HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: fuzzy@netcom.com (Fuzzy Fox)
Subject: Re: Like ODI but with Packet Drivers?
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 03:20:52 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

wo@rio70.snibln.de (Wolfgang Kalthoff) writes:

>all you have to do is to link the ipx.obj with the BYU-stuff.
>Then start your packetdriver with the -n option, which allows 802.3 packets.
>Good luck!

I tried this and NETX hangs the machine when it tries to locate a file
server.  (Not just times out, but hangs up!)

I was conversing with some folks via E-mail about this, but my mail folders
seems to have disappeared, so I have lost contact with who I was talking
to about it.

The reason I want to go through all this is to save on the ~80K of
memory that all these TSR's take up (when I load LAN WorkPlace).  Some
nice fellow out there pointed out that there is something you can put in
your NET.CFG file to reduce the number of buffers allocated by drivers
such as LSL.  The fellow showed LSL taking ~4K to load on his system,
whereas it takes ~20K on mine.  How is this done?

-- 
#ifdef TRUE         | Fuzzy Fox                  fuzzy@netcom.com
#define  TRUE   0   | a.k.a. David DeSimone      an207@cleveland.freenet.edu
#define  FALSE  1   | ---------- Bob and Doug Meet Bill and Ted: -----------
#endif              |  "Take off, dude!"  "No way!"  "Yes way, you hoser!"
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: 10basT Question
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 17:08:21 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <53020001@hpscit.sc.hp.com> karl@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Karl Watanabe) writes:
>> Though this is not usually done (and may not officially be supported?),
>> you can connect them with a crossover cable...
>
>The 10baseT chip transceiver from AMD automatically has polarity reversal.
>Therefore it wouldn't be necessary to use a crossover cable.

Sorry, it still would be.

Polarity reversal corrects reversals *within a single pair*.  The crossover
cable interchanges the transmit and receive pairs.  I know of no hardware
that will do that automatically (although some boxes have crossover switches
to make things easier -- for example, the Synoptics hub we're using has a
crossover switch for port 1, to make it easier to cascade hubs).
-- 
There is nothing wrong with making      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: redin@lysator.liu.se (Magnus Redin)
Subject: Specification for ethernet AUI port wanted.
Keywords: ethernet AUI lysator home built
Organization: Lysator Academic Computer Club, Linkoping University, Sweden
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 21:42:57 GMT

I am looking for the electrical specifications of the 10base5 AUI port.

We are planning to connect several CPU-boards with an AUI port to a 
common ethernet and we dont have enough money in our university computer club
to buy transcievers so we will try to build a box with a 0 length ethernet
and about 8 AUI ports.

We would also want to share experiences with people who have done similar
hardware hacks.
--
--
Magnus Redin    Lysator Computer Club    redin@lysator.liu.se
Mail: Magnus redin, Rydsv{gen 240C26, 582 51 LINK|PING, SWEDEN
Phone: Sweden (0)13 260046 (Answering machine)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: johnk@gordian.com (John Kalucki)
Subject: Re: Link for two LANs
Organization: Gordian; Costa Mesa, CA
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 17:16:17 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.184847.17503@news.acns.nwu.edu>, jweiss@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Jerry Weiss) writes:
>
>I have two lans (ethernet thin coax) in seperate buildings (across the
>street from each other) in which I need to link together.  While I have
>plenty of unshielded twisted pair running directly between the sites,
>bureaucratic hassles prevent me from running fiber, coax or rf between
>these sites.  What type of device would allow me to make this link and
>still achieve reasonble bandwidth?  I've seen some devices that run links
>over UTP at 56Kbit/sec, but that seems a tad slow for NFS mounts etc.
>Anyone aware of products that can utilize multiple lines to increase
>bandwidth?
>

I don't know if this qualifies as RF, but a company called Cylink
makes 'wireless' modems that don't require much of an antenna. From
the picture in the glossy marketing release, it looks like the
antenna for a walkie talkie, or one of those old transistor radios
from the 60's. You could probably install a set of these and your
physical plant would never notice ;-)

They claim up to 10 mile range, and 256kb/sync with 'spread spectrum
technology'. Their phone number is 408 735 5800.

I have no connection with these folks, other than I'd like to have
one between my office and home.

Why don't you just try running 10bT between the buildings?

