From owner-freebsd-hardware Sun Jul 7 00:26:38 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id AAA04673 for hardware-outgoing; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 00:26:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au [129.127.96.120]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA04665 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 00:26:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from msmith@localhost by genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (8.6.12/8.6.9) id QAA26978; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:50:01 +0930 From: Michael Smith Message-Id: <199607070720.QAA26978@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN To: troy@circle.net (Troy Arie Cobb) Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:50:00 +0930 (CST) Cc: hardware@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from "Troy Arie Cobb" at Jul 6, 96 11:31:02 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Troy Arie Cobb stands accused of saying: > > All questions/issues of bandwidth aside, the real issue > as I see it w/ cable networking is that it is BROADCAST > ethernet. That is, every one in your cable-division (i.e. > all of those houses connected to the same switch > as you are) will get the same packets. Drop a wee little This is dubious. Ive seen no indication one way or another, but I'd imagine that you'd have to sniff the cable side of the box, not the inhouse side to see anything. > Know of any machine that can handle destination-based encryption on > the fly, fast enough to support 10MB/s? You're almost certainly typing on one. > all up. So, take heart ISPs! Just be ready to move quickly, who knows > when your local cable company might want to buy their access thru you? > Or consulting, too... :) Yup, have to agree here; I don't know about the USA, but the cable companies here don't inspire my confidence when it comes to service provision. 8( > Troy Arie Cobb -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control (ph/fax) +61-8-267-3039 [[ ]] Collector of old Unix hardware. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[ From owner-freebsd-hardware Sun Jul 7 10:11:31 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA22430 for hardware-outgoing; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 10:11:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from terra.Sarnoff.COM (terra.sarnoff.com [130.33.11.203]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA22420 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 10:11:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from rminnich@localhost) by terra.Sarnoff.COM (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA14712; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 13:10:56 -0400 Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 13:10:56 -0400 (EDT) From: "Ron G. Minnich" X-Sender: rminnich@terra To: hardware@freebsd.org cc: bsdi-users@bsdi.com Subject: cable modems In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk amusing stories abound for the bi-directional cable modem trials. Best one so far is the guy who was using his cable to run power to his tv set. needless to say cable companies will have a bit of work to do before they turn on bidirectional cable for real! It will be a while before this type of problem is resolved. But, don't knock uni-directional techniques. I've been using DirecPC off and on and boy is that download speed nice. I can live with an asymmetric world for a while. ron Ron Minnich |"Inferno runs on MIPS ..., Intel ..., and AMD's rminnich@sarnoff.com |29-kilobit-per-second chip-based architectures ..." (609)-734-3120 | Comm. week, may 13, pg. 4. ftp://ftp.sarnoff.com/pub/mnfs/www/docs/cluster.html From owner-freebsd-hardware Sun Jul 7 16:16:24 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA21023 for hardware-outgoing; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from persprog.com (persprog.com [204.215.255.203]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA21016 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:16:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by persprog.com (8.7.5/4.10) id SAA21515; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 18:00:07 -0500 Received: from novell(192.2.2.201) by cerberus.ppi.com via smap (V1.3) id sma021510; Sun Jul 7 18:59:53 1996 Received: from NOVELL/SpoolDir by novell.persprog.com (Mercury 1.12); Sun, 7 Jul 96 18:56:25 +0500 Received: from SpoolDir by NOVELL (Mercury 1.12); Sun, 7 Jul 96 18:56:13 +0500 From: "David Alderman" Organization: Personalized Programming, Inc. To: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 18:56:10 EST Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN CC: hardware@freebsd.org Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.31) Message-ID: <34658837B9@novell.persprog.com> Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > From: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" > > Personally, I don't care. Whoever gets to my house first with a > digital tap I can afford, with decent performance, will get my > business. If it's the cable company, fine. Phone company? Well, I > don't have any love for them, but I'll take what they offer *if* they > manage to get here first. I'd say the odds are against them, however. > I could not have said it better. I personally challenge all comers to provide me with an affordable internet access. ISDN, cable modem, Ouija board, or HSSS (high speed smoke signals) - I don't care. If it's faster and it's reasonably priced you will get my business. ====================================== When philosophy conflicts with reality, choose reality. Dave Alderman -- dave@persprog.com ====================================== From owner-freebsd-hardware Sun Jul 7 16:17:37 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA21055 for hardware-outgoing; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:17:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from persprog.com (persprog.com [204.215.255.203]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA21048 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:17:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by persprog.com (8.7.5/4.10) id RAA21501; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 17:51:51 -0500 Received: from novell(192.2.2.201) by cerberus.ppi.com via smap (V1.3) id sma021499; Sun Jul 7 18:51:29 1996 Received: from NOVELL/SpoolDir by novell.persprog.com (Mercury 1.12); Sun, 7 Jul 96 18:48:01 +0500 Received: from SpoolDir by NOVELL (Mercury 1.12); Sun, 7 Jul 96 18:47:40 +0500 From: "David Alderman" Organization: Personalized Programming, Inc. To: "Jacob M. Parnas" , hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 18:47:37 EST Subject: Re: Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.31) Message-ID: <3440F75C13@novell.persprog.com> Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > From: "Jacob M. Parnas" > > But I think if you research carefully its receive only. Send must be done > through some other channel like a V.34+ modem. > My brother in Jacksonville, Florida is being offered bidirectional access through Continental Cablevision for $40 / month. Continental has converted large portions of Jacksonville to fiber and they have bidirectional capability. No phone lines are required - I repeat no phone lines are required. I have heard of what you are talking about, Mr. Parnas, and this is indeed how some cable providers are planning to set things up but others are planning what appears to be reasonable, competitive solutions. Continental Cablevision did their original trials at Boston College and I think they may know what they are doing (although I am certainly not known for my love of cable companies). The big problem I see with ISDN, cable modems, etc. is that the service is only available in some areas and the pricing strategies are so varied. I live in Alachua, Florida. My cable provider is Cable Florida and my local phone system is Alltel. While Alltel may provide internet services in Georgia they have failed to deliver ISDN in three years of promises in this area (unless my information is out of date - if so my sincere apologies to Alltel and please send your rates immediately!). Less than ten miles away Gainesville has BellSouth and full ISDN services available although I don't know if there are any ISP's providing ISDN at a reasonable rate. I work for a software company but my only access to the internet is through POTS because our local phone company has the attitude that if enough people ask them for ISDN, maybe they will provide it. If they had used the same approach for basic phone service I bet half of the United States would have no phones. ====================================== When philosophy conflicts with reality, choose reality. Dave Alderman -- dave@persprog.com ====================================== From owner-freebsd-hardware Sun Jul 7 16:26:17 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA21343 for hardware-outgoing; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:26:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zoo.toronto.edu (zoo.toronto.edu [128.100.72.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA21338 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:26:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 19:25:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Henry Spencer Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN To: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com In-Reply-To: <199607070539.WAA01617@MindBender.HeadCandy.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > >...As I said above: they own the wires, so there's not a lot of > >room to maneuver. If you don't like monopolies, start lobbying now for > >competitive cable and phone services. > > Uh, the economics of that are rather unworkable. These are > "controlled monopolies"... This is comonly done where public > access is limited in some way (such as redundant infrastructure wiring > costs), and granting a controlled monopoly is actually in the public > interest. That is the standard party line, but it's worth noting that this idea was invented by one of its major beneficiaries -- Bell -- and not by some disinterested third party. I'm told that in the few places where there are multiple cable companies (and where they serve the same neighborhoods, rather than cosily dividing the city into regional monopolies), prices actually often are lower *despite* the redundant infrastructure, because competition controls costs better than government regulators do. The original problem with multiple phone companies was not redundant infrastructure, but their unwillingness to interoperate so that customers would see a seamless network. That problem can be solved quite easily without monopolies. Henry Spencer henry@zoo.toronto.edu From owner-freebsd-hardware Sun Jul 7 16:29:09 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA21534 for hardware-outgoing; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:29:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zoo.toronto.edu (zoo.toronto.edu [128.100.72.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA21527 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:29:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 19:28:54 -0400 (EDT) From: Henry Spencer Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN To: Joel Yancey cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > ...For one thing, the 128k/10M split is just an oddity of *your* > > local cable system -- the better-equipped ones are talking about symmetrical > > bandwidth... > > Well, do you have proof otherwise? i heard this from a national bases, in > fact, from what *I* hear, they really dont exsist in the working form as > of yet. Rogers Cable has been testing them, live, with real customers, in one of the suburbs of Toronto. Your informant is seriously behind the times. Henry Spencer henry@zoo.toronto.edu From owner-freebsd-hardware Sun Jul 7 19:09:44 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA22499 for hardware-outgoing; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 19:09:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lserver.infoworld.com (lserver.infoworld.com [192.216.48.4]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA22473 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 19:09:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ccgate.infoworld.com by lserver.infoworld.com with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 #12) id m0ud7Me-000wsLC; Sun, 7 Jul 96 20:52 PDT Received: from cc:Mail by ccgate.infoworld.com id AA836791639; Sun, 07 Jul 96 20:02:56 PST Date: Sun, 07 Jul 96 20:02:56 PST From: "Brett Glass" Message-Id: <9606078367.AA836791639@ccgate.infoworld.com> To: Henry Spencer , michaelv@HeadCandy.com Cc: hardware@FreeBSD.