Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!gatech!amdcad!phil From: phil@amdcad.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans Subject: Re: Terminal Servers & Ethernet Xcvrs Message-ID: <17472@amdcad.AMD.COM> Date: Fri, 10-Jul-87 19:59:44 EDT Article-I.D.: amdcad.17472 Posted: Fri Jul 10 19:59:44 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 12-Jul-87 12:49:59 EDT References: <4746@columbia.UUCP> <12962@topaz.rutgers.edu> Reply-To: phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) Distribution: na Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., Sunnyvale, Ca. Lines: 65 Oh boy, another TCP vendor discussion. In article <12962@topaz.rutgers.edu> ron@topaz.rutgers.edu (Ron Natalie) writes: >BRIDGE: CS series > Bridge makes good hardware, but they don't always get the protocols > right. There TCP used to be pretty awful though I admit they've gotten > better lately. They still don't answer ICMP echos. Also, you must either > boot these from floppy disk or have a Bridge server box. I wouldn't go so far as to say they make good hardware; I know they don't have acceptable diagnostics for their GS/3 series. We just recently had a nasty problem with their V.35 interface cards. We have a few which pass the diagnostics but don't work. Bridge Comm doesn't have loopback tests. I know the guys working on the terminal server protocols and have high hopes for them (if management doesn't get in their way). The last time I talked to them (three weeks ago) they had just implemented ICMP. (it's about time, Bridge Comm!) But, the future of their gateway products (internet routers) is less clear. They've made some promises but they've already broken one promise to test their releases before inflicting them on us. It used to be that if your routers had one high speed line and one low speed line between them, their software would ignore the low speed line as long as the high speed line worked. That meant we were paying AT&T $1,400 per month per site to whistle at us. We asked BCI to test their software with dirty phone lines before releasing it to us and they agreed. We get release 11000 and it uses both lines as promised. It uses both lines even when one is dirty. When our low speed line got dirty (which happens about once a week), things fell apart. Well, they finally admitted they didn't test the release with dirty lines like they promised. Their software kept resending over the dirty line instead of doing something intelligent like using the good line. >Micom-Interlan: No experience I saw one at a trade show and it had some neat stuff in the way of statistics information but their ideas on network management weren't well developed. >Encore Annex: These boxes are fairly well received. I've heard nothing > but good things about them and their staff has been very helpful Same here. I've tried it and liked it. But they don't have any gateways. Cisco has a more complete product line and we are evaluating them. >Computer Machinery Corp: They have a cute 8 line box that has the > most innovative packaging I've seen so far. It looks pretty much > like a ethernet transciever with 8 RJ-11s on the side for the terminals. > Haven't actually used one. Here's a company who seems to only want to sell you one box. The reason I say that is because each box has to be individually programmed to know the names and internet addresses of your hosts. As we have over a hundred hosts, that's a lot of typing. Arpanet sites will like this style of network management even more. (sarcasm, if you don't recognize it) The sales drone I talked to didn't seem to think name server support was important. I didn't even ask about routing protocol support. -- Phil Ngai, {ucbvax,decwrl,allegra}!amdcad!phil or amdcad!phil@decwrl.dec.com