		-John Kalucki
		johnk@gordian.com
From: dgoldst@medusa.unm.edu (David Goldstein)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: Re: Mixing RG58/U and RG-59 cable
Date: 26 Jul 92 19:37:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: medusa.26JUL199212374999
Organization: University of New Mexico School of Medicine
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <2017@tivoli.UUCP>, mikec@tivoli.com (Michael Callahan) writes...
>We had a happy network work wired out of RG58/U cable.  Then we had a
>network company come in and wire more offices.  They used RG-59 cable
>for the wiring.
> 
>After the wiring, the network did not work well.  Many retransmissions
>occurred.  I ran a wire (RG58/U) to bypass the new wire and the
>problems went away.  Prior to bypassing the suspect wire, I moved our
>repeater to shorten the cable far more than the length of the new
>wire.  This should have elimiated the chance that the cable was just
>made too long.
> 
>Is the problem likely to be the mix of wire?  Or is it likely to be another
>problem such as a bad strand of cable or connector?  Or should I just have
>them replace all the new wire with the "correct" RG58/U, or should we look
>for another cause?
> 
> 
>	Thanks,
>	Mike Callahan
>	mikec@tivoli.com
>	(512) 794-9070

RG59 is video wire 75 ohms, it is not to be used for networking in 
any way shape or form. I would consult your company's attorney.
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ David Goldstein, University of New Mexico SOM Computing Services Director   +
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ Internet:  dgoldst@medusa.unm.edu,dgoldst@unmb.unm.edu (why?)               +
+ Bitnet:    dgoldst@medusa,dgoldst@unmb                                      +
+ Span:      medusa::dgoldst                                                  +
+ Fax:       You can't touch this                                             +
+ Voice:     505-277-1384                                                     +
+ SnailMail: UNM SOM, 915 Camino de Salud, Albuquerque, NM 87131              +
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+                                                                             +
+ A friend of mine once told me, there are 500 people in the world, the rest  +
+ are all filler. That's a Cobol joke in case you didn't know it.             +
+                                                                             +
+ The opinions expressed here are mine, as usual.                             +
+ Any others are someone else's                                               +
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Date: Thursday, 23 Jul 1992 10:15:55 EDT
From: David Neal <LORAX@wvnvm.wvnet.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: Is Starlan really Ethernet?

We want to replace our Starlan network with something that actually works
but we have a lot of money invested in the hardware.  From what I understand
Starlan is just a variation of Ethernet made to run over twisted pair wiring.
In fact the microchannel NICs in our PS/2s have "Ungerman-Bass" printed on
them and have a D-shell connector on the back which is then connected to an
external box that adapts them to an RJ-45 jack.  Our ISA boards have the RJ-45
jack built in.  Do these boards conform to the 10Base-T standard?  Can we just
swap the Stargroup software with Netware and keep rolling?

david neal                                     lorax@wvnvm.wvnet.edu
Elk and Kanawha Rivers
Appalachia
From: art@acc.com (Art Berggreen)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: Re: Mixing RG58/U and RG-59 cable
Date: 21 Jul 92 21:09:58 GMT
Organization: ACC, Advanced Computer Communications

In article <10992@rls.UUCP> randy@rls.UUCP (randy) writes:
>How do you go about determining the length of thin line cable that
>wasn't installed too terribly well?  I have some cable run in a rambling
>and looping fashion throughout the laboratories.  A great deal of the
>cable is behind walls or above ceilings and we need to know what it will
>take to expand.  Anyone?

Well, if you have control over both ends, have a good fast
oscilloscope and a pulse generator you could try the following.
(or go borrow a real Time Domain Reflectometer ;>} )

Leaving the remote end open, drive the local end with the pulse
generator.  Use the oscilloscope to measure the time from a pulse
edge to the time the primary reflection is seen.  Multiply half of
this time by the propagation velocity for the particular type of
coax.  The propagation velocity can vary between about 0.6-0.8c
depending on exactly what flavor of coax being used.  If you can't
get the exact number 0.66c is a good guestimate.

Art
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: furtaw@comm.mot.com (Bob Furtaw)
Subject: Re: Mixing RG58/U and RG-59 cable
Organization: Motorola
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 16:44:56 GMT

In article <26JUL199212374999@medusa.unm.edu>, dgoldst@medusa.unm.edu (David Goldstein) writes:
>  
> >Is the problem likely to be the mix of wire?  Or is it likely to be another
> >problem such as a bad strand of cable or connector?  Or should I just have
> >them replace all the new wire with the "correct" RG58/U, or should we look
> >for another cause?

