Hi,
Does anyone on this friggin list LOL LOL own a
Northstar Dimension? I'd like to know it's dimensions
(how quaint) and how much it weighs. I got a line on a
few, and want to help the dude get a carton for it and
all. Thanks so much.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
Your server (the VAX 4000-200) does have to be running DECnet. Er no it
doesn't and isn't. I attended a 1976 DEC engineering meeting where this
was discussed. It just my personal memory has a long access time.
Download and run was around long before Decnet was thought of.
There's no Decnet or any other normal network involved. I am also
beginning to suspect that the whole cluster thing is another GRH (Giant
Red Herring) Whats actually happening is an old diagnostic tool is being
used to download and run a program on a remote system to exclude the
disk drives from the test.
Rod Smallwood
-----Original Message-----
From: cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org
[mailto:cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Antonio Carlini
Sent: 03 June 2007 17:31
To: 'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts'
Subject: RE: Repairing the damage.
>I am beginning to wonder if everybody is talking and nobody is
>listening.
>The target machine is not running anything except low level firmware
That's how it works.
>The server has to respond to the request (Remember No Decnet and No
>Tcpip available) somehow or other.
Your server (the VAX 4000-200) does have to be running DECnet. MOP is
not technically part of DECnet but the MOP-handling software is started
as part of DECnet. (Actually, there is a another way with more recent
versions of OpenVMS, using the LANACP stuff but I assume you haven't
done this).
Maybe I've missed a message or to, but does your VAX 4000-200 have
DECnet (either Phase IV or DECnet-Plus) installed and running? It would
be very unusual if it didn't, but it is possible to install without it.
Antonio
arcarlini at iee.org
Works marginally on certain limited hardware (IP30, IP22, IP32,
IP27(Sort of)) NetBSD has slightly better hardware support. Support for
graphics is marginal at best (Newport and some IMPACT).
Go with IRIX, you'll be happier.
>
>Subject: Re: New pcb design for S-100 prototype board available
> From: Dan <ragooman at comcast.net>
> Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 00:33:41 -0400
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only <cctech at classiccmp.org>
>
>Roy,
>
>Thanks for the input. I was thinking about including one with vertical
>rows and one with horizontal rows. That way you can have some flexibility.
>
>One of the recent options for the onboard power supply was to use a low
>dropout voltage regulator. This allowed boards to be installed in S-100
>systems which contained either the original S-100 specs or the IEEE-696
>specs. The latter have a lower power supply voltage on the
>backplane(translates to lower power consumption) which an ordinary 7805
>voltage regulator can't accept. These require at least a 10+ volts on
>the backplane just to get a regulated 5V output. The LO voltage
>regulators need only about 7V input to get a regulated 5v output.
Wrong data. The 7805/lm309/lm323 reguire only 8V. All of the older
3 terminal regulators must have a 2.7V differential to regulate.
The yabut, most of the S100 supplies were so poorly filtered that
at any load the ripple voltage was excessive and didn't meet the minimum
of 8V at the bottom of the ripple trough. A good example of that
was the early Altair 8800 before MITS upgraded the transformer.
With a 8A load the DC votage sat at 8.3V but the lowest voltage was
7.1V due to the AC ripple. Needless to say that ripple fould it's
way to the 5V rail as the regualtor didn't have enough head room to
regulate. The fix was a higher voltage transformer or much heaftier
filter caps or both.
>
>The original backplanes were only 2 layer and couldn't handle the
>current capacity. The local(distributed) voltage regulators were the
>only option. You need at least a 4 or 6 layer backplane with a separate
>copper layer for each voltage and then a layer for ground to have enough
>copper for all that current.
Seals made a decent proto card. Horizontally gridded for power, up to
four regulator pads one of which was for +12 (7812), plated though holes
both hole per pad and for power gridding (two sides).
Allison
>=Dan
>
>[ My Corner of Cyberspace http://ragooman.home.comcast.net/ ]
>
>
>
>Roy J. Tellason wrote:
>> Hmm, good question!
