Re: IP address classes vs CIDR (was Re: Reviving ARPAnet)

mån 2018-02-05 klockan 10:31 -0700 skrev Grant Taylor via cctalk: > On 01/18/2018 12:23 PM, Dennis Boone via cctalk wrote: > > You all talk about Proxy ARP in the past tense for some reason. :) > > You might find it entertaining to know that I was just talking with > colleagues that are

Re: IP address classes vs CIDR (was Re: Reviving ARPAnet)

On 01/18/2018 12:23 PM, Dennis Boone via cctalk wrote: You all talk about Proxy ARP in the past tense for some reason. :) You might find it entertaining to know that I was just talking with colleagues that are currently using Proxy ARP to solve the lack of subnet problem at 40 Gbps line

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

On 01/19/2018 01:25 AM, Christian Corti via cctalk wrote: Why do you want to convert between the two frame types? They can happily coexist on the same segment. In fact I'm using this setup on some Linux servers that provide both ordinary IP services (like NFS) and Novell shares (using Mars

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, Grant Taylor wrote: I'm wondering if it might be possible to use an old NetWare 4.x / 5.x box as a router to convert from one Ethernet frame type to another Ethernet frame type. I.e. from IP over Ethernet II frames to IP over 802.3 frames. Why do you want to convert

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

> On Jan 18, 2018, at 9:39, Grant Taylor via cctalk > wrote: > > On 01/17/2018 11:33 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote: >> E.g. it probably only supports class A addresses, for instance, which is >> going to influence the code for picking the first-hop router. > > I was

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

> On Jan 18, 2018, at 9:27, Grant Taylor via cctalk > wrote: > > On 01/17/2018 01:12 PM, Frank McConnell via cctalk wrote: >> So here's a real example: I have an HP 3000 Micro GX with MPE G.A3.09 >> (V-delta-9) which is very 1990. And it has a LANIC, and V-delta-9 is

Re: IP address classes vs CIDR (was Re: Reviving ARPAnet)

On 01/18/2018 12:53 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote: Proxy ARP is (or was, at the time) something that had to be configured for individual IP addresses or ranges. What I did was have it reply to an ARP for any IP address outside the subnet(s) configured on that interface. Intriguing. I guess

Re: IP address classes vs CIDR (was Re: Reviving ARPAnet)

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 11:35 AM, Grant Taylor via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > On 01/18/2018 11:00 AM, Eric Smith wrote: > >> Years ago I added a configurable "bozo-arp" feature to the Telebit >> NetBlazer router, which would respond to ARP requests for non-local >> addresses and

Re: IP address classes vs CIDR (was Re: Reviving ARPAnet)

On 01/18/2018 12:23 PM, Dennis Boone via cctalk wrote: You all talk about Proxy ARP in the past tense for some reason. :) Please don't interpret the fact that I am inadvertently talking about Proxy ARP in the past tense to mean anything. I personally started solving the problem that Proxy

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

Noel wrote: > but I dunno how one would hook _that_ simulation up to a simulated host > running a simulated ARPANET interface. It would seem silly to simulate a bit by bit interface, so just come up with an encapsulation of 1822 messages in TCP? Two-octet count(*), plus 1822 leaders . (*)

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:27 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > From: Grant Taylor > > > The ARPANET supported several different kinds of interfaces between the > IMPs > (the switching nodes in the ARPANET) and hosts, but the 'usual' one was > either 'Local Host'

Re: IP address classes vs CIDR (was Re: Reviving ARPAnet)

> > which would respond to ARP requests for non-local addresses and > > reply with the router's MAC address (on that interface), > > specifically in order to make classful-only hosts work on a > > CIDR network. > Yeah, Proxy ARP (an early RFC here: You all talk about Proxy

Re: IP address classes vs CIDR (was Re: Reviving ARPAnet)

> From: Eric Smith > which would respond to ARP requests for non-local addresses and reply > with the router's MAC address (on that interface), specifically in > order to make classful-only hosts work on a CIDR network. Yeah, Proxy ARP (an early RFC here:

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

Grant Taylor wrote: > Do the necessary emulators support the ARPANET interface? Ken Harrenstien's PDP-10 emulator does. ITS uses the IMP interface for TCP/IP to this day.

