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

[Stephen Hoffman]

On 2016-10-03 05:45:19 +0000, Michael Moroney said:

> As to DECnet-Plus, I doubt I will be tasked with any further work 
> there, other than, perhaps, getting it working on x86 once x86 VMS 
> exists, and if a demand is seen for it.  But a customer waving money 
> and shouting "We want DECnet!" could change that -- if such a customer 
> even exists.   I am a little surprised at the interest in DECnet here.

Ayup.   Parts and projects at DEC ran aground on some of these same 
rocks, and with more than a little wreckage resulting.    I'd hope VSI 
spends rather more time and effort pulling folks forward to more secure 
and more modern network protocols, and maybe to IP-based remote file 
access akin to DECnet FAL, rather than working on and enhancing an 
already-mature and insecure and proprietary and increasingly 
problematic product like DECnet going, but that's not my call.    
Neither DECnet nor the old OSI stack are where the industry is headed, 
and not what OpenVMS will be integrating with.  Building a replacement 
FAL client into RMS on sftp get and maybe even reget would avoid 
needing a bespoke server for these IPv4 and IPv6 transfers, too.    
That same layer of RMS is where CIFS or NFS would want to connect into 
the stack for transparent file transfers, too.   As for SET HOST / 
CTERM, telnet (problematic at best, best made harder-to-find) or ssh 
works for those operations, and MOP was dragged clear of DECnet a long 
time ago...




-- 
Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC