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