Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!iuvax!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!delta.eecs.nwu.edu!phil From: phil@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Newsgroups: comp.sys.encore Subject: Re: Things I miss.... Message-ID: <1057@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 16 Aug 89 04:22:34 GMT References: <8908031737.AA08682@skeeve.mcs.anl.gov> <12006@xenna.Encore.COM> <1000@accuvax.nwu.edu> <6917@xenna.Xylogics.COM> Reply-To: phil@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Organization: Northwestern U, Evanston IL, USA Lines: 23 In article <6917@xenna.Xylogics.COM> loverso@Xylogics.COM (John Robert LoVerso) writes: >Actually, the two things I miss greatly are process arguments and >working network code! (Not being able to reach BARRnet from NEARnet >because the of 4.2-style IP TTL handling is sad).... I'ts really not IP TTL that's the problem (does IP even *have* a TTL field?). It's TCP's TTL field that's too small: 15. But if you have software support, tell Encore that you need a larger TTL. We did, and we are now running a UMAX 4.2 kernel with TCP TTL set to 60! They were quite helpful. This is kind of an annoying, funny, sad story: when one of the technical guys got back with me about this problem, he said "we'll make you a kernel with TCP_TTL set to 60. Is that alright?" I said, "60?!? What were you using before?" He said, "30". I said, "well you started off where I want to be---ours came set at 15. So 60 will certainly be adequate." William LeFebvre Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Northwestern University