[Info-vax] What would you miss if DECnet got the chop? Was: "bad select

[Johnny Billquist]

On 2016-09-19 20:55, David Froble wrote:
> Bob Koehler wrote:
>> In article <nrlmbk$if0$1 at dont-email.me>, David Froble
>> <davef at tsoft-inc.com> writes:
>>> In general I agree with what you've written.  I consider DECnet as a
>>> part of VMS, and if one really doesn't want VMS, then just go and use
>>> something else.
>>
>>    Having used DECnet on VMS, MVS, RSX, TOPS-20, MS-DOS, Ultrix, AIX, and
>>    Linux, I find your concept much too narrow for reality.
>>
>
> You're always so easy to get along with Bob ....
>
> :-)
>
> Yes, there have been implementations of the DECnet transport part on
> multiple OSs, both DEC and others.  But, as far as I know, there has not
> been the full range of DECnet tools available on those environments.  As
> an example,  does FAL exist on all those implementations?

Without making a thorough check - yes I believe so. Definitely true for 
RSX, Windows, Linux, TOPS-20 and Ultrix. Never having played with MVS or 
AIX, so I can only guess on those, but it wouldn't make sense if it 
wasn't there.
(I think I can show you RSX, Windows, TOPS-20 and Ultrix straight away 
if you want to see it...)

> For me, it's the utilities, tools, and such that I feel make DECnet
> worth keeping around.  Much more so than the communications stuff.  Of
> course, those utilities, tools, and such do use the communications stuff.

Agree.

	Johnny