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 Natalie 

We 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