HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ddl@burrhus.harvard.edu (Dan Lanciani)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Re: Problems with KA9Q and ARCNET
Date: 7 Sep 92 00:22:19 GMT
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

In article <1992Sep6.094826.15321@rhrk.uni-kl.de>, puder@rhrk.uni-kl.de (Arno Puder) writes:
| 
| I seem to have an old version of the KA9Q package. When I tried
| to run it with my ARCNET (ATTACH PACKET...) it responded "un-
| supported type class 8". Interesting enough the documentation
| said that it should work. I logged on to Archie and got a couple
| of dozens of references. Which one works with ARCNET?

	It is my impression that most of the world has given up on
class 8 packet drivers.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the
current ARCnet packet driver fake class 1?  I know that the general
consensus was that ODIPKT should do this when it sees an ODI ARCnet
driver, and thus it does.  At least, it does by default.  You can
assemble it for class 8, but I was never able to find an ARCnet-supporting
version of KA9Q tcp/ip to test that mode with!

				Dan Lanciani
				ddl@harvard.*
From: jrd@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Re: I NEED DG EMULATION FOR NCSA TELNET
Date: 5 Sep 92 22:00:55 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <1565@rwja.umdnj.edu>, green@rwja.umdnj.edu (Cliff Green) writes:
> jrd@cc.usu.edu writes:
> [stuff deleted]
>>Dave,
>>	What you want exists, but not with NCSA Telnet and near relatives.
>>If you contact Data General, Mike_Normile@DGC.ceo.dg.com, he will tell you
>>about a version of MS-DOS Kermit now in development which gives you more than
>>this:
> [stuff about DG emulating proto-kermit deleted]
> 
> Joe, this may not be the appropriate place, but...
> Do you know if anyone has worked on/developed an HPterminal emulator
> for MSKermit?  
> 
> c-- 
> Clifford Green               Internet:   green@rwja.umdnj.edu
> Academic Computing Services     voice:   908-463-4436
> UMDNJ-RWJMS                       fax:   908-463-5252
> #include <fineprint.h>
---------
	Seems to be as good a place as any for these interesting tidbits.
No, there has been no request to emulate an HP terminal in MS-DOS Kermit.
The terminal emulation business is a difficult one: complex specs (only ~= 
hardware), clashes between dedicated terminal silicon and PC hardware, bulk, 
time/energy, etc). There would have to be really good incentives to consider 
another terminal which differed greatly from what is present now. I haven't 
looked at HP terminal specs in a very long time so their characteristics are 
unknown here.
	The sources for MSK v3.12 should be out shortly if someone wants to
rough in another terminal; in the meanwhile MSK 3.11 is close enough for
government work. Please note that I generally accept code only on items which 
I can verify in detail (and thus can be supported over the long haul).
        Joe D.
From: VANDENHOUT@RUUMTC.TCU.RUU.NL (Koos van den Hout)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: RE: Ever hear of a TNVT100 or TNVT220?
Date: 15 Sep 92 08:13:00 GMT
Organization: The Internet

|Anyone ever hear of a TELNET like program for the ibmpc that
|will do VT100 emulations? How does it work? Where o where? and how much?

For as far as I can recall, at least NCSA-telnet has a full-fledged VT-100
terminal emulation (and a _lot_ of other goodies).

                                     Grtx. KH.
From: tklancar@galaxy.gov.bc.ca
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: FTP Public domain source code
Date: 6 Sep 92 00:33:04 -0700
Organization: BC Systems Corporation

Has anyone ported the NCSA Telnet sources over to Borland /Turbo C++2.0?
and Turbo ASM?  The sources that I have (TEL2305S, TEL23050) both fail in the  
tlink with undefined symbols.

What I am really looking for is a FTP public domain source that I can modify
for a top secret project... one that is Borland/Turbo ready. 

Any help would be appreciated.

Reply here or to my mailbox.

Thanks - Tony Klancar 
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: jpc@avdms8.msfc.nasa.gov (J. Porter Clark)
Subject: What do I do with an Ungermann-Bass PC1100?
Organization: NASA/MSFC
Date: 15 Sep 92 19:06:01 GMT

I had an old Excelan 205T board die in a PC a few days ago.  Our
intrepid (8-) repair organization replaced it with an Ungermann-Bass
PC1100 board.  They didn't provide any documentation or software.  They
did give us a box this time. 8-)

I've had a similar occurrence in the past.  But the board they provided
earlier was a different UB board.  That board had a proprietary
interface and there were no packet drivers of any sort available for
it.