>>
>> I have currently only two S-100 systems, a Cromemco System 3 with problems in
>> the PersSci drive. The floppy that was in the drive when I got it had been
>> in there and run so long that you could see clearly through the track zero
>> location. :-) I have some data on this stuff somewhere, and it appears
>> that they're using incandescent bulbs for such stuff as index sensors and
>> such? And the Imsai, here.
>>
>> Got a Vector S-100 backplane too, that I've started to build, only I lack a
>> few parts. Most importantly the S-100 connectors themselves. :-(
>>
>> I also have a couple of prototyping cards, I *think* they're Vector as well,
>> but haven't done anything with 'em yet to come up with a preference. I guess
>> vertical rows makes more sense in terms of air flow for heat dissipation?
>> That for the heatsinks for sure, though a lot of systems I saw mention of
>> later on in the popular period for S-100 seemed to be inclined to put a
>> regulated switching power supply in place and simply jumper across the
>> regulator positions. I dunno, to me the distributed approach always made a
>> lot of sense.
>>
>>
************************************** Episode 1
***********************************
This is as far as I got to this morning:
I am beginning to wonder if everybody is talking and nobody is
listening.
************************************************************************
***************
* The target machine is not running anything except low level firmware
!!! *
* No DECNet No Tcpip No VMS - Nothing !!!! (It can't-disk drives
inoperable) *
************************************************************************
***************
However after wading around in sea of online manuals I think am
beginning to find out the things they don't tell you.
Given that there has to be some form of communication between the Boot
server and the target. Then what's left is this MOP thing.
As you can specify that the boot device is the ethernet adaptor (EZA0:
in this case) when you try to boot from the target system it must be
sending out some kind of request packet with an ID attached. It can't be
a node name or an IP address. There's no way tell it what they are!!
What it does know, is its MAC address which is hard encoded into the
interface.
The server has to respond to the request (Remember No Decnet and No
Tcpip available) somehow or other.
So what is it that runs on the server does not use Decnet or Tcpip and
can load images into the target machine?
We can rule out @SYS$MANAGER:CLUSTER_CONFIG_LAN which expects Decnet and
screw's up TCPWARE.
I'm out of ideas at this point.
Rod Smallwood
************************************** Episode 2
***********************************
More wading around in on line manuals ...
Then some light ....
The key is a program called LANCP invoked as $MCR LANCP
It allows you to associate a name say VAX300 with a MAC address and add
it to a database.
To do this it uses the DEFINE command.
DEFINE NODE VAX300/ADDRESS=08-00-2B-18-BB-D0/FILE=APB_061.EXE
This refered to as a NODE. Now the Boot server knows about the target
machine and its MAC Address.
So far so good....
Now for the other half of the puzzle. How does the boot server listen
for requests.
Well there's an executable program call LANACP that is invoked by
running LAN$STARTUP.COM
Once running it services boot requests from across the network.
It uses the data from the data base maintained by LANCP.
It gives progress messages when a Node tries to boot.
... and of course it works up to the point where it does not recognise
the file name to down load (I have not found out what thats called yet)
So..
1. Hands up all of you who knew this and did not mention it. -
Shame on you!!!
2. Hands up all of you that did not know this - Well, now you
do!!
3. For MOP read LANACP.
4. Whats the name of the file to be downloaded from boot server
to target to get VMS running on the target.?
Lessons
1. Never run a .COM file before looking to see what it
does.
2. Try and work out what needs to happen first.
Rod Smallwood
>
>Subject: Re: New pcb design for S-100 prototype board available
> From: woodelf <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca>
> Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 11:39:32 -0600
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
>
>Al Kossow wrote:
>>
>> If you are doing a design with on-board regulators in the 21st
>> century, why not use integrated switching rather than linear
>> regulators?
>>
>> Heat dissipation will be MUCH lower if you do this.
the real problem was NOT the heat from the regulators but the
heat from the rest of the board. 8K of 2102 memory produces
a lot of heat and a box with 8 of them needed a good set of fans
to move that heat.
