HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: morita@tornade.rikei.co.jp (Toru Morita)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
Subject: about CAP on Ultrix 4.2.
Date: 18 Nov 92 08:59:55 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Internet

Does anyone have experience running CAP on Ultrix. I have a 5000/
200 running Ultrix 4.2, and I'm having trouble installing CAP.
Which CAP's patch level is 75.  I think that level dose not support
the DEC/Ultrix 4.2.  Any help out there?
From: Michel.Davidoff@sonoma.edu (Michel Davidoff)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
Subject: Re: AppleTalk and a IBM 386SX
Date: 17 Nov 92 16:57:15 GMT
Organization: Sonoma state university

In article <Bxtuso.Au8@max.physics.sunysb.edu> jnunez@libws3.ic.sunysb.edu (Juan Nunez) writes:
>Subject: AppleTalk and a IBM 386SX
>From: jnunez@libws3.ic.sunysb.edu (Juan Nunez)
>Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 21:10:00 GMT
>
>Is there anyway to connect a IBM to Appletalk...just so we can keep the second laser printer connected to the network instead on just having it on the IBM.
>We've tried the switchbox but employees forget to switch back to Appletalk.
>Thank You 
>jnunez@ic.sunysb.edu
Yes, You needto get a card and the software.
You may choose to look at Farallon PhoneNet

Thank You
Michel Davidoff
E-Mail Michel.Davidoff@Sonoma.edu
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
From: resnick@cogsci.uiuc.edu (Pete Resnick)
Subject: Re: CLAIM: Seed Routers are not Nodes
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 00:50:16 GMT


denny@alisa.com (Bob Denny) writes:

>I would like to add one thing. By making all of your routers seed routers,
>you are asking for trouble. Why not make _none_ of them seed routers? If
>they are all seed routers, you must set each one of them up manually so as
>to be SURE they have the correct data when they are brought on line. Well,
>if you have to do that, why even use seed routing? 

First of all, you can't make *none* of them seed routers. You *must*
have at least one seed router on every network. According to Inside
AppleTalk, if you come up as a non-seed router and there are no RTMPs
on the net, then you don't route. Period. Having all routers seed
routers is only a problem if you constantly are changing network
numbers, which is something that shouldn't be going on anyway. I don't
understand what you mean by "What's the point of seed routers?"

Second, I am a group administrators for one of the networks that Chris
Gressley manages here at Beckman, and I can tell you that I want *all*
of her routers to be seed routers! If some bozo in the building
decides to throw a Gatorbox on his net with *my* network number on his
net and makes it a seed router, the next time we have a power failure
I want his net to be broken, not mine.

>The more seed routers you have, the more trouble you are asking
>for. Having routers seed other seed routers is akin to bringing too
much
>uranium together too close.

I don't get this. All routers are able to "seed" (i.e. give network
configuration information to) other routers once they are up and
running. Being able to "seed" is not what makes it a seed router; it's
that you have the network information pre-configured that makes you a
seed router. Having more than one seed router on a network works
perfectly, unless you have conflicting network numbers, in which case
your net is broken and won't work anyway.

Well, it's also a problem if your routers don't do node aquisition
correctly....

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick             (...so what is a mojo, and why would one be rising?)
Graduate assistant - Philosophy Department, Gregory Hall, UIUC
System manager - Cognitive Science Group, Beckman Institute, UIUC
Internet: resnick@cogsci.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
From: chris@ph-meter.beckman.uiuc.edu (Chris Gressley)
Subject: Re: CLAIM: Seed Routers are not Nodes
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 23:00:01 GMT

winders@aux.support.apple.com (Scott Winders) writes:

>2. All AppleTalk nodes need to aquire their network address dynamically.
>There are no if, ands, or butts on this particular question. If the
>network addresses are assigned statically, you may have the problem you
>describe with your two seed routers.

I heard back from my developer.  He now concedes that a router is a
node, but says that all 'nodes' are not alike.  He says that router
nodes behave differently from nonrouter nodes in some cases.  Because
routers have port descriptors, seed routers HAVE to obtain their
network and node numbers statically.  The developer's opinion is that
this is one of the inconsistencies in Inside AppleTalk, and that the
routers follow the AppleTalk specs "to the letter".  The developer
tells me that I can only bring up one seed router per network.  And if
I really want to have more than one seed router on a single network,
then I have to bring up the other routers as nonseed, let the router
dynamically obtain a node number, then bring the router up as a seed
router.