Is there any way I can use this board without buying a bunch of
Ungermann-Bass software?  I'd like to find a packet driver if at all
possible.  I won't miss the Excelan software.

-- 
J. Porter Clark    jpc@avdms8.msfc.nasa.gov or jpc@gaia.msfc.nasa.gov
NASA/MSFC Communications Systems Branch
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: ron@rivm.nl (Ron Roozendaal)
Subject: Inventory into use/installed base
Followup-To: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Summary: Trying to make up list of packages used/installed
Reply-To: ron@rivm.nl (Ron Roozendaal)
Organization: RIVM
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 11:21:02 GMT

Hi all,

We are trying to make up a list of TCP/IP stacks most used and or programmed
for on the DOS/WINDOWS platform. We do so to be able to make a thorough
descision as to standardize on what stack(s) for our couple of hundred DOS
machines.

Therefore we are asking you, if you would be willing to e-mail us:

What stacks you have installed
What software works AND does not work on those stacks
What SMTP/POP e-mail dos clients (Public domain and/or commercial) you use
What, to your experience, would be a good stack to standardize on (and why)

Thanks in advacne for replying to these questions. As this is of general
interest, I will summarize to the net in about one or two weeks time,


Regards,


Ron Roozendaal  


____________
 Ron Roozendaal (ron@rivm.nl)
        National Institute on Public Health and Environmental Protection
        Informatics Service Centre
        Postbox 1, 3720 BA Bilthoven, the Netherlands
        Tel. ++31 30 742790, Fax. ++31 30 282 316
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: pim@cti-software.nl (Pim Zandbergen)
Subject: NE2100 packet driver ?
Organization: CTI Software BV, The Hague, The Netherlands
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 18:08:34 GMT

I've got hold of an ethernet card that seems to be a
clone of a Novell NE2100 (?).

Does a packet driver for this card exist ?
It's not in the latest drivers.zip.

Thank you.
-- 
Pim Zandbergen                      domain : pim@cti-software.nl
CTI Software BV                     uucp   : uunet!mcsun!sun4nl!ctisbv!pim
Laan Copes van Cattenburch 70       phone  : +31 70 3542302
2585 GD The Hague, The Netherlands  fax    : +31 70 3512837
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: puder@rhrk.uni-kl.de (Arno Puder)
Subject: Problems with KA9Q and ARCNET
Organization: University of Kaiserslautern, Germany
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 09:48:26 GMT


I seem to have an old version of the KA9Q package. When I tried
to run it with my ARCNET (ATTACH PACKET...) it responded "un-
supported type class 8". Interesting enough the documentation
said that it should work. I logged on to Archie and got a couple
of dozens of references. Which one works with ARCNET?


Arno
puder@rhrk.uni-kl.de
From: nelson@crynwr.com (Russell Nelson)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Sun <=> PC Transfer Rate (Summary) 
Distribution: world
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 04:06:41 GMT
Organization: Crynwr Software

In article <920911085058@minimillian.ftp.com> backman@vaxeline.ftp.com writes:

    >> >I've gotten as high as 5megabits/second using a 50Mhz 486DX box with a 16     >> >bit WD board using the same software and packet driver.
    >> 
    >> That is about the limit of the current ISA ethernet hardware and packet
    >> drivers.  3Com's new (unreleased) cards should up that by 25% to 50%.

    The 3C509 (if this is what you are referring to) has serious problems with
    8K receives.  I have had little luck in getting its OS/2 NDIS driver to 
    consistently receive all 6 IP fragments in an 8K RPC.  3Com's response
    has been to state that the NFS protocol is flawed if it expects to
    receive 6 back to back packets.

The problem is probably more due to OS/2's interrupt latency.  From
what I see of the 3c509, it's receive performance will be very closely
related to your interrupt latency.

-russ <nelson@crynwr.com>  I'm proud to be a humble Quaker!
Crynwr Software            Crynwr Software sells packet driver support.
11 Grant St.               315-268-1925 Voice
Potsdam, NY 13676          315-268-9201 FAX
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: dan@dribble.c-mols.siu.edu (Dan Ellison)
Subject: PCRoute+Racore TR card=trouble.  Anybody else seen this?
Organization: Southern Illinois University - Carbondale, IL (SIU-C)
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 22:03:41 GMT

We have a small problem here using PCRoute on our campus network.
We have builing backbones constructed from token ring.  Hanging off
of the backbone are routers and bridges to ethernets and other 
tokenrings.  One such router is PCRoute running on a Gateway 386
machine with a 3COM 3C503 ethernet card and a Racore Tokenring
card.  The router itself seems to work fine.  The problem comes
when I try to use Win/QVT or NCSA telnet from a different subnet
than the one the PCRoute machine is on.  When I try this I receive
an error message stating that I am using a duplicate IP address
pointing to the arp address of the PCRoute machine.  I have verified
that once this machine is taken off line everything works fine.