FYI: even the 2102LP parts were around 50mA each (512 *.05=25.6W)
and the more common parts were around 80-100mA. Add regulators and
that could easily total 40-60W of heat. Add a few IO, Floppy card
and CPU and now your cooking. If the drives are in the box add
fans accoringly.
Dont forget the average 8V bus PSU was (in a decent box) rated to
deliver that voltage at 25A (125W of 5V alone). Some boxes like
the Compupro and Intergrand had CVCC transformers that typically ran
hot as well. So the average S100 grate needed to move between 100
for a small system to as much as 500W of heat.
>True, but with the advent modern chips like CMOS I see that
>power consumption less of a problem. Is the proto-board
>for 8 bit S-100 or 16 bit S-100 as I remember some where the buss
>was upgraded for 16 bit processors? ( Can you say INTEL ? )
>If it where not for that fact, having De-codeing and buffer chips
>laid out as that would save some space rather than in the pro-type
>area.
CMOS will help, denser memories (even back then) really help.
Allison
>
>
>Subject: RE: New pcb design for S-100 prototype board available
> From: "Rod Smallwood" <RodSmallwood at mail.ediconsulting.co.uk>
> Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 15:20:47 +0100
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org>
>
>Hi
> Thanks for the positive feed back. Needless to say like all standards
>S100 had different versions.
>For example the Northstar Horizion had some active components on the
>mother board.
The fact that the mother board had IO on it was a savings of a card or two
but made NO difference to S100 standards. The variation of standards
were around timing, use of some specific pins, how memory extension (>64k)
was done and the troublesome DMA.
>However if we look at a basic passive (other than power) back plane.
>What are the potential problems? Firstly the connectors are they
>available? They had two rows of fifty connections.
>Spacing pin to pin .125in. Mother board was thicker than the usual 1/16
>in for rigidity possibily 3/32 in.
>Card guides pretty standard but how high? Then the metalwork supporting
>the card guides.
Generally backplanes were passive and interchangeable excluding mechanical
differences that were generally small. Some however included termination
and that was a plus as S100 can ring badly.
>Possible Parts List
>
>1. Double sided S100 motherboard (Say twelve slots)
>2. Aluminium base plate drilled for backplane and card guide
>supports.
>3. Twelve double sided 2x50 edge connectors.
>4. Card guide support frame.
>5. Twenty four card guides.
>6. Nuts, bolts and screws etc.
An outercase..
Power supplies in the case.
Fans! Lots of fans!
Allison
>Rod Smallwood
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org
>[mailto:cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Dan
>Sent: 03 June 2007 12:59
>To: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
>Subject: Re: New pcb design for S-100 prototype board available
>
>Rod,
>
>I see what you mean. I'm just starting off small right now since it's
>mainly a hobby. It's mostly to support the existing vintage computers
>out there. I really don't know what the demand there is for a new S-100
>chassis. I suppose that might be a good kit to build with the right
>parts. I can look into this.
>
>=Dan
>
>[ My Corner of Cyberspace http://ragooman.home.comcast.net/ ]
>
>
>
>Rod Smallwood wrote:
>> Prototype boards are nice but whats really needed is an S100 card cage
>with back plane and PSU.
>> Its normal to build the foundations before the rest of the house!!
>>
>> Rod Smallwood
>>
>>
>
>
>
>Subject: RE: New pcb design for S-100 prototype board available
> From: "Rod Smallwood" <RodSmallwood at mail.ediconsulting.co.uk>
> Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 15:24:30 +0100
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org>
>
>Hi
> 1. Where did you see all these crates. (I'm in the UK)
I'm not, New England USA.
> 2. Nice shiny new boards in old back planes ?
Once I run an old backplane through a wash it's pretty good looking.
Whats really needed is smaller backplanes in the range of 8 to 12
slots as most S100 crates wer 18-22 and large.
Of course you also need the power supply(s) and an enclosure.
So an old crate that may be missing boards is actually pretty handy.
