From: lbartz@indy6.irs.gov ("Larry S. Bartz")
Newsgroups: comp.sys.novell
Subject: Novell/client/NATIVE IP
Date: 8 Oct 92 18:06:34 GMT

Subject: Novell/client/NATIVE IP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.novell, comp.protocols.tcp-ip, comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Organization:  My Own Little Dream World, ask my wife!
Summary:  OST article hints. I want details. Let's demonstrate demand.
Keywords:  IP, IPX, choice, open, heterogenous, UNIX-tm

In "Unix-NetWare Connection" in _Open Systems Today_ (Sep 14 '92)
Paul Kapustka wrote:
> [paraphrased heavily]
> "...an NFS client package for NetWare 3.11 servers, will allow
> NetWare clients to access files on Unix servers and will ship before
> the end of the year..."
> "...a package that will provide native NetWare client support over
> TCP/IP, is slated to ship by spring of 1993...will be available...
> for..3.11 and higher."

I've been watching my other trade rags and mags for more details, but
haven't seen any. Did I miss a discussion of this issue in these
newsgroups?

Mr. Kapustka's article seems to hint that Novell doesn't anticipate
much demand for these products. A lack of fanfare in other media makes
me wonder: Is Novell floating a trial ballon with this "announcement"?

I certainly hope this announcement isn't vaporous. I asked a
significantly-more-experienced-Noveller what he thought of this news,
and he said, "Oh sure. They've hinted that lots of times. It'll
never happen."

These capabilities would enhance our Novell's viability significantly
as we proceed to LAN-WAN-LAN support of a heterogenous Novell/UNIX
environment. Think of the administrative overhead and confusion which
would be saved if each workstation/client had only one (IP) address
as opposed to two (IP & IPX). Howzabout the expense and overhead of
routing one protocol instead of two over the WAN? I'm thinkin' there's
another golden opportunity for savings; in dollars, performance over-
head, and twisted brain cells.

If it's not too late, Novell, I'd really appreciate at least a
client-side implementation of bootp. If you don't implement the
host bootp server side, that's okay by me for now. I have UNIX boxes
for that. The bootp protocol saves so much in terms of individual client
configuration, and offers so much in terms of centralized management and 
control, I consider it a critical feature.

In "Why TCP/IP Still Has The Edge" in _DATAMATION_ (October 1 '92)
Ned Snell wrote:
> [some consultant] "suggests that Novell's TCP/IP offerings may be
> intentionally lackluster in order to make IPX look better: 'I bet
> you'll find Novell's heart's not in it,' he says."

I certainly have no reason to expect this to be true, and hope sincerely
that Novell will refute this position, then vigorously pursue the "open"
direction indicated here. It can only make them stronger.

Okay, newsgroupies, that's my two cents. Anyone else care to make a little
noise over this?

#::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|
#  IGNORE THE HEADER, THIS IS ME:                                  |
#  Larry Bartz                                                     |
#   lbartz@indy6.irs.gov                                           |
#   (317) 226-7060                                                 |
#::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|