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

[Dirk Munk]

brad wrote:
> On 2012-08-04, Paul Sture <paul at sture.ch> wrote:
>> 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?
>>
>
>  From the horse's mouth  (both comparisons vs. TCP/IP):
>
> <http://process.com/tcpip/multicompare.html>  (Multinet)
>
> <http://process.com/tcpip/tcpcompare.html>  (TCPware)
>
> Full disclosure - satisfied Hobbyist user of both stacks for a number of
> years.
>
> [...]
>
It would have been nice if they used the current TCPIP services 5.7 in 
these comparison charts.

Having said that, I also know that TCPIP development for OpenVMS seems 
to be a bit slow to use a euphemism. The Ipsec debacle is a good example 
for this state of affairs. You almost get the impression that the TCPIP 
development group consist out of one man with a typewriter high up in 
the Himalaya.