[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:
>> Johnny Billquist wrote:
>>> On 2016-10-01 02:47, Dirk Munk wrote:
>>>> Johnny Billquist wrote:
>>>>> On 2016-09-29 22:34, Dirk Munk wrote:
>>>>>> Johnny Billquist wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2016-09-28 23:09, Rob Brown wrote:
>>>>>>>> I would like Phase V to retain the ability to talk to Phase IV.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would assume/hope that this was not removed, if Phase V were
>>>>>>> worked
>>>>>>> on. But I would seriously question the sanity of anyone at VSI who
>>>>>>> suggested they should put any work into DECnet.
>>>>>>> At most, it could make sense to provide the ability that Multinet
>>>>>>> already have, of using TCP/IP as a transport for DECnet circuits,
>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>> can be done for Phase IV. I suspect that could actually be of
>>>>>>> some use
>>>>>>> at a few places. And it has already been implemented.
>>>>>>> But anything beyond that, just would not make sense.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Johnny
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem with the Multinet solution is that it is non-standard
>>>>>> (not
>>>>>> covered by IP RFC's), and that it does not cover OSI applications.
>>>>>
>>>>> Who cares? You have two Phase IV nodes, they can connect using IP. All
>>>>> else is unchanged. Phase IV couldn't care less about OSI applications
>>>>> anyway. The same goes for RFCs. You do not have to have an RFC to
>>>>> use a
>>>>> protocol. We are talking about DECnet here, remember? The fact that it
>>>>> can be carried over IP just means that you have your phase IV DECnet,
>>>>> nothing changed there. All that happened is that you can connect two
>>>>> DECnet Phase IV machines who only have connectivity through IP
>>>>> otherwise. A simple, obvious win, without any downsides at all (except
>>>>> in your head).
>>>>>
>>>>>     Johnny
>>>>
>>>> So you tell the people who need OSI over IP, that their systems don't
>>>> matter. Nice.
>>>
>>> Excuse me? Where did I write that???
>>
>> Here for instance:
>>
>> "But I would seriously question the sanity of anyone at VSI who
>> suggested they should put any work into DECnet. At most, it could make
>> sense to provide the ability that Multinet already have, of using
>> TCP/IP as a transport for DECnet circuits, which can be done for Phase
>> IV. I suspect that could actually be of some use at a few places. And
>> it has already been implemented. But anything beyond that, just would
>> not make sense."
>>
>> Unless I'm mistaken, you're writing that DECnet Phase IV over Mulinet
>> tunnels should be implemented, but DECnet Phase V + OSI over IP
>> "should not make sense".
>
> No, DECnet IV over Multinet should not be "implemented", because "IT
> ALREADY EXISTS"!

Not on TCP/IP services 10.5. It is *based* on Multinet, doesn't mean it 
is the same! I.t may take 6 months or a year before TCP/IP services 10.5 
is ready. VSI may choose to keep this functionality, or drop it.

>
>>> Are you intentionally just not
>>> understanding what I say, or are you in fact just not understanding?
>>>
>>> I was making a comment that Phase IV with Multinet works just fine
>>> talking to other Phase IV multinet hosts, using IP as a carrier. You
>>> complain that it's "non-standard", to which I point out that nothing
>>> could be less relevant than that comment. If you have two phase IV
>>> nodes, they can talk to each other. Would having an RFC (which by the
>>> way does not mean it's any more standard) make any difference? No, it
>>> would not. The communication works equally fine with or without an
>>> RFC.
>>> And it does not pretend that it will communicate with anything except
>>> another Multinet node.
>>
>> And that's the point, a phase V system using IP as transport stack can
>> talk OSI over IP to non VMS systems that have no DECnet.
>
> This statement, if true, which I'm not able to answer, seems to be proof
> that the IP stack doesn't know anything about DECnet V, and that
> everything is in DECnet V to use the IP transport.

No, it is not. When you configure TCP/IP services, you can install 
telnet, FTP, DNS and so on. You can also install PWIP, and DECnet over 
IP uses PWIP.