HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: de_cowley@pnl.gov (David E. Cowley)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet,comp.sys.dec
Subject: Re: Problems with Cabletron 10BaseT hubs and DEC XMI Ethernet cards?
Keywords: 10BaseT
Date: 27 Aug 92 18:16:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: oracle.1992Aug27.181610.28062
Organization: Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs, Richland, WA
Originator: d3c724@baldrick.pnl.gov


In article <1992Aug27.001413.20506@pony.Ingres.COM>, ack@Ingres.COM (David Ackerman) writes:
|> Is anyone out there using Cabletron 10BaseT hubs with a DEC XMI Ethernet
|> card? We are, and we have experienced the following problem:
|> 
|> We have a DEC VAX 6000-540 which uses a DEC XMI Ethernet card. When it is
|> hooked to a Cabletron 10BaseT hub, over 50% of the transmissions on the port
|> it is connected to are errors. The approximate breakdown of these errors is
|> as follows: 10% CRC errors, 40% runt packets and 50% frame alignment errors.
|> The Cabletron hub is an MMAC5 chassis, TPMIM-34 10BaseT card connected to a
|> Cabletron TPT-4 10BaseT transceiver on the VAX, and an IRM2 management card.
|> The statistics are from the IRM2 management card in the hub.

				<< Stuff Deleted >>

David's not alone.  We too installed DEC's XMI Ethernet controller in our 
VAX 6000-420 and connected it via a 10BaseT Microceiver to a Cabletron 10BaseT
hub.  It went bananas.  Our solution was to punt.  We used that controller for 
our LAVC interface, and ran AUI cable.  It's had nary a problem since.

I think the bottom line is that the controller just don't work with 10BaseT.
Probably not the answer you were looking for...?

			- Dave C.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Cowley			Internet: de_cowley@pnl.gov
Unix/VMS System Manager		Voice:	(509) 375-2260
Production Systems MSIN K7-53	Fax:	(509) 375-6703
Battelle Northwest	
PO Box 999	
Richland, WA 99352
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Null Modem on EtherNet
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 17:19:59 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <TR27PB1w164w@Control.Com> ics.jjmc@control.com writes:
>>you can't just connect two
>ethernet cards together with a "null modem" and get it to work. 
>
>Maybe you can, if you don't understand the problem. For the IEEE
>Conference here this Spring, we hooked an AT and an XT together
>with 10 feet of coax...

He's talking about hooking AUI port to AUI port.  Not all Ethernet
cards have the coax interface.
-- 
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
From: aazobian@athena.mit.edu (Assef A Zobian)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: Saber LAA Starter Kit software
Date: 30 Aug 92 01:14:29 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology


I have a brand new Saber LAA Starter Kit software . This software supports Nodell,
Microsoft, DEC, Bayan,IBM and any MS-NET based network. It has LAA Console/RT and the 
Saber LAA agent Toolkit. The LAA Agent Toolkit performs the following functions:
1- Application control and inventory
2- Hardware inventory
3- Event logging
4- File auditing
5- Schduler
6- Disk monitor
Its retail price is $ 1195 but I am willing to sell it for much less. If you need it,
e-mail me and we will fix the price.

 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: rpw3@rigden.wpd.sgi.com (Rob Warnock)
Subject: Re: Is there a blackbox that will resolve IP conflicts when joining two nets?
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 06:31:47 GMT

marke@fsi-ssd.csg.ssd.fsi.com (Mark W. Easter) writes:
+---------------
| On one hand this seems like a dumb question, but on the other, it
| doesn't seem likely that every system in the world that has access to
| the Internet has a legal SRI/NIC IP.
+---------------

Yes, every system in the world that has access to the Internet has a legal
NIC-assigned IP address. (Note: SRI is not the NIC anymore.)

There are even many, many systems *not* connected to the Internet that have
legal NIC-assigned IP addresses, just on the off chance that some day they
*will* be so connected.

There are also many systems not connected to the Internet that have totally
bogus, duplicated, or stolen-from-others-without-bothering-to-check addresses.
These can often work for quite some time, until a situation like yours arises.

*Strong* suggestion: Change your product to allow the customer to easily set
the IP addresses used in it. If you must, for internal manufacturing or test,
default the addresses to 192.0.2.1 through 192.0.2.254 (net 192.0.2 is the
Internet "test" network).


