Archive-Date: Thu, 04 Jan 1996 09:37:30 -0500 Subject: Performance of Windows Networking... Message-ID: <30EBE62A.5817@voicenet.com> From: "Darwin J. Sanoy" Date: Thu, 04 Jan 1996 09:37:30 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit We are currently running the TCPware stack on various VMS/Pathworks 5.0 servers. Our IP performance when doing Windows Networking is NOTEABLY slower than NETBEUI and DECNet. An non-windows based networking (telnet, ftp) seem to work fine. My questions are these: *) Does anyone know of any tuning parameters (or one big one) we are missing that would correct this situation? *) Does anyone have experience with the different available IP stacks for VMS/Pathworks and could compare their relative performance for me? Thank you, djs. -- __ _ Darwin J. Sanoy ____/ / (_) _____ / __ / / / / ___/ / /_/ /_ / /_ (__ )_ __________________________________________________\__,_/(_)_/ /(_)____/(_) OS/2 Certified Engineer sanoydj@voicenet.com /___/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: XXX, 4 Jan 1996 16:07:27 -0500 Subject: Re: Performance of Windows Networking... Message-ID: <1996Jan4.160727@process.com> From: bryant@process.com (Geoff Bryant) Date: 4 Jan 96 16:07:27 -0500 References: <30EBE62A.5817@voicenet.com> In article <30EBE62A.5817@voicenet.com>, "Darwin J. Sanoy" writes: > We are currently running the TCPware stack on various VMS/Pathworks 5.0 > servers. Our IP performance when doing Windows Networking is NOTEABLY slower > than NETBEUI and DECNet. An non-windows based networking (telnet, ftp) seem > to work fine. In our recent TCPware 5.0-4 release, there was a change made which significantly helps performance for Pathworks under some conditions. You may wish to upgrade to this release. Geoff Bryant Process Software ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 16:42:37 GMT Subject: TCPWare TCP site command Message-ID: From: royfran@statcan.ca (Francois Roy) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 16:42:37 GMT Hi, I'm trying to implement a data server using only ftp, using the SITE command available in TCPWare. Problem is, if my command line exceeds a hundred or so characters (i.e. way less than the VMS limit of 256, although I don't know the exact length at which this starts to happen), the client gets a message back from the VMS machine: "SYSTEM-F-IVBUFLEN - Invalid Buffer Length". Does anyone know how I can manage to SITE SPAWN a command line that can be as long as the VMS maximum (256)? ================================================================================ Archive-Date: XXX, 5 Jan 1996 11:11:57 -0500 Subject: Re: TCPWare TCP site command Message-ID: <1996Jan5.111157@process.com> From: volz@process.com (Bernie Volz) Date: 5 Jan 96 11:11:57 -0500 References: In article , royfran@statcan.ca (Francois Roy) writes: > Hi, > > I'm trying to implement a data server using only ftp, using the > SITE command available in TCPWare. Problem is, if my command > line exceeds a hundred or so characters (i.e. way less than > the VMS limit of 256, although I don't know the exact length > at which this starts to happen), the client gets a message > back from the VMS machine: "SYSTEM-F-IVBUFLEN - Invalid Buffer > Length". > > Does anyone know how I can manage to SITE SPAWN a command line > that can be as long as the VMS maximum (256)? > I don't recall what we set the command line limit to, but it may be that is much less than the 256 character maximum. One suggested work around might be to set up some command procedures to execute the commands you want - then PUT the command procedure and invoke it via the SITE SPAWN command (SITE SPAWN @file). - Bernie ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:59:11 GMT Subject: Re: TCPWare TCP site command Message-ID: <4ddq4g$c37@news.knoware.nl> From: kcl@knoware.nl (John Kattestaart) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:59:11 GMT References: royfran@statcan.ca (Francois Roy) wrote: >Hi, >I'm trying to implement a data server using only ftp, using the >SITE command available in TCPWare. Problem is, if my command >line