> RG59 is video wire 75 ohms, it is not to be used for networking in 
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> any way shape or form. I would consult your company's attorney.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Bzzt.  The assumption is the network in question is baseband Ethernet.
75 ohm cabling IS specified for use 10broad36 (broadband Ethernet) and
MAP 802.4 token bus.
Bob Furtaw
From: pat@hprnd.rose.hp.com (Pat Thaler)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 17:51:24 GMT
Subject: Re: 10BASE-T at home
Organization: HP Roseville Networks Division
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet

In comp.dcom.lans.ethernet, edwards@world.std.com (Jonathan Edwards) writes:

    I want to prewire my new house for future installation of a LAN.
    Running extra pairs for 10BASE-T seems the most flexible.
    But a post on comp.dcom.telecom states that 10BASE-T is not FCC class B, and
    in fact generates tons of RFI, making it unsuitable for home use.
    He recommends running 10BASE-2 coax (RG58) instead.
    Does anyone have any expertise or experience to share on this matter?
    Thanks - Jonathan

To sell products such as 10BASE-T and 10BASE2 in the US, they must meet
FCC class A requirements (for use in commercial environments).  Products
for residential environments must meet FCC class B (about 10 dB stricter).
In neither case does product meeting the legal limits generate "tons of 
RFI".  Selling products that don't meet the legal requirements can 
result in big fines for the manufacturer.

I have seen both 10BASE-T and 10BASE2 products which meet
FCC class B.  I have also seen products of both types which meets class A
but is above the class B limits at one or more frequencies.
The signalling used puts a bottom limit on the amount of RFI radiated,
but there are a lot of other sources of RFI in products.  The quality
of the design can make a lot of difference to how much RFI above the
minimum is produced.  (I had a 300 Baud modem from before the FCC regulated
computer equipment that radiated at multi-megahertz frequencies when it
was plugged in transmitting or not.)

Pat Thaler
From: pat@hprnd.rose.hp.com (Pat Thaler)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: Re: 10basT Question
Date: 23 Jul 92 17:31:25 GMT
Organization: HP Roseville Networks Division

In comp.dcom.lans.ethernet, karl@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Karl Watanabe) writes:

    In comp.dcom.lans.ethernet, jonathan@netcom.com (Jonathan Ridder) writes:

    > Though this is not usually done (and may not officially be supported?),
Connecting two (and only two) 10BASE-T devices without a repeater is 
explicitly allowed in the IEEE 802.3i, the 10BASE-T standard.
    > you can connect them with a crossover cable.  The crossover cable is
    > wired so that the receive pairs connect to the transmit pairs.  If I
    > recall,  this would be pin 1 to pin 3 and pin 2 to pin6.

    The 10baseT chip transceiver from AMD automatically has polarity reversal.
    Therefore it wouldn't be necessary to use a crossover cable.

People often confuse polarity switching with the crossover function. 
Polarity refers to the way the two wires of a pair are attached.  Crossover
refers to swapping the transmit and receive pair.

Ethernet uses a polarity sensitive encoding.  If you attach the wire with
the positive transmit signal, TD+, to the negative receiver input, RD-,
and the TD- to the RD+, the receiver won't decode a usable signal.  (This
wasn't a problem for a coax based system where shield and center conductor
were unlikely to get switched.)  Because the Ethernet packets always
end with a certain polarity transition, it is possible to sense in the
transceiver that the polarity is reversed.  The sensing can also use
the link test pulse to correct polarity before traffic occurs on a quiet
link.  Therefore, some transceivers have a feature that corrects for
a receive pair with incorrect polarity.

When you connect two 10BASE-T transceivers together, you need to attach
the transmitter output of one to the receiver input of the other.  Between
a DTE and a repeater, this is handled by having the default pinout of 
transceivers which are internal to repeaters use the same pins for the
transmitter that the DTE uses for the receiver and vice versa.  The
wire then can be wired straight.  Between two DTEs or two repeaters,
you need to swap the pairs.  (The old null modem problem.)  I don't
know of any device that provides the crossover function automatically.

