I've done the basic digging (www.chipdir.com, etc.) and can't find info
on the following chips I found in a box of stuff some one gave me a while
back:
AMD 91L02 - I know it's some kind of SRAM but not the size or pinout. The 9101
is 256x4. This one is likely to be either 1024x1 or 1024x4 but I don't know
which.
NS 74C921 - The 74C922 and 74C923 are somewhat common keyboard encoders, one
of which was used on the Netronics Elf-II design. I can't find any info on
the pinout of the 74C921, but I did find several places selling them from
$6 USD to 72 Danish Kroner (however much that is)
I have a few of each, along with 2Kb of 21L02 chips (-2L and -4L speeds,
whatever they are), all with 1979 - 1983 date codes.
Any clues?
Thanks,
-ethan
=====
Even though my old e-mail address is no longer going to
vanish, please note my new public address: erd(a)iname.com
The original webpage address is still going away. The
permanent home is: http://penguincentral.com/
See http://ohio.voyager.net/ for details.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
I have four Qbus cards that I am interested in finding out what they are.
One is a Micro Technology QTS25. It has a 50 pin header. I was wondering if
it was a SCSI card?
The second is an Emulex QD331040100 Rev. J. This has a 60 pin header and two
26 pin headers. I was wondering if this was a SMD drive controller?
The third is a Dilog DQ696-20.vThis has a 34 pin header and two 20 pin
header. My guess is that it is a MFM or ESDI hard drive controller.
In the same group of cards is a DEC M7546 which I believe is a TK50 tape
drive controller. Why is it called a Maya Controller?
Thanks for the help.
Paxton
>One is a Micro Technology QTS25. It has a 50 pin header. I was wondering if
>it was a SCSI card?
This is a TD Systems Viking controller, tape-only.
>The second is an Emulex QD331040100 Rev. J. This has a 60 pin header and two
>26 pin headers. I was wondering if this was a SMD drive controller?
That's right, a QD33, MSCP emulating. It handles fairly fast SMD drives (i.e.
Eagles, 2344's, etc.)
>In the same group of cards is a DEC M7546 which I believe is a TK50 tape
>drive controller. Why is it called a Maya Controller?
I believe that Maya was the DEC
development code-name for the TK50. The Aztec, IIRC, was the RC25.
--
Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa(a)trailing-edge.com
Trailing Edge Technology WWW: http://www.trailing-edge.com/
7328 Bradley Blvd Voice: 301-767-5917
Bethesda, MD, USA 20817 Fax: 301-767-5927
I thought the classic PDP-11 unix way was UUCP.
Allison
..>On Fri, 31 Mar 2000, Chris Kennedy wrote:
>>
>> Dunno, but I was using FTP in 1975-76. I'd guess that
>> any behavioral resemblence is more a consequence of the
>> two both having similar functions, i.e., moving files
>> around, rather than any sort of common parentage...
>>
>
>If you were using it in 1975-1976, it wasn't FTP as it exists today -
>it would be the FTP implemented on top of the "old" ARPANET protocols
>(sometimes referred to as "NCP", but I believe more properly referred to
>as simply "Host-to-Host Protocol").
>
>But that reminds me of a question I had while I was having lunch today ...
>Was there ever an implementation of the old ARPANET protocols on a PDP-11
>or VAX Unix? If it ever existed, I'd guess it would have had to have been
>on top of Seventh Edition, but I can't recall ever seeing any drivers for
>an ACC LH/DH or DEC IMP-11 on any incarnation of that platform. Berkeley
>Unix added TCP/IP in 4.1a, but I don't remember if there had been any
>ARPANET support (for the old protocol) before that.
>
>--Pat.
>
>
On Mar 31, 14:57, John Allain wrote:
> Funny, I've been using Kermit since 1981 and FTP since 1985 and
> I still don't know which egg/chicken came first.
> They seem awfully similar from a user's standpoint.
> Anybody know If FTP is based on Kermit or Vice-Versa?
They're fairly different "inside". For example, kermit assumes an
"unreliable" connection, and does it's own error-checking, while FTP relies
to some extent on a transport layer that already has error-checking. I
suppose they naturally have some similarities on the "outside" because they
serve similar purposes, though. Anyway, kermit predates FTP by a few
years.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
>Funny, I've been using Kermit since 1981 and FTP since 1985 and
>I still don't know which egg/chicken came first.
>They seem awfully similar from a user's standpoint.