Of course this doesn't take into account the situation where 

	1) a seed router goes down 
	2) another node is turned on for the first time on the network 
	3) the new node obtains the seed router's node number 
	4) the seed router comes back up
	5) and there now exists a node number conflict.

What else can I tell my developer to convince him that he is wrong?

Thanks.

Chris
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
Subject: CAP: Banner printing problems
From: thetroll@rata.vuw.ac.nz (The Troll)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 02:58:54 GMT
Organization: Computing Serv. Ctr, Victoria Uni., Wellington, New Zealand

I have just built cap60 patch level 125 on our DEC 5400 running Ultrix 4.2
and am experiencing problems with banner pages. 

What happens normally is that the banner program papof gets called before a
print job is printed and creates a file called .banner which is then
picked up by papif and printed before the standard input. 

This all worked swimingly for patch level 75. Now what happens is that the
contents of the .banner file is sent to the printer, but when it comes to
try sending the actual file to the printer it fails with an error code of
-1079 (tooManyReq) according to the documentation this error should
*never* occur!

Has anyone else seen this problem? Or am I alone? A dump of the errorlog
from papif is appended below. 

BTW we are running pure iptalk, no uab and no ethertalk stuff. 

Any help that people can give on this would be appreciated...

papif: Starting job for root@rata.vuw.ac.nz at Mon Nov 23 15:09:23 1992 on printer CSC Upstairs ONLY:LaserWriter@csc
pap: open return from remote: 0
pap: connection 83 opened
pap: starting timeout on PAP socket 480
pap: papwrite: cno 0, datasize 73, eof no
pap: pwr entry with 73 bytes
pap: papread called: cno 0
pap: prr entry on cno 0, seq 2
pap: Seq 1, expected 0
pap: sending packet (pap 1, atp 10999)
pap: Seq 2, expected 2
pap: papwrite: cno 0, datasize 2410, eof no
pap: pwr entry with 2410 bytes
pap: sending packet (pap 2, atp 11255)
pap: papwrite: cno 0, datasize 41, eof yes
pap: pwr entry with 41 bytes
pap: EOF SET
pap: papread called: cno 0
pap: papwrite: cno 0, datasize 73, eof no
papif: sendfile: 1st PAPWrite: call error -1097
pap: papclose: cno 0
pap: Seq 3, expected 3
pap: sending packet (pap 3, atp 11511)
pap: cancel timeout on PAP socket
pap: readdone cancelling ttimer!
pap: cancel timeout on PAP socket
/usr/local/etc/lpd: tlaser- Print_filter:Filter '/usr/local/lib/lpdfilters/general_tlaser -Ptlaser -w94 -l75 -x0 -y0 -c -CZ -J../cscps/bat.01 -nroot -hrata.vuw.ac.nz -Fl /usr/var/spool/lpd/tlaser/acct' Retry wanted at Mon Nov 23 15:09:28 1992





--
Alex Heatley                                Computing Services Centre
Domain: Alex.Heatley@vuw.ac.nz              Victoria University of Wellington
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
Subject: Re: CLAIM: Seed Routers are not Nodes
From: Jerrod T. Carter <Jerrod@Lilly.Com>
Date: 20 Nov 92 13:10:03 EST
Distribution: world,local
Organization: Eli Lilly & Company
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d11X-XXMessage-ID: <A732942B0C010103@venus.d46.lilly.com>X-XXDate: Fri, 20 Nov 92 18:10:03 GMTLines: 31

Chris Gressley, chris@ph-meter.beckman.uiuc.edu writes:
>nodes behave differently from nonrouter nodes in some cases.  Because
>routers have port descriptors, seed routers HAVE to obtain their
>network and node numbers statically.  The developer's opinion is that
>this is one of the inconsistencies in Inside AppleTalk, and that the
>routers follow the AppleTalk specs "to the letter".  The developer
>tells me that I can only bring up one seed router per network.  And if
>I really want to have more than one seed router on a single network,
>then I have to bring up the other routers as nonseed, let the router
>dynamically obtain a node number, then bring the router up as a seed
>router.
>
>Of course this doesn't take into account the situation where 
>
>	1) a seed router goes down 
>	2) another node is turned on for the first time on the network 
>	3) the new node obtains the seed router's node number 
>	4) the seed router comes back up
>	5) and there now exists a node number conflict.
>
>What else can I tell my developer to convince him that he is wrong?

