Re. Wollongong TCP/IP
Douglas P. Ambort
outdated version of Wollongong TCP/IP, ported a long time ago by AT&T
to its 3B1's is harsh. Given the 3B1, his indictment may not be
altogether off base; but it could be misconstrued by netnews readers as
a general indictment of all Wollongong TCP/IP (past, present, future,
and on good, bad or indifferent platforms). And such an indictment
would not only be unfair, but misinformed.
Wollongong continues to upgrade its TCP/IP with _significant_ enhancements.
And AT&T continues to select Wollonong as its TCP/IP vendor of choice,
for current and future platforms. Why? Because of our TCP/IP's performance
and features, our commitment to continued enhancement, and because of
the solid OEM support we provide.
In this case of the (the 3B1 shortcomings described by Mr. Floryan),
AT&T has simply chosen not to upgrade an ancient TCP/IP
on a platform that has been retired. Perhaps AT&T is concentrating on
new platforms?
If you want to see the best TCP/IP in its class, check out the TCP/IP
on UNIX System Release V 4.0 on AT&T's 6386 WGS series of machines.
It's Wollongong's. And we're proud of it.
On the other hand, if someone must rail against an old TCP/IP
implementation on (let's face it) 'old iron', go ahead.
You could just as easily criticise the skinny tires on a Model T
for not being steel belted radials.
Time passes. Technology progresses. And so has Wollongong's TCP/IP!
.--------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Douglas Ambort The Wollongong Group, Inc. |
| Product Manager 1129 San Antonio Road |
| INTERNET: dou...@twg.com Palo Alto, CA 94303 |
| (415) 962-7248 |
| FAX: (415) 969-5547 |
`--------------------------------------------------------------------'
Tom Ivar Helbekkmo
>Time passes. Technology progresses. And so has Wollongong's TCP/IP!
Yeah, you're right about that. We used to call it "Willgowrong" here,
but after receiving our last upgrade (to version 5.1 for VAX/VMS),
we've had to reevaluate. It's a darn good package, and well
documented. Congratulations!
-tih
--
Tom Ivar Helbekkmo, NHH, Bergen, Norway. Telephone: +47-5-959205
t...@barsoom.nhh.no, thel...@norunit.bitnet, edb...@debet.nhh.no
Guy Harris
>on UNIX System Release V 4.0 on AT&T's 6386 WGS series of machines.
>It's Wollongong's. And we're proud of it.
So AT&T threw out the Lachman-based one they supply standard with S5R4
and supply a Woolongong-based release instead?
Eduardo Krell
>So AT&T threw out the Lachman-based one they supply standard with S5R4
>and supply a Woolongong-based release instead?
Not so, a quick scan at the header files shows that they all contain:
* System V STREAMS TCP was jointly developed by Lachman Associates and
* Convergent Technologies.
Eduardo Krell AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ
UUCP: {att,decvax,ucbvax}!ulysses!ekrell Internet: ekr...@ulysses.att.com
Eduardo Krell[dgb]
>Not so, a quick scan at the header files shows that they all contain:
>
> * System V STREAMS TCP was jointly developed by Lachman Associates and
> * Convergent Technologies.
This is what I saw in the SVR4 source distribution. The binaries shipped
with the AT&T machines are from Wollongong, though. Go figure ...
--
Eduardo Krell AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
{att,decvax,ucbvax}!ulysses!ekrell Internet: ekr...@ulysses.att.com
Steve Yackey
no, when you buy 5.4 you get lachman tcp.
when you buy a 6386, you get wollongong. for the 6386 at&t "upgraded" the tcp.
Kevin Darcy
>Ouch! Mr. Floryan's indictment of AT&T's implementation of a very old
>outdated version of Wollongong TCP/IP, ported a long time ago by AT&T
>to its 3B1's is harsh. Given the 3B1, his indictment may not be
>altogether off base; but it could be misconstrued by netnews readers as
>a general indictment of all Wollongong TCP/IP (past, present, future,
>and on good, bad or indifferent platforms). And such an indictment
>would not only be unfair, but misinformed.
He (Thad Floryan) criticizes the "latest" version of TCP/IP software
publically available (and, if I'm not mistaken, still sold, perhaps only by
Wollongong directly) for a still-existing base of 3B1's, based on his own
personal experiences and professional expertise. I don't know what *you* would
qualify as an "informed indictment"...?
>In this case of the (the 3B1 shortcomings described by Mr. Floryan),
>AT&T has simply chosen not to upgrade an ancient TCP/IP
>on a platform that has been retired. Perhaps AT&T is concentrating on
>new platforms?
