[email protected] (Paul Gilmartin) writes: > Why did that fail? Just too little, too late? NIH?
re: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#39 Resistance to Java http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#44 Resistance to Java internal network was larger than the arpanet/internet from just about the beginning until sometime late '85 or early '86. Part of the reason was that the (vm370 vnet-based) internal network had a form of gateway in everynode (which didn't exist in the arpanet host protocol, sna, and/or osi model). Arpanet/internet got internetworking protcol as part of the great change-over to tcp/ip on 1jan1983. this "ibm-main" discussion group originated on univ. "bitnet" which used technology similar to the internal network ... and about the same time the communication group was forcing the internal network to convert to SNA ... bitnet was converting to tcp/ip for bitnet2 ... which is what the internal network should have done also. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BITNET i had project i called hsdt with T1 (1.5mbit/sec) and faster speed links ... started doing T1 in 1980s. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#hsdt the initial mainframe tcp/ip product (mentioned upthread, implemented in vs/pascal) has some performance issues .... getting about 44kbytes/sec effective using nearly full 3090 processor. I did the enhancements to support RFC1044 and in some tuning tests at cray research got 1mbyte/sec channel sustained throughput between 4341 and cray using only modest amount of 4341 processor (possibly 500 times improvement in bytes moved per instruction executed) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#1044 standard mainframe 37xx product only supported up to 56kbits/sec. communication group prepared a report for corporate hdqtrs that customers didn't want much more than 56kbits/sec and wouldn't need T1 (1.5mbits/sec) until well into the 90s. At the same time, HSDT didn't superficial customer survey and found 200 customer T1 links connected to IBM mainframes (but using non-ibm controllers). The communication group kept up the facade for a time ... but eventually was forced to came out with the rube-goldberg 3737 hack supporting T1. SNA/VTAM had a separate problem with latency handling in communication links. It was unable to get only a very small fraction of T1 throughput capacity. To get around it the 3737 supported a CTCA link to another local mainframe. Inside the 3737 it had a bunch of processing and enormous amount of buffering (including four 68k, 100k lines of code) ... it would simulate ACK on data RUs to the local VTAM (as if the data had already arrived at the remote end) trying to compenstate for the lack of latency compensation in SNA & VTAM. some past posts detailing 3737 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011g.html#75 We list every company in the world that has a mainframe computer http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011g.html#77 Is the magic and romance killed by Windows (and Linux)? with these old email http://www.garlic.oom/~lynn/2011g.html#email880130 http://www.garlic.oom/~lynn/2011g.html#email880606 http://www.garlic.oom/~lynn/2011g.html#email881005 the claims were the 3737 could just barely support 1.5mbit/sec throughput ... even though full-duplex T1 is 3mbits/sec aggregate (1.5mbit/sec concurrent in both direction) and european T1 is 4mbits/sec aggregate other trivia ... I had been blamed for online computer conferencing on the internal network in the late 70s and early 80s. folklore is that when the corporate executive committee was informed of computer conferencing (and the internal network), 5of6 wanted to fire me. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#cmc old email from person charged with setting up EARN (bitnet in europe) looking for network apps http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#email840320 posts mentioning bitnet http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#bitnet as part of HSDT, we was also working with NSF and NSF supercomputer centers. We were suppose to get $20M from NSF to tie together the supercomputer centers, then congress cut the budget and several other things happened. Finally NSF releases an RFP ... but internal politics (large amount from communication group) prevent us from bidding. The director of NSF tries to help by writting the company a letter (co-signed by some other agency CTOs) ... but that just makes the internal politics worse (as does comments that what we already had running was at least five years ahead of all bid submissions). -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
