HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Tue, 29 Dec 1992 10:01:51 EDT
From:         TOSDRST@GE1VM.SCHDY.GE.COM
Subject:      I/O errors on BTI boxes connected to AMDAHL 5995-4550

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From:
Subject: I/O errors on BTI boxes connected to AMDAHL 5995-4550
 Hello List,
 On occassion we are receiving BOTH on our MVS/TCP and MVS/DECnet
 BTI boxes..
   IOS000I 680,81,EQC,06,0200,10,,,(SNS or TCP)
 I have uncomfirmed information that this is an AMDAHL micro-code
 problem..
 Can anyone supply more on this...?
 **********************************************************************

Don Smith
Senior Software Engineer--Network Services
General Electric Company
Corporate Information Technology-Schenectady Megacenter
*
              ______
             /      |   INTERNET:  TOSDRST@GE1VM.SCHDY.GE.COM
            |       |   IBMMAIL:   IBMMAIL(USGESTVS)
  _________/        |   PROFS:     GE1VM(TOSDRST)
  >              0  |   DIALCOMM   8-235-1946
 /                  |   AT&TNET:   1-(518)-385-1946
| ______________    |   SNEAKERNET:General Electric Company
               `_   |              Corporate Information Technology
                 `__|              2500 Cambridge Road
                                   2nd Floor East Wing
                                   Schenectady New York, 12345
                          FAX:      1-518-385-0654
                                       8-235-0654

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From The Desk of Don Smith.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Wed, 30 Dec 1992 09:25:34 -0700
From:         bradley@MARCVM.MARC.USDA.GOV
Subject:      Re: what is tcp

   Literally:  Transmission Control Protocol.  Usually used with IP:
Internet Protocol.  TCP is an implementation of layer 4 (TRANSPORT) of the
ISO seven layer network model while IP is an implementation of layer 5 or
the NETWORK layer. In english, TCP provides program to program
communications on a network.  IP breaks these program links into packets
for sending, and then puts them back together on the other end in the
correct order.  (kind of like Star Trek "beam me up Scotty" and "scrambling
a man's molecules and sending them accross the universe" :-)
   Common Use:  It has become common to refer to the suite of programs that
are common on TCP/IP networks as TCP/IP.  (ie TELNET, FTP, SNMP, NFS, etc.)
 Ironically, some of these programs do not use TCP but thats history for
you.
   Hope this helps.

>I would like to know what is TCP-IP?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1992 10:34:26 EST
From:         Harold Pritchett <HAROLD@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: IBMLink
              16 Dec 1992 14:41:00 CET from <perezs@WORMS-EMH6.ARMY.MIL>

On Wed, 16 Dec 1992 14:41:00 CET Steve Perez said:
>
>Is there an Internet access point into IBMLink? If so, besides terminal
>access, is it possible to FTP fixes, announcements, etc?

At the interim SHARE meeting in Tampa, the open systems group sponsored
a talk by an IBM'er from IIN.  He talked about the IIN and connectivity to
the Internet.  One of the things he mentioned was IBMLink.

This paper will be presented again at the San Francisco SHARE as session
O859.  If you will be at the winter SHARE, come on by and make your needs
known to someone from inside IIN.

The abstract for the talk is as follows:

     Norm de Carteret - IBM Tampa

     IBM Information Network gateways to the Internet are part of full
     functions TCP/IP projects for the IBM Corporation and IIN customers.
     The VNET-Internet, VNET-BITNET, and IIN-Internet gateways will be
     discussed including features, support, growth, usage and experiences.
     Telnet and FTP pilot experiences will be outlined and other IP
     connection support will be described as well.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.GLA.PH.I1; 21 DEC 92 16:54:51 GMT
Phone:      041 339 8855 ext 5454 or 4197  (fax 334 9029)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1992 16:46:20 GMT
From:         "Alan J.Flavell (SY07 at GWIA)" <SY07@I1.PH.GLA.AC.UK>
Subject:      Post in haste, repent at leisure

I'm sorry, my too-hasty response would easily be misunderstood.
Here is a corrected version.

