[Info-vax] What would you miss if DECnet got the chop? Was: "bad select 38" (OpenSSL on VMS)

[Dirk Munk]

David Froble wrote:
> Dirk Munk wrote:
>
>> Hence my question to you, if you think VSI should support both
>> incompatible versions of DECnet over IP.
>
> Ok, maybe I also need reading lessons ...
>
> :-)
>
> Now, you use DECnet V, I don't, so you'd know more.  My question is,
> when DECnet V is routed via TCP/IP, is that something in the VMS TCP/IP
> stack?  I'd doubt it.  I'm guessing that it's something in DECnet V, and
> if so, then should not it work over any IP stack?

It uses the PWIP driver, and Multinet also has a PWIP driver. I don't 
know if the Multinet implementation is compatible (enough).

OSI transport over IP is defined in RFC1006 and RFC1859, and RFC2126 in 
the case of IPv6.

I assume there are parts of the implementation in the IP stack (the PWIP 
driver), and parts in the DECnet/OSI stack.

The PWIP driver is VMS specific, so I suppose your question "then should 
not it work over any IP stack?" can be answered with "yes, if that stack 
has a PWIP driver that is compatible with DECnet/OSI"

>
> If so, then you've still got as much as you can expect.  If not,
> remember, VSI has purchased Process Software Intellectual Property, and
> they (VSI) can use it in whatever manner they choose.  I'm going to
> guess there may be more than one thing in the DEC/Compaq/HP TCP/IP that
> they might want to retain.  But what do I know?

You could be right there.