>Anybody know If FTP is based on Kermit or Vice-Versa?
The first RFC for FTP is RFC 765, from June 1980. It begins:
The objectives of FTP are 1) to promote sharing of files (computer
programs and/or data), 2) to encourage indirect or implicit (via
programs) use of remote computers, 3) to shield a user from
variations in file storage systems among Hosts, and 4) to transfer
data reliably and efficiently. FTP, though usable directly by a user
at a terminal, is designed mainly for use by programs.
Note that today there are few "programs" that know how to speak FTP
directly, when someone says "FTP this" they almost always mean running
the user-types-command-to-a-FTP-client.
(Yes, there certainly are some programs that know how to speak FTP, I'm
just pointing out that this isn't as common as the originators of the
protocol wanted. If anything, it seems to be gaining in popularity
as a "built-in" protocol, for example wget will take a ftp: or http:
URL quite interchangably.)
The user interface for both Kermit and FTP certainly are similar, and
that shouldn't be a surprise, since the "big iron" being hooked up to
other "big iron" in that day was almost always PDP-10 to PDP-10. Both
the Kermit and FTP command styles are descended from the PDP-10 conventions
(the TOPS-20 monitor in particular.)
--
Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa(a)trailing-edge.com
Trailing Edge Technology WWW: http://www.trailing-edge.com/
7328 Bradley Blvd Voice: 301-767-5917
Bethesda, MD, USA 20817 Fax: 301-767-5927
I wrote:
>The first RFC for FTP is RFC 765, from June 1980. It begins:
Whoops, I found several earlier ones, extending all the way back to
RFC 354 (from 8-Jul-1972). This references RFC264, which doesn't seem
to exist anymore.
Tim.
>I was just looking over a notebook on what appears to be an OS called
>Storage Machine 1 by FileTek. I was wondering if anyone knows anything
>about this, and what hardware it ran on. Some notes identify the
>cartridge tape drive as "TK50" and the system seesm to have had a big optical
>disk library device, about 2.3 or 2.6 gigs.
>
>Does this sound familiar to anyone? It came in a pile of material from a
>DG Nova system.
>From www.filetek.com:
William C. Thompson and John Burgess founded FileTek in 1984 to
address the need for making very large volumes of offline
information accessible to online users of mainframes
minicomputers, and networked workstations. They firmly believed
that historic detail has an increased value when organizations can
access and use it productively.
In 1987, FileTek introduced its first product, Storage Machine/1, a
shared client/server-based, automatically managed storage server.
This innovative data server used sophisticated storage management
software to control a storage hierarchy of magnetic disk and write
once read many (WORM) optical technology.
--
Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa(a)trailing-edge.com
Trailing Edge Technology WWW: http://www.trailing-edge.com/
7328 Bradley Blvd Voice: 301-767-5917
Bethesda, MD, USA 20817 Fax: 301-767-5927
>>>It would be really nice if this software just asked the end user to load a
>>>paper tape, then huit return, and it sends the data read out a separate
>>>serial port, then prompts to load the next one.
>
>>What sort of paper tape reader are you using? If it's a serial reader,
>>you can hook it straight up to a PC-clone running MS-DOS and MS-Kermit
>>(or Linux and C-Kermit) and archive the tapes that way. Both MS-Kermit
>>and C-Kermit include powerful scripting languages.
>PC05 with a PC11 controller.
OK, you can hook the PC05 up to a PC, but you'd have to do some re-wiring
and write the simple code to read it. If you've already got a running RT-11
system with the PC11 in it up and running, it's probably easier if
you use Kermit on the RT end and a Kermit script on the PC-clone to
do the automation and user prompting.
OTOH I could run all the tapes through the machinery here in a few days,
as well. It's too bad that you have to do it all in just a few days
before they're gone, setting up the automation on your end with your equipment
sounds like it might end up taking most of your allotted time, when such
archiving (ideally) shouldn't be done in such a rush.
How many feet total are we talking about, 10 thousand feet, 30 thousand
feet, 100 thousand feet? Remember than 10 thousand feet is (approximately)
1.2 megabytes, and takes a bit more than an hour if you can run it
continuously through a PC05's 300 char/sec reader.
--
Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa(a)trailing-edge.com
Trailing Edge Technology WWW: http://www.trailing-edge.com/
7328 Bradley Blvd Voice: 301-767-5917
Bethesda, MD, USA 20817 Fax: 301-767-5927