Allison
>Rod
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Allison
>Sent: 03 June 2007 12:34
>To: cctech at classiccmp.org
>Subject: RE: New pcb design for S-100 prototype board available
>
>>
>>Subject: RE: New pcb design for S-100 prototype board available
>> From: "Rod Smallwood" <RodSmallwood at mail.ediconsulting.co.uk>
>> Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 23:52:27 +0100
>> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only"
>><cctech at classiccmp.org>
>>
>>Prototype boards are nice but whats really needed is an S100 card cage with back plane and PSU.
>>Its normal to build the foundations before the rest of the house!!
>>
>>Rod Smallwood
>
>There are plenty of S100 crates around usually with boards missing or damaged.
>That is rarely a problem, Working bords to fill it or proto on are.
>
>Allison
>
>
>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org
>>[mailto:cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Roy J. Tellason
>>Sent: 02 June 2007 21:10
>>To: CCTECH
>>Subject: Re: New pcb design for S-100 prototype board available
>>
>>On Saturday 02 June 2007 10:26, Dan wrote:
>>> I've been working on a pcb design for a S-100 prototype board. I
>>> noticed a few people on the forums asking about this. I decided to
>>> make this since this is a big hobby of mine too(member-MARCH club). I
>>> based this design on a old prototype board I kept back from the S-100
>>> days. It's made by Electronic Control Technology.
>>>
>>> Here's a link to the picture
>>> http://pghvintage.home.comcast.net/p...otypeboard.jpg
>>> <http://pghvintage.home.comcast.net/pics/S-100/s-100_prototypeboard.j
>>> p
>>> g>
>>>
>>> There were several different styles made before--each with their own
>>> advantages. This prototype board(in pic) has the rows in a vertical
>>> pattern to allow 300mil and 600mil DIP packages. It also accommodates
>>> 2 voltage regulators. Then there were some which only had a grid of
>>> solder pads to allow any arrangement of 300mil and 600mil DIP packages.
>>>
>>> I like to ask everyone what their preference might be in the
>>> arrangement of the solder pads, eg: vertical rows, horizontal rows,
>>> grid, etc. If I get enough feedback, I can include 2 different styles.
>>> It's not much work to alter the design. I have a panel setup to
>>> include 2 pcb designs at the moment, and it can be any 2 kinds of
>>> S-100 designs. In the future, I like to setup a bigger panel to
>>> include several more S-100 designs.
>>>
>>> Since this is mainly a hobby for me, I thought I might help out and
>>> offer this service. I'm designing this from my home workshop and
>>> intend to make this an affordable hobby. In case anyone is
>>> interested, with enough orders(minimum 30) then I can offer these for only $15 each.
>>
>>Hmm, good question!
>>
>>I have currently only two S-100 systems, a Cromemco System 3 with problems in the PersSci drive. The floppy that was in the drive when I got it had been in there and run so long that you could see clearly through the track zero location. :-) I have some data on this stuff somewhere, and it appears that they're using incandescent bulbs for such stuff as index sensors and such? And the Imsai, here.
>>
>>Got a Vector S-100 backplane too, that I've started to build, only I
>>lack a few parts. Most importantly the S-100 connectors themselves.
>>:-(
>>
>>I also have a couple of prototyping cards, I *think* they're Vector as well, but haven't done anything with 'em yet to come up with a preference. I guess vertical rows makes more sense in terms of air flow for heat dissipation?
>>That for the heatsinks for sure, though a lot of systems I saw mention of later on in the popular period for S-100 seemed to be inclined to put a regulated switching power supply in place and simply jumper across the regulator positions. I dunno, to me the distributed approach always made a lot of sense.
>>
>>--
>>Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and ablest -- form of life in this section of space, ?a critter that can be killed but can't be tamed. ?--Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
>>-
>>Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies.
>>--James M Dakin
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>Subject: RE: New pcb design for S-100 prototype board available
> From: "Rod Smallwood" <RodSmallwood at mail.ediconsulting.co.uk>
> Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 23:52:27 +0100
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org>
>
>Prototype boards are nice but whats really needed is an S100 card cage with back plane and PSU.