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > The original problem with multiple phone companies was not redundant > infrastructure, but their unwillingness to interoperate so that customers > would see a seamless network. Both are problems. That the new telecommunications legislation has mandated sharing of infrastructure does NOT mean it will be shared in a way that will encourage competition! Incumbent local carriers everywhere are looking to set rates, terms, and conditions so that they have an edge and/or competition is still impractical. And because they have the local lobbying muscle, they often can do this quite effectively. From owner-freebsd-hardware Mon Jul 8 04:55:57 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA28783 for hardware-outgoing; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 04:55:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from flubber.futurecomm.com (bbecker@flubber.futurecomm.com [205.247.49.222]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA28770 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 04:55:51 -0700 (PDT) From: bbecker@flubber.futurecomm.com Received: from localhost (bbecker@localhost) by flubber.futurecomm.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id HAA06731; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 07:55:44 -0400 Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 07:55:44 -0400 (EDT) To: Richard Foulk cc: "Jacob M. Parnas" , hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: <199607060653.UAA29144@pegasus.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 5 Jul 1996, Richard Foulk wrote: > Our cable company here in Honolulu is apparently going to use modems that > provide 6Mb in both directions. The promise is $50/month. The cable > modem connects to your ethernet. The cable company is becoming an ISP, > in a big way. Well, a video channel -- With sound -- Is 6 megabits. So they are going to dedicate two entire 6mbit video channels to individual customers, for $50/month? Naah. Maybe they are going to set two channels aside for everyone. If that means sharing with 20,000 people then 6 megabits is not as good as a v.34 modem. Of course they can add more channels and give you a guaranteed data rate. What exactly are they selling? From owner-freebsd-hardware Mon Jul 8 07:04:25 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id HAA05533 for hardware-outgoing; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 07:04:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from diablo.ppp.de (diablo.ppp.de [193.141.101.34]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA05512 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 07:04:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from allegro.lemis.de by diablo.ppp.de with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0udGtU-000QfNC; Mon, 8 Jul 96 16:02 MET DST From: grog@lemis.de (Greg Lehey) Organisation: LEMIS, Schellnhausen 2, 36325 Feldatal, Germany Phone: +49-6637-919123 Fax: +49-6637-919122 Received: (grog@localhost) by allegro.lemis.de (8.6.9/8.6.9) id PAA09745; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 15:54:24 +0200 Message-Id: <199607081354.PAA09745@allegro.lemis.de> Subject: Re: your mail without subject line about ADSL To: richard@pegasus.com (Richard Foulk) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 15:54:24 +0200 (MET DST) Cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com In-Reply-To: <199607060653.UAA29144@pegasus.com> from "Richard Foulk" at Jul 5, 96 08:53:31 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I'm sure more people would notice your message if you had given it a subject :-) Richard Foulk writes: > >}> Cable has a good chance of blowing ISDN away. Much faster and cheaper. And >}> it will be available in many places this year. More, next. >}> >}> Keep your eye on the cable companies. >}> >}> >}> Richard >} >} Cable is a pain. It works only one way. If you want to send a large file >} you still have to go slow. And, you still need to be a member of a ISP >} as you can't write to cable, from what I've read. > > Slow compared to what? > > There are a few different configurations. Eight megabits in, three > megabits out is one. Still way faster than other modes, even on the > slower half. As far as I know, the slowest slow in cable modems is > still fast. That's certainly fast compared to ISDN BRI or PRI. > Our cable company here in Honolulu is apparently going to use modems that > provide 6Mb in both directions. The promise is $50/month. The cable > modem connects to your ethernet. The cable company is becoming an ISP, > in a big way. There's a difference between supplying bandwidth and supplying Internet services. My understanding is that the telcos and the cable companies are currently fighting for market share. I've heard that they're going to offer a similar service in Austin, TX Real Soon Now. > Imagine how that kind of throughput could change the landscape. Indeed. It could blow everything we've seen so far out of the water. Greg From owner-freebsd-hardware Mon Jul 8 09:40:41 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA16886 for hardware-outgoing; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 09:40:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zoo.toronto.edu (zoo.toronto.edu [128.100.72.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA16879 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 09:40:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 12:40:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Henry Spencer Subject: cable etc. To: bbecker@flubber.futurecomm.com cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Maybe they are going to set two channels aside for everyone. If that > means sharing with 20,000 people then 6 megabits is not as good as a v.34 > modem... Just how many people you share with depends on how well the cable company does its job. They don't run all the cables in the city to a central point for video distribution -- it's done as a tree. The irreducible minimum area of sharing is had by putting the head-end data equipment at the lowest level of video amplifier, serving, I dunno, maybe a few residential city blocks or one big building. It is possible for the data equipment to be higher up in the tree, in which case the sharing is over a larger area. Almost certainly, most of the cable companies planning data services will start with the head ends fairly high up and move them down as volume grows. Bear in mind that what they are selling is high data rates. Their whole stock in trade is that they are better than modems. They'll move the equipment as far down as necessary to achieve that. Henry Spencer henry@zoo.toronto.edu From owner-freebsd-hardware Mon Jul 8 11:46:29 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA29235 for hardware-outgoing; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 11:46:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from charlotte.spiders.com (charlotte.spiders.com [199.224.7.188]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA29230 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 11:46:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from gwh@localhost) by charlotte.spiders.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA03169; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 14:49:01 -0400 Message-Id: <199607081849.OAA03169@charlotte.spiders.com> From: gwh@spiders.com (Gene W Homicki) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 14:49:00 -0400 In-Reply-To: Henry Spencer's message as of Jul 8, 12:40 X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: Henry Spencer , bbecker@flubber.futurecomm.com Subject: Re: cable etc. Cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk +--- | Bear in mind that what they are selling is high data rates. Their whole | stock in trade is that they are better than modems. They'll move the | equipment as far down as necessary to achieve that. +--- My apologies if this is going even further off topic for these mailing lists, but: Everyone keeps talking about the bandwidth from the home to the ISP (whether that ISP is a local ISP, cable or regional bell company), but I find that very often the limiting factor is the ISP interconnection points (the NAPs and MAEs especially). Its all well and good to have a blindingly fast connection to your ISP, as long as the resources you want are on another machine using the smae ISP (assuming your ISP's own backbone isn't saturated). Until there are more ISP interconnections, having the very high bandwidth to the end points is kinda useless much of the time (unless you just want the resources your ISP provides..ha ha). A good example of this is some recent congestion problems we had with MCI (yay). They kept telling us how thigs would get better when they upgraded their backbone to OC-3 (155Mbps)....things got worse, because it just made the interconnection points worse (in this case the Sprint NAP in the NY area). It wasn't until they brought more direct interconnections (with UUnet, another gem of a company) online that we got somewhat useable service. Now back to our regularly scheduled discussion. Gene -- Gene W. Homicki gwh@spiders.com Objective Consulting, Inc. http://www.spiders.com/ Internet Presence Design voice: +1 914.353.3511 From owner-freebsd-hardware Mon Jul 8 23:35:33 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA03111 for hardware-outgoing; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 23:35:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pancake.remcomp.fr (root@pancake.remcomp.fr [194.51.30.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA03097 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 23:35:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aida.aida.org (aida [128.127.10.1]) by aida.aida.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA00318; Thu, 4 Jul 1996 18:26:54 GMT Date: Thu, 4 Jul 1996 20:26:54 +0200 (MET DST) From: didier@aida.org To: Andrew cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Racal InterLan NI5210 and SCO drivers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 5 Jul 1996, Andrew wrote: > Hi All, > > I have a Racal InterLan ethernet card type NI5210 (8 bit). It isnt in the > supported ethernet card list. I wondered (hoped :-) that this was an > ommision and it really was supported or that I could use some other driver > with it. > > Racal have drivers for SCO available...Is there anyway I could use these? > Are there any things I could try? > > Andrew > -- > mango takes advantage of the lack of t on sendmail > > > ni5210 board is supported: ie0 driver. -- Didier Derny | Private FreeBSD 2.2-CURRENT Site Email: didier@aida.org | Microsoft Free Computer. Homepage: http://www.codix.fr/~dderny | AMD 5x86-160 on a ASUS PVI-486SP3 From owner-freebsd-hardware Tue Jul 9 07:28:59 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id HAA10387 for hardware-outgoing; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 07:28:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from service-2.agate.net (service-2.agate.net [199.191.1.22]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA10372 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 07:28:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from news@localhost) by service-2.agate.net (8.7.3/8.6.9) id KAA04439; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 10:28:48 -0400 (EDT) To: freebsd-hardware@freefall.FreeBSD.org Path: mac.nxi.com!user From: jchase@nxi.com (Jason Chase) Newsgroups: muc.lists.freebsd.hardware,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Intel EtherExpress Pro/10 FreeBSD Device Driver Date: Tue, 09 Jul 1996 10:35:20 -0500 Organization: NetExpress Inc Lines: 14 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: mac.nxi.com Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I've been lurking around on the Usenet archives and reading these groups for close to a week now trying to discover if a driver for the Intel EtherExpress Pro/10 existed or not. At best its been mixed. I've seen drivers for the IEE Pro/100b and the IEE 16 but nothing for the IEE Pro/10. If anyone knows where I could find such a device driver or which snap release it is in, please e-mail me or post to these groups. Thanks, Jason jchase@nxi.com From owner-freebsd-hardware Tue Jul 9 12:11:56 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA28908 for hardware-outgoing; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 12:11:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns2.harborcom.net (root@ns2.harborcom.net [206.158.4.4]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA28900 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 12:11:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from swoosh.dunn.org (swoosh.dunn.org [206.158.7.243]) by ns2.harborcom.net (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA03381; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 15:11:37 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199607091911.PAA03381@ns2.harborcom.