We are planning to change out the tokenring card next Monday to see
if it is a problem at the hardware level.  In the mean time, has
anyone else experienced this problem when using PCRoute on an
enterprise network?  If so, did you find a solution?  Many thanks
in advance to those that respond.

CUL
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| Dan Ellison, Network Team 	  -    	Computing Affairs, SIU-C 	| 
| Southern Illinois University 	  - 	Carbondale, IL 62901            |   
| FAX:      (618) 453-3459        -   	PHONE:    (618) 453-6149 	|
From: dittrich@milton.u.washington.edu (Dave Dittrich)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Re: University of Washington's CUTCP w/key remapping ability
Date: 14 Sep 92 16:50:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: milton.dittrich.716489422
Organization: University of Washington

mzafir@leon.ariadne-t.gr (Zafeiropoulos) writes:

>He points to ftphost.nwnet.net as
>an anonymous ftp site from which it can be downloaded.

>Does anybody has the address for this machine?

Sorry for the post, but my email bounced.

The address should be 140.142.100.1, by my arp.
From: dank@blacks.jpl.nasa.gov (Daniel R. Kegel)
Subject: Problems with Novell LWP
Organization: Image Analysis Systems Group, JPL
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 23:37:57 GMT

Hi,
I just got my NE2000 card and a copy of Novell Lan Workplace for DOS (their
name for TCP/IP software).  I'm using an external transciever (and, yes,
I did move the jumper to use the DIX connector instead of the RG-58 connector).

Unfortunately, I can't seem to get it working.
I've gotten it to ping itself, but it can't see anyone else, and vice versa.
Worse yet, I can't seem to get ne2000.com to unload; it complains
    FATAL : Failed to locate MLID section heading in NET.CFG File.

Plus, there's a mysterious option in ne2000.com, D, Enable DIX connector, that seems
to be undocumented.  Is it needed?

One final question: where should NET.CFG be located?  In the directory where
the utilities live?  In the current directory?  I get no guidance from the
manuals.

Here's my net.cfg:

link driver ne2000
	INT  #1 3
	PORT #1 300
	Frame Ethernet_II
	Frame Ethernet_802.3
	Protocol IPX 0 Ethernet_802.3

Link Support
	Buffers 8 1500
	MemPool 4096

Protocol TCPIP
	ip_address	128.149.77.167
	ip_router	128.149.77.7
	ip_netmask	255.255.255.0
	tcp_sockets	32
	udp_sockets	4
	raw_sockets	8
	nb_sessions	1
	nb_commands	1
	nb_adapter	0
	nb_domain	

Thanks for any help,
  Dan Kegel (dank@blacks.jpl.nasa.gov)
From: steve@rmit.edu.au (Steve Iatropoulos)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: BOOTP and LWP4DOS...
Date: 14 Sep 92 15:36:06 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Internet



We are investigating in standardising on a TCP/IP kernel campus-wide and
we have been looking at LanWorkplace for dos 4.01.  I have been
quite happy with the package on the whole except in one thing - it
doesnt support BOOTP!  All our labs and most of our staff machines
BOOTP now and we need to have a kernel support this feature if 
its going to fit into our environment.

Can anyone please shed some light on the status of LWP and BOOTP?


Thanx for your time,
Steve

................................................................................
Steve Iatropoulos,	ACSnet:   steve@otto.bf.rmit.oz
Faculty of Business,	UUCP:	  uunet!munnari!goanna!otto.bf.rmit.oz.au!steve
    Level 2		Internet: steve@rmit.edu.au
    411 Swanston St,	Tel:	  +613 660 3470
    Melbourne, Victoria	ICBM:	  37 48 S / 147 58 E
    Australia, 3000	
................................................................................
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: waltje@cs.vu.nl (Kempen van Fred)
Subject: Re: LPD for IBM PCs
Organization: Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 17:55:21 GMT

dale@manet.wustl.edu (Dale Frye) writes:

[about LPD programs for PC's et al]

>Call Beame&Whiteside and ask for a free fully functional demo disk. It
>does everything just has a timeout. They have a LPD that will support
>multiple printers on one PC. (Windows required for multiple printer  
>support.) It will also provide multiple FTPd and TELNETd sessions into
>the PC (Yes, at the same time!)