-Rob

-----
Rob Warnock, MS-9U/510		rpw3@sgi.com
Silicon Graphics, Inc.		(415)390-1673
2011 N. Shoreline Blvd.
Mountain View, CA  94043

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: weis@netmbx.netmbx.de (Dietmar Weis)
Subject: Re: what is SQE  (DUMB QUESTION!)
Organization: netmbx, Berlin, Germany
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 06:38:51 GMT

craa85@ccsun.strath.ac.uk ( D.W.Stevenson) writes:

>In article <1992Aug25.202024.4870@hubcap.clemson.edu>, cballen@hubcap.clemson.edu (charles allen) writes:

>|> We have an AUI to Thinwire thing for a Decstation server
>                     By the sound of it, your `AUI to thinwire thing'
>is a transceiver (or MAU in 802.3 parlance).

This ``AUI to Thinwire thing'' is called DESTA (DEC Ethernet station Adapter)
and provides a means to connect standard Ethernet controllers (with 15-pin
connector) to a Thinwire Segment via a BNC connector. It has two ports, one
15-pin AUI connector and one BNC connector. It contains 802.3/Ethernet
circuitry and provides transceiver functions.
(Quoted from Digitals Network Buyer's Guide)

SQE should be turned off for a transceiver connected to a *Thinwire* repeater.
I don't know for a Standard Ethernet repeater.
The reason is, that the SQE-Signal, which tests the Collision Detect
functionality in the Ethernet Controller, will be transmitted via the
Thinwire repeater to the whole Thinwire segment, which would **dramatically**
slow down. On a 15-pin AUI-Cable to an Ethernet controller you have seperate
Collision Detect lines, which you don't have on a Thinwire. So the SQE-Test
sends it's test Collision Detect signals right onto the segment.
The attached stations think there are real collisions.

Dietmar
-- 
weis@netmbx.netmbx.de       | Dietmar Weis         DONOP CONSULT GmbH
Voice: +49 30 884 28 54-0   |                      Uhlandstrasse 179/180
Fax:   +49 30 882 55 29     |                      D - 1000 Berlin 12
                     I don't speak for my company!
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: aazobian@athena.mit.edu (Assef A Zobian)
Subject: Saber LAA Starter Kit software
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 01:41:20 GMT


I have a brand new Saber LAA Starter Kit software . This software supports Nodell,
Microsoft, DEC, Bayan,IBM and any MS-NET based network. It has LAA Console/RT and the 
Saber LAA agent Toolkit. The LAA Agent Toolkit performs the following functions:
1- Application control and inventory
2- Hardware inventory
3- Event logging
4- File auditing
5- Schduler
6- Disk monitor
Its retail price is $ 1195 but I am willing to sell it for much less. If you need it,
e-mail me and we will fix the price.
From: nason@pa881a.inland.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: Re: what is SQE  (DUMB QUESTION!)
Date: 3 Sep 92 14:51:32 GMT
Organization: Inland Steel Company, East Chicago, IN

In article <1992Sep2.091738.4218@nuscc.nus.sg>, ccewch@nuscc.nus.sg (Wong Chee Heng) writes:
> nason@pa881a.inland.com writes:
> : circuitry.  Each MAU under 802.3 must be have a provision to manually turn off
> : the SQE test.  This is done for a variety of reasons.  If the MAU is connected
> : to a repeater, or if the MAU is connected to a Ethernet V2 device.  
> : 
> : One of the differences between 802.3 and ethernet V2 is the collision detect
> :circuitry test.  Under Ethernet it is called the Collsion Presence Test.  Under
> : 802.3 it is called the SQE test.  In your appliction, you want SQE test turned
> : on.    
> : 
> Why SQE must be turned off when connecting to Ethernet V2 device? If the problem
> is due to some incompatibilties of the two standards, shouldn't there be a
> special MAU for Ethernet v2 device that allow SQE enabled? SQE seems to be
> a good feature
> 
Ethernet V2 devices(no 802.3 conformance) cannot accept the 802.3 SQE-test.
If you are stuck with a Ethernet V2 device and an 802.3 MAU, then you can turn
off the SQE  test and live with the "collsion check detect failure".  You
would not want to do this over the long term, but this does allow you to use the
802.3 MAU in an Ethernet only station.  

There were ethernet devices that did not require "heartbeat", the 802.3 MAU
could work with them as well.  However, to answer your direct question.  There
are Ethernet V2 MAU's for ethernet devices and 802.3 MAU's for 802.3 devices.  

