Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucbvax.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!info-vax From: info-vax@ucbvax.ARPA Newsgroups: fa.info-vax Subject: Re: Connecting Supercomputers to DEC's Cluster Systems Message-ID: <5220@ucbvax.ARPA> Date: Mon, 4-Mar-85 17:04:40 EST Article-I.D.: ucbvax.5220 Posted: Mon Mar 4 17:04:40 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 5-Mar-85 03:25:25 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA Organization: University of California at Berkeley Lines: 21 From: Ron NatalieWe are in the process of acquiring a (yet to be determined) supercomputer to integrate into our collection of mostly UNIX machines. The machine must come with an appropriate network hardware to interface the super computer to three UNIBUS's, two SELBUS's, and an IBM channel. Looks like Hyperchannel is the one people are going to be bidding. Personally, I detest NETIX. In order to simplify software on the NON-Supercomputer operating systems, and to facilitate communications between these six core minis and the rest of the BRL complex, we have specified that the protocol must be TCP/IP. We already use it extensibly, and have a public domain spooling and rje system called MDQS that we rely on heavily for our internal use (we only have three or four lineprinters and two laser printers to split among a whole ton of machines). Supporting DEC Cluster is a nice idea, looking at the DEC<->Super problem narrowly, but I think that a more generic DEC CLUSTER<->WORLD interface would be more useful. Especially with people with such diverse supercomputers as ours (we already have two from different manufacturers and it looks like the next one will go to even a third). -Ron