David Boyes writes (among other things):

> I certainly would appreciate Internet access to IBMlink; getting
> external access from a dialup here is a real hassle. I'd even be
> willing to consider a specially modified tn3270 to support file
> transfer. It's no worse than we have now (PMFTERM, etc), and it
> certainly would be more convenient.

Here in UK we access something called DIAL-IBM, which I gather is
similar to USA IBMLINK.  IBM does *not* provide Internet access to
this facility, but it is technically feasible for a *customer* who
has a connection to their network (it seems to be known variously
under the names IIN and MNS) on the same mainframe as an Internet
connection, to provide connectivity between TN3270 and DIAL-IBM.
Naturally, such customers are not going to advertise their mainframe
as a public gateway from Internet to DIAL-IBM.

I have the use of a TN3270 package for the PC that implements
IND$FILE transfer, and this works quite well for transferring files
from DIAL-IBM.  My chief complaint is not with the file transfer
procedure itself, but with the complex procedures needed on DIAL-IBM
to put the desired material into a disk file on one's "personal file
store" (a.k.a CMS minidisk) prior to performing the download.

Unfortunately the TN3270 with IND$FILE is copyright, but at least
you can deduce from its existence that such a thing is feasible!!!
(the so-called "proof by example").  Feel free to contact me directly
if you want to know more.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:41:00 PST
From:         "Denis DeLaRoca 825-4580 (310)" <CSP1DWD@UCLAMVS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Usage of vector facility for TCP/IP?

>  "You're selling me the fastest general available computer on the
>   planet and it connects to my network via this straw?"...

...and that straw many times plain doesn't work. The current release
of TCPIP continues to offer unsurmountable impediments to the develop-
ment and deployment of client/server applications using concurrent
tcp/ip services... it is an acknowledged problem and I am beginning
to develop the suspicion that IBM doesn't give a hoot about these
defficiencies.

-- Denis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1992 13:18:52 +0100
From:         ZDV104@DJUKFA11.BITNET
Subject:      Problems with ftp via RS6000-BMPX

Hello all,

Using an RS6000 as a gateway between ES9000/620 VM-system and the KFA-wid
FDDI network, I get an error using binary FTP transfer.

The scenario is the following:

                          ==========================
                         //                        \\
                    +------------+            +------------+
    +----+   BMPX   |            |            |            |
    | VM |----------| RS6000/350 |  FDDI-net  | RS6000/350 |
    +----+          |  rs-host-1 |            |  rs-host-2 |
                    +------------+            +------------+
                          \\                       //
                           ====.. other hosts ..====

Transferring a binary file with e.g. 4040 Bytes from rs-host-2
to the VM-system (PUT from rs-host-2), the ftp command is hanging.

Binary files with less than 4030 bytes are working fine.

I assume that 4030 bytes + IP-, TCP- and other headers add up
to less than 4096 bytes(max-seg-size for BMPX-adapter). FDDI does
support a max-segment-size of up to 4500.

It seems to me that the VM-TCP/IP-software and the rs-host-2 software
(AIX-TCP/IP) do not agree on the max-seg-size.

Setting the "MAXIMUM IP PACKET SIZE (Default:4352)" for the RS6000-fddi
interface to e.g. "4000" (lower than 4096), the file was transfered
correctly. But the decreased packetsize in general has effect to the
throughput to other hosts.

Has anyone else seen this behavior? Any remarks?

Thank in advance, Marry Christmas and a happy new year.

Ralph Niederberger             Research Center Juelich (KFA)
                               Central Institute for Applied Mathematics
                               P.O.BOX 1913
                               D-5170 Juelich
                               Tel.: +49 2461 61 4772
                               INTERNET: R.Niederberger@kfa-juelich.de
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Thu, 31 Dec 1992 08:08:58 CST
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X
From:         Chuck Nelson <NELSON@TWSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Erros running Gopher 2.2.0 in XA mode

We found the same problem. The problem appears to be using the FULLSCR NOREAD
stage in pipes when running in XA/ESA mode through vtam. I understand there
is a fix for this from IBM but do not know what it is.