This guy is just wrong. I haven't had experience with every type of
router, but none that I know of do this. They HAVE to obtain their node
number dynamically. Network numbers do have to be obtained statically
for seed routers, but NOT the node numbers. For instance, I used to
have more than ten routers that were seed routers for our local
Ethertalk network. We are using Shiva and Wellfleet for our routers.
Who are you using? I'd like to steer clear of these guys.

jerrod
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
From: Luis Miguel Quinta <lquinta@animal.inescn.pt>
Subject: Addressing AppleTalk Networks
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A7304FB7AA01F690@mac4.inescn.pt>
X-Xxdate: Wed, 18 Nov 92 19:53:27 GMT
Organization: INESC Porto
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 20:25:50 GMT

Hi everyone!

I know this subject was already discussed here but I still have any
doubts there I'd like to put here.
I about to join several building AppleTalks but, before that, I'm
planning to readdress all the networks.
I'm following the idea given in Apple Internet Router manual of giving
intelligent addresses to networks. Apparently, and by the way they
present the problem on the book, everything is real simple however, I
just starting to guess a great number of possible exceptions to my
addressing rules. The good solution I've seen at the beginning is now
becoming an head hake.

On your experience of addressing multiple networks what is the best
advise you can give me ?
Should I define a Phase II net range at the begging of the each building
addresses table and reserve numbers sequentially for LocalTalks without
trying to store information like floor and room number, type of network,
etc. ?
Does anyone of you see disadvantages on using non sequential LT addrs ?
What can be the real problems of using large PhaseII net ranges for
ethertalk networks ?
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: Locks, CAP, and NFS Patches
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
	<1e9eqcINNmv7@pith.uoregon.edu>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 03:21:00 GMT

JQ> == JQ Johnson <jqj@duff.uoregon.edu> 

 JQ> For SunOS 4.1.1 you need at least the "rpc.lockd jumbo patch", 100075-06. 

I think this one's up to version 09 already.  (Sun and lockd...)

Try that and see if it helps.  (100075-xx, where xx is the version number).
--
Christopher K. Davis      | ``Usenet seems to run much like the Kif (or,
<ckd@eff.org>   EFF #14   |   for the TV generation, Klingon) high command.
System Administrator, EFF |   Whoever takes action and can be heard wins.''
+1 617 864 0665  [CKD1]   |   --Peter da Silva <peter@ferranti.com>
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
From: bill@cognet.ucla.edu (William M. Eldridge)
Subject: Re: looking for CHEAP Mac ethernet cards
Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Research Program
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 00:40:13 GMT


>>I installed some Asante LC ethernet cards with the 4.0 driver that shipped
>>with them.  I had several occasions where they just locked the machine up
>>and flooded the ethernet with traffic.  I verified this by looking at the
>>activity light on another machine.  I ftp'd the 4.1 drivers and installed
>>them and have had a lot less problems since and haven't flooded the network
>>with traffic once :-).  They seem to be working fine now.  I've only had a
>>couple of lockups since and I'm not sure that the cards are at fault for
>>those.

>I would try using the Apple drivers instead of the Asante drivers
>(yes, they work.) The Asante drivers have some conflicts with MacTCP
>that the Apple drivers don't.

Asante pretty well acknowledged their problems with the LC, and
did seem to be responsive in getting out new drivers (even giving
out an ftp site where you can download it).

Where can I get the Apple drivers?  Do these work with Nuvotech
cards as well?

Bill
-- 
{{{{ bill eldridge           310-206-3960                x                }}}}
{{{{ bill@cognet.ucla.edu    310-206-3987 fax           xxx              }}}}
{{{{ ~more, ~better, ~faster [80's motto]                x              }}}}
{{{{ ~hot, ~toxic, and ~shallow [90's motto]                              }}}}
From: montaron@eurecom.fr (Laurent Montaron)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
Subject: AppleTalk Internet Router
Keywords: Appletalk, Nets, Internet
Date: 11 Nov 92 14:50:35 GMT
Organization: Institut Eurecom, Sophia Antipolis

We wrote a software able to connect distant AppleTalk networks. It has been
successfully tested between several Universities in France.

With it, you may connect two or more Ethertalk nets. All you have to do
is to write a simple network numbers file, to avoid AppleTalk net numbers
conflicts, and run the soft on any Unix machine located on same Ethernet
cable as one of your Appletalk routers. Ten minutes should be enough to
configure it. It can also be used as an ordinary Appletalk router, for
instance on a Sun4 with two Ethernet devices.

Hardware requirements:
A Unix machine with the /dev/nit device, for instance any sun4 on sparc station.

Software requirements:
GCC 2.2.2

The package is an ordinary .tar.Z file, with installation guide and manpages
included.

