[Info-vax] Choice of network stacks for Hobbyists?

[Paul Sture]

On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 17:01:08 +0000, Simon Clubley wrote:

>>
> In reality however, depending on what the OP wants to do with SFTP,
> he may find the version he is using utterly broken and in need of more
> recent images from HP.
> 
> It's embarrassing that the vendor supplied TCP/IP stack for it's
> enterprise level operating system cannot even get the basics right and
> that customers are forced to point out that Linux works just fine in
> similar circumstances before said vendor supplied stack gets fixed.
> 
> (The OP's TCP/IP version is the same version I was using when I had the
> series of SFTP/SSH issues I discussed in comp.os.vms a few months ago.)

This is very relevant to anyone running Hobbyist systems.

FWIW with the version that came with VMS V8.4 last February, ssh simply 
hung on me.  I had read of problems with it so gave up at that point.

Before I make the leap to Multinet or TCPware, can anyone point me to a 
comparison chart of the two products please?

And while we are on the subject, any Hobbyist not needing the features
of DECnet Phase V should definitely stick with Phase IV.  I speak as 
someone who has run Phase V on Hobbyist systems for over a decade, and I 
specifically chose that because I was supporting Phase V systems at 
work.  If you don't use this stuff on a regular basis, you quickly become 
rusty (this applies to other networking stuff too: I recently heard of a 
guy who was very experienced with Cisco kit but had a hard time getting 
back into the swing of it after a period in management).

In contrast Phase IV was always a product which you could set up and 
forget, then pick up quickly a year or so later.  Phase IV always 
consumed far less system resources, and you notice this when using 
various emulators out there, particularly with those which have memory 
restrictions for the free versions.

-- 
Paul Sture