This issue really involves very old ethernet only devices.  Most devices except
for the repeaters would work with either an Ethernet MAU or an 802.3 MAU.  In
today's environment, you should not have too much trouble connecting
non-repeater devices with an 802.3 MAU and leaving SQE turned on.  
  
-- 
My opinions are my own and not those of my company.  
Free advice is worth its cost.  
--- John M. Nason - NA9U ---|--------------------------------------------|
Inland Steel Company        |  -- nason@pa881a.inland.com                |
Process Automation MS 2-464 |  -- Fax:   219-399-7856                    |
3210 Watling Street         |  -- Voice: 219-399-2450                    |
East Chicago IN 46312       |"Ya can't shoot em till they stop sparklin" |
----------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.lans.ethernet:1742 comp.sys.dec:4786
From: rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Richard H. Miller)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet,comp.sys.dec
Subject: Re: Problems with Cabletron 10BaseT hubs and DEC XMI Ethernet cards?
Keywords: 10BaseT
Date: 28 Aug 1992 23:10:06 GMT
Followup-To: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet,comp.sys.dec

In article <1992Aug27.181610.28062@oracle.pnl.gov>, de_cowley@pnl.gov (David E. Cowley) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Aug27.001413.20506@pony.Ingres.COM>, ack@Ingres.COM (David Ackerman) writes:
> |> Is anyone out there using Cabletron 10BaseT hubs with a DEC XMI Ethernet
> |> card? We are, and we have experienced the following problem:
> 
> 				<< Stuff Deleted >>
> 
> David's not alone.  We too installed DEC's XMI Ethernet controller in our 
> VAX 6000-420 and connected it via a 10BaseT Microceiver to a Cabletron 10BaseT
> hub.  It went bananas.  Our solution was to punt.  We used that controller for 
> our LAVC interface, and ran AUI cable.  It's had nary a problem since.
> 
> I think the bottom line is that the controller just don't work with 10BaseT.
> Probably not the answer you were looking for...?

We had the same problem when we installed our 6610 with an XMI ethernet. We
encountered the problem when we used a Lantronics LXT-T transciever. When
we replaced it with a Cabletron TPT-T unit, the problem went away. We have 
been able to use it on a 10BaseT setup with this transcieiver. I am glad
to see someone else has encountered the problem.











-- 
Richard H. Miller                 Email: rick@bcm.tmc.edu
Asst. Dir. for Technical Support  Voice: (713)798-3532
Baylor College of Medicine        US Mail: One Baylor Plaza, 302H
                                           Houston, Texas 77030
From: milton@vivian.enet.dec.com (Tony Milton)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: Re: Max Repeaters/multiport repeater wiring questions
Date: 1 Sep 92 15:40:26 GMT
Reply-To: milton@vivian.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


>Wouldn't you still count this as a repeater when calculating distances
>between systems?  Eg.:
>
>VMS----DELNI---transceiver===coax===transceiver---DELNI---VMS
>
>The two VMS systems above should be counted as having two repeaters
>(the DELNIs) between them, yes?
>
>-- 
>Randy Kunkee
>Ferranti International Controls Corporation
>12808 W. Airport Blvd.  Sugar Land, TX 77478
>UUCP: uupsi!ficc!kunkee       ph: (713) 274-5132
>INTERNET: kunkee@ferranti.com

There are NO repeaters in the above diagram. A DELNI is NOT a repeater.

Tony.
From: shava@hermes.oit.unc.edu (Shava Nerad Averett)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: IPX frame types and performace degradation (was Re: TCP/IP and Netware ...)
Date: 3 Sep 92 22:08:53 GMT
Organization: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

In article <hz01930.715352014@cygnus> hz01930@hx.deere.com (Jay D. Anderson) writes:
>I understand from this and other posts in this thread that retransmit
>backoffs are hardware functions.  Good.  When setting up the 
>parameters for NetWare, don't you have a choice of using 802.3 compliance
>*or* Ethernet II?  We are using a Vax Netware server which requires
>Ethernet II to be the parameter setting, and we have experienced
>difficulties with PCs using 3C503 ethernet controllers to talk TCP/IP.
>The PCs frequently would not see reply packets, and keyboard input
>using telnet would be "sticky," you may type for a while with nothing
>echoing on the screen, then after a second or two, the characters would
>appear.  Additionally, we have long had a strange behavior on our Sun
>workstations where we would get "NFS server not responding" messages
>occasionally.  Looking back at that problem, it only occurs on segments
>of the network not protected from Netware traffic by a bridge or router.
>We finally placed the segment with the PCs on the other side of a bridge
>to get away from the Netware traffic with resulting perfect performance.
>
>Our overall network traffic is in the neighborhood of 7%.  Are these
>symptoms of using Netware with the Ethernet II setting, or would I see
>the same thing with Netware using 802.3 compliance?