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Bradley Dunn" Organization: Harbor Communications To: Michael Smith Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 15:05:56 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN Reply-to: dunn@harborcom.net CC: hardware@freebsd.org Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.31) Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On 7 Jul 96 at 16:50, Michael Smith wrote: > Troy Arie Cobb stands accused of saying: > > > > All questions/issues of bandwidth aside, the real issue > > as I see it w/ cable networking is that it is BROADCAST > > ethernet. That is, every one in your cable-division (i.e. > > all of those houses connected to the same switch > > as you are) will get the same packets. Drop a wee little > > This is dubious. Ive seen no indication one way or another, but I'd > imagine that you'd have to sniff the cable side of the box, not the > inhouse side to see anything. What box, the cable "modem"? All diagrams of this technology I have seen have the modem in the house, connected via ethernet to the computer. In this case I do not think sniffing the cable side would be too difficult for the technically inclined. Of course it would be significantly more difficult if this box were buried outside or on a utility pole. The point is a valid one, though, I think. Cable was engineered from the start to be a broadcast media. AFAIK, there is no concept of a local loop with cable. The signal is just broadcast over the wires, with repeaters installed where necessary. Of course, I could be wrong, I'm not a cable guy. :) Bradley Dunn Harbor Communications From owner-freebsd-hardware Tue Jul 9 18:13:26 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA22680 for hardware-outgoing; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 18:13:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA22675 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 18:13:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arrakis.cs.put.poznan.pl (root@arrakis.cs.put.poznan.pl [150.254.23.18]) by who.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.11) with ESMTP id SAA07399 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 18:13:12 -0700 Received: (from piesik@localhost) by arrakis.cs.put.poznan.pl (8.7.5/8.7.3) id DAA00691 for freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 03:11:37 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 03:11:37 +0200 (MET DST) From: Piotr Piesik Message-Id: <199607100111.DAA00691@arrakis.cs.put.poznan.pl> To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: problems with 4 MB VRAM Diamond Stealth Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk hi :) I have a 4 MB VRAM Diamond Stealth (2 MB on board and 2 MB expansion from Kingston, designed for Diamond Stealth VRAM). All possible 2MB or less video modes (for example 1024x768x64k) are working fine. But all 4MB modes (for example 1024x768x16M or 1280x1024x64k) are not. There are vertical stripes on the screen, some fonts are garbaged, some random color pixels appear on white surfaces... I'm using 2.1.0 Release, with its default XFree86. This hardware works correctly under Windoze. Does anyone have a solution? Or at least any experience with other 4 MB cards, especially ATI Mach64? Piotr Piesik Poznan University of Technology, Poland From owner-freebsd-hardware Tue Jul 9 21:59:40 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA07244 for hardware-outgoing; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 21:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MindBender.HeadCandy.com (root@mindbender.headcandy.com [199.238.225.168]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA07238 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 21:59:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.HeadCandy.com (michaelv@localhost.HeadCandy.com [127.0.0.1]) by MindBender.HeadCandy.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA20387; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 21:57:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199607100457.VAA20387@MindBender.HeadCandy.com> X-Authentication-Warning: MindBender.HeadCandy.com: Host michaelv@localhost.HeadCandy.com [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: Piotr Piesik cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: problems with 4 MB VRAM Diamond Stealth In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 10 Jul 96 03:11:37 +0200. <199607100111.DAA00691@arrakis.cs.put.poznan.pl> Date: Tue, 09 Jul 1996 21:57:07 -0700 From: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >I have a 4 MB VRAM Diamond Stealth (2 MB on board and 2 MB expansion >from Kingston, designed for Diamond Stealth VRAM). > >All possible 2MB or less video modes (for example 1024x768x64k) >are working fine. But all 4MB modes (for example 1024x768x16M >or 1280x1024x64k) are not. I think you need the latest beta of XFree86 for that card. The list of supported cards should have come with your XFree86 distribution. If that isn't the case, I would suspect your memory expansion. My card with 4MB from the factory works just fine (see below). >This hardware works correctly under Windoze. >Does anyone have a solution? >Or at least any experience with other 4 MB cards, especially >ATI Mach64? I am using a Diamond Stealth 64 Video VRAM 4MB PCI. Mine came from the factory with 4MB. Otherwise, I believe it should be identical to yours. Mine works perfectly under Windows 95, Windows NT (4.0), and Descent 2. :-) I have not tried to run *BSD or XFree86 on it. I find it to be an excellent video board. ATI makes good stuff, too, but I don't think the Mach64 is quite as fast as this card. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael L. VanLoon michaelv@HeadCandy.com --< Free your mind and your machine -- NetBSD free un*x >-- NetBSD working ports: 386+PC, Mac 68k, Amiga, Atari 68k, HP300, Sun3, Sun4/4c/4m, DEC MIPS, DEC Alpha, PC532, VAX, MVME68k, arm32... NetBSD ports in progress: PICA, others... Roll your own Internet access -- Seattle People's Internet cooperative. If you're in the Seattle area, ask me how. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-freebsd-hardware Tue Jul 9 22:56:13 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id WAA12428 for hardware-outgoing; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 22:56:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shiva.jussieu.fr (shiva.jussieu.fr [134.157.0.129]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA12419 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 22:56:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mekong.biomath.jussieu.fr (mekong.biomath.jussieu.fr [134.157.72.87]) by shiva.jussieu.fr (8.7.5/jtpda-5.2) with SMTP id HAA13005 ; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 07:55:55 +0200 (METDST) Received: from iaka.biomath.jussieu.fr (iaka) by mekong.biomath.jussieu.fr (5.67b/jn930126+af960507(mailhost)) at Wed, 10 Jul 1996 07:55:24 +0100 Received: by iaka.biomath.jussieu.fr (5.67b/jf930126) at Wed, 10 Jul 1996 07:55:22 +0100 Message-Id: <199607100655.AA15558@iaka.biomath.jussieu.fr> Subject: Re: problems with 4 MB VRAM Diamond Stealth To: piesik@cs.put.poznan.pl (Piotr Piesik) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 07:55:21 +0100 (GMT+0100) From: "Alain FAUCONNET" Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199607100111.DAA00691@arrakis.cs.put.poznan.pl> from "Piotr Piesik" at Jul 10, 96 03:11:37 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Piotr Piesik wrote / a ecrit: > > > hi :) > > > I have a 4 MB VRAM Diamond Stealth (2 MB on board and 2 MB expansion > from Kingston, designed for Diamond Stealth VRAM). > [I'm not sure this belongs to freebsd-hardware or to the XFree86 lists/groups] I have the "video VRAM" (series 3400) variant. I might be the same, I'm kind of lost into Diamond's changing model names. It has 4Mb too (all of Diamond origin) > All possible 2MB or less video modes (for example 1024x768x64k) > are working fine. But all 4MB modes (for example 1024x768x16M > or 1280x1024x64k) are not. > It works fine for me in all modes including those using 4Mb. > There are vertical stripes on the screen, some fonts are garbaged, > some random color pixels appear on white surfaces... > > I'm using 2.1.0 Release, with its default XFree86. That may be an issue, you really should get the 3.1.2E server (latest beta available last time I checked) from any XFree86 archive. Also, the S3 server has a "slow_vram" option you might want to try. Maybe your add-on memory has marginal timings which require driving it in a more conservative mode. > > This hardware works correctly under Windoze. > > Does anyone have a solution? > Or at least any experience with other 4 MB cards, especially > ATI Mach64? > My only experience is that I returned the only such card I had bought a few months ago and changed it for a Diamond Stealth, being unable to run XFree86 on it. The situation might have changed since then. Good luck, _Alain_ -- Alain FAUCONNET Ingenieur systeme - System Manager AP-HP/SIM Public Health 91 bld de l'Hopital 75013 PARIS FRANCE Medical Computing Research Labs Mail: af@biomath.jussieu.fr Tel: (+33) 1-40-77-96-19 Fax: (+33) 1-45-86-80-68 I've RTFMed. It says: "Refer to your system administrator" But... I *am* the system administrator :-] From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Jul 10 08:18:13 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA18395 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 08:18:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from balt.BLaCKSMITH.com (balt.blacksmith.com [206.181.226.66]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA18366 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 08:17:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BLaCKSMITH.com (BLaCKSMITH.com [205.147.162.8]) by balt.BLaCKSMITH.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA19829 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 11:17:46 -0400 Received: from sparcplug.blacksmith.com by BLaCKSMITH.com (NX5.67f2/NX3.0M) id AA22077; Wed, 10 Jul 96 11:17:46 -0400 Message-Id: <9607101517.AA22077@BLaCKSMITH.com> Received: from thompson by sparcplug.BLaCKSMITH.com (NX5.67f2/NX3.0M) id AA13815; Wed, 10 Jul 96 11:17:44 -0400 Received: by thompson.BLaCKSMITH.com (NX5.67f2/NX3.0X) id AA14859; Wed, 10 Jul 96 11:17:42 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain Mime-Version: 1.0 (NeXT Mail 3.3 v118.2) Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.118.2) From: Kevin Swanson Date: Wed, 10 Jul 96 11:17:39 -0400 To: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: riscom/8 and cyclom-8Yo Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Can someone help me figure out the differences strictly in terms of hardware between the SDL Riscom/8 asynch. multiport serial board and the Cyclades Cyclom-8Yo? Thanks, Kevin Swanson kswanson@blacksmith.com From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Jul 10 20:36:15 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id UAA10653 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 20:36:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jparnas.cybercom.net (jparnas.cybercom.net [206.28.135.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA10648 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 20:36:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.cybercom.net (localhost.cybercom.net [127.0.0.1]) by jparnas.cybercom.net (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id XAA00559; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 23:34:45 -0400 Message-Id: <199607110334.XAA00559@jparnas.cybercom.net> X-Authentication-Warning: jparnas.cybercom.net: Host localhost.cybercom.net didn't use HELO protocol To: Narvi cc: Richard Foulk , hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com X-External-Networks: yes Subject: Re: your mail In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 06 Jul 1996 12:31:33 +0300. Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 23:34:38 -0400 From: "Jacob M. Parnas" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In message you write: > > >On Fri, 5 Jul 1996, Richard Foulk wrote: > >> } >Cable has a good chance of blowing ISDN away. Much faster and cheaper. And >> } >it will be available in many places this year. More, next. >> } > >> } >Keep your eye on the cable companies. >> } > >> } > >> } >Richard >> } >> } Cable is a pain. It works only one way. If you want to send a large file >> } you still have to go slow. And, you still need to be a member of a ISP >> } as you can't write to cable, from what I've read. >> >> Slow compared to what? >> >> There are a few different configurations. Eight megabits in, three >> megabits out is one. Still way faster than other modes, even on the >> slower half. As far as I know, the slowest slow in cable modems is >> still fast. >> >> Our cable company here in Honolulu is apparently going to use modems that >> provide 6Mb in both directions. The promise is $50/month. The cable >> modem connects to your ethernet. The cable company is becoming an ISP, >> in a big way. >> >> Imagine how that kind of throughput could change the landscape. >> > >And from where should trans-ocean, trans-continent, tnrans-etc. pipes >come from through which to press all that data? I can get around 500KB >from the local University's ftp setrver allmost anytime, but it doesn't >carry much I care about - and all that is at best around some KB/s - so >what's the big deal? > > Sander > >> >> Richard If its bidirectional, and they keep throughput up as usage goes up and you know you won't move too soon for it to make sense, cable sounds good. I think comparing home <-> internet connection to a transatlantic line is really comparing apples to oranges. Jacob From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Jul 10 21:00:31 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA11620 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jparnas.cybercom.net (jparnas.cybercom.net [206.28.135.