14 Mar
2007
14 Mar
'07
12:55 a.m.
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, arcarlini at iee.org wrote:
Andrew Back wrote:
But where is the fun in RFC1006? Would prefer to have native ISO CONS
running direct atop layer 2 on the LAN rather than on top of IP. So you
kinda have a real native network, and can play around with ISO routing.
Or, are you saying you can configure IS-IS connections to tunnel via IP
and have your ES-IS native ethernet?
Well it wouldn't be a replacement as such,
but I was thinking of
setting up a L2 peer-to-peer network on top of said pesky network, so
we folks with VMS can run DECnet and the likes and use VMSmail and
'set host' etc. I've set this up between my house and workshop using
ethernet-over-ip via two OpenBSD routers. And just recently
discovered a Linux tool called uvlan that looks like it would do a
similar job and require much less config.
If you are running DECnet-Plus (i.e. DECnet/OSI) then you can use IP
as a transport layer, so you won't need to do any funny ethernet-over
-IP stuff. (This is just like doing RFC 1006). If you are running the Multinet IP stack then it can
tunnel DECnet
(Phase IV).
At least I _think_ it is Multinet that can do that (certainly one of the
3rd party ones can).
Or, within your own site/home, you could just run a pair of real
routers that can handle DECnet-Plus!
Well that would be nice...
That all being said, VMSmail can certainly send and
receive over
IP (and X.25 and anything else you care to write a mail transport for).
Right, forgot VMSmail could use IP direct. Would be more fun it using an
X.400 gateway and then X.400 MIXER gateway to get out to the Internet, and
storing all the routing and address translation in X.500.
As for X.400, I think my first "critical"
bug fix involved MRX, although
the details are currently lost in my notebooks. So I think that's enough
Mailbus to last me a lifetime!
Hmm, I can imagine that must have been fun. Just using X.400 can be a
steep-ish learning curve, and peering to another vendor's MTA
'interesting', especially if in some other ADMD you don't control and
across over a public PSDN... Still, I think these systems and associated
protocols also need preserving and using, and can be fun :o)
Andrew