>Sorry, I'm a little hasty. These are features due out in their next
>release (any day now Carl?)
I got such a demo from our dealer in Holland, it had no server programs
at all.  It is version 2.30 (so says the disk..), and the manual stuff
does not say anything about servers, either.

So, being really pissed at this, I installed KA9Q/NOS 2.00m (by Gerard
van der Grinten, PA0GRI), and that machine now acts as a standalone LPD
server for my EPSON LX-800 on PRN/LPT1:, and my HP DeskJet500 on LPT2:.
Works fine...

However, I think that a server running under BW-TCP would be a lot
faster.  So, can either "B" or "W" shed some light on this?

Fred.
-- 
--
Fred N. van Kempen                           | Home: waltje@uwalt.nl.mugnet.org
VU Amsterdam, Fac. Math && Computer Science  | Work: waltje@cs.vu.nl
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: skc@Turing.ORG (Shriram K. Chaubal)
Subject: Re: PC/TCP 2.1 copy protection
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 20:36:05 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.214208.41914@clinicom.com> john@clinicom.com (John Hensley) writes:
>
>Is anyone else torqued about this, or am I letting my bias against copy
>protection cloud my judgment of a handy new network management feature? Any
>suggestions for how FTP could protect their software *without* catching hell
>from people like me? Just doesn't seem likely, given the nature of the product,
>but I'd sure like the current policy to change....
>

I havent seen the latest release of the 2.1 software so I am not going to 
comment on the specifics ... but here's what happens more than often
at a place like where I work .... 1) System Admin has a 'master' disk
2) New Sales person joins ... 3) Admin type takes his disk (which he knows
has all the stuff with the right settings on em...) and installs it on the
sales type's PC. Again .. I have no clue how FTP's software protection works
but I could see this being a major problem and a hassle with the admin types,
if you need a new diskette for every person on the network. I dont think
the traffic would create a problem (If a single packet every few minutes could
mess your network up ... you have other problems to deal with :-)).

I just bought the SNMP tools from FTP and noticed that I had the 2.1 Kernel 
with it... where is all the memory reduction? (This was about a month ago.)

In the mean time .. why do I get the feeling that more people are likely
to be moving towards Lan WorkPlace ???i

Shriram Chaubal

Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: jennings@ncs.dnd.ca (M. Jennings)
Subject: Printing problem using FTP's TCP/ip Ver 2.05
Organization: DND, Ottawa, CANADA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 12:50:50 GMT

Hello,
         I am having probems printing from WP51 over the network
         using FTP's PC/TCP ver 2.05 pl2.  I have been told that the
problem is with PREDIR and has been solved with PC/TCP ver 2.10 or with
ver 2.05 pl4 plus, is this true?  I would appreciate any comments on
this, thanks.

              Mark  
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: towen@relay.nswc.navy.mil (Thomas F. Owen)
Subject: pktmux11/qvtnet27 compatability
Organization: Code E402, Naval Surface Warfare Center
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 16:34:48 GMT

I have been using pktmux11 for quite some time now with Windows 3.1 and
can get it to function mostly correct with FTP Software PCTCP 2.1B and 
trumpet 1.05g.  Mostly correct means that all of the services work correctly 
but sometimes tnglass (Since pktmux only supports 4 virtual packet 
drivers, I use kermit over tnglass in lieu of networked kermit to get 
multiple sessions.) will crash upon exit.

I can get qvtnet27 to load and operate properly with multiple telnets and 
a ftp.  However, if I close wnqvtnet and then try to run it again, Windows 
will crash and I will back at the DOS prompt.  Furthermore, the DOS is not 
stable and the system needs to be rebooted to correct the problem.

If I set up qvtnet27 without pktmux11, there are no problems with qvtnet27.  
However, this prevents using trumpet and FTP's idrive.

I tried to ftp to uk.ac.rl.ib to get a later version of pktmux to see if 
the problem has been reported or corrected, but my system cannot resolve the 
address for either ftp or mail.

Has anyone else expereinced this and if so is there a workaround?

