Technical Info
Date: 04-19-90 (19:57) Number: 3707
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3693
From: BOB KIEL Read: YES
Subj: SERVER DISCONNECTS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Thanks for the tips
Date: 04-20-90 (07:23) Number: 3708
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: WOLFGANG JOHN Read: YES
Subj: DATE LOSS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Hi J.,
With the help from Walt Freedman (70043,2416) on PCMagNet I offer the
following information:
The Date-Loss problem is discussed in PC Magazine of March 27, 1990 on
page 307 under "For the technically curious". It is part of a
discussion of a utility called "Schedule.Com". In Walt's words: <It
automatically pops-up at midnight - so BIOS gets reset even if you are
away for days. Couple that with a screen dimmer that will "wake up"
when SCHEDULE activates at 12.01am and you got a system!!> Both utils
are in Lib 2 as SCHEDU.ARC (81K) and DIM103.ZIP (13K). ( From
CompuServe: GO PCM:UTILFORUM )
<Wolfgang>
/ex
Date: 04-20-90 (19:27) Number: 3709
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: JOE TAIBI Read: YES
Subj: Z-LAN AND T1000 LAPTOP? Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I just found that the Toshiba 1000 laptop is listed as incompatible with
Z-LAN for what appears to be a very strange reason! It states that it
does not work because the T1000 has DOS 2.1 in ROM and cannot be
upgraded.
First of all, in the two years I've owned a T1000 the only time I've
booted it from the internal ROM has been at airport baggage checks to
prove it is a computer, the rest of the time I boot up with a 3.3 DOS
boot disk...
There are also ROM upgrades available for that machine now but not from
the manufacturer ( from what I understand ) I can get more detail on
this if necessary but what I'm really curious about is why nobody tried
booting it from a floppy to see if the program worked that way?
The boot disk (A: or ROM) is selctable in the T1000 setup, the ROM is
not the only choice. Are they saying that the ROM has an effect even if
a disk with DOS 3.3 is used to boot?
I really would be able to use the Z-LAN if my hunch that booting from
disk would work, especially since my laptop is a T1000! <grin>.
-jt
Date: 04-23-90 (08:11) Number: 3716
To: WOLFGANG JOHN Refer#: 3708
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: DATE LOSS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> The Date-Loss problem is discussed in PC Magazine of March 27, 1990
-> on page 307 under "For the technically curious".
Wolfgang, once again, thanks very much for the follow up!
- J Gerring
Date: 04-23-90 (08:19) Number: 3717
To: JOE TAIBI Refer#: 3709
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: Z-LAN AND T1000 LAPTOP? Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> The boot disk (A: or ROM) is selctable in the T1000 setup, the ROM is
-> not the only choice. Are they saying that the ROM has an effect even
-> if a disk with DOS 3.3 is used to boot?
Joe, well, it's possible that whoever reported the incompatibility was
not aware that you could select how you wanted the T1000 to boot. I
will pass you note along to our Compatibility Engineer and have her
change that to "incompatible when booted from original ROM" or something
similar. Thanks for the info!
- J Gerring
Date: 04-25-90 (19:07) Number: 3736
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3717
From: JOE TAIBI Read: YES
Subj: Z-LAN AND T1000 LAPTOP? Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Well I have not *verified* that it WILL work. I have only tried to pass
along to you that the T1000 doesn't HAVE to boot from the ROM if you
don't want it to. I'd suggest someone in test get a T1000 and try
booting it from A: and see if Z-LAN works. If it does then *I* would
likely BUY that version to add to my current 2.57u setup!! ( I'd hate to
buy it to find that some OTHER oddity makes my T1000 incompatible ).
-jt
I'd have to agree just on the evidence, that the T1000 Lap top would not
be compatible IF booted from the ROM.