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA11614 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 21:00:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.cybercom.net (localhost.cybercom.net [127.0.0.1]) by jparnas.cybercom.net (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id XAA00628; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 23:56:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199607110356.XAA00628@jparnas.cybercom.net> X-Authentication-Warning: jparnas.cybercom.net: Host localhost.cybercom.net didn't use HELO protocol To: Michael Smith cc: stesin@elvisti.kiev.ua, Kevin_Swanson@blacksmith.com, hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com X-External-Networks: yes Subject: Re: muliport boards - building a PPP dialup server In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 06 Jul 1996 19:42:42 +0930. <199607061012.TAA23745@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 23:56:12 -0400 From: "Jacob M. Parnas" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In message <199607061012.TAA23745@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au>you write: >Jacob M. Parnas stands accused of saying: >> > >> >Quatech do a card called the DS-100 with a pair of PC16550D's and an 18MHz >> >clock and a jumperable /1 /2 /5 /10 divider that will allow your to >> >run your 16550 ports significantly faster. >> > >> >Unfortunately, they tried to implement the card properly, and as such >> >we have had serious problems with the cards in fast (>486/33) machines. >> >> It shouldn't be a hard thing. Simply build a fifo which has say a 1 >> Megabit of memory on it (pretty cheap these days). It sends an >> interrupt if it goes from full to not full or another if it reaches >> half full. If known by the kernel not to be empty, empty it 25 >> times/second (if it was full at 10 MB/sec, it would be emptied in >> 1/80th of a second.) That's fast, cheap, and will go very fast. >> I'm not even hardware oriented, but can see that it wouldn't be hard >> or difficult to build or program, and would support very fast I/O. In my opinion, when people can't back up their statements or opinions with logical arguments, the smart ones admit their stumped, the rest resort to personal insults. I didn't insult you. I don't see why you want to turn this from an polite discussion or bow out instead of what should go to alt.flame. >Out of the mouths of babes - Jacob, it's _blindingly_obvious_ that you >don't know spit about hardware. Attempting to discuss this with you >would be like trying to talk existentialism with a donkey. Purely a personal insult. No substance behind the statement at all. >Or do you honestly believe that you, with your self-avowed lack of >hardware orientation, can come up with something that hasn't been done >before? Are you _really_ that concieted? Purely a personal insult. No substance behind the statement at all. I have very little training in economics, but I knew that Digital and IBM were in trouble when most of their business was significantly overpriced for no increase in production (comparing workstations to mainframes in the late 1980's). In other words, because I'm more software oriented than hardware doesn't mean I'm wrong about a hardware statement. >> Back to the personal insults. This is where I step off. I have better >> things to do than act like elementary school kids trading insults. What's >> next? "My daddy can beat up your daddy". >Jacob; you butt in on a discussion brandishing your swollen ignorance >and your myopic perspecive in everyone's face, and then burst into >tears when this is pointed out to you. There is nothing 'mature' in >this attitude, so I can't see what you're complaining about. Believe me, I'm not bursting into tears over this. If you review your statements in the message I'm responding to, you'll see there isn't anything but personal insults from you in it and not one single attempt at a criticism of why my design would not work. I know its not optimal, but it isn't overly expensive and have no reason to believe it wouldn't work work. >> Jacob M. Parnas I think most people see this newsgroup as a vehicle to help eachother rather than flame eachother. Responding to a message is not "butting into a discussion". I don't consider what my role in this thread particularly mature but polite and trying to be helpful. More normal than mature. On the other hand, your response is in my opinion, extremely immature and inappropriate for this discussion. Its just a personal flame against me with no substance behind it. Read it again, and I think you'll see that what I say is true. >-- >]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ >]] Genesis Software genesis@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ >]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ >]] realtime instrument control (ph/fax) +61-8-267-3039 [[ >]] Collector of old Unix hardware. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[ Jacob M. Parnas From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Jul 10 21:05:20 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA11781 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 21:05:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jparnas.cybercom.net (jparnas.cybercom.net [206.28.135.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA11767 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 21:05:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.cybercom.net (localhost.cybercom.net [127.0.0.1]) by jparnas.cybercom.net (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id AAA00651; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 00:04:09 -0400 Message-Id: <199607110404.AAA00651@jparnas.cybercom.net> X-Authentication-Warning: jparnas.cybercom.net: Host localhost.cybercom.net didn't use HELO protocol To: Henry Spencer cc: Richard Foulk , hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com X-External-Networks: yes Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 06 Jul 1996 10:58:52 EDT. Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 00:04:06 -0400 From: "Jacob M. Parnas" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In message you write: >> >Cable has a good chance of blowing ISDN away. Much faster and cheaper. And >> >it will be available in many places this year. More, next. >> >> Cable is a pain. It works only one way. If you want to send a large file >> you still have to go slow. And, you still need to be a member of a ISP >> as you can't write to cable, from what I've read. > >Depends on how good your local cable system is. The cable-data system >that Rogers Cable is introducing in the Toronto area is two-way (with >symmetrical bandwidth, amazingly enough, or at least that's the way it was >in the prototype system). That's wonderful, but unfortunately rare. Also, unlike ISDN, its not portable to much if not most of North America and other countries. >Incidentally, harking back to the original theme of this discussion :-), >the hardware used for the Rogers prototype talked to the computers by >Ethernet. As pointed out earlier, isn't ethernet tcp/ip based or some other network protocol based. What if one wants to communicate below that level? Otherwise, if its inexpensive enough, fast enough and doesn't use unnecessary hardware, I think it would be fine. > Henry Spencer > henry@zoo.toronto.edu Jacob From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Jul 10 22:49:19 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id WAA18650 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 22:49:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns2.harborcom.net (root@ns2.harborcom.net [206.158.4.4]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA18562 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 22:47:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from swoosh.dunn.org (swoosh.dunn.org [206.158.7.243]) by ns2.harborcom.net (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA05849; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 01:47:26 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199607110547.BAA05849@ns2.harborcom.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Bradley Dunn" Organization: Harbor Communications To: "Jacob M. Parnas" Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 01:41:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN Reply-to: dunn@harborcom.net CC: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.31) Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On 11 Jul 96 at 0:04, Jacob M. Parnas wrote: > As pointed out earlier, isn't ethernet tcp/ip based or some other network > protocol based. What if one wants to communicate below that level? > Otherwise, if its inexpensive enough, fast enough and doesn't use unnecessary > hardware, I think it would be fine. I do not quite understand what you mean here. Ethernet as I understand it means the IEEE 802.3 protocols, which specify both the physical and data link aspects of network communication. AFAIK, you cannot communicate "below" the physical layer. :) The 802.3 protocols are not "tcp/ip based". Sure TCP/IP can be run on top of them, but the IP spec stops at the network layer, it does not specify anything at the data link or physical layers. Bradley Dunn Harbor Communications From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Jul 10 23:02:37 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA19359 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 23:02:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jparnas.cybercom.net (jparnas.cybercom.net [206.28.135.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA19354 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 23:02:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.cybercom.net (localhost.cybercom.net [127.0.0.1]) by jparnas.cybercom.net (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id CAA01010; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 02:01:20 -0400 Message-Id: <199607110601.CAA01010@jparnas.cybercom.net> X-Authentication-Warning: jparnas.cybercom.net: Host localhost.cybercom.net didn't use HELO protocol To: Henry Spencer cc: Richard Foulk , hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com X-External-Networks: yes Subject: Re: your mail In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 06 Jul 1996 20:10:21 EDT. Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 02:01:18 -0400 From: "Jacob M. Parnas" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In message you write: > >That's what people are trying to tell you: CABLE DOES NOT HAVE TO BE >ONE-WAY. When he says "both directions", he really does mean both, as in >bidirectional. > >Some places with old cable systems are stuck with unidirectional >transmission, and that means going the other way by phone modem, which >is marginally satisfactory at best. Modern cable systems can do better. That's great! I've been near several major cities and they were all in the future and "coming soon" but unidirectional. I'm sorry and I stand corrected. >> ...that 3-8 mbits/second, Usually without putting a whole new >> set of cables underground (or above), its bandwidth would be split by many >> users and the for 1000 users, on average, that's the same as 3-8 Kbits per >> second... > >The bandwidth is indeed split, but the question of "by how many users" >does not have a simple answer -- it depends on what the cable company has >done. Note that the splitting is *not*, in general, over the entire >metropolitan area -- the cable company can and does subdivide. The folks >in the Rogers Toronto-area experiment say that the net effective data rate >did vary depending on load, but it was always a lot faster than phone >modems. I thought that while it was pretty easy to add a new ISDN server, it was hard to add a new cable. This would seem to be a problem, especially if this was done in bulk. But since it is bidirectional now (I really hadn't heard that, when did that start?) it seems very attractive. I wish our cable company would do it. >> And if you have to move, you may be out of luck. > >ISDN has the same problem. I thought ISDN was a bit more common and standardized, but I could be wrong. Also, how much are the charges for installation, equipment and any monthly/ packet/etc charges? Thanks, Jacob > Henry Spencer > henry@zoo.toronto.edu From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Jul 11 00:07:05 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id AAA21761 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 00:07:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jparnas.cybercom.net (jparnas.cybercom.net [206.28.135.