🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Added.0Xp8g2y00Ui383x08C@andrew.cmu.edu>, RSILVERMAN@EAGLE.WESLEYAN.EDU (Richard Silverman) writes:
> >> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 89 15:42 EDT From:
> >> Sorry if this question has been asked repeatedly, or is too
> >> obvious, but: Can a Mac II with an EtherNet card such as EtherPort II
> >> or EtherTalk etc. serve as a bridge for the rest of a local-talk
> >> network, or must I use a FastPath or similar box?
> 
> 	I can see no reason why you couldn't do that; I just don't know of
> anyone who has actually written the code.  However, I don't see that it would
> save you money; even the most expensive FastPath is around $2700; the Mac
> II alone is more than that, without the Ethernet card.  And once you set it
> up as a gateway, it'll be useless for anything else.  Or is there something
> about the situation I'm not seeing?
  I'd like to think that this is where the MultiFinder or true multiprocessing
in future versions of the Mac OS can come into use.  There are a couple of 
programs that would be nice to have:  this proposed appletalk to ethernet 
gateway, GatePost, a program that takes data from the serial port and routes
in onto appletalk, and to some extent file servers like TOPS or AppleShare.
These are programs that really aren't best run (even if they can be) in the 
background on a normal users machine, but which don't require a completely
dedicated Mac.  But why make the programs capable of running in MultiFinder
or multiprocessing mode.  Certainly a Mac II (if not IIx or future '030 machine)
could handle taks like this.  I realize the reason Apple requires a dedicated
server for AppleShare, but I'd like to think that other server or gateway
programs could also run on the machine at the same time.

						Jeff White
						Drexel University - ECE Dept.
						rutgers!bpa!drexel!jeff