I would be interested in having it tested on some foreign sites. Just send
me some mail. 

The software is also able to export a KIP network, but you may not see the foreign
nets from inside the KIP network, unless you modify your local atalkatab file.



-- 
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
+    /    / /           / TM..........+ montaron@poly.polytechnique.fr +
+   /    / /___        /___ ..........+ montaron@inf.enst.fr           +
+  /    / /   / /   / /   / ..........+ montaron@eurecom.fr            +
+ /____/ /___/ /___/ /   /  ..........+--------------------------------+
+...........................Unlimited Corporation......................+
+......................................................................+
+........."Belgian submarines have nothing to do in aquariums".........+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: Mark.R.Valence@dartmouth.edu (Mark R. Valence)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
Subject: Re: RTMP question
Date: 16 Nov 92 22:24:57 GMT
 <1e605dINN44o@roche.csl.sri.com>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <1e605dINN44o@roche.csl.sri.com>
dstine@cisco.com (David Stine) writes:
> 
> Then there is the flip side of the coin: by switching the value for A-ROUTER
> with every update, you effect a sort of "load sharing" between the routers
> present on a cable.

Actually, this does not effect load sharing necessarily.  It will
happen if the two routers are out of phase (sending RTMP broadcasts
five seconds apart).  As the routers do not negotiate the timings of
these broadcasts, there is a likely chance that the broadcasts will be
closer together.  Let's say there are two routers A and B on a net
(LocalTalk).  If router A sends out an RTMP bcast, and then router B
sends one out 1 second later, then router B will get 90% of the traffic
on that net (from the non-router machines).

> Which is better? I'm sure we can find arguments in favor of both.
> 
> dsa
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
From: fredette@athena.mit.edu (Matthew H Fredette)
Subject: IP over AppleTalk
Keywords: IP, tunneling
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 17:00:22 GMT

Hi all,
 
  We're thinking about asking the campus Information Services department
to give our house a wire into the net, which apparently they will do for a
modest fee :).  Now, as many of us in the house already use a small LocalTalk
network to do some file sharing and play net games, it would be nice just
to shift the Ethernet line coming in down to the LocalTalk, probably using
an IBM PC, since we have an unused one and I know how to program it.  Now, the
question is, where can I get specs on how to encapsulate IP in the AppleTalk 
packet?  Really all I need is the spec, as I've done some pretty heavy
AppleTalk work myself in the past.  Any clues would be greatly appreciated,
and responses by mail are also greatly preferred.  

Thanks!

Matt


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matt Fredette - internet: fredette@athena.mit.edu
"Coming quickly to terms with all expression laid/
 Emotion revealed as the Ocean maid/
 As the movement regained and regarded both the same/
 All complete in the sight of Seas of Life with you."  Yes, "And you and I"
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
From: yoko@research.nj.nec.com (Yoko Ozawa)
Subject: Re: CAP6.0 pl126 with Sys7 and Sys6? (printer list problem)
Originator: yoko@research.nj.nec.com
Organization: NEC Research Institute
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 17:36:24 GMT

I love this group!  I came in this morning and found emailed responses
to my question already. (If only life was as easy -- sigh).  
Here's the summary for anyone else who may be interested:

The gist of my question was --

In article <1992Nov16.233222.10433@research.nj.nec.com> yoko@research.nj.nec.com (Yoko Ozawa) writes:
... 
YO> The CAP is running on a Sun and everything seemed fine [on System 7]
...
YO> Instead of giving us a beautifully sorted printer list, the System 6
YO> Chooser only provides a partial list (only 10 instead of ~20 printers)
YO> in random order.

***********
In response
***********

Christopher Davis <ckd@eff.org> wrote --

CKD> The System 6 Chooser has a rather, um, undersized buffer.  As you
CKD> have found out the hard way.  Live with it or upgrade...

Tom Ivar Helbekkmo <tih@barsoom.nhh.no> wrote --

TIH> That's the System 6 Chooser.  It works that way...  I doesn't sort
TIH> its lists, and it has only a small buffer for the service info, so
TIH> with many services and/or long service names, you won't see all of
TIH> them.  As a workaround, the user can open the Chooser,  scroll through
TIH> to the bottom of the list, and, if the wanted service is not found,
TIH> then wait.  New services seen will be added to the bottom of the
TIH> list, making it possible to scroll further down.  Repetition will
TIH> happen, but after a while (longer if you'e in a hurry, of course),
TIH> the needed service will show up.
TIH> 
TIH> Shorter service names will help, of course.
TIH> 
TIH> On the other hand, you might want to upgrade to 7...  :-)

I tried Tom's suggestion and the missing printers appeared (after a
few seconds each, and much repetition of the scroll-down-and-wait
procedure).  Goes to show you ... you can never be too impatient!  ;-)
Our System Administrator is playing with Zones now to see if this
would help to shorten the service list.