I was able to work-around the problem by adding "DIAG58" option to each
FULLSCR stage in each pipe. This keeps the error msgs from appearing but
the status lines normally displayed when gopher is doing something ( waiting
for connection... etc.) do not display.

Hope this helps and if you can find the fix from IBM please let me know.

Happy Gophering,

Chuck Nelson
Tech. Support Analyst
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.GLA.PH.I1; 21 DEC 92 16:40:58 GMT
Phone:      041 339 8855 ext 5454 or 4197  (fax 334 9029)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1992 16:15:17 GMT
From:         "Alan J.Flavell (SY07 at GWIA)" <SY07@I1.PH.GLA.AC.UK>
Subject:      File transfer for IBMLINK

David Boyes writes (among other things):

> I certainly would appreciate Internet access to IBMlink; getting
> external access from a dialup here is a real hassle. I'd even be
> willing to consider a specially modified tn3270 to support file
> transfer. It's no worse than we have now (PMFTERM, etc), and it
> certainly would be more convenient.

Here in UK we access something called DIAL-IBM, which I gather is
similar to USA IBMLINK.  I have the use of a TN3270 package for the
PC that implements IND$FILE transfer, and this works quite well
for transferring files from DIAL-IBM.  My chief complaint is not
with the file transfer procedure itself, but with the complex
procedures needed on DIAL-IBM to put the desired material into a
disk file on one's "personal file store" (a.k.a CMS minidisk)
prior to performing the download.

Unfortunately the TN3270 with IND$FILE is copyright, but at least
you can deduce from its existence that such a thing is feasible!!!
(the so-called "proof by example").  Feel free to contact me directly
if you want to know more.
From: ZOUARI@TNEARN.BITNET (Zouari Mourad)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Subject: ka9q help.
Date: 22 Dec 92 07:18:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  JNET%"ibmtcp-l@pucc"

Hello,
Please can you tell me where can I find a doucumentation about the ka9q
ip router ? (how configure it in order to have a small PC lan).
any documentation about the ka9q will be useful.
any example of ka9q configuration will be useful too.
your help will be very appreciated.
best regards.
   Mourad.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
   Zouari Mourad                          // Phone : (216-1) 799-293
Institut Regional Des Sciences           //  Fax   : (216-1) 787-827
Informatiques et des Telecommunications //   Mail Drop :
(I.R.S.I.T)                            //      B.P. 212
                                      //       Cite Mahrajene
                                     //        1082 Tunis
Internet : zouari@spiky.rsinet.tn   //         TUNISIA
Bitnet : zouari@TNEARN.bitnet      //
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.2 PL14]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1992 16:47:29 EDT
From:         Craig Jackson <cjackson@MGH.COM>
Subject:      Re: IBMLink
              Dec 21, 92 5:25 pm

> Firstly, there is a difference between per-account support and services
> available to everyone, even non-customers. Apple and Novell provide anonymous
> FTP and Gopher sites, containing some patches, documentation etc. which are
> accessible by anyone on the Internet. However, their customer-only services
> (AppleLink and NetWire respectively) are _not_ accessible by Internet, only by
> dialup. IBM also has services on the Internet, but at development labs, not
> sales/support offices.
>
> Secondly, while IBM would be allowed to offer password-protected access to
> resources on a commercial TCP/IP network, I think most people on this list are
> at academic or military sites, and hence are talking about using the research
> Internet. My understanding is that its usage policy does not allow support of
> formal commercial relationships, whether intra-business, inter-business, or
> business-to-customer.
>
> So, IBM _may_ be allowed to have a publicly-accessible service on the research
> Internet listing APARs, PTFs, announcements etc. and other read-only
> information; Apple's and Novell's services would be a precedent. But as soon
> as they try to restrict it to existing customers only, by using passwords,
> that becomes a commercial relationship.
>
> This is just my informal understanding of how it works. But I guess that part
> of the reason for keeping commercial, for-money business off the Internet is
> precisely to avoid having to be too formal in the first place!

