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

[Dirk Munk]

Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On 2016-09-28 23:09, Rob Brown wrote:
>> On 2016-09-19, Dirk Munk <munk at home.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>> DECnet Phase IV and DECnet Phase V are two completely different
>>> products.
>>
>> But phase V can communicate with Phase IV nodes.  RSX never got Phase V.
>> What about DEC's other OSes?
>
> Only VMS ever got Phase V. All other DEC OSes stayed at IV.

Incorrect, Tru64 also had Phase V.

>
>> 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.