[email protected] (Seymour J Metz) writes:
> Back in the Paleolithic era IBM ported VMPC to MVS for use by
> TCP/IP. The Pascal stack has been dead for lo these many years. Is it
> conceivable that the VMCF port is still present in z/OS V2?
I've periodically commented about how how the communication group was
going to be responsible for the demise of the disk division
... communication group had corporate strategic responsibility
("stranglehold") for everything crossed datacenter walls and was
fiercely fighting off distributed computing and client/server (trying to
preserve their dumb terminal paradigm). some past posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#terminal
Part of this was doing its best to prevent shipping TCP/IP. Eventually
it shipped but only got 44kbytes/sec transfer using whole 3090 cpu. I
did the enhancements for rfc1044 and in some throughput tests at Cray
research, got mbyte/sec channel speed throughput between 4341 and Cray
using only modest amount of 4341 processor (possibly 500 times
improvement in cpu used per bytes moved) ... some past posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#1044
sometime later, it was ported to MVS by emulating VM370 function on
MVS. However later, the communication group hired subcontractor to add
TCP/IP support to VTAM. His initial implementation had TCP/IP performing
much faster than LU6.2. He was told that everybody "knows" that a
"correct" TCP/IP implementation is much slower than LU6.2 and they would
only be paying for a "correct" implementation.
recent post in thread
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017k.html#37 CMS style XMITMSG for Unix and other
platforms
recent post about communication group
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017k.html#34 Bad History
--
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