How convenient for Wollongong to blame AT&T for not updating the product,
while AT&T can cite the unfeasibility of doing so, given the state of the
original version (perhaps even give that as one of the marketing reasons that
the UNIX PC line was discontinued). At some point, I would think that one or
the other party would admit their mistake - either Wollongong for providing a
flawed product, or AT&T for distributing it without adequate updates.
>If you want to see the best TCP/IP in its class, check out the TCP/IP
>on UNIX System Release V 4.0 on AT&T's 6386 WGS series of machines.
>It's Wollongong's. And we're proud of it.
Sorry, I don't have a 6386, I have a 3B1, along with a lot of other "cult
diehards" who haven't joined the 80x86 tribe. I just bought a 3B1 ethernet
card, and was looking forward to running TCP/IP on it to see what makes it
tick. Now I hesitate. Would I be learning the *wrong* things from this setup?
Is this really the ancestor of Wollongong's later products?
>On the other hand, if someone must rail against an old TCP/IP
>implementation on (let's face it) 'old iron', go ahead.
And what happens when 3B2's or WGS's become 'old iron'? Cast them off in the
same manner?
I don't accuse Wollongong of being opportunistic and of only hyping their
latest, sexiest implementations of TCP/IP on AT&T products, but if Mr. Ambort's
attitude is representative of Wollongong's as a whole, it seems to be bordering
very close to that...
>You could just as easily criticise the skinny tires on a Model T
>for not being steel belted radials.
But, then again, software and tires differ in significant ways: one seemingly
small deficiency or bug can render software useless for a given environment.
It's not a question of *performance*, but (as I understand Mr. Floryan's
comments), one of *functionality*. Those old tires *did work*, in other words.
(Since this is at this point mainly a vendor-support and 3B1 performance issue,
respondents please do not follow up to comp.protocols.tcp-ip. Thank you.)
DISCLAIMERS: I speak only for myself (*not* at all for Chrysler); a concerned
3B1 owner who has not yet used the product, but heard of its shortcomings
secondhand.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ke...@cfctech.cfc.com | Kevin Darcy, Unix Systems Administrator
...[mailrus!]sharkey!cfctech!kevin | Technical Services (CFC)
Voice: (313) 948-4863 | Chrysler Corporation
Fax: (313) 948-4975 | 27777 Franklin, Southfield, MI 48034
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Halloran
The SVr4 source package includes Lachman TCP/IP code.
Binary distributions for AT&T 3B (and probably 386 - haven't seen it) have
TWG binaries included.
On the 6386, the Micom/Interlan package we OEM'd has been replaced with TWG.
Bob Halloran
=========================================================================
UUCP: att!mtune!rkh Internet: r...@mtune.dptg.att.com
Disclaimer: If you think AT&T would have ME as a spokesman, you're crazed.
Quote: "Remember, kids, if some weirdo in a blue suit offers you some DOS,
JUST SAY NO!!!"
=========================================================================
Guy Harris
>>and supply a Woolongong-based release instead?
>
>no, when you buy 5.4 you get lachman tcp.
>when you buy a 6386, you get wollongong. for the 6386 at&t "upgraded" the tcp.
Lots of people seem to have misread what I said. In the hope that
nobody who hasn't yet had the opportunity to do so does so, I'll note
that I said
> ...the Lachman-based one they supply standard with S5R4...
*explicitly acknowledging* that "when you buy 5.4 you get lachman tcp",
and that what I was asking was whether AT&T, when building the S5R4
release that they supply as the OS for their 386-based machines, threw
out the Lachman-based TCP/IP supplied in source form with S5R4 source,
and replaced it with Woolongong's version. The answer to that question
is "yes, they did".
Colonel Panic
>>and supply a Woolongong-based release instead?
>
>no, when you buy 5.4 you get lachman tcp.
>when you buy a 6386, you get wollongong. for the 6386 at&t "upgraded" the tcp.
Uh, the 6386 definitely does not come with WIN/TCP automatically. It
is an *option*, as is the Interlan solution. You can get either
WIN/TCP 3.0 for StarLAN cards or a Racal Interlan s/w-card combo.
Note that AT&T's version of WIN/TCP is still 3.0. Wollongong sells
3.1 themselves as the current release, and they include drivers for
a number of common ethernet cards (AT&T strips those out). On my
6386s, I'm running Wollongong's own 3.1 version on WD cards because I have
to use interrupt 2 (=9), and WIN/TCP 3.0 doesn't handle that interrupt
properly...
--
Alan Denney # Informix # al...@informix.com # {pyramid|uunet}!infmx!aland
"These tests will have no effect on your grades. They will merely
determine your future social status and financial success, if any."