[Info-vax] What would you miss if DECnet got the chop?

[Dirk Munk]

John E. Malmberg wrote:
> On 9/19/2016 6:49 PM, Dirk Munk wrote:
>> John E. Malmberg wrote:
>>> On 9/18/2016 3:35 AM, Dirk Munk wrote:
>>>
>>>> First of all, which DECnet do you mean?  DECnet Phase IV should have
>>>> been abandoned years ago, DECnet Phase V has been the successor for
>>>> years now, but many DECnet users are just to plain lazy to learn how it
>>>> works. They took a look at the UI, concluded that is was very different
>>>> from the NCP commands of Phase IV, and just gave up. Or are they too
>>>> stupid to understand it?
>>>
>>> The last time this thread came up, I asked for an on-line resource that
>>> could be used for a hobbyist to get a simple DECNET Phase V network
>>> running.
>>
>> There is a configuration manual, it's really just a simple commandfile
>> you have to run. It takes about 5 minutes.
>>
>>>
>>> I got no answers at all.  It was like my post went into the bit-bucket.
>>> Or maybe some posts to the news groups are not making into the info-vax
>>> mailing list.
>>>
>>> You can not simply translate NCP commands to NCL.  Too many commonly
>>> used NCP commands do not translate to NCL.  And many times there is no
>>> documented way to translate them.
>>
>> True, what you need is a picture with all the OSI layers and their NCL
>> objects. That is quite essential, and certainly when you start with NCL.
>> The you can work your way up from the NIC to the upper layers.
>
> With the Phase V documentation, I can find out only about 80% of what a
> system manager needs to know to automate configuration and management to
> the same level as I can with Phase IV.
>
> I can not find the rest in the documentation, and I have spent a lot of
> time on that.
>
>>> In some cases it involves knowing some Decnet V name for something that
>>> NCL is not smart enough to default to the only way it is set on the
>>> system and the NCL help will not provide you with enough prompting to
>>> find out what it wants to construct the command.  And no way to know
>>> which Phase V manual might possibly have the answer.
>>>
>>> I can get DECNET IV running simply by running a script and passing some
>>> simple information.  I should be able to do that with the successor.
>>
>> That can be done!
>>
>>>
>>> Now I have spent a bit of time with Phase V, and converted all my
>>> network object scripts to work with it.  At one time my entire VMS
>>> network was Phase V.
>>>
>>> And I still am having far more trouble with it for a simple setup.  I
>>> have also worked with other OSI protocols on VMS.  I have seen the fall
>>> out of many OSI protocol changes as they evolved.
>>>
>>> I have had so much trouble with Phase V debugging that I decided it was
>>> not worth the hassle and have been removing it as I update my home
>>> systems, since I never see the need to tunnel it over TCP/IP.
>>
>> It is *NOT* a tunnel. You replace DECnet Phase IV or OSI names by IP DNS
>> names. Unlike MultiNet that is using a tunnel.
>
> Sorry for confusion on the terms.
>
> For most U.S. residential home broadband ISPs, direct incoming access to
> our systems are prohibited by the ISP Terms of Service.
>
> So the only way that I would need DECNET V over TCP/IP is if I had a VPN
> type tunnel set up and a cooperating remote site.
>
>>> And I forget exactly what issue I was trying to do as it was well over
>>> 16 years ago, but one of the things I wanted to script with NCL was only
>>> documented to be done through a DECWindows Utility.  I could find no
>>> documentation anywhere on how to use NCL to extract the same
>>> information.  The same operation was trivial to do with Decnet IV.
>>>
>>> As far as a UI or documentation, Phase V was a major jump backwards.
>>>
>>> I do not see Phase V replacing TCP/IP for communication with non-VMS
>>> hosts.
>>
>> Of course not, no one is claiming that. Once again, DECnet is for VMS <>
>> VMS communication. with DECnet over IP you can do it ona IP-only
>> network. That's it.
>
> So what is the reason for me to learn Decnet V and deploy it locally
> instead of Decnet IV?
>

How local is local? On one switched network segment? Suppose your 
company has two VMS systems using DECnet, but these systems are not on 
the same network segment. They are/must be separated by routers for 
whatever reason, then with DECnet over IP your network people will be 
very happy.

> Is there a strong demand to hire people that can configure and
> troubleshoot DecNet V?  I am not seeing that on past job searches.
>
> Instead I am seeing a requirement of having a DecNet V expert as just
> one more reason for upper management to be considering moving off of
> VMS, even if they have not told the people maintaining the VMS systems.
>
> My most recent U.S. job search with Glassdoor salary lookups showed that
> most VMS jobs are paying about 50 to 80 % of what is currently being
> offered for people with equivalent Linux skills.
>
> Being able to setup and manage Jenkins, Chef/Salt-stack/cobbler, on
> Linux etc all pays a lot more, and even though these are pretty easy to
> learn on-line and test on home equipment, those jobs both pay more and
> are easier to find.
>
> My skills learned on updating GNV and Perl on VMS are currently what is
> keeping me employed at non-VMS jobs.
>
> Regards,
>  -John
>  wb8tyw at qsl_network
>