Pat Thaler
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: vjs@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com (Vernon Schryver)
Subject: Re: Early and Late Collision
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 04:46:13 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.224300.14298@ncar.ucar.edu>, hyder@mrbean.scd.ucar.edu (Paul Hyder) writes:
> Two last notes and then I promise to stay out of this...
> 
> On many hosts it is impossible to capture long collisions, only a few
> hosts even bother to tell you about them.  You need something like
> a LANalyzer to capture the packets.  It is important to know how far
> into the packet the collision was, close values point to cable length
> and longer ones other problems.


How can you capture a late collision?  What will you see but the jumble
of two simultaneous transmissions?  The bad guy will be the one whose
first bit is in trashed by the later bits of the innocent guy.  The
easily capturable MAC header will be that of the innocent guy.


Does the LANalyzer or anything else have enough electronics to try to
peel some of the bits apart by assuming the two clocks are different?
Or does it compare the signal at several different points on the
network, and thereby figure out the bad guy's bits?


Vernon Schryver,  vjs@sgi.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: 10basT Question
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 16:37:27 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <3hfm+da.jonathan@netcom.com> jonathan@netcom.com (Jonathan Ridder) writes:
>>Is it possible to link 2 PCs together using 10baseT only. ie. A 10basT card in
>>each PC attached over a single run of UTP.
> 
>Though this is not usually done (and may not officially be supported?),
>you can connect them with a crossover cable...

10BaseT was specifically designed to make this possible; it's official.
The reason it's not all that common is that it does *not* generalize to
more than 2 machines; beyond 2, you need a hub.  But for 2 and only 2,
all you need is a correctly-wired cable.
-- 
There is nothing wrong with making      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: fuzzy@netcom.com (Fuzzy Fox)
Subject: Re: Where to find PDETHER ??
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 05:32:33 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa

gburlile@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Greg Burlile) writes:

>I was notified of a software product that will make ODI look like a packet
>driver.  I believe the product is called PDETHER.  Does anyone know where I can
>get this.  I'm trying to see how to get CUTCP 2.2-D (Clarkson Univ.'s Telnet) 
>to run on a Novell 3.11 or Netware Lite newtork.

I am trying to do this, too.  I believe the file you are looking for is
called ODIPKT.  The SOFTWARE.DOC file in the packet driver distribution
lists:

Odipkt, Dan Lanciani's packet-driver-over-ODI shim.

        hsdndev.harvard.edu:pub/odipkt/net.cfg
        hsdndev.harvard.edu:pub/odipkt/odipkt.8
        hsdndev.harvard.edu:pub/odipkt/odipkt.asm
        hsdndev.harvard.edu:pub/odipkt/odipkt.com

-- 
#ifdef TRUE         | Fuzzy Fox                  fuzzy@netcom.com
#define  TRUE   0   | a.k.a. David DeSimone      an207@cleveland.freenet.edu
#define  FALSE  1   | ---------- Bob and Doug Meet Bill and Ted: -----------
#endif              |  "Take off, dude!"  "No way!"  "Yes way, you hoser!"
From: randy@rls.UUCP (randy)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: Re: Mixing RG58/U and RG-59 cable
Date: 21 Jul 92 15:29:18 GMT
Organization: The Internet

gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston) writes:
> Max length of a thin segement is 185 meters (about 600 feet). You might 
> be able to push that somewhat with excellent quality cable, but not with
> RG-59. 

How do you go about determining the length of thin line cable that
wasn't installed too terribly well?  I have some cable run in a rambling
and looping fashion throughout the laboratories.  A great deal of the
cable is behind walls or above ceilings and we need to know what it will
take to expand.  Anyone?

Cheers!

- randy

uucp: randy@rls.uucp
bang: <backbone>!osu-cis!rls!randy
inet: rls!randy@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
disc: Will be President for food.
From: avraham@itexjct.jct.ac.il (avraham shir-el)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: 10bT patch panneling
Date: 22 Jul 92 14:12:06 GMT
Organization: ITEX, Jerusalem, Israel

how sensitive is 10bT to additional connectors between the node and the hub?
i know that w/ 10b2 additional bnc's on the segment, (ex. at the ducting)
	will reduce the max # of nodes u can put on the segment, and/or
	reduce the max length of the segment.

with 10bT, if i have a patch panel between the node and the hub, using
	twisted-pair cable for the patch cords, will i need to reduce
	the max total length of the cable due to loss at each connector?
tnx in advance
ams
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: per@teknologi.agderforskning.no (Per Sigmond)
Subject: ISOLAN-Gateway 4610-510. What does it do?
Organization: Agderforskning
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 09:33:12 GMT

We have come across two boxes of the type ISOLAN Gateway 4610-510. On the front
is a PROM-device called "Type 4650 Asynch Multiplexer". It has 6 RS-232-ports as
well as thin/thick 802.3-connectors.
We have no documentation on these devices, but they look interesting when
glancing at the hardware.