Thanks in advance,
Tom Owen
===================================================================
Thomas F. Owen (towen@relay.nswc.navy.mil)
Work: (703) 663-7614
Paper Mail: NAVSWC, Code E402, Dahlgren VA 22448


Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: john@clinicom.com (John Hensley)
Subject: PC/TCP 2.1 copy protection
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 21:42:08 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: CliniCom Incorporated, Boulder, CO


I just got a call from someone at FTP Software informing me that our upgrade to
2.1 should ship in the next week or two. "Great!" says I -- I've been waiting
for some of the new features for a long time. But this is no mere notification,
this is to let me know that among the new nifties is a simple way of ensuring
my compliance with my site license! Was I *not* complying, I wonder? After all,
we've only got 8 or 10 PCs on the net, and the license is for a full twenty
(20) nodes -- seems like it's pretty easy to keep in line as things stand. Well,since this rep is so psyched about the new feature (she didn't even mention the
other improvements), I inquire further. Each copy of the new kernel is coded,
I'm told, and sends out its signature onto my Ethernet, so all of my PCs'
kernels can tell if they have been installed on more than one workstation.

Uh, hey (something begins to show its horrid self behind the rep's enthusiasm)
-- so this upgrade means that I have to keep track of which diskettes I used on
which PC, and make sure if I ever have to reinstall, that I use the right copy,
and even if I manage to keep them all straight so that all the kernels will
function, they're going to be taking up more precious memory on the PC and
generating more traffic on my net, all so *I* can ensure my compliance with the
site license? "That's correct!" she assures me.

Now if CliniCom had bought a single license, FTP'd have some meager amount of
justification; I'd guess it's pretty rare for a business to have one copy of
a networking package -- kind of pointless -- but we spent several thousand on
this license. I don't need some gleeful spokesperson calling up and informing
me that after finally getting a *much needed* upgrade to this software, they're
*throwing in* copy protection, unnecessary code and more traffic on my net, and
expecting me to be happy about it. It's not like some game you play once a 
week, to which the only obstacle is a code wheel -- this is mucking around with
our resources, both on the PCs and the net. Either remove the crap and trust 
customers who pay for site licenses *direct from your company*, or admit 
you're bending us over for the specter of corporate software piracy. 

Is anyone else torqued about this, or am I letting my bias against copy
protection cloud my judgment of a handy new network management feature? Any
suggestions for how FTP could protect their software *without* catching hell
from people like me? Just doesn't seem likely, given the nature of the product,
but I'd sure like the current policy to change....

-- 
John Hensley           |
john@clinicom.com      | "You think slower when you graze." -- Holling
jhensley@nyx.cs.du.edu |
From: bob@comlab.gatech.edu (Bob Baggerman)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Re: PC/TCP 2.1 copy protection
Date: 10 Sep 92 13:32:02 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

[ Various folks talk about the evils of copy protection ]

I agree that copy protection (that is, some mechanism which physically 
prevents multiple copies of the same software to run), even for sites 
are totally legal, is a hassle for reasons that I think are obvious to
most.  Sun's PC-NFS falls in this category.

But to cast FTP Software's protection mechanism as "copy protection" in
the MS-DOS traditional sense is very misleading, IMHO.  It's about as non-
obtrusive as you can get.  I haven't tried it so someone please correct me
if I'm wrong but I understand you can copy their software all day long and
the worst it will do is occasionally complain to the screen.  This certainly
seems reasonable to me and I am willing to live with it.

Bob

--
Bob Baggerman                         !  bob.baggerman@gtri.gatech.edu
Communications Laboratory             !  bob@comlab.gatech.edu
Georgia Tech Research Institute       !  qseclrb@prism.gatech.edu
Atlanta, GA  30332  USA               !  404-894-3525
From: wjr@FTP.COM (William J Rust)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Re: SNMP-based Monitoring Software for PC's
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:11:31 GMT
Reply-To: wjr@ftp.com
Distribution: world
Organization: The Internet


    From pcip-request@louie.udel.edu  Tue Sep 15 12:35:56 1992
    
    Does anyone know of a public domain or commercial snmp-based monitoring
    software package for PC's.
    
    You can reply to this list or e-mail to me directly.
    
    mark@wugate.wustl.edu
    -- 
    mark@wugate.wustl.edu


We sell a product called PC/SNMP Tools that has simple get / getnext
functions as well as some whizzier stuff. Contact info@ftp.com if you
want more information.

WJR

--
William J Rust (aka, not-the-mama)                       Internet: wjr@ftp.com
FTP Software, Inc.                         (508) 685-4000, fax: (508) 794-4488