A similar thing we run into sometimes is that if you are running Netware
IPX on two frame types, and you have servers that bind *BOTH* Ethernet_
802.3 and Ethernet_II on their interfaces, then you get RIP broadcasts
of every damn bit of IPX routing information from each server with both
frame types duplicated for each frame type.  On a large internetwork of
Netware servers, this can up your broadcast traffic to 6-12% of a 10Mb/sec
ethernet.  Sound daunting?  (RIP is a pig even with *one* frametype,
obviously...)

We are working on getting *all* our servers and workstations on 
Ethernet_II ASAP because of this problem.
-- 
Shava Nerad Averett				shava_averett@unc.edu
/*  all materials (c)1992, Shava Nerad Averett, and have nothing significant
    to do with the University of North Carolina, a mostly owned subsidiary 
    of the NC Legislature, a mostly owned subsidiary of the DOT.      */
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.lans.ethernet:1808 comp.dcom.lans.misc:712
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: solution to 3Com 3C501 weirdness
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:07:24 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

A month or so ago I posted a query about a problem we had:  a 3C501 board
that no longer seemed able to do FTPs to the rest of the world very well,
and showed bizarre symptoms when we tried isolating it on a small Ethernet
for testing.

Our thanks go out to Manfred Kwiatkowski of Berlin, who pointed us to the
problem.  The KA9Q software, unlike the usual flavors of Unix, requires
you to supply an explicit route to a directly-connected network.  If you
don't do that, but do supply a route to a default gateway, *all* your
traffic goes to that gateway.  The gateway typically will pass the packet
on and send you an ICMP redirect.  So everything seems to work fine,
although you're getting (and ignoring) a lot of redirects... until you
upgrade the server you're talking to.  Now it responds quickly enough
that the redirect and the server's response to the packet arrive in fast
succession, and the 3C501 is known to have trouble with back-to-back
packets.  So suddenly things aren't so very reliable any more.  And of
course, if you try to isolate the suspect machine, the first thing you
do is to isolate it from the gateway... and then *nothing* works.

Adding the explicit route fixed it.
-- 
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: peter@miller.cs.uwm.edu (Peter J Diaz de Leon)
Subject: How do you connect 10baseT?
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 18:12:27 GMT

How do I go about cableing together two computers
using 10baseT. One will been a Unix file server,
the other will be a DOS machine. Is it just
UTP with RJ45's wired straight thru or what?
I am kinda new to this.

Thanks
-Peter
peter@miller.cs.uwm.edu
From: nason@pa881a.inland.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: Re: Max Repeaters/multiport repeater wiring questions
Date: 26 Aug 92 15:19:44 GMT
Organization: Inland Steel Company, East Chicago, IN