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA21756 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 00:07:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.cybercom.net (localhost.cybercom.net [127.0.0.1]) by jparnas.cybercom.net (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id DAA01228; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 03:04:57 -0400 Message-Id: <199607110704.DAA01228@jparnas.cybercom.net> X-Authentication-Warning: jparnas.cybercom.net: Host localhost.cybercom.net didn't use HELO protocol To: "David Alderman" cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com X-External-Networks: yes Subject: Re: In-reply-to: Your message of Sun, 07 Jul 1996 18:47:37 EST. <3440F75C13@novell.persprog.com> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 03:04:54 -0400 From: "Jacob M. Parnas" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk As I wrote to Henry Spencer, I was incorrect about cable and networking to homes. I stand corrected and apologize for all misinformation I gave out on this one. Please accept my sincere apology. Sincerely, Jacob M. Parnas --------------- In message <3440F75C13@novell.persprog.com>you write: >> From: "Jacob M. Parnas" > >> >> But I think if you research carefully its receive only. Send must be done >> through some other channel like a V.34+ modem. >> > >My brother in Jacksonville, Florida is being offered bidirectional >access through Continental Cablevision for $40 / month. Continental >has converted large portions of Jacksonville to fiber and they have >bidirectional capability. No phone lines are required - I repeat no >phone lines are required. > >I have heard of what you are talking about, Mr. Parnas, and this is >indeed how some cable providers are planning to set things up but >others are planning what appears to be reasonable, competitive >solutions. Continental Cablevision did their original trials at >Boston College and I think they may know what they are doing >(although I am certainly not known for my love of cable companies). > >The big problem I see with ISDN, cable modems, etc. is that the >service is only available in some areas and the pricing strategies >are so varied. I live in Alachua, Florida. My cable provider is >Cable Florida and my local phone system is Alltel. While Alltel may >provide internet services in Georgia they have failed to deliver ISDN >in three years of promises in this area (unless my information is out >of date - if so my sincere apologies to Alltel and please send your >rates immediately!). Less than ten miles away Gainesville has >BellSouth and full ISDN services available although I don't know if >there are any ISP's providing ISDN at a reasonable rate. > >I work for a software company but my only access to the internet is >through POTS because our local phone company has the attitude that if >enough people ask them for ISDN, maybe they will provide it. If they >had used the same approach for basic phone service I bet half of the >United States would have no phones. > > >====================================== >When philosophy conflicts with reality, choose reality. >Dave Alderman -- dave@persprog.com >====================================== > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Jacob M. Parnas | | IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Ctr. | | Internet: jparnas@jparnas.cybercom.net | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Jul 11 01:59:25 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id BAA27454 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 01:59:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redwood.CS.Berkeley.EDU (redwood.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.36.44]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA27445 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 01:59:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redwood.cs.berkeley.edu (localhost.Berkeley.EDU [127.0.0.1]) by redwood.CS.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id CAA23778 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 02:02:18 -0700 From: William Maddox Message-Id: <199607110902.CAA23778@redwood.CS.Berkeley.EDU> X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.5 12/11/95 To: hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Triton-2 motherboards, fast IDE disk drives Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 02:02:17 -0700 Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I've decided that I need a dedicated Windows95 box, so I'm planning to move the current SCSI I/O setup on my P90 FreeBSD machine to a new Triton-II P166 and put an IDE drive in the old box to run Windows. I'm looking for recommendations on two components: a new mainboard for the FreeBSD box and a good IDE drive for the Windows box. 1) Mainboard: Triton-II, able to handle a P200, good BIOS. I'm partial to the ATX form factor, because I'm planning to buy a new case and power supply, and it looks like ATX is the future. How does the ASUS P/I-XP55T2P4 stack up? Are there any others I should be considering? Have the Triton-II bugs been shaken out yet? 2) IDE disk drive: Something in the 1GB range, quiet, reliable, reasonably fast, and not too expensive. I've heard many recommendations for the Quantum Fireball series drives, and I've seen the 1.2GB QM31280FBA advertised locally for $215, which looks like a good price. On the other hand, I've heard a lot of negative comments on Quantum and Western Digital. What about IBM and Fujitsu? Is there a good source of meaningful and reliable information on comparative disk speeds? The average access times and buffer-to-host data rates that the manufacturers quote on their web pages say absolutely nothing about sustained sequential-access performance. Thanks for any info, Bill Maddox maddox@cs.berkeley.edu From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Jul 11 05:21:08 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA08021 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 05:21:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jparnas.cybercom.net (jparnas.cybercom.net [206.28.135.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA08014 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 05:21:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.cybercom.net (localhost.cybercom.net [127.0.0.1]) by jparnas.cybercom.net (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id IAA02173; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 08:20:08 -0400 Message-Id: <199607111220.IAA02173@jparnas.cybercom.net> X-Authentication-Warning: jparnas.cybercom.net: Host localhost.cybercom.net didn't use HELO protocol To: dunn@harborcom.net cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com X-External-Networks: yes Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 11 Jul 1996 01:41:43 CDT. <199607110547.BAA05849@ns2.harborcom.net> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 08:20:06 -0400 From: "Jacob M. Parnas" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In message <199607110547.BAA05849@ns2.harborcom.net>you write: >On 11 Jul 96 at 0:04, Jacob M. Parnas wrote: > >> As pointed out earlier, isn't ethernet tcp/ip based or some other network >> protocol based. What if one wants to communicate below that level? >> Otherwise, if its inexpensive enough, fast enough and doesn't use unnecessary >> hardware, I think it would be fine. > >I do not quite understand what you mean here. Ethernet as I >understand it means the IEEE 802.3 protocols, which specify both the >physical and data link aspects of network communication. AFAIK, you >cannot communicate "below" the physical layer. :) > >The 802.3 protocols are not "tcp/ip based". Sure TCP/IP can be run on >top of them, but the IP spec stops at the network layer, it does not >specify anything at the data link or physical layers. > >Bradley Dunn >Harbor Communications > I guess what I mean is that when you're trying to get very low overhead response (like for kernel debugging), why add a whole layer of work putting a something into an IP format, turning it into serial (when it was serial to begin with), or vice versa (reading every serial input as an IP packet and turning it into a serial character, when it was that way in the first place? At that time uucp was used a lot (or was about to be). I don't see how putting something serial into an IP packet to something serial and vice versa makes sense. Everything would be etherneted (like serial mice, keyboards, terminal output, etc). It seems like a fairly expensive way to do things, but I could be wrong. I agree that the way it was done left much to be desired. Jacob Parnas From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Jul 11 07:01:33 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id HAA12118 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 07:01:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zoo.toronto.edu (zoo.toronto.edu [128.100.72.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA12111 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 07:01:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 10:01:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Henry Spencer Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN To: "Jacob M. Parnas" cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com In-Reply-To: <199607110404.AAA00651@jparnas.cybercom.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > >the hardware used for the Rogers prototype talked to the computers by > >Ethernet. > > As pointed out earlier, isn't ethernet tcp/ip based or some other network > protocol based... The question is phrased poorly, and is ambiguous, so I'll answer both interpretations. :-) Is Ethernet tied to a specific protocol, like TCP/IP? No. Ethernet just gets a packet from point A to point B, accompanied by a checksum (well, CRC) and a type indicator. Any other structure is imposed by software. Do you need to use a non-trivial protocol of some kind to make use of Ethernet? In principle, no, but in practice, yes. However, this is not necessarily a bad thing, because talking to network or a complex device invariably involves a protocol *anyway*... and better you should use a well-designed one that your software already supports. The alternative is not to do without a protocol, but to use some kludged-up mess invented by the hardware vendor, typically undocumented and buggy. (I've written device drivers.) I'd much rather have the hardware supplier use a standard protocol that I have debugging tools for. Henry Spencer henry@zoo.toronto.edu From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Jul 11 07:16:00 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id HAA12921 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 07:16:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zoo.toronto.edu (zoo.toronto.edu [128.100.72.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA12908 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 07:15:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 10:15:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Henry Spencer Subject: Re: your mail To: "Jacob M. Parnas" cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com In-Reply-To: <199607110601.CAA01010@jparnas.cybercom.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > >...Note that the splitting is *not*, in general, over the entire > >metropolitan area -- the cable company can and does subdivide. The folks > >in the Rogers Toronto-area experiment say that the net effective data rate > >did vary depending on load, but it was always a lot faster than phone... > > I thought that while it was pretty easy to add a new ISDN server, it was > hard to add a new cable. This would seem to be a problem, especially if > this was done in bulk... They don't have to add new cable, just new boxes at the appropriate point in the distribution tree. (As I think I already mentioned, the signal distribution in cable is a tree, not a star, with the last amplifiers at a fairly local level, out on poles in your neighborhood.) Especially if everything before the final amplifier uses fiber -- which is, I believe, the new trend, to the point where existing wiring is being converted at a brisk pace in many areas -- the wiring is already in place. > >> And if you have to move, you may be out of luck. > >ISDN has the same problem. > > I thought ISDN was a bit more common and standardized, but I could be wrong. Standardized, yes, but common... well, that varies a whole lot. It's not something you can count on being able to get, especially at a reasonable price, not yet. The bottom line for ISDN and cable is similar -- if you really need it, that constrains where you move -- although the extent of the problem may differ at the moment. > Also, how much are the charges for installation, equipment and any monthly/ > packet/etc charges? This depends very heavily on the cable company, the same way ISDN charges depend very heavily on the phone company. In Toronto, Rogers is talking about a flat monthly fee of $30-40 on top of what you pay for your basic cable service (which they quietly assume you already have!). We'll see. Henry Spencer henry@zoo.toronto.edu From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Jul 11 10:42:47 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA21795 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 10:42:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from isgate.is (isgate.is [193.4.58.51]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA21756; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 10:42:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hummer.islandia.is by isgate.is (8.7.5-M/ISnet/14-10-91); Thu, 11 Jul 1996 17:41:51 GMT Received: from hummer.islandia.is by hummer.islandia.is (8.7.5/ISnet/12-09-94); Thu, 11 Jul 1996 17:42:32 GMT Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 17:42:31 +0000 () From: Stefan Thor Hreinsson To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org, freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Problems with PPP and cyclades (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Greetings, I hope somebody can help with this problem. I'm trying to get ppp-iij using the tun device to work. I can connect to it and everything seems fine until I hangup, the ppp daemon doesn't terminate and just holds the device open. This happens only when using Cyclades 16-Ye DB25-DB25 device with 16 modems connected (from dmesg: cy0 irq 5 maddr 0xd4000 msize 8192 on isa). But when using sio everything works fine and ppp terminates. I'm using the same modem on both devices. I'm running FreeBSD 2.1-STABLE (Now named 2.1.5-GAMMA). Has anyone here had a problem similar like this ? Could this be a problem with the Cyclades card or the device driver ? Currently I'm using sliplogin.dynamic with the Cy-16 with the external connector box, and there are no trouble with that setup. But some of my users want to use ppp to connect to my server. Below are samples from the ppp.log while using ttyd0 and ttycf , and my ppp config file. (BTW. I'm using Trumpet 2.0f to connect.) -- /etc/ppp.conf default: set authname hummer.islandia.is enable lqr set debug phase lcp accept proxy enable proxy ttyd0: set device /dev/cuaa0 set ifaddr 194.144.233.1 194.144.233.36 set debug chat phase accept proxy enable proxy ttycf: set device /dev/cuacf set ifaddr 194.144.233.1 194.144.233.35 set debug chat phase accept proxy enable proxy stty -f /dev/ttycf speed 57600 baud; lflags: -icanon -isig -iexten -echo iflags: -icrnl -ixon -ixany -imaxbel -brkint oflags: -opost -onlcr -oxtabs cflags: cs8 -parenb crtscts stty -f /dev/ttyd0 speed 9600 baud; lflags: -icanon -isig -iexten -echo iflags: -icrnl -ixon -ixany -imaxbel -brkint oflags: -opost -onlcr -oxtabs cflags: cs8 -parenb ^^^^^^ No crtscts ? Is that normal ? This is what i get in ppp.log when connecting to /dev/ttycf 07-11 02:33:10 [14040] Using interface: tun0 07-11 02:33:10 [14040] Listening at 3000. 