in all JES2 systems
(actually the offset makes them different.)

The old GENROUTS could have read a previous JES2 initialization
file for that node, and reserve some range for free assignments
of node numbers. The next month these node number would be
taken. Of course this only works when the JES2 table are
available where GENROUTS is used, but in the beginning of EARN
the tables had been created at the central NETSERV. The central
assignment of node numbers was a simple solution.

For GR and NJEF we have the situation that we need some three
character names associated to the direct neighbours, and these
names must not change and they should not be arbitrily choosen
because of local naming conventions.

If GR is used at a remote NETSERV to create an NJEF table then
either local post processing must be done, or the information
about the lids has to be in BITEARN NODES.

The current GR writes LIDnnnn where nnnn is the JES2 nodenumber,i.e.
an erroneous file is created.

Peter