exceeds a hundred or so characters (i.e. way less than >the VMS limit of 256, although I don't know the exact length >at which this starts to happen), the client gets a message >back from the VMS machine: "SYSTEM-F-IVBUFLEN - Invalid Buffer >Length". > >Does anyone know how I can manage to SITE SPAWN a command line >that can be as long as the VMS maximum (256)? I don't know, but why not use a DCL procedure in the SIT SPAWN. In the DC procedure you can use up to the VMS limit. I'v used SITE SPAWN to execute DCL-commands with parameters for optional actions. John Kattestaart KCL Foundation Netherlands ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 21:07:13 GMT Subject: Re: TCPWare TCP site command Message-ID: From: royfran@statcan.ca (Francois Roy) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 21:07:13 GMT References: <4ddq4g$c37@news.knoware.nl> John Kattestaart (kcl@knoware.nl) wrote: : royfran@statcan.ca (Francois Roy) wrote: : >back from the VMS machine: "SYSTEM-F-IVBUFLEN - Invalid Buffer : >Length". : > : >Does anyone know how I can manage to SITE SPAWN a command line : >that can be as long as the VMS maximum (256)? : I don't know, but why not use a DCL procedure in the SIT SPAWN. Can't do that: the parameters (command line) come from the client, and are not known in advance. The client would have to generate the .COM file and ftp it over and then run it. It's a solution, but I would prefer passing the command line directly to the executable, in its full length. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: XXX, 16 Jan 1996 17:58:31 -0500 Subject: Re: TCPWare TCP site command Message-ID: <1996Jan16.175831@process.com> From: volz@process.com (Bernie Volz) Date: 16 Jan 96 17:58:31 -0500 References: <4ddq4g$c37@news.knoware.nl> In article , royfran@statcan.ca (Francois Roy) writes: > John Kattestaart (kcl@knoware.nl) wrote: > : royfran@statcan.ca (Francois Roy) wrote: > > > : >back from the VMS machine: "SYSTEM-F-IVBUFLEN - Invalid Buffer > : >Length". > : > > : >Does anyone know how I can manage to SITE SPAWN a command line > : >that can be as long as the VMS maximum (256)? > > : I don't know, but why not use a DCL procedure in the SIT SPAWN. > > Can't do that: the parameters (command line) come from the client, and > are not known in advance. The client would have to generate the .COM > file and ftp it over and then run it. It's a solution, but I would > prefer passing the command line directly to the executable, in its > full length. At present, the maximum length is 191 characters for the command you can specify. We can certainly entertain the idea of allowing the maximum in a future release of TCPware. Perhaps now that you know the length limitation, a combination of using a command procedure and parameters to the command procedure might work for you? - Bernie Volz Process Software Corporation ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 17:13:29 GMT Subject: Using UCX services in TCPware Message-ID: From: andycheetham@cix.compulink.co.uk ("Andy Cheetham") Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 17:13:29 GMT Has anyone got any experience using TCPware UCX emulation ? I have created a service using add service 2001 bg_tcp - /routine=create_server_process - /nolog - /username=TCPWARE - /input=HRS_IMAGE:HRS_SERVER.COM But I just get %%%%%%%%%%% OPCOM 17-JAN-1996 10:46:25.30 %%%%%%%%%%% Message from user AUDIT$SERVER on MAT1 Security alarm (SECURITY) and security audit (SECURITY) on MAT1, system id: 1025 Auditable event: Network login failure Event time: 17-JAN-1996 10:46:25.19 PID: 0000374A Process name: TCPware_35 Username: TCPWARE Status: %LOGIN-F-INVPWD, invalid password Yet this account is /NOPASS in AUTHORIZE What have I done wrong ????? Andy Cheetham Systems Manager Morgan Matroc Ltd (All my opinions are my own etc...) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: XXX, 18 Jan 1996 21:05:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Using UCX services in TCPware Message-ID: <1996Jan18.210507@process.com> From: volz@process.com (Bernie Volz) Date: 18 Jan 96 21:05:07 -0500 References: In article , andycheetham@cix.compulink.co.uk ("Andy Cheetham") writes: > Has anyone got any experience using TCPware UCX emulation ? > > I have created a service using > > add service 2001 bg_tcp - > /routine=create_server_process - > /nolog - > /username=TCPWARE - > /input=HRS_IMAGE:HRS_SERVER.COM > > But I just get > > %%%%%%%%%%% OPCOM 17-JAN-1996 10:46:25.30 %%%%%%%%%%% > Message from user AUDIT$SERVER on MAT1 > Security alarm (SECURITY) and security audit (SECURITY) on MAT1, system > id: 1025 > Auditable event: Network login failure > Event time: 17-JAN-1996 10:46:25.19 > PID: 0000374A > Process name: TCPware_35 > Username: TCPWARE > Status: %LOGIN-F-INVPWD, invalid password > > > Yet this account is /NOPASS in AUTHORIZE > > What have I done wrong ????? > What version of TCPware do you have? There was a odd bug in the UCX service creation that could result in this problem and it has been fixed. You should request TCPware V5.0-4 if you can upgrade. Otherwise, contact Technical Support to see if a patch is available for your version of TCPware. - Bernie Volz Process Software Corporation ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 19 Jan 1996 20:53:25 GMT Subject: Calling OS-scripts from a PC-client using TCP/IP ? Message-ID: <4dp0b8$di9@mordred.cc.jyu.fi> From: tojala@cc.jyu.fi (T Ojala) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 1996 20:53:25 GMT Hello everybody! I wonder if anybody could give me some useful information, experience, hints etc about calling OS-scripts (VMS-procedures, unix-scripts) from a PC-client without any terminal session. I'm especially interested in solutions using Microsoft's TCP/IP stack together with Oracle7 on the server side. What would be the simpliest way to implement this? Anybody using Oracle7's DBMS_PIPE -procedure? Is it possible to use r-commands (rexec) with MS TCP/IP + Digital's UCX (or Process's TCPware) ? Any other useful methods? Any useful freeware available? I'd appreciate if you would mail answers to me directly (and of course to the newsgroup also). Thanks in advance! -- Tane http://www.jyu.fi/~tojala/index.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 20 Jan 1996 19:10:49 GMT Subject: Re: Calling OS-scripts from a PC-client using TCP/IP ? Message-ID: From: dan@bristol.com (J. Daniel Smith) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 1996 19:10:49 GMT Sender: usenet@bristol.com (USENET News System) References: <4dp0b8$di9@mordred.cc.jyu.fi> In <4dp0b8$di9@mordred.cc.jyu.fi> tojala@cc.jyu.fi (T Ojala) writes: >hints etc about calling OS-scripts (VMS-procedures, unix-scripts) from >a PC-client without any terminal session. I'm especially interested in >[...] >Is it possible to use r-commands (rexec) with MS TCP/IP + Digital's Netmanage's Chamealon product has a "rsh" GUI tool that works well for things like this; I'm sure others are available. Dan -- --------------------- message is author's opinion only -------------------- J. Daniel Smith http://www.bristol.com/~dan Bristol Technology Inc. +1 203 438 6969, 438-5013 (FAX) Ridgefield, Connecticut (USA) {info,jobs}@bristol.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: XXX, 22 Jan 1996 13:22:15 GMT Subject: Re: Calling OS-scripts from a PC-client using TCP/IP ? Message-ID: <4e0327$jmc@mx.nsu.nsk.su> From: fancy@iceman (Evgeny Faddeenkov) Date: 22 Jan 1996 13:22:15 GMT References: <4dp0b8$di9@mordred.cc.jyu.fi> T Ojala (tojala@cc.jyu.fi) wrote: : Hello everybody! : I wonder if anybody could give me some useful information, experience, : hints etc about calling OS-scripts (VMS-procedures, unix-scripts) from : a PC-client without any terminal session. I'm especially interested in : solutions using Microsoft's TCP/IP stack together with Oracle7 on the You can activate various process from the PL/SQL block's by using Dbms_pipe package. It allows you to transfere some data from one client (i.e. on Microsoft Windows) to another (Your unix-platform). At unix-site You can browse message and activate proper process. Execution results can be send back. : server side. : What would be the simpliest way to