Date: 04-25-90 (19:55) Number: 3737
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: SCOTT ERICKSON Read: (N/A)
Subj: CABLE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
}e a cable in hand from a potential customer who has strung a
few hundred feet around his building. Customer is a Fortune 1000,
and I need some help. Cable lable says as follows:
MANHATTAN ELECTRC CABLE E-7937NAWM STYLE 2764 800 300V VW1 - - -
LL4985 (Mayber 46185, I have an old piece) CSA AWN S-R PVC
800 300V P/N M3194
Connectors are DB-9, metal mate, so connections can be canged to
accomodate what we need for 2 MBPS adapters. Metal shell, so we
can accomodate a proper ground.
a> Is this even close to the Belden cable?
b> Can we use the existing building cabling?
c> Length limits? One shot is 250 feet. Total network length with
18 stations will be about 800 - 1200 feet.
d> It will be a hell of a lot shorter if they can't use their exist-
ing cable.
HELP ???!!!
Scott Erickson
PC Support
Voice (408) 226-6896
FAX: (408) 578-8748
Date: 04-26-90 (08:16) Number: 3740
To: JOE TAIBI Refer#: 3736
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: Z-LAN AND T1000 LAPTOP? Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> Well I have not *verified* that it WILL work. I have only tried to
-> pass along to you that the T1000 doesn't HAVE to boot from the ROM if
-> you don't want it to.
Joe, ok, and now that we know that, I'm willing to say that it's highly
likely that the T1000 will work fine with Z, as long as you boot from a
disk with DOS 3.1 or higher. I will, however, see if we can get an
evaluation unit in-house to test, but I don't know how long that might
take...
- J Gerring
Date: 04-26-90 (08:44) Number: 3742
To: SCOTT ERICKSON Refer#: 3737
From: JAY GERRING Read: NO
Subj: CABLE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> Is this even close to the Belden cable?
Scott, First, I have to warn you that we can't support you on this site
if you do use the installed cabling... That said, there really is no
way to know if it's close to the Belden cable except to call the
manufacturer of the cable and see if they can tell you. Barring that,
hooking it up and trying it out is the only way to know if it will work
for sure. But if it doesn't, there's nothing I can recommend except to
use a supported cable...
- J Gerring
Date: 04-27-90 (13:35) Number: 3752
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: STEVEN HEITZNER Read: (N/A)
Subj: UPDATE TO NOS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I am running the 10megabit Eithernet boards and your software Lantastic
Eth. 2.57u and NE-3. Will I be getting an upgrade, if so when (approx
date) and at what cost??? I got your Ethernet boards.
Date: 04-28-90 (11:55) Number: 3754
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: JOHN SOLTOW Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC & LANTASTIC Z Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I noticed in a previous message that you said it is possible to run
a server with both the 2 MBPS and Lantastic-Z systems. How much extra
memory would I be giving up by adding Lantastic-Z to my server? We're
looking into adding some of our older portables into the network (when
they're here) to allow then access to the printers.
Are there any other problems that might be involved that I'm not
aware of?
Thanks,
Ò ÖÄÄ·
Ò ºohn ÓÄÄ·oltow
ÓĽ ÓÄĽ
Date: 04-29-90 (15:47) Number: 3757
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: JOE TAIBI Read: NO (Has Replies)
Subj: NMDM21.ZIP Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Just found a beta test version of a set of utils that allow common
access to a MODEM SERVER on a NETBIOS LAN. It appears to require a
dedicated machine to be the modem server which makes sense and it
provides a util for each user called VTERM ( No not the same as the one
you're thinking of as far as I could tell ). Since I've seen so many
people express an interest ( no a definite requirement actually ) for
such capability I thought it a good idea to upload it here! Mayne it
will fill the void for somebody! In my current setup I have no need of
such a thing since my LANtastic setup is merely three nodes at present
and TNE serves more than adequately for this when necessary!
-jt
Date: 04-30-90 (00:22) Number: 3760
To: JOE TAIBI Refer#: 3757
From: DANA SNOW Read: YES
Subj: NMDM21.ZIP Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Thanks Joe, I'll take a look at it when "J" decides it's safe for public
consumption. (Kind of like the kings food taster - if J lives it gets
posted <grin>)
Date: 04-30-90 (09:26) Number: 3761
To: STEVEN HEITZNER Refer#: 3752
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: UPDATE TO NOS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> I am running the 10megabit Eithernet boards and your software
-> Lantastic Eth. 2.57u and NE-3. Will I be getting an upgrade, if so
-> when (approx date) and at what cost???