>Its normal to build the foundations before the rest of the house!!
>
>Rod Smallwood
There are plenty of S100 crates around usually with boards missing or damaged.
That is rarely a problem, Working bords to fill it or proto on are.
Allison
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Roy J. Tellason
>Sent: 02 June 2007 21:10
>To: CCTECH
>Subject: Re: New pcb design for S-100 prototype board available
>
>On Saturday 02 June 2007 10:26, Dan wrote:
>> I've been working on a pcb design for a S-100 prototype board. I
>> noticed a few people on the forums asking about this. I decided to
>> make this since this is a big hobby of mine too(member-MARCH club). I
>> based this design on a old prototype board I kept back from the S-100
>> days. It's made by Electronic Control Technology.
>>
>> Here's a link to the picture
>> http://pghvintage.home.comcast.net/p...otypeboard.jpg
>> <http://pghvintage.home.comcast.net/pics/S-100/s-100_prototypeboard.jp
>> g>
>>
>> There were several different styles made before--each with their own
>> advantages. This prototype board(in pic) has the rows in a vertical
>> pattern to allow 300mil and 600mil DIP packages. It also accommodates
>> 2 voltage regulators. Then there were some which only had a grid of
>> solder pads to allow any arrangement of 300mil and 600mil DIP packages.
>>
>> I like to ask everyone what their preference might be in the
>> arrangement of the solder pads, eg: vertical rows, horizontal rows,
>> grid, etc. If I get enough feedback, I can include 2 different styles.
>> It's not much work to alter the design. I have a panel setup to
>> include 2 pcb designs at the moment, and it can be any 2 kinds of
>> S-100 designs. In the future, I like to setup a bigger panel to
>> include several more S-100 designs.
>>
>> Since this is mainly a hobby for me, I thought I might help out and
>> offer this service. I'm designing this from my home workshop and
>> intend to make this an affordable hobby. In case anyone is interested,
>> with enough orders(minimum 30) then I can offer these for only $15 each.
>
>Hmm, good question!
>
>I have currently only two S-100 systems, a Cromemco System 3 with problems in the PersSci drive. The floppy that was in the drive when I got it had been in there and run so long that you could see clearly through the track zero location. :-) I have some data on this stuff somewhere, and it appears that they're using incandescent bulbs for such stuff as index sensors and such? And the Imsai, here.
>
>Got a Vector S-100 backplane too, that I've started to build, only I lack a few parts. Most importantly the S-100 connectors themselves. :-(
>
>I also have a couple of prototyping cards, I *think* they're Vector as well, but haven't done anything with 'em yet to come up with a preference. I guess vertical rows makes more sense in terms of air flow for heat dissipation?
>That for the heatsinks for sure, though a lot of systems I saw mention of later on in the popular period for S-100 seemed to be inclined to put a regulated switching power supply in place and simply jumper across the regulator positions. I dunno, to me the distributed approach always made a lot of sense.
>
>--
>Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and ablest -- form of life in this section of space, ?a critter that can be killed but can't be tamed. ?--Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
>-
>Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James M Dakin
>
>
>
>
>Subject: Re: Hazeltine 1400 info?
> From: Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com>
> Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 19:39:36 -0400
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org>
>
>On Jun 2, 2007, at 1:28 PM, Richard wrote:
>>> I was working for Hazeltine terminals group at the time, one look
>>> at the
>>> 1400s and I left. There were a few things about it that suggested
>>> with
>>> better firmware it could be nice but didn't happen.
>>
>> That makes me wonder if new firmware could be created now? What uP
>> did it use to control the electronics?
>>
>> Its my first Hazeltine for my collection. And no, I don't expect I'll
>> actually be sitting at it doing coding :-P.
>
> I seem to recall the 1420 being built around the 8080. Not sure
>about the 1400, but I strongly suspect it's a very similar design.
>
It was 8048/9 not 8080. The 1500 series was 8080.
Allison
> -Dave
>
>--
>Dave McGuire
>Port Charlotte, FL
>
