🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <8240001@hp-lsd.COS.HP.COM>, harmon@hp-lsd.COS.HP.COM (Bruce
Harmon) writes:
> 
> 
> I may be interested in making the transition from Wollongong's
> TCP/IP (VMS hosted) to the new DEC product.  I also need two-way
> NFS support VMS to/from a non-DEC Unix platform.  Does anyone
> out there have any experience with the new DEC TCP/IP product
> that he/she would like to share.
> 
> Areas of particular interest are the use of sockets, ftp, and NFS.
> Performance and price relative to the Wollongong product would
> be interesting.

I use the product within DEC. I have used the Wollongong product in the past.
I prefer the DEC product.

The socket implementation is what is used for providing the TCP/IP transport
for the DECwindows VMS implementation. So, You can assume that the AF_INTERNET
transport has been very well exercised. It all works like you would hope it
would, just as Berkley designed it.

The ftp program is very simular to other ftp implementations, probably because
the RFC doesn't leave much room for interpretation. You won't be loosing
anything
by using the DEC flavor.

NFS under VMS works reasonably. There are a few gotchas, especially if you are
trying to use it in a mixed access (VMS/*ix) environment. In this case, file
names and other nits need to use the most common method. There is however a
mode which if you are only using *ix will eliminate many of these gotchas.

I suggest the change, if for no other reason that the third party products will
likely break  when DECnet phase V becomes available (I can't really say
anything
more).

- Marc (An unbiased contract software hacker)

===========================================================================
Marc Evans - WB1GRH - evans@decvax.DEC.COM  | Synergytics     (603)635-8876
     Unix/X-window Software Contractor      | 21 Hinds Ln, Pelham, NH 03076
===========================================================================