There is a fundamental misconception here about the NSFNet Acceptible Use
Policy (which is the most stringent, in general).  Use of NSFnet resources
to communicate between a Research/Education site and a Commercial site is
generally determined to be in furtherance of research and education.  (This
has been discussed extensively on the commercialization/privatization mailing
list, com-priv@psi.com.)  If you consider it, it makes sense.  The reason
why a university buys a computer from IBM (or whoever) in the first place
is to further research and education.  Keeping that system working through
maintenance and support activities would presumably also further research
and education, and therefore would be acceptable traffic over NSF network
resources.

(I'm explicitly not saying NSFNet here, because I don't understand the
relationship between the "NSFnet" and the ANS backbone.  And my company
is an ANS customer!)

--
Craig Jackson -- cjackson@mgh.com (Straight Internet)
dricejb@drilex.dri.mgh.com (uucp-forwarded)
{bbn,alliant,redsox}!drilex!{dricej,dricejb}
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1992 21:16:00 GMT
From:         "Robert G. Moskowitz" <0003858921@MCIMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: File transfer for IBMLINK

>Unfortunately the TN3270 with IND$FILE is copyright, but at least
>you can deduce from its existence that such a thing is feasible!!!
>(the so-called "proof by example").  Feel free to contact me directly
>if you want to know more.

There are commercial packages that provide IND$FILE over TN3270.  For Windows
users, DYNACOMM and RUMBA today and IRMA Workstation for Windows momentarily
(beta is almost done).  For DOS users, IRMA Workstation for DOS very soon (a few
remaining bugs in beta).  I have also heared claims that OCS's DOS product
includes IND$FILE support, but I have not used it like I have the others...

I have SNI connection to IBMLINK.  I use any of the above to access one of our
TN3270 gateways (MVS/TCP or OCS on an RS6000), then I connect to IBMLINK.
IND$FILE transfers are trival from there.  Of course I have that SNI
connection...


Robert Moskowitz
Chrysler Corp
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: University of Connecticut Computer Center
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Tue, 29 Dec 1992 14:32:59 EST
From:         John Hammond <MAILMNT@UCONNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Phone Number/Address of OpensConnect Systems (Mitek)

If anyone has the phone number and/or address of the company, I'd
appreciate it if you would reply to me privately.  I can't find it in
any of the sources I checked.  Thanks.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1992 10:15:24 EST
From:         "David J. Buechner" <CC100DB@GITVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: IBMLink
              17 Dec 1992 14:06:42 CET from <perezs@WORMS-EMH6.ARMY.MIL>

On Thu, 17 Dec 1992 14:06:42 CET Steve Perez said:
>
>As for commercial uses of the Internet....I have to admit that I didn't
>consider this. I can see how making use of the configurators, sales info and
>other marketing stuff could be seen as a violation of the spirit of Internet.
>But I don't see the Internet community getting up in arms over something
>like this (if I'm wrong, I'm sure someone will let me know).
>

I've heard this argument before, but I seem to remember some discussion
somewhere that would lead me to believe that IBMLINK access via Internet
wouldn't be considered "commercial use" of the net.

As I remember, the logic went like this:  If a vendor provided a service and
provided *several* means of accessing that service and *one* of those means was
via the Internet, then using the Internet doesn't count as "commercial" unless
the vendor charges *extra* for Internet access specifically.  Since we all
pay for the IBMLINK userids, as long as there is no extra charge for Internet
access it seems like IBM would be in the clear.  Of course in my mind the other
supporting argument is that there are several other vendors that provide
support via Internet such as Sun.


David Buechner
Manager, IBM Systems Support
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1992 08:28:06 CST
From:         Frank Vance <fvance@WG.WAII.COM>
Subject:      IBM TCP/IP inadequacies (was Usage of vector facility for TCP/IP?)
              825-4580" at Dec 22, 92 6:41 pm

Denis DeLaRoca 825-4580 writes:
>
> >  "You're selling me the fastest general available computer on the
> >   planet and it connects to my network via this straw?"...
>
> ...and that straw many times plain doesn't work. The current release
> of TCPIP continues to offer unsurmountable impediments to the develop-
> ment and deployment of client/server applications using concurrent
> tcp/ip services... it is an acknowledged problem and I am beginning
> to develop the suspicion that IBM doesn't give a hoot about these
> defficiencies.
>

I used to think that, but Bill R. convinced me they really do care, they
just don't have the resources.  So they try to focus on things they
think are most in demand from the customers.