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > Easier, to get this old TCP/IP running, might be to write a Unix V6 driver > for > an Ethernet card (one the simulators do support - I know Ersatz-11 does the > Interlan NI1010A/2010A, which is nice and

Re: IP address classes vs CIDR (was Re: Reviving ARPAnet)

On 01/18/2018 11:00 AM, Eric Smith wrote: Years ago I added a configurable "bozo-arp" feature to the Telebit NetBlazer router, which would respond to ARP requests for non-local addresses and reply with the router's MAC address (on that interface), specifically in order to make classful-only

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

> From: Grant Taylor >> It is TCP/IPv4, so it's got compatible headers > Are you referring to the 802.3 Ethernet (vs Ethernet II) frame type No, I meant the IP and TCP headers. Those are end-end; the Ethernet stuff is just a local wrapping, and can be substituted. > I was not

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

On 01/18/2018 10:53 AM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk wrote: I thought that what Novell refers to as "IEEE 802.3 raw" was an early day foulup on their part where they put IPX data directly into IEEE 802.3 frames with nothing to indicate what protocol was being transported. That's my understanding

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

Here's a link with a lot of gory details on NetWare's support of multiple Ethernet frame types. Link - Migrating Ethernet Frame Types from 802.3 Raw to IEEE 802.2 - https://support.novell.com/techcenter/articles/ana19930905.html Here are the four frame types that NetWare supports: -

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

> On Jan 18, 2018, at 12:27 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk > wrote: > > On 01/17/2018 01:12 PM, Frank McConnell via cctalk wrote: > ... >> So you might think I'd be able to move files between it and a modern FreeBSD >> box, right? I mean, it's all just Ethernet, right? >

IP address classes vs CIDR (was Re: Reviving ARPAnet)

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:39 AM, Grant Taylor via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > I was not aware that there was code that supported /only/ Class A (/8) > addresses and /not/ Class B (/16) or Class C (/24) addresses. > > I /thought/ that everything was either classful (as in supports

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

On 01/17/2018 11:33 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote: This just a guess, but 'sort of'? It is TCP/IPv4, so it's got compatible headers, but I don't know if other parts have changed enough to make it not work. Are you referring to the 802.3 Ethernet (vs Ethernet II) frame type that Frank

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

On 01/17/2018 01:12 PM, Frank McConnell via cctalk wrote: So here's a real example: I have an HP 3000 Micro GX with MPE G.A3.09 (V-delta-9) which is very 1990. And it has a LANIC, and V-delta-9 is late enough for it to be able to do IP over Ethernet (vs. V-delta-4 and before which could only

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Frank McConnell via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > On Jan 17, 2018, at 10:18, Warner Losh via cctalk > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:40 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk < > > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > >>

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

> On Jan 17, 2018, at 10:18, Warner Losh via cctalk > wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:40 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > >> http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=BBN-V6 >> >> (The latter includes NCP as well as TCP/IP.) >> >

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:16 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > From: Charles Anthony > > > it was shipped has an "unbundled" product. > > Ah. I assumed that what had happened was that the set of source files at > MIT > was just what was in the 'last

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

> From: Warner Losh > I'm curious: does it inter-operate with modern TCP/IP implementations? This just a guess, but 'sort of'? It _is_ TCP/IPv4, so it's got compatible headers, but I don't know if other parts have changed enough to make it not work. E.g. it probably only supports class

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:40 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=BBN-V6 > > (The latter includes NCP as well as TCP/IP.) > I'm curious: does it inter-operate with modern TCP/IP implementations? Warner

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

> From: Charles Anthony > it was shipped has an "unbundled" product. Ah. I assumed that what had happened was that the set of source files at MIT was just what was in the 'last release', and the NCP code had been discarded by then. I wonder if it's on a backup tape that MIT retained,

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 4:40 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > From: Lars Brinkhoff > > > - Multics NCP has not been located. > > Really? It wasn't in the code dump at MIT? > > Nope; it was shipped has an "unbundled" product. -- Charles

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

Noel Chiappa wrote: >> - Multics NCP has not been located. > Really? It wasn't in the code dump at MIT? I asked my Multics guy about it, and he said it was missing. I don't know about the code dump. > I'm not sure a VMS machine was ever on the NCP ARPANet? So maybe they > were front-ended

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 7:50 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > From: Phil Budne > > > I asked around for v6 Unix with "NCP" code when the IMP code was > > resurected, but never found it > > Yeah, that one was retrieved only recently, when Chuck

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

> From: Phil Budne > I asked around for v6 Unix with "NCP" code when the IMP code was > resurected, but never found it Yeah, that one was retrieved only recently, when Chuck managed to read an old dump tape I had of the MIT-CSR PWB1 Unix PDP-11. We didn't run NCP on that machine,

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

> From: Lars Brinkhoff > - Multics NCP has not been located. Really? It wasn't in the code dump at MIT? > - Unix? For V6 NCP, we have several versions: http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=SRI-NOSC http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=BBN-V6 (The latter

Re: Reviving ARPAnet

> - Unix? I asked around for v6 Unix with "NCP" code when the IMP code was resurected, but never found it

Reviving ARPAnet

Hello, What software, hardware, simulators, emulators, etc are there that could run ARPAnet today? - ITS has support for NCP, but I don't know if it works. - There's source code for the IMP. - TENEX seems ok at a quick glance. - WAITS, likewise. - Multics NCP has not been located. - Unix? - IBM