Steve, We will make an announcement when version 3 becomes avaialable,
and then registered users will be able to upgrade. The cost will be $50
and the release is currently projected for sometime in late May. In
addition, we will be sending upgrade notices to all registered users.
- J Gerring
Date: 04-30-90 (09:53) Number: 3762
To: JOHN SOLTOW Refer#: 3754
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC & LANTASTIC Z Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> How much extra memory would I be giving up by adding Lantastic-Z to
-> my server?
John, the low-level drivers for Z take about 10K more.
-> Are there any other problems that might be involved that I'm not
-> aware of?
Not really, the speed isn't blinding, but Z will certainly do the job
for your printing.
- J Gerring
Date: 04-30-90 (09:59) Number: 3764
To: JOE TAIBI Refer#: 3757
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: NMDM21.ZIP Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> Just found a beta test version of a set of utils that allow common
-> access to a MODEM SERVER on a NETBIOS LAN.
Joe, Thanks for letting me know about your upload, I'll take a look at
it and probably post it for download soon. Thanks,
- J Gerring
Date: 04-30-90 (12:32) Number: 3767
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: ERIC SHAMIE Read: (N/A)
Subj: LAPTOPS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I have Lantastic installed on 4 full-size PCs using 2mbps adaptors.
I would like to add the 1 - 2 laptops we have to the network. Is
there a recommended way? Can I use pocket Ethernet adaptors and have
some machines running with the 2mbps and some using Ethernet? Or,
would it be better to use a Lantastic-Z connection?
Date: 05-01-90 (08:16) Number: 3770
To: ERIC SHAMIE Refer#: 3767
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: LAPTOPS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> I would like to add the 1 - 2 laptops we have to the network. Is
-> there a recommended way? Can I use pocket Ethernet adaptors and have
-> some machines running with the 2mbps and some using Ethernet? Or,
-> would it be better to use a Lantastic-Z connection?
Eric, Well, if you already had Ethernet adapters installed in the PCs
then the Pocket Ethernet adapters would be the easiest way to add in
laptops. But since you have the 2Mbps adapters then I'd recommend using
LANtastic Z, or 2Mbps cards if the laptops have an available slot.
- J Gerring
Date: 05-01-90 (12:10) Number: 3773
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3770
From: ERIC SHAMIE Read: YES
Subj: LAPTOPS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
So you don't forsee any problems running both Lantastic NOS and
Lantastic-Z on a single machine? Also, would there be substantial
advantages to converting all the adaptors to Ethernet...?
Date: 05-01-90 (19:28) Number: 3774
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: RON FAIRCLOTH Read: (N/A)
Subj: PRINTER USAGE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Is there a way to set up a 2 machine LANtastic network, one server and
one workstation, with a seperate individual printer attached to both the
server and the workstation, where the server can use the workstation's
printer (without making the workstation a second server). If not, how
can you do it making the workstation a second server?
Date: 05-02-90 (08:13) Number: 3779
To: ERIC SHAMIE Refer#: 3773
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: LAPTOPS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> So you don't forsee any problems running both Lantastic NOS and
-> Lantastic-Z on a single machine?
Eric, nope, it's pretty much designed to work that way... <smile>
-> Also, would there be substantial advantages to converting all the
-> adaptors to Ethernet...?
Sure, the overall throughput of the LAN would be much higher, especially
for the laptops. Z is a pretty slow link, the Ethernet adapters are
probably five times faster...
- J Gerring
Date: 05-02-90 (08:28) Number: 3780
To: RON FAIRCLOTH Refer#: 3774
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: PRINTER USAGE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> where the server can use the workstation's printer (without making
-> the workstation a second server). If not, how can you do it making
-> the workstation a second server?
Ron, A machine must be running as a server to be able to share any of
its resouces. To make the second machine a server, you first install
the software from the distribution disk, selecting the 'install for
server and redirector' option under the 'install software' option in
NET_MGR. Then, change the batch file that brings up the LAN on the
workstation to include the SHARE and SERVER commands. Bring up NET_MGR
on the drive you installed