My personal opinion is that the "typical" customer wants some crazy things,
like CICS sockets, the NDB system, and the like, none of which I have
use for.  Of course, that "typical" customer probably thinks my
requirement list (higher throughput, lower CPU consumption, better
Network Systems support) is strange too.

--
Frank Vance  +1.713.963.2426            Western Geophysical
fvance@airgun.wg.waii.com               10001 Richmond Avenue
Fax: +1.713.963.2758                    Houston, TX 77042   USA
From: ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Subject: Re: IBMLink
Date: 21 Dec 92 17:25:24 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England


Firstly, there is a difference between per-account support and services
available to everyone, even non-customers. Apple and Novell provide anonymous
FTP and Gopher sites, containing some patches, documentation etc. which are
accessible by anyone on the Internet. However, their customer-only services
(AppleLink and NetWire respectively) are _not_ accessible by Internet, only by
dialup. IBM also has services on the Internet, but at development labs, not
sales/support offices.

Secondly, while IBM would be allowed to offer password-protected access to
resources on a commercial TCP/IP network, I think most people on this list are
at academic or military sites, and hence are talking about using the research
Internet. My understanding is that its usage policy does not allow support of
formal commercial relationships, whether intra-business, inter-business, or
business-to-customer.

So, IBM _may_ be allowed to have a publicly-accessible service on the research
Internet listing APARs, PTFs, announcements etc. and other read-only
information; Apple's and Novell's services would be a precedent. But as soon
as they try to restrict it to existing customers only, by using passwords,
that becomes a commercial relationship.

This is just my informal understanding of how it works. But I guess that part
of the reason for keeping commercial, for-money business off the Internet is
precisely to avoid having to be too formal in the first place!
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1992 10:30:41 EST
From:         "Daniel M. Barton" <dmbarton@VNET.IBM.COM>
Subject:      4381 to RS/6000 connection

Ref:  Append to IBMTCP-L DIGEST (NETFORUM) at 15:14:09 on 92/12/21

> >
> >I have the block multiplexor adapter option for the RS/6000 connected to
> >a 4381. FAL fails with an assertion check when the statements referencing
> >this device are put into the profile.
> >
> >A call to the support center indicated the problem was that we are runing
> >FAL in V=V mode and that the CLAW mode of operation required V=R mode.
> >I can't find this in documantation. Is there anyone using the adapter
> >who has the experience or documentation to verify this? We are running
> >with a 10M virtual machine and can't afford to tie up that much real estate
> >on a 32M machine.
> >
> >We are currently running FAL 2.2 in XA mode with DIAG98. Everything seems
> >to be OK except for the CLAW mode failure.
> >
> >Any help would be appreciated.
>
> There is no need to run TCPIP in V=R region. I run TCPIP in a 16 M
> machine with MACHINE XA and support for CLAW. Its FAL 2.2 Base with
> ptf UN18074 and UN19085 applied. VM is VM/XA 2.1 SL 209. You may even
> run the TCPIP in MACHINE 370 when you set up the RIO370 area in the
> HCPSYS module.

Actually, from reading the original note, I believe Michael is not
running FAL first level, but is instead running FAL in a guest VM
host, running in a 10M region on a 32M machine.

So the problem is that you cannot run CLAW devices on a guest machine
without running V=R, this is due to the fact that VM does not yet
recognize the CLAW device type.

However, this support has been added to VM ESA 1.0/1.1 in APAR VM52625.
If you obtain this APAR and apply it to your system (assuming its
VM ESA), you will no longer have to run V=R.

Regards,

Daniel



=====-=====-=====-=====-=====-=====-=====-=====-=====-=====-=====-=====-=====

Daniel M. Barton                 Internet:  dmbarton@vnet.ibm.com
TCP/IP Development
IBM Research Triangle Park, NC  USA
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU