🚀 go-pugleaf

  Sorry this took so long to respond, but things have been rather busy
lately.  Several weeks ago I asked for information, the original message
is included again in case anyone missed it and might be able to help.
If I get any more responses I will post them also.


>  We have just recently started connecting the different system here to
>internet and are innterested in finding out how other sites had handled
>IBM mainframes.  We are particularly interested in knowing what hardware
>and software has been used, and the advantages and disadvantages of each.
>TCP/IP, Ethernet, and DECNET are the main protocol we are interested in.
>Please respond directly to me, as I am not on all of these lists.

  These are most of the responses which I received.

                                 Greg Swartwout

****
From:         Bob Blackmun <ACC00RRB@UNCCVM>

From our reading of comments on various lists, the IBM TCP/IP for VM
software and the IBM 8232 to provide the channel-to-Ethernet
hardware connection seem to be the consensus.
****
From:         Michael Hebgen <$02@DHDURZ1>

Like you  we are just  in the process  of connecting our  IBM mainframes
running VM  and MVS to  Internet via Ethernet-TCP/IP. Because  there are
just a  few offers  for the MVS  site we have  selected the  ACS9310 box
from Synelec,  which runs on  the VM site  with the IBM  TCP/IP software
and on the MVS site with  software provided from Synelec. The ACS-box is
physically  connected to  the VM  machine  (4381) and  we try  to get  a
connection to a MAC  workstation, the box for the MVS  site is on order.
Like you  we are interested in  this survey, especially in  Gateways for
mapping the TCP/IP  applications like SMTP mail  to EARN/BITNET applica-
tions and vice versa. Could you please forward information on this topic
if you receive one.
Thanks and regards, Michael
****
From:         Peter Coleman <PCOLEMAN@MCMVM1>

At McMaster we currently use 2 Bridge CS100's to connect ethernet
to our IBM Hosts.  Mail is transferred via a BSC line from a Vax using
JNET.  We also have a DEC SNA Gateway which only talks to MVS.

We have now signed a contract with IBM for an 8232 and hope to replace
all Vax and Ethernet connections with it. This means that we run the
5798-FAL software in VM.  This set up also provides us with the ability
to let 3270 users connect from VM via ethernet to our Vaxes or using a
gateway CS100 to Datapac and other external services.  We use a 3Com
ethernet and the 8232 will require a 3-Com card to attached to
ethernet.  Our main ethernet uses fibre.

        Peter Coleman
****
From:         Nick Gimbrone <NJG@CornellA>

We find the IBM 5798-FAL (TCP/IP product for VM) to be great. Check
out the comments on the IBMTCP-L@CUNYVM list. The only possible current
problem is the IBM network attachment performance (better than before,
but still not up to what you can do with 3rd party vendor hardware).
However, there are drivers for the 3rd party vendor hardware, so it
really is great stuff. :-)
****
From: nowicki@Sun.COM (Bill Nowicki)

Sun sells a product called CA3270 that allows a Sun to attach to an
IBM Channel.  We use these to talk to our mainframes, since of course
we trust our own TCP and DECnet software.  That is, you plug one of these
into a 3/150 or 3/180, 4/280, etc. and replicate depending on load.
Then run the TCP and DECnet on the Sun to act as a front end - Sun cycles
are much chaper than 3090 cycles.

    -- WIN
****
From: mqh@crnlthry.BITNET (Mike Hojnowski)

For our VM systems, we use IBMs TCP/IP Program Offering (5798-FAL).
There is a mailing list for that product (IBMTCP-L@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU).
If you would like more information, feel free to contact me.

Mike Hojnowski
Network System Programmer
Cornell University
****
From: ames!pacbell!belltec!lance@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Return-Path: <ames!pacbell!belltec!lance>

An ex-coworker of mine has ported Berkeley 4.3 TCP to Amdahl UNIX 5.2.
He is Rob Warnock in San Mateo, California.