[Info-vax] Unexpected DECnet Phase IV functionality with possible captive account implications

[Simon Clubley]

On 2021-05-12, Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh at hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
>
> DECnet use is still common, due to a less than robust migration path.
>
> Remote DECnet FAL for shared-file-access use, rather less common. I'd 
> hope. That's just asking for trouble.
>
> I don't see a great future in DECnet generally, or for FAL 
> shared-file-access among specific features.
>

I would write that as "I _hope_ there isn't a great future for DECnet
generally". :-)

The fact that people are still demanding it in 2021 does make me wonder.

> I do see ample room for vastly better IP integration, and a better path 
> away from DECnet.  Maybe that turns into scp/sftp-integrated FAL-ish 
> support, too. But I'd doubt that. That's unlikely to ever make a VSI 
> schedule. SMB client integration would be far easier to market, and 
> more useful.
>

The filesystem over SSH work that is showing up elsewhere would be
nice on VMS as well. I don't know what changes would be needed to
VMS to make that possible however.

Done properly, and with VMS specific support for non-sequential
files if needed, that could be the way forward. It would ideally have
the kind of tight integration into VMS that FAL currently has however.

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.