Questions: 	- What protocols can be supported by these things? 
		- What can they be used for?
		- How do we "speak" to them (and get them to respond)?
		- Who has info about them?

Thanks. Per.

-- 
Per Sigmond
Agderforskning Teknologi
Televeien 1
4890 Grimstad
Norway

Internet: Per.Sigmond@teknologi.agderforskning.no
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: olson@anchor.esd.sgi.com (Dave Olson)
Subject: Re: SQE
Organization:  Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 06:43:51 GMT

In <1992Jul23.101648.1@ptavv.llnl.gov> oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov writes:
| RULE FOR SQE. Always turn it on except for repeaters. There should be no
| exceptions to this rule, but there are. Some manufacturers can't seem to read
| standards (or just don't care). As a result there are some terminal services
| that get upset when they see SQE. The SGI Indigo seems to be one of these. I
| suspect any device using the same 802.3 chip (SEEQ?) would also get upset by
| SQE. I have been told that the same is true of the cisco AGS, but not the IGS.
| Not that there is any documentation on this.

You were doing just fine up to here...  The Indigo has no problem with
SQE being present.  The issue was that due to a minor misunderstanding
with the hardware folk ;), the collision stats (as reported by netstat)
were incremented by one for every xmit if sqe was on (assuming no
collision).  IRIX 4.0.5 has a heuristic to fix this in the s/w.
(The Seeq part has no way to report full collision counts back to the
host without some external glue, and it wasn't quite right).

--
Let no one tell me that silence gives consent,  |   Dave Olson
because whoever is silent dissents.             |   Silicon Graphics, Inc.
    Maria Isabel Barreno                        |   olson@sgi.com
From: mwr@eng.tridom.com (Mark Reardon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: Re: SQE, Once more
Date: 31 Jul 92 17:22:59 GMT
Reply-To: mwr@eng.tridom.com (Mark Reardon)
Organization: AT&T Tridom; Marietta, Georgia

In article <1992Jul31.124357.10781@relay.nswc.navy.mil>, tdrake@relay.nswc.navy.mil (Tim Drake - E41) writes:
|> 
|>    I've read all the postings on SQE I've seen in the last two
|> weeks (many). I'm still unclear on a few points. SQE should
|> help me find problems in faulty MAU's, but how?? Say I'm working
|> on a Unix system, what command will report the error's I shoud see
|> if I have SQE turned on and the MAU is faulty. In short how can
|> SQE help me find problems.
This is always system dependent.  If you can get to driver statistics
such as collisions etc., SQE counts should be there also.  Sorry I
don't know the specifics of your system.

|> 
|>   My other confussion is if it looks like a collision to my MAU
|> (the "CP collision packet" LED lights up) how does the system
|> tell the difference between the "test" and an actual collision?

After a host transmits a packet there is a dead time (or inter packet
gap).  The host's tranceiver asserts the collision signal to the
host after the transmission is complete (carrier has gone away) and
before a short time window has expired (I beleive it is 2 microseconds).
This time window is shorter than the IPG, so it shouldn't interfere 
with anything else.  Also, some people worry that other nodes will see
it.  That is not a problem because the SQE is only between a host and
its tranceiver.

|> 
|>   I must admit that we turn SQE off religiosly because of problems
|> we had with it being enabled and connected to repeater equipment.  
|> 
|> 
|> 
|>         Tim Drake                   NAVSWD : Navy Dahlgren Va.
|>         tdrake@relay.nswc.navy.mil
|> 
|> 
|>    

-- 
Mark

---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Mark Reardon           |  AT&T Tridom                             |
| mwr@eng.tridom.com     |  840 Franklin Court                      |
|                        |  Marietta, GA 30067                      |
---------------------------------------------------------------------