Obviously, as both Chris and Tom recommended, upgrading to System 7 is
the BEST way to eliminate the problem.  With the System 7 users
showing off the additional features, there IS a growing
"bite-the-bullet" sentiment in the user community.  That, and the fact
the 7.1 is already here, so one version below (7.0.1) doesn't seem as
bad -- can't be TOO backward, can we?  (Wish me luck!)

Thanks to you both!!!


-- 
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Yoko Ozawa             : NEC Research Institute, Inc.: yoko@research.nj.nec.com
Technical Administrator: 4 Independence Way          : 609 951-2511 (voice)
......................:.Princeton, NJ 08540.........:.609 951-2480 (fax ).....
From: AHUHTIN@hut.fi (Arttu Huhtiniemi)
Subject: CAP and Netware for Mac
Organization: Graafisen Tekniikan Laboratorio, HUT
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 12:36:51 GMT


I am having trouble printing to a IBM 4029 PS 40 printer via papif and 
a Netware server. From Macintoshes the printing works OK, but when i try to
use papif the printing hangs after 49 bytes have been spooled to the 
server. The bytes can be seen at the server using PCONSOLE.

Has anyone solved this problem?

I am using CAP 6.0 pl 126 with no ouput filter.
Here is my printcap entry:


ibm|ps|postscript:\
	:lp=/dev/ps:\
	:sd=/usr/spool/lpd/ibm:\
	:pl#72:pw#85:\
	:sf:lw=/usr/adm/ibm-errs:\
	:sf=/usr/adm/ibm.acct:\
	:if=/usr/local/cap/ibm:


- Arttu Huhtinemi
- System Manager
- Laboratory of Graphics Arts
- Helsinki University of Technology
From: wcc@cup.portal.com (wcc - usa)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
Subject: Re: CLAIM: Seed Routers are not Nodes
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 16:46:18 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <winders-191192110001@macwinders.support.apple.com>
  <chris.722214001@ph-meter.beckman.uiuc.edu>

>>winders@aux.support.apple.com (Scott Winders) writes:

>>2. All AppleTalk nodes need to aquire their network address dynamically.
>>There are no if, ands, or butts on this particular question. If the
>>network addresses are assigned statically, you may have the problem you
>>describe with your two seed routers.

>I heard back from my developer.  He now concedes that a router is a
>node, but says that all 'nodes' are not alike.  He says that router
>nodes behave differently from nonrouter nodes in some cases.  Because
>routers have port descriptors, seed routers HAVE to obtain their
>network and node numbers statically.
Maybe HIS seed router.......  What it should do is pick a node number,
test the net to see if it is NOT taken and then use it.  If the number is
taken then it MUST choose another node number.

>  The developer's opinion is that
>this is one of the inconsistencies in Inside AppleTalk, and that the
>routers follow the AppleTalk specs "to the letter". 
 Does it really ??????

>The developer
>tells me that I can only bring up one seed router per network.  And if
>I really want to have more than one seed router on a single network,
>then I have to bring up the other routers as nonseed, let the router
>dynamically obtain a node number, then bring the router up as a seed
>router.
You can have as many "SEED" routers on a network as you want - As long as
the network numbers (& zone names/lists) match on all connecting networks.

>Of course this doesn't take into account the situation where 

>	1) a seed router goes down 
>	2) another node is turned on for the first time on the network 
>	3) the new node obtains the seed router's node number 
>	4) the seed router comes back up
>	5) and there now exists a node number conflict.
Any router, once running, becomes a SEED router.  Whether it started as
a SEED or whether it obtained it's network info from another source
is irrelevant. Once it is running it is able to inform other networks
of Zone/Network info.  So if your SEED router goes down - big deal - the
network still exists -(you just can't route through the broken router -
obviously).  Other routers will still continue to supply network #'s &
zone info to inquiring nodes.  If the Seed router comes back online and
it's old node number is taken - choose another...  simple !

>What else can I tell my developer to convince him that he is wrong?
The best way to convince him that he is wrong is to not buy their product.
Go else where and get good reliable support ;-)

>Chris
Darryl.
Webster Computers


Usual disclaimers apply !!!.
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk