[Info-vax] Rethinking DECNET ?

[JF Mezei]

On 14-09-04 13:46, Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:

>> DECnet per say, no. But the embedded functionality yes. (for instance,
>> edit node::file.name ).
> 
> You doesn't *need* to do that. It's (only) a convenience.
> A "nice to have" but there are other ways.


VMS has been good to maintain upward compatibility. Moving the node::
stuff to native IP based applications such as FAL would allow them to
ditch DECnet and maintain user interface compatibility.