Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mandrill!gatech!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!interlan!backman From: backman@interlan.UUCP (Larry Backman) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc Subject: Re: OS/2 TCP/IP, anyone? Message-ID: <541@interlan.UUCP> Date: 21 Jun 88 13:31:43 GMT References: <8806201234.aa16881@Louie.UDEL.EDU> Reply-To: backman@interlan.UUCP (Larry Backman) Organization: MICOM-Interlan, Boxborough, MA (1-800-LAN-TALK) Lines: 62 In article <8806201234.aa16881@Louie.UDEL.EDU> snorthc@NSWC-G.ARPA writes: >Phil Karn's code is the only PCIP I have found that runs in the >DOS compatibility box, The FTP SW INC and CMU drivers are rejected >by the OS/2 operating system at boot. > Forget the "penalty box" box for OS/2 networking solutions. Running networking code in the compatablity box defeats the whole purpose of networking underr OS/2, providing a networking interface that is an integrated part of the OS. >OS/2 without networking and SW applications is rather like UNIX >system 5 rel. 2, a lot of potential, if only there was something >it would actually DO. > Having spent the last 5 months chasing Microsoft's moving target with LAN Manager, Protocol Manager, and OS/2, I have to agree. We have OS/2 networked in house using the SDK LAN Manager. Is it usable? Yes, I am compiling across the network as I write this. Is it a finished product? No, LAN Managar and Protocol Manager are still evolving. Are wwwe selling it? Well... I don't really want to answer that one! Two examples: We received that OS/2 SDK kit LAN Manager betat with .exe's dated 5/6/8 Up till then we had been happily running LAN Manager under DOS & OS/2 with exe's dated 3/15/88. DOS MSNET talked to OS/2 LM and everyone was happy! Now, upon my doorstep sits a box of disks, pretty Microsoft labels, nice documentation indicating that everything is going to work better than before. So we plug in the disks, and to our surprise DOS no longer talks to OS/2. I do some Sniffing, find some SMB no-no's, and send off a Technical Assistance Report (TAR) to Microsoft. Lo and behold, a day later the answer back; "Yes DOS and OS/2 do not talk to each other. Is that a major problem for you?". Example #2. There is a thing called the protocol manager, designed by a comittee of Microsoft & 3Com. It allows protocol modules to talk to MAC modules which talk to wires. It demands that not only does the protocol module leave space for a MAC header in a transmit buffer, but worse yet, the protocol module actually build the MAC header into the ttransmit buffer. NNo so bad you think, but... The point of the protocol manager is to isolate protocol's from MAC's. Now my humble little protocol has to know how to build an ethernet header, a Token- ring header, an FDDI header, an SDLC header, et. al. So off went another TAR to Msoft suggesting some sort of interface that passed a MAC structure as well as a transmit buffer. Nothing was heard from Washington state forr a day, a week, and then..., We reviewed your TAR, and have FAXED it to 3COM since it is their problem". In all seriousness, I am not trying to fault Microsoft or 3COM, only have a little fun at their expense. OS/2 & LAN manager are neat to play with today; in a year they are going to be a full fledged product with awesome possibilities. It's not a bad product today, it's an alpha or pre-beta product with 3,000 beta sites. It's going to be a slow year until the product is complete, when it's complete it will be a barnburner. Larry Backman Micom - Interlan