In article <1992Aug21.172813.1606@ra.royalroads.ca>, bbaskett@post.RoyalRoads.ca (Bill Baskett) writes:
> 
> These are probably FAQs but I couldn't find a FAQ list.
> There are basic questions, I'm sure, but if I don't ask, I'll
> never know!
> 
> 1) I find conflicting information (mostly from salespersons) about 
>    how many repeaters I can have in my network. One source says
>    2 another says 3 and yet another says 4. Which is correct?
>    (I should say, how many can I have between to communicating
>    systems on the same ethernet (i.e. not broken by a non-repeating
>    apparatus such as a bridge or gateway?)
> 
> 2) Is a repeater effectively two transceivers? If so, then do
>    the thin to fiber converters (one at each end of fiber) count
>    as one repeater?
> 
> 3) Which is the correct way to wire a thinnet segment into a 
>    multiport repeater?
>   
>    a)                                  b)
>   
>     .------------.                       .--------------.
>     | mpr box    |                       | mpr box      |
>     `---.--------'                       `----.---------'
>         |                                     |
>     |---T--------------|                      |
>                                               |
>                                               -     <-terminator
>     (two terminators, t-connection        (one terminator, direct bnc
>      to multiport repeater)                connection to multiport repeater)
> 
>     I'm 99% sure it's (b), but I have to resolve this issue to the
>     satisfaction of all. (BTW would (a) be correct for a bridge?)
> 
> 4) Can a transceiver be plugged directly into the workstation, or
>    is there some reason that you must use the tranceiver cable?
> 
> 5) Are thinnet segments supposed to be grounded somewhere?
> 
> Thank you kindly for your assistance!
> -- 
> Bill Baskett, Network Manager       vx: 604 363-4635 fx: 604 363-4513
> Royal Roads Military College        em: BBaskett@post.RoyalRoads.ca
> Victoria, B.C.                      "this space for hire"
-- 
My opinions are my own and not those of my company.  
Free advice is worth its cost.  
--- John M. Nason - NA9U ---|--------------------------------------------|
Inland Steel Company        |  -- nason@pa621a.inland.com                |
Process Automation MS 2-464 |  -- Fax:   219-399-7856                    |
3210 Watling Street         |  -- Voice: 219-399-2450                    |
East Chicago IN 46312       |"Ya can't shoot em till they stop sparklin" |
----------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: Re: TCP/IP and Netware coexistence (Was: 802.3 Non-Compliance (?))
From: Aengus Lawlor <RBYAML@rohvm1.rohmhaas.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 09:02:25 EDT
Organization: Rohm and Haas Company

In article <hz01930.715352014@cygnus>, hz01930@hx.deere.com (Jay D. Anderson)
says:
>I understand from this and other posts in this thread that retransmit
>backoffs are hardware functions.  Good.  When setting up the
>parameters for NetWare, don't you have a choice of using 802.3 compliance
>*or* Ethernet II?  We are using a Vax Netware server which requires
>Ethernet II to be the parameter setting, and we have experienced
>difficulties with PCs using 3C503 ethernet controllers to talk TCP/IP.
>The PCs frequently would not see reply packets, and keyboard input
>using telnet would be "sticky," you may type for a while with nothing
>echoing on the screen, then after a second or two, the characters would
>appear.  Additionally, we have long had a strange behavior on our Sun
>workstations where we would get "NFS server not responding" messages
>occasionally.  Looking back at that problem, it only occurs on segments
>of the network not protected from Netware traffic by a bridge or router.
>We finally placed the segment with the PCs on the other side of a bridge
>to get away from the Netware traffic with resulting perfect performance.
>
>Our overall network traffic is in the neighborhood of 7%.  Are these
>symptoms of using Netware with the Ethernet II setting, or would I see
>the same thing with Netware using 802.3 compliance?
I use Ethernet_II frames for Netware on our net, with 3C503s, running Novell
and/or PathWorks and TCP/IP (CUTCP and PC/TCP both with Packet-Drivers) all
the time. (Over 100 Novell/PathWorks users, 10-20 of them using TCP/IP at the
same time). I have never experienced any of the problems you report.

As I understand it, the Ethernet_II frame type was introduced when Netware
for VMS was developed. As I understand it, trying to get the VAXes ethernet
card to speak Ethernet_II for DECnet traffic, and Novell's "raw" 802.3 for
the Netware stuff could cause Vaxen to crash. The most recent incarnation of
Netware for VMS (File Sharing Services from InterConnections) specifically
supports Novells 802.3 frame type.

I don't think moving from Ethernet_II to "raw" 802.3 is likely solve any
problems.
>Thanks for your input.
>       /   __  /   /   / Jay D. Anderson        hz01930@hx.deere.com
Aengus
--
RBYAML@ROHMHAAS.COM                    Aengus Lawlor
RBYAML@ROHVM1.BITNET                   (who used to be ALAWLOR@DIT.IE)
"How about some of that famous Dublin wit, Barman?"
"Certainly, sir. Would that be Dry or Sparkling?"
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
From: ccewch@nuscc.nus.sg (Wong Chee Heng)
Subject: IEEE vs Ethernet II MAU and AUI cable
Organization: National University of Singapore
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 09:34:20 GMT

I read from one of an ethernet thin MAU manual that state very
vaguely that it must be with the right AUI cable, and SQE setting when 
connecting to either IEEE802.3 device or Ethernet v2.0 device or some 
problems may occur. Can someone pls enlighten me what is it all about 
and how to do it correctly?

Thank you very much.

--
Wong Chee Heng
Systems Programmer