07-11 02:33:10 [14040] PPP Started. 07-11 02:33:10 [14040] Packet mode enabled 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] Phase: Authenticate 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] his = 0, mine = 0 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] Phase: Network 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] Phase: Terminate 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] Phase: Authenticate 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] his = 0, mine = 0 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] Phase: Network 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] Phase: Terminate 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] found interface ep0 for proxy arp 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] OsLinkup: 194.144.233.35 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] Phase: Authenticate 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] his = 0, mine = 0 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] Phase: Network 07-11 02:33:11 [14040] *Connected! 07-11 02:35:31 [14040] SIGTERM Here i had to kill the ppp daemon after hanging up on in Trumpet and the ppp proccess didn't die. 07-11 02:35:31 [14040] OsLinkdown: 194.144.233.35 07-11 02:35:31 [14040] Phase: Terminate 07-11 02:35:31 [14040] PPP Terminated. And this is what i get when i connect to /dev/ttyd0 07-11 02:37:12 [14073] Using interface: tun0 07-11 02:37:12 [14073] Listening at 3000. 07-11 02:37:12 [14073] PPP Started. 07-11 02:37:12 [14073] Packet mode enabled 07-11 02:37:12 [14073] Phase: Authenticate 07-11 02:37:12 [14073] his = 0, mine = 0 07-11 02:37:12 [14073] Phase: Network 07-11 02:37:13 [14073] found interface ep0 for proxy arp 07-11 02:37:13 [14073] OsLinkup: 194.144.233.36 07-11 02:37:13 [14073] *Connected! 07-11 02:37:27 [14073] Disconnected! 07-11 02:37:27 [14073] Connect time: 14 secs 07-11 02:37:27 [14073] Phase: Dead 07-11 02:37:27 [14073] OsLinkdown: 194.144.233.36 07-11 02:37:28 [14073] PPP Terminated. Everything is normal and the ppp proccess downs itself when I do BYE in Trumpet. Any help will be greatly appreciated, Med kvedju fra Islandi Sincerely Stefan Thor Hreinsson From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Jul 11 11:25:57 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA23820 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 11:25:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jparnas.cybercom.net (jparnas.cybercom.net [206.28.135.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA23807 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 11:25:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.cybercom.net (localhost.cybercom.net [127.0.0.1]) by jparnas.cybercom.net (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id OAA03222; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 14:24:30 -0400 Message-Id: <199607111824.OAA03222@jparnas.cybercom.net> X-Authentication-Warning: jparnas.cybercom.net: Host localhost.cybercom.net didn't use HELO protocol To: Henry Spencer cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com X-External-Networks: yes Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 11 Jul 1996 10:01:11 EDT. Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 14:24:28 -0400 From: "Jacob M. Parnas" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In message you write: >> >the hardware used for the Rogers prototype talked to the computers by >> >Ethernet. >> >> As pointed out earlier, isn't ethernet tcp/ip based or some other network >> protocol based... > >The question is phrased poorly, and is ambiguous, so I'll answer both >interpretations. :-) > >Is Ethernet tied to a specific protocol, like TCP/IP? No. Ethernet just >gets a packet from point A to point B, accompanied by a checksum (well, >CRC) and a type indicator. Any other structure is imposed by software. I understand. It can run DECNET a Xerox protocol, etc. I understand the checksum too. Thanks. >Do you need to use a non-trivial protocol of some kind to make use of >Ethernet? In principle, no, but in practice, yes. However, this is not >necessarily a bad thing, because talking to network or a complex device >invariably involves a protocol *anyway*... and better you should use a >well-designed one that your software already supports. The alternative is >not to do without a protocol, but to use some kludged-up mess invented by >the hardware vendor, typically undocumented and buggy. (I've written >device drivers.) I'd much rather have the hardware supplier use a standard >protocol that I have debugging tools for. > > Henry Spencer > henry@zoo.toronto.edu I agree that ethernet has a lot fewer problems than serial line connections. But, I think that's due to poor design and shortsightedness of the designers of most serial stuff. Ethernet was well designed. I don't see why other serial output couldn't be well designed too. For instance, the new TI UART card. I understand it can handle close to a megabit/second sustained input. That's a true improvement. But, many devices don't need a huge input speed. For instance keyboards, printers, terminals, etc don't really have serial problems due to their low inputs. Yes, a lot of serial input have been screwed up, and ethernet would have probably been better from the start than what happened. It just seems like a bit of a, kludge to me, for serial input, twice convert everything to a high speed networking protocol, each way, and pay for it on devices that don't need it, to avoid developing a really good long term protocol for serial devices seems complicated. The cost factor is pretty important too. If there's $100/computer of ethernet serial stuff on it (for all the serial devices at both ends), that would be pretty significant. With all the computers put out per year, this is the pretty significant. My question is why was it decided to use such tiny FIFO's? They went from 1-2 bytes to 16 per port, when the speed isn't so vital and with larger FIFO's, it seems like there would be much fewer interrupts, and writing drivers for it would be much easier. It can't be that expensive should it? 16 bytes isn't much. To have to empty it is a huge load on the bus for moving fairly little data. What about some DMA connection to the modems? Just a question. I don't know the answer. Thanks, Jacob From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Jul 11 11:29:17 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA24076 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 11:29:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jparnas.cybercom.net (jparnas.cybercom.net [206.28.135.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA24055 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 11:29:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.cybercom.net (localhost.cybercom.net [127.0.0.1]) by jparnas.cybercom.net (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id OAA03235; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 14:28:11 -0400 Message-Id: <199607111828.OAA03235@jparnas.cybercom.net> X-Authentication-Warning: jparnas.cybercom.net: Host localhost.cybercom.net didn't use HELO protocol To: Henry Spencer cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com X-External-Networks: yes Subject: Re: your mail In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 11 Jul 1996 10:15:40 EDT. Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 14:28:09 -0400 From: "Jacob M. Parnas" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In message you write: >> >...Note that the splitting is *not*, in general, over the entire >> >metropolitan area -- the cable company can and does subdivide. The folks >> >in the Rogers Toronto-area experiment say that the net effective data rate >> >did vary depending on load, but it was always a lot faster than phone... >> >> I thought that while it was pretty easy to add a new ISDN server, it was >> hard to add a new cable. This would seem to be a problem, especially if >> this was done in bulk... > >They don't have to add new cable, just new boxes at the appropriate point >in the distribution tree. (As I think I already mentioned, the signal >distribution in cable is a tree, not a star, with the last amplifiers at >a fairly local level, out on poles in your neighborhood.) Especially if >everything before the final amplifier uses fiber -- which is, I believe, >the new trend, to the point where existing wiring is being converted at a >brisk pace in many areas -- the wiring is already in place. > >> >> And if you have to move, you may be out of luck. >> >ISDN has the same problem. >> >> I thought ISDN was a bit more common and standardized, but I could be wrong. > >Standardized, yes, but common... well, that varies a whole lot. It's not >something you can count on being able to get, especially at a reasonable >price, not yet. The bottom line for ISDN and cable is similar -- if you >really need it, that constrains where you move -- although the extent of >the problem may differ at the moment. > >> Also, how much are the charges for installation, equipment and any monthly/ >> packet/etc charges? > >This depends very heavily on the cable company, the same way ISDN charges >depend very heavily on the phone company. In Toronto, Rogers is talking >about a flat monthly fee of $30-40 on top of what you pay for your basic >cable service (which they quietly assume you already have!). We'll see. > > Henry Spencer > henry@zoo.toronto.edu Thanks for all the useful information. I wish my cable company would provide the service that some of you are getting. A nearby one does, but that doesn't help. *sigh*. I did think that ISDN was catching on, like touch-tones did, but I'm not sure. Jacob From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Jul 11 16:58:02 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA15171 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 16:58:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA15094; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 16:57:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.12/8.6.9) id JAA20628; Fri, 12 Jul 1996 09:54:39 +1000 Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 09:54:39 +1000 From: Bruce Evans Message-Id: <199607112354.JAA20628@godzilla.zeta.org.au> To: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, stefan@islandia.is Subject: Re: Problems with PPP and cyclades (fwd) Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >I'm trying to get ppp-iij using the tun device to work. I can connect to it >and everything seems fine until I hangup, the ppp daemon doesn't terminate >and just holds the device open. This happens only when using Cyclades 16-Ye >DB25-DB25 device with 16 modems connected (from dmesg: cy0 irq 5 maddr >0xd4000 msize 8192 on isa). But when using sio everything >works fine and ppp terminates. I'm using the same modem on both devices. >... >Currently I'm using sliplogin.dynamic with the Cy-16 with the external >connector box, and there are no trouble with that setup. But some of my >users want to use ppp to connect to my server. ppp polls DCD while slattach waits for a SIGHUP. ppp's method is much easier to get right for both the daemon and the driver, but there seems to be a problem with it. I use the following program to poll the modem state for all sio and cy lines. The DCD state should be `-DCD' when nothing is connected and change to '+DCD' when something is connected and raises DCD and change to `-DCD' on hangup. This works with a Cyclaydes 8Yo. Perhaps there is a timing problem in the ppp daemon. You should probably use kernel ppp if there is more that one ppp session at a time. --- comstate.c --- #include #include #include #include static void try(char *prefix); int main() { try("ttyd"); try("cuaa"); try("ttyc"); try("cuac"); return 0; } static void try(char *prefix) { int bit; char dev_name[32]; int dev_nr; int fd; int comstate; int stat; static char *statenames[] = { "LE", "DTR", "RTS", "ST", "SR", "CTS", "DCD", "RI", "DSR", }; for (dev_nr = 0; dev_nr < 32; ++dev_nr) { sprintf(dev_name, "/dev/%s%c", prefix, dev_nr < 10 ? '0' + dev_nr : 'a' + (dev_nr - 10)); fd = open(dev_name, O_RDWR | O_NONBLOCK); if (fd >= 0) { comstate = 0xdeadbeef; stat = ioctl(fd, TIOCMGET, &comstate); printf("%s: ioctl returned %d:", dev_name, stat); for (bit = 0; bit < 9; ++bit) printf(" %c%s", comstate & (1 << bit) ? '+' : '-', statenames[bit]); printf("\n"); close(fd); } } } >stty -f /dev/ttyd0 >speed 9600 baud; >lflags: -icanon -isig -iexten -echo >iflags: -icrnl -ixon -ixany -imaxbel -brkint >oflags: -opost -onlcr -oxtabs >cflags: cs8 -parenb > ^^^^^^ No crtscts ? Is that normal ? It is the default. Bruce From owner-freebsd-hardware Fri Jul 12 07:14:22 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id HAA13883 for hardware-outgoing; Fri, 12 Jul 1996 07:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zoo.toronto.edu (zoo.toronto.edu [128.100.72.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA13877 for ; Fri, 12 Jul 1996 07:14:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 10:13:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Henry Spencer Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN To: "Jacob M. Parnas" cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com In-Reply-To: <199607111824.OAA03222@jparnas.cybercom.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > ...It just seems like > a bit of a, kludge to me, for serial input, twice convert everything to a high > speed networking protocol, each way, and pay for it on devices that don't need > it, to avoid developing a really good long term protocol for serial devices... It's overkill, yes... but then, one characteristic of a mature technology is that a lot of problems get solved with overkill, because it's simpler and cheaper to apply a heavy-duty general-purpose solution than to do major custom engineering for each problem. > My question is why was it decided to use such tiny FIFO's? They went from 1-2 > bytes to 16 per port, when the speed isn't so vital and with larger FIFO's, > it seems like there would be much fewer interrupts, and writing drivers for > it would be much easier. It can't be that expensive should it? ... There are two interacting problems here, or maybe three. One is that FIFOs are actually moderately complicated devices, and eat up a fair bit of chip area. Oh, it's not a lot by the standards of modern CPUs, but serial-I/O chips generally are not thought to merit the same level of effort and pain lavished on CPUs, and that means they are constrained to rather smaller chips. (Also, they are considered fairly cost sensitive; until quite recently, serial ports with *any* FIFOs were premium add-ons rather than standard equipment.) Another is that until very recently, almost everyone building PC hardware thought in terms of classical MSDOS, where only one thing happens at once and nothing is interrupt-driven. There's no real need for a FIFO if the whole computer is sitting there waiting for the next character to arrive. Only when you start running a real operating system (or a kludged imitation thereof :-)) do you start to care about buffering. I guess there is a third issue: serial ports were minor auxiliaries whose performance simply wasn't important. (And this was self-reinforcing, because people with demanding data rates went elsewhere.) > What about some DMA connection to the modems? ... Standard practice in the minicomputer world for 15-20 years, but only just starting to get attention in the PC world. Don't need it under MSDOS, after all, so why bother? Henry Spencer henry@zoo.toronto.edu From owner-freebsd-hardware Fri Jul 12 09:11:27 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA22329 for hardware-outgoing; Fri, 12 Jul 1996 09:11:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lassie.eunet.fi (lassie.eunet.fi [192.26.119.7]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA22320 for ; Fri, 12 Jul 1996 09:11:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from key.hole.fi by lassie.eunet.fi with SMTP id AA22569 (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 12 Jul 1996 19:11:14 +0300 Received: (from count@localhost) by key.hole.fi (8.7.5/8.6.12) id TAA02055 for freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org; Fri, 12 Jul 1996 19:10:46 +0300 (EET DST) From: "Bror 'Count' Heinola" Message-Id: <199607121610.TAA02055@key.hole.fi> Subject: 100M ethernet, weird problem To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 19:10:46 +0300 (EET DST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24alpha5] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I built a P166 machine with FreeBSD 2.1.5-GAMMA today, and installed a AT-2560TX 10/100M ethernet card into it, just to see if it would work at all. The card is Intel based and gets recongnized as fxp0 rev 1 int a irq 11 on pci0:11 It works in both 10M and 100M modes, though I didn't test it at 10M more than booted up, pinged a few hosts and rebooted, just because I have hordes of nice 10M cards which do work and my goals are a bit higher than that. Basically, the problem is of throughput. I can send stuff to the machine over three times faster than I can receive from it! If I do a 'time ping -f -s 1024 -c 100000 thrush' I get something like 1.6M/second but on the other way I get over 5M/sec. The machine thrush is a SUN Ultra 1 which is quite capable of going even faster. Any ideas? I'll include dmesg info, kernel config etc. below. FreeBSD 2.1.5-GAMMA #0: Fri Jul 12 14:56:52 EET DST 1996 count@lark2.sms.fi:/usr/src/sys/compile/LARK2 CPU: 166-MHz Pentium 735\\90 or 815\\100 (Pentium-class CPU) Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x52c Stepping=12 Features=0x1bf real memory = 67108864 (65536K bytes) avail memory = 64204800 (62700K bytes) Probing for devices on PCI bus 0: chip0 rev 1 on pci0:0 chip1 rev 0 on pci0:7:0 chip2 rev 0 on pci0:7:1 pci0:7:2: Intel Corporation, device=0x7020, class=0x0c, subclass=0x03 int d irq 9 [no driver assigned] vga0 rev 0 int a irq 9 on pci0:9 chip3 rev 2 on pci0:10 fxp0 rev 1 int a irq 11 on pci0:11 fxp0: Ethernet address 00:a0:c9:05:e9:77 Probing for devices on PCI bus 1: ahc0 rev 3 int a irq 12 on pci1:4 ahc0: aic7870 Channel A, SCSI Id=7, 16 SCBs ahc0: target 0 Tagged Queuing Device (ahc0:0:0): "SEAGATE ST51080N 0943" type 0 fixed SCSI 2 sd0(ahc0:0:0): Direct-Access 1030MB (2109840 512 byte sectors) ahc0: target 1 Tagged Queuing Device (ahc0:1:0): "HP C3725S 6039" type 0 fixed SCSI 2 sd1(ahc0:1:0): Direct-Access 2047MB (4194058 512 byte sectors) ahc0: target 2 Tagged Queuing Device (ahc0:2:0): "HP C3725S 6039" type 0 fixed SCSI 2 sd2(ahc0:2:0): Direct-Access 2047MB (4194058 512 byte sectors) ahc1 rev 3 int a irq 9 on pci1:5 ahc1: aic7870 Channel B, SCSI Id=7, 16 SCBs ahc1: target 0 Tagged Queuing Device (ahc1:0:0): "HP C3725S 6039" type 0 fixed SCSI 2 sd3(ahc1:0:0): Direct-Access 2047MB (4194058 512 byte sectors) ahc1: target 1 Tagged Queuing Device (ahc1:1:0): "HP C3725S 6039" type 0 fixed SCSI 2 sd4(ahc1:1:0): Direct-Access 2047MB (4194058 512 byte sectors) Probing for devices on the ISA bus: sc0 at 0x60-0x6f irq 1 on motherboard sc0: VGA color <16 virtual consoles, flags=0x0> sio0 at 0x3f8-0x3ff irq 4 on isa sio0: type 16550A sio1 at 0x2f8-0x2ff irq 3 on isa sio1: type 16550A lpt0 at 0x378-0x37f irq 7 on isa lpt0: Interrupt-driven port lp0: TCP/IP capable interface fdc0 at 0x3f0-0x3f7 irq 6 drq 2 on isa fdc0: NEC 72065B fd0: 1.44MB 3.5in fe0 at 0x300-0x31f irq 15 on isa fe0: address 00:00:f4:d0:5f:38, type AT1700/RE2000 npx0 on motherboard npx0: INT 16 interface ccd0: Concatenated disk driver machine "i386" cpu "I586_CPU" ident LARK_II maxusers 16 options INET #InterNETworking options FFS #Berkeley Fast Filesystem options NFS #Network Filesystem options PROCFS #Process filesystem options "COMPAT_43" #Compatible with BSD 4.3 options UCONSOLE #Allow users to grab the console options SYSVSHM options SYSVSEM options SYSVMSG options AHC_TAGENABLE options "NMBCLUSTERS=4096" options DUMMY_NOPS options "AUTO_EOI_1" options "AUTO_EOI_2" options FAT_CURSOR options HARDFONTS config kernel root on sd0 controller isa0 controller pci0 controller fdc0 at isa? port "IO_FD1" bio irq 6 drq 2 vector fdintr disk fd0 at fdc0 drive 0 controller ahc0 controller ahc1 controller scbus0 device sd0 device st0 device cd0 #Only need one of these, the code dynamically grows device sc0 at isa? port "IO_KBD" tty irq 1 vector scintr device npx0 at isa? port "IO_NPX" irq 13 vector npxintr device sio0 at isa? port "IO_COM1" tty irq 4 vector siointr device sio1 at isa? port "IO_COM2" tty irq 3 vector siointr device lpt0 at isa? port? tty irq 7 vector lptintr device de0 device fxp0 device fe0 at isa? port 0x300 net irq ? vector feintr pseudo-device loop pseudo-device ether pseudo-device log pseudo-device pty 64 pseudo-device gzip # Exec gzipped a.out's pseudo-device ccd 1 The machine lark2.sms.fi is a P166 (Asus P/I-P55T2P4) with 64M RAM. 1G disk is used for the OS and the 4 2G disks are striped together by using ccd. I don't think that it affects the ethernet performance. The other end, thrush.sms.fi is a SUN Ultra 1/170. In between those two machines is a Cisco Catalyst 5000 switch, but don't bother to point at it being the culprit :) -- Bror 'Count' Heinola % count@key.hole.fi % http://pobox.com/~count/ Pengerkatu 13b A5 % IRC: Count NIC: BH271 % FI-00530 HELSINKI % Work: bror@sms.fi % Roads? Where we're going, Cell: +358-40-5533-554 % Santa Monica Software % we don't need roads. From owner-freebsd-hardware Fri Jul 12 12:13:47 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA07836 for hardware-outgoing; Fri, 12 Jul 1996 12:13:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from isgate.is (isgate.is [193.4.58.51]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA07829; Fri, 12 Jul 1996 12:13:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hummer.islandia.is by isgate.is (8.7.5-M/ISnet/14-10-91); Fri, 12 Jul 1996 19:13:18 GMT Received: from yogurt.islandia.is by hummer.islandia.is (8.7.5/ISnet/12-09-94); Fri, 12 Jul 1996 19:13:51 GMT Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 19:13:51 GMT Message-Id: <199607121913.TAA15390@hummer.islandia.is> X-Sender: stefan@islandia.is X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG From: Stefan Thor Hreinsson Subject: Re: Problems with PPP and cyclades (Solved) Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk At 09:54 AM 7/12/96 +1000, you wrote: >>I'm trying to get ppp-iij using the tun device to work. I can connect to it >>and everything seems fine until I hangup, the ppp daemon doesn't terminate >>and just holds the device open. This happens only when using Cyclades 16-Ye >>DB25-DB25 device with 16 modems connected (from dmesg: cy0 irq 5 maddr >>0xd4000 msize 8192 on isa). But when using sio everything >>works fine and ppp terminates. I'm using the same modem on both devices. > >>... >>Currently I'm using sliplogin.dynamic with the Cy-16 with the external >>connector box, and there are no trouble with that setup. But some of my >>users want to use ppp to connect to my server. > >ppp polls DCD while slattach waits for a SIGHUP. ppp's method is much >easier to get right for both the daemon and the driver, but there seems >to be a problem with it. > >I use the following program to poll the modem state for all sio and cy >lines. The DCD state should be `-DCD' when nothing is connected and >change to '+DCD' when something is connected and raises DCD and change >to `-DCD' on hangup. This works with a Cyclaydes 8Yo. Perhaps there >is a timing problem in the ppp daemon. You should probably use kernel >ppp if there is more that one ppp session at a time. > [SNAP] Thanks for that program Bruce, it showed us that dcd was still up even though we had already hung up the line. Later I received a fix to modem.c in ppp: >>I have experienced a similar problem. I solved it changing the CLOCAL flag >>to HUPCL, in modem.c. >> >>diff modem.c ~wsj/src/ppp/modem.c >>440c440 >>< rstio.c_cflag = (CS8 | CREAD | CLOCAL | CCTS_OFLOW|CRTS_IFLOW); >>--- >>> rstio.c_cflag = (CS8 | CREAD | HUPCL | CCTS_OFLOW|CRTS_IFLOW); >> >>With this, the ppp program receives a SIGHUP when the modem lost the >>carrier, and it terminates in the expected way. >> >>I have three models of cyclades (8Ys/8Yo/16Ye) and this works fine. >> >>I hope this can help you. Good look! ;-) >> >>Waldemar. >>-------------------------------------------------------------- >>Waldemar Scudeller Jr. wsj@widesoft.com.br >>Widesoft Sistemas Ltda. http://www.widesoft.com.br >>Limeira/SP - Brasil F. +55 194 51 6300 >>-------------------------------------------------------------- This worked, the ppp dies with SIGHUP and the line is ready for the next user. Thanks everyone who helped me solve this problem. Kvedja fra Islandi. --------------------------------------------------------------- Stefan Thor Hreinsson. Isl@ndia Administrator of Islandia.is Gresásveg 7 2.h.th stefan@islandia.is Sími: 5884020 --------------------------------------------------------------- There are two types of people: those who divide people into two types, and those who don't. --------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-freebsd-hardware Sat Jul 13 02:42:34 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id CAA27949 for hardware-outgoing; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 02:42:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA27893; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 02:41:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.12/8.6.9) id TAA18861; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 19:37:29 +1000 Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 19:37:29 +1000 From: Bruce Evans Message-Id: <199607130937.TAA18861@godzilla.zeta.org.au> To: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org, stefan@islandia.is Subject: Re: Problems with PPP and cyclades (Solved) Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >Thanks for that program Bruce, it showed us that dcd was still up even though >we had already hung up the line. Later I received a fix to modem.c in ppp: >>>I have experienced a similar problem. I solved it changing the CLOCAL flag >>>to HUPCL, in modem.c. >>> >>>diff modem.c ~wsj/src/ppp/modem.c >>>440c440 >>>< rstio.c_cflag = (CS8 | CREAD | CLOCAL | CCTS_OFLOW|CRTS_IFLOW); >>>--- >>>> rstio.c_cflag = (CS8 | CREAD | HUPCL | CCTS_OFLOW|CRTS_IFLOW); >>> >>>With this, the ppp program receives a SIGHUP when the modem lost the >>>carrier, and it terminates in the expected way. The CLOCAL probably doesn't matter, and HUPCL is only supposed to affect hangups at your end (it causes DTR to be dropped when the line is closed). This seems to be fixed in -current by setting HUPCL in some cases: if (!