Z8-02 demo PCB (was Re: Running a Z8-02 MPD on a breadboard)

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 1:41 AM, Eric Smith wrote: > I designed a simple QUIP adapter for use with solderless breadboards, > and wired up a Z8-02 MPD along with a 28C16 EEPROM for the program > memory, a 62256 static RAM, address latch, and decoder. I programmed a > copy of

Re: AT Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.6

At 12:36 AM 3/28/2016, Tapley, Mark wrote: On Mar 26, 2016, at 5:19 PM, Jerry Kemp wrote: > Just curious if something specifically is broken or non-fixable with the 10.6.8 IPv6 stack?] No, there's nothing broken with OSX. I have a functioning IPv6 network here at home, with

Re: AT Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old)

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Robert Johnson wrote: > > > > On Mar 28, 2016, at 7:45 AM, Charles Anthony > wrote: > > > > I think that having HTTP use DNS was the big one; it changed the role of > > DNS from finding computers by name to the

OT RE: AT Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old)

TSIA -Original Message- From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Robert Johnson Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 1:36 PM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: j...@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Subject: Re: AT Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X

Re: AT Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old)

> > On Mar 28, 2016, at 7:32 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > >> From: Jerry Weiss > >> Disabling IPV6 was the cure. > > I was _extremely_ amused to hear that. > > (Backstory: I'm a long-time detractor of IPv6 - I've always thought it's a > rolling ball of digestive

Re: AT Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old)

> > On Mar 28, 2016, at 7:45 AM, Charles Anthony > wrote: > > I think that having HTTP use DNS was the big one; it changed the role of > DNS from finding computers by name to the being the innocent victim of the > land rush of domain name marketing. > > Followed

Re: Mainframe floating point math implementation.

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 7:26 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Charles Anthony > > > the missing piece of the rounding algorithim has been identified: > > Only round if the mantissa was shifted more then 71 bits. > > Wow. I'm really impressed that they

Re: AT Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old)

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Jerry Weiss > > > Disabling IPV6 was the cure. > > I was _extremely_ amused to hear that. > > (Backstory: I'm a long-time detractor of IPv6 - I've always thought it's a > rolling ball of digestive

Re: AT Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old)

> From: Jerry Weiss > Disabling IPV6 was the cure. I was _extremely_ amused to hear that. (Backstory: I'm a long-time detractor of IPv6 - I've always thought it's a rolling ball of digestive byproduct, to be blunt. In fact, if I had still been on the IESG when it came around, I'd have

Re: Mainframe floating point math implementation.

> From: Charles Anthony > the missing piece of the rounding algorithim has been identified: > Only round if the mantissa was shifted more then 71 bits. Wow. I'm really impressed that they implemented that in hardware, back then! Then again, they threw so many gates at the

Re: multinet 4.1 PAK

On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 10:33 AM, william degnan wrote: > >> >> I guess by "get the checksum of VMS", you mean find the checksum that was >> used >> to validate your current VMS license. It is possible to do this (I >> outlined >> how to do it in an email to you a week or

Re: multinet 4.1 PAK

> > > > I guess by "get the checksum of VMS", you mean find the checksum that was > used > to validate your current VMS license. It is possible to do this (I > outlined > how to do it in an email to you a week or two ago) but this is not what you > want to do. > > To get a MULTINET hobbyist

PDP-12 Restoration at the RICM

We are now working on the RK8F controller and RK05 drive. The RK8F has special M7104 and M7105 boards so it will work in the DW8E Omnibus-Posibus chassis. The MAINDEC-08-DHRKA RK8E Diskless Control Test showed that a data-break to address worked, but did not work to address . After about