implement this? : Anybody using Oracle7's DBMS_PIPE -procedure? : Is it possible to use r-commands (rexec) with MS TCP/IP + Digital's : UCX (or Process's TCPware) ? : Any other useful methods? : Any useful freeware available? : I'd appreciate if you would mail answers to me directly (and of : course to the newsgroup also). Thanks in advance! : -- : Tane : http://www.jyu.fi/~tojala/index.html -- Evgeny N. Faddeenkov +7-(383-2)-39-78-95 (ph) http://www.cnit.nsk.su/~fancy/ +7-(383-2)-35-52-38 (fax) Novosibirsk State University ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 18:00:09 gmt Subject: Win 95 32 bit emulation - TERMiTE beta testers required Message-ID: From: francisc@pixel.co.uk (Francis Carden) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 18:00:09 gmt Win 95 32 bit emulation - TERMiTE beta testers required Pixel Innovations are looking for Beta Testers for it's brand new TERMiTE 95 32 bit terminal emulation product. TERMiTE 6 is already fully compatible with Win 95 and NT but the 32 bit versions for NT and Win 95 set the standard for the next generation of emulation and client/server products for the GUIisation of host based legacy applications. TERMiTE 95 is currently in Alpha Trial and we are now compiling a list of pre-qualified Beta testers. Developers, please call re OEM opportunities of Emulation Objects. Please complete the Beta Testers form by completing the details requested in this email and send toTERMITE95@pixel.co.uk PLEASE DON'T BE DAUNTED BY THE NUMBER OF QUESTIONS, IT'S IMPORTANT WE ESTABLISH THE RIGHT MIX OF BETA TESTERS FOR THE HUNDREDS OF ENVIRONMENTS SUPPORTED BY TERMITE. PLEASE COMPLETE ALL QUESTIONS YOU CAN, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR ALL OF US. THANKS. Email the following details to termite95@pixel.co.uk company information =================== Name : Job Title : Company : Add : Add : Town/City : County/State : Country : Postcode/Zip : No of employees : Phone: Fax: Email: Connection Information :- ========================= No of PC's : No of Win 95 PC's: No of NT Clients : No of dumb terms : No of Hosts : No of Host users : Type of Hosts : (AS/400, HP, Data General, IBM Mainframe, NT etc.,) O/S types : (Oracle, Sybase, PICK, Inges etc.,) Network Type : (Novell IPX, TCP/IP, Dec Lat, IBM Sync) Emulations Used : (Wyse, VT, TN5250, 5250 Native, TN3270, 3270 Native) Main Interests (Mark as a % of 100, the higer the more important to you) ======================================================================== Emulation : File Transfer : Auto GUI look : Client Server : GUI of Legacy Apps : Other Comments : feel free to state why you would like to be a beta tester of any other information you feel would be important to both parties in this beta trial leave blank if not appropriate. Users can download the 16 bit version of TERMiTE today from our Web site at www.pixel.co.uk, - FULL evaluation versions under 'try TERMiTE now' Francis Carden CEO - Pixel USA *********** P I X E L U S A Atlanta, GA. ************* Francis Carden francisc@pixel.co.uk tel: (770) 512 7417 http://www.pixel.co.uk/pixel/ fax: (770) 512 7745 ************************************************************* ********* F R E E E V A L U A T I O N S *************** download from http://www.pixel.co.uk/pixel/ TERMiTE - future-proof terminal emulation and GUI integration ------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 29 Jan 1996 16:36:36 GMT Subject: Mixing UCX and TCPWARE in a cluster Message-ID: <4eibfs$gms@romeo.logica.co.uk> From: Blacka@logica.com (Andrew Black) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 96 16:36:36 GMT Does anyone know if there might be problems trying to load TCPWARE and UCX on two nodes that share a common system disk. We already have TCPWARE, and it has been suggested to load UCX. My gut feeling is someting is SYS$SYSTEM or SYS$LIBRARY or similar will get itself very confused. Dont ask too closely why I want to do this - its to do with trying to support a product that can use either if the two TCP stacks. Thanks for the help ================================================================================ Archive-Date: XXX, 29 Jan 1996 15:22:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Mixing UCX and TCPWARE in a cluster Message-ID: <1996Jan29.152223@process.com> From: volz@process.com (Bernie Volz) Date: 29 Jan 96 15:22:23 -0500 References: <4eibfs$gms@romeo.logica.co.uk> In article <4eibfs$gms@romeo.logica.co.uk>, Blacka@logica.com (Andrew Black) writes: > Does anyone know if there might be problems trying to > load TCPWARE and UCX on two nodes that share a common > system disk. We already have TCPWARE, and it has > been suggested to load UCX. > > My gut feeling is someting is SYS$SYSTEM or SYS$LIBRARY > or similar will get itself very confused. > > Dont ask too closely why I want to do this - its to > do with trying to support a product that can use either > if the two TCP stacks. > There should not be any problems. We took care not to place any conflicting files on the system. - Bernie Volz Process Software Corporation ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 13:39:08 GMT Subject: Re: Mixing UCX and TCPWARE in a cluster Message-ID: <4el74a$5hd@news.knoware.nl> From: kcl@knoware.nl (John Kattestaart) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 13:39:08 GMT References: <4eibfs$gms@romeo.logica.co.uk> Blacka@logica.com (Andrew Black) wrote: >Does anyone know if there might be problems trying to >load TCPWARE and UCX on two nodes that share a common >system disk. We already have TCPWARE, and it has >been suggested to load UCX. >My gut feeling is someting is SYS$SYSTEM or SYS$LIBRARY >or similar will get itself very confused. We have a cluster where some nodes use UCX and other use TCPWARE. Personally I prefer TCWARE, but we can't afford to change alll licenses to TCPWARE. TCPWARE installs in SYS$COMMON:[TCPWARE] and SYS$SPECIFIC:[TCPWARE]. The libaray modules are not conflicting. Also the manual is very clear about the installlation and configuration. >Dont ask too closely why I want to do this - its to >do with trying to support a product that can use either >if the two TCP stacks. Yes, I do want to. TCPWARE is by far superior to UCX. More over TCP WARE emulates UCX. But OK you're the boss. >Thanks for the help John Kattestaart KCL Foundation Netherlands ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 13:47:21 GMT Subject: Re: Using UCX services in TCPware Message-ID: <4el7jo$5i3@news.knoware.nl> From: kcl@knoware.nl (John Kattestaart) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 13:47:21 GMT References: andycheetham@cix.compulink.co.uk ("Andy Cheetham") wrote: >Has anyone got any experience using TCPware UCX emulation ? >I have created a service using >add service 2001 bg_tcp - > /routine=create_server_process - > /nolog - > /username=TCPWARE - > /input=HRS_IMAGE:HRS_SERVER.COM > >But I just get >%%%%%%%%%%% OPCOM 17-JAN-1996 10:46:25.30 %%%%%%%%%%% >Message from user AUDIT$SERVER on MAT1 >Security alarm (SECURITY) and security audit (SECURITY) on MAT1, system >id: 1025 >Auditable event: Network login failure >Event time: 17-JAN-1996 10:46:25.19 >PID: 0000374A >Process name: TCPware_35 >Username: TCPWARE >Status: %LOGIN-F-INVPWD, invalid password >Yet this account is /NOPASS in AUTHORIZE >What have I done wrong ????? >Andy Cheetham >Systems Manager >Morgan Matroc Ltd >(All my opinions are my own etc...) I don't know if NOPASS is helping. Because it's a process startup. I'v started some services with the folowing option: /NOAUTHORIZE/UIC=[SYSTEM] Maybe you could try this before testing other accounts. John Kattestaart KCL Foundation Netherlands ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 22:33:09 GMT Subject: Work around TCPWARE 5.0 bug Message-ID: <4eoqll$vhs@hera.cuci.nl> From: akorsten@cuci.nl (Andreas Korsten) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 22:33:09 GMT Recently I installed the 5.0 version of TCPWARE. I discoverd that if you use the DECW interface of the FTP module the window of the FTP session starts growing and schrinking. Has any one discoverd the same problems??? ================================================================================ Archive-Date: XXX, 31 Jan 1996 23:51:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Work around TCPWARE 5.0 bug Message-ID: <1996Jan31.235110@process.com> From: volz@process.com (Bernie Volz) Date: 31 Jan 96 23:51:10 -0500 References: <4eoqll$vhs@hera.cuci.nl> In article <4eoqll$vhs@hera.cuci.nl>, akorsten@cuci.nl (Andreas Korsten) writes: > Recently I installed the 5.0 version of TCPWARE. I discoverd that if > you use the DECW interface of the FTP module the window of the FTP > session starts growing and schrinking. > Has any one discoverd the same problems??? > This bug has been fixed in TCPware V5.0-4 (just recently released maintanence release for V5.0). Please contact your distributor or Process Software technical support to request a kit to be set to you (support customers should be receiving this update shortly). If you are really hot to get the kit, drop me a line and I can give you instructions for FTPing it - it is ZIPped but is still large (7MB for VAX, 15MB for Alpha). - Bernie Volz Process Software Corporation ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 29 Jan 1996 13:42:23 GMT Subject: Re: Mixing UCX and TCPWARE in a cluster Message-ID: <822922954.3181@paulr.integralis.co.uk> From: Paul.Roberts@integralis.co.uk (Paul Roberts) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 1996 13:42:23 GMT References: <4eibfs$gms@romeo.logica.co.uk> Blacka@logica.com (Andrew Black) wrote: >Does anyone know if there might be problems trying to >load TCPWARE and UCX on two nodes that share a common >system disk. We already have TCPWARE, and it has >been suggested to load UCX. >My gut feeling is someting is SYS$SYSTEM or SYS$LIBRARY >or similar will get itself very confused. >Dont ask too closely why I want to do this - its to >do with trying to support a product that can use either >if the two TCP stacks. I'd be careful about this. TCPware emulates the UCX $QIO interface anyway, so everything that runs over UCX should run fine over TCPware. Also, if both products update DCLTABLES then which version of ftp, telnet, rsh, ping etc. will be run when you issue those commands? If you really want to try this I would suggest first de-installing one product and then installing the other, but as a distrubutor of TCPware, I would obviously recommend that you just throw UCX in the bin and forget about it! :-) Regards, Paul ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 15:52:05 GMT Subject: Re: Mixing UCX and TCPWARE in a cluster Message-ID: From: mikewd@leica.co.uk (Mike Wilmot-Dear) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 15:52:05 GMT References: <4eibfs$gms@romeo.logica.co.uk> Andrew Black (Blacka@logica.com) wrote: : Does anyone know if there might be problems trying to : load TCPWARE and UCX on two nodes that share a common : system disk. We already have TCPWARE, and it has : been suggested to load UCX. I don't think this should cause a problem. We used to have such a configuration (admittedly it was with TCPWare V4 and UCX V2 but I don't think it should be any different with the current versions) and had no problems with it. : My gut feeling is someting is SYS$SYSTEM or SYS$LIBRARY : or similar will get itself very confused. Most of the TCPWare file get put under [tcpware...] directory trees so won't clash with the UCX stuff and the files that go in the system directories all have TCPWARE in their name whereas the UCX ones all seem to have UCX in their name so again I don't think they should clash. The only area where I guess you might get problems I guess is in things like command definitions (especially with the new COPY /FTP type stuff in VMS 6.2) if you have common command tables between the two nodes. It would probably be best to make sure you had seperate system command tables for each node. Normal TCPware commands (like FTP) are done using symbols whereas I think UCX puts them into the command tables. Mike. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ +*I'm not paid to make official comments for Leica, so the above isn't one.*+ Mike Wilmot-Dear (MW342) e-mail: mikewd@leica.co.uk