(mode & MODE_DEDICATED)) rstio.c_cflag |= HUPCL; 2.1R is also missing a `modemios = rstio;' statement. Bruce From owner-freebsd-hardware Sat Jul 13 14:03:38 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA12190 for hardware-outgoing; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 14:03:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jparnas.cybercom.net (jparnas.cybercom.net [206.28.135.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA12174 for ; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 14:03:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.cybercom.net (localhost.cybercom.net [127.0.0.1]) by jparnas.cybercom.net (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id RAA10473; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 17:02:35 -0400 Message-Id: <199607132102.RAA10473@jparnas.cybercom.net> X-Authentication-Warning: jparnas.cybercom.net: Host localhost.cybercom.net didn't use HELO protocol To: Henry Spencer cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com X-External-Networks: yes Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 12 Jul 1996 10:13:43 EDT. Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 17:02:32 -0400 From: "Jacob M. Parnas" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In message you write: >> ...It just seems like >> a bit of a, kludge to me, for serial input, twice convert everything to a high >> speed networking protocol, each way, and pay for it on devices that don't need >> it, to avoid developing a really good long term protocol for serial devices... > >It's overkill, yes... but then, one characteristic of a mature technology >is that a lot of problems get solved with overkill, because it's simpler >and cheaper to apply a heavy-duty general-purpose solution than to do major >custom engineering for each problem. I agree with this statement except that its done with so many computers and peripherals/computer that it seems like it really adds up in cost. >> My question is why was it decided to use such tiny FIFO's? They went from 1-2 >> bytes to 16 per port, when the speed isn't so vital and with larger FIFO's, >> it seems like there would be much fewer interrupts, and writing drivers for >> it would be much easier. It can't be that expensive should it? ... > >There are two interacting problems here, or maybe three. > >One is that FIFOs are actually moderately complicated devices, and eat up >a fair bit of chip area. Oh, it's not a lot by the standards of modern CPUs, >but serial-I/O chips generally are not thought to merit the same level of >effort and pain lavished on CPUs, and that means they are constrained to >rather smaller chips. (Also, they are considered fairly cost sensitive; >until quite recently, serial ports with *any* FIFOs were premium add-ons >rather than standard equipment.) That's interesting. Modems seem to have like a 2-4 Kbyte FIFO, even inexpensive ones, made back in the mid 80's. Why, except for poor design, weren't they at least an option on the computer side. (1 byte was normal, 16 was "buffered") I'm also confused as to why building FIFO's is difficult or complicated. I remember we built one as a project in my first hardware course back in 1982-1983 and nobody found it hard (it was a beginning minor project nobody seemed to have problems with. >Another is that until very recently, almost everyone building PC hardware >thought in terms of classical MSDOS, where only one thing happens at once >and nothing is interrupt-driven. There's no real need for a FIFO if the >whole computer is sitting there waiting for the next character to arrive. >Only when you start running a real operating system (or a kludged imitation >thereof :-)) do you start to care about buffering. True, but even machines like Sun Sparc 2's or IBM RT's which only ran Unix had small FIFO's. And they only ran Unix. >I guess there is a third issue: serial ports were minor auxiliaries whose >performance simply wasn't important. (And this was self-reinforcing, because >people with demanding data rates went elsewhere.) I think this is it. And therefore, no real need for good design. Until well into the product life of these workstations. But it still seems like a widespread problems. Even in MS-DOS if you ran windows, there were/are strict limits without special boards. >> What about some DMA connection to the modems? ... > >Standard practice in the minicomputer world for 15-20 years, but only just >starting to get attention in the PC world. Don't need it under MSDOS, >after all, so why bother? > > Henry Spencer > henry@zoo.toronto.edu Thanks for the information and ideas. Sincerely, Jacob From owner-freebsd-hardware Sat Jul 13 18:42:59 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA18790 for hardware-outgoing; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 18:42:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lugh.kerris.com (lugh.kerris.com [142.77.242.145]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA18782 for ; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 18:42:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mkerr@localhost) by lugh.kerris.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA00534; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 21:42:24 -0400 Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 21:42:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Mike Kerr To: hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Colorado Tape Drives In-Reply-To: <199607132102.RAA10473@jparnas.cybercom.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Howdy! I have a Colorado Jumbo drive and was using 'ft' to backup my /usr filesystem. It gave me an error before it was done, something about /kernel input timed out or /kernel timed out on input. The commandline I used was taken directly from the ft man page. The tape I used was pre-formatted for the Colorado using a DOS package and already had stuff on it. I'm thinking that it ran out of space, but there was no indication of that from the error message. I was wondering if anybody knows of any freeware available to format a QIC-80 tape in Colorado format? Or is there any Colorado backup software? Thanks. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Mike Kerr | http://www.net/~mkerr Kerr Information Systems | http://www.kerris.com/ mkerr@kerris.com | Web Guy, etc. From owner-freebsd-hardware Sat Jul 13 19:19:35 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA22434 for hardware-outgoing; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 19:19:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zoo.toronto.edu (zoo.toronto.edu [128.100.72.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA22410 for ; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 19:19:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 22:19:01 -0400 (EDT) From: Henry Spencer Reply-To: Henry Spencer Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN To: "Jacob M. Parnas" cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com In-Reply-To: <199607132102.RAA10473@jparnas.cybercom.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > ...Modems seem to have like a 2-4 Kbyte FIFO, even > inexpensive ones, made back in the mid 80's. Why, except for poor design, > weren't they at least an option on the computer side. (1 byte was normal, 16 > was "buffered") The modems weren't single-chip devices. They were a boardful of electronics, typically including at least one microprocessor. (At one point, the modem I was using had considerably more computing power than the computer it was connected to.) In fact there was no actual FIFO on them -- the microprocessor had a few KB of RAM, and used that for data buffering among other things. > I'm also confused as to why building FIFO's is difficult or complicated. > I remember we built one as a project in my first hardware course back in > 1982-1983 and nobody found it hard (it was a beginning minor project nobody > seemed to have problems with. It's easy enough to do, but doing it on a chip does eat a fair bit of space. > >Only when you start running a real operating system (or a kludged imitation > >thereof :-)) do you start to care about buffering. > > True, but even machines like Sun Sparc 2's or IBM RT's which only ran Unix > had small FIFO's. And they only ran Unix. However, if you look inside them you will usually find that their serial-I/O chips are off-the-shelf commercial designs built for other markets. Henry Spencer henry@zoo.toronto.edu From owner-freebsd-hardware Sat Jul 13 22:21:05 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id WAA09489 for hardware-outgoing; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 22:21:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jparnas.cybercom.net (jparnas.cybercom.net [206.28.135.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA09477 for ; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 22:21:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.cybercom.net (localhost.cybercom.net [127.0.0.1]) by jparnas.cybercom.net (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id BAA00558; Sun, 14 Jul 1996 01:20:13 -0400 Message-Id: <199607140520.BAA00558@jparnas.cybercom.net> X-Authentication-Warning: jparnas.cybercom.net: Host localhost.cybercom.net didn't use HELO protocol To: Henry Spencer cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com X-External-Networks: yes Subject: Re: cable vs. ISDN In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 13 Jul 1996 22:19:01 EDT. Date: Sun, 14 Jul 1996 01:20:11 -0400 From: "Jacob M. Parnas" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In message you write: >> ...Modems seem to have like a 2-4 Kbyte FIFO, even >> inexpensive ones, made back in the mid 80's. Why, except for poor design, >> weren't they at least an option on the computer side. (1 byte was normal, 16 >> was "buffered") > >The modems weren't single-chip devices. They were a boardful of >electronics, typically including at least one microprocessor. (At one >point, the modem I was using had considerably more computing power than >the computer it was connected to.) In fact there was no actual FIFO on >them -- the microprocessor had a few KB of RAM, and used that for data >buffering among other things. Its weird that sufficient buffering was available on the modems (though it took more boardspace possibly. I doubt it would in todays technology). Yet only 1 byte (or up to 16 was available on buffered boards. >> I'm also confused as to why building FIFO's is difficult or complicated. >> I remember we built one as a project in my first hardware course back in >> 1982-1983 and nobody found it hard (it was a beginning minor project nobody >> seemed to have problems with. > >It's easy enough to do, but doing it on a chip does eat a fair bit of space. I've looked at circuit boards of that time and the space was definately available, especially on 4 port-16 port boards. >> >Only when you start running a real operating system (or a kludged imitation >> >thereof :-)) do you start to care about buffering. >> >> True, but even machines like Sun Sparc 2's or IBM RT's which only ran Unix >> had small FIFO's. And they only ran Unix. > >However, if you look inside them you will usually find that their serial-I/O >chips are off-the-shelf commercial designs built for other markets. > > Henry Spencer > henry@zoo.toronto.edu I did and your're correct. But why when both had extra space on them? Well, I guess hindsight is 20/20. *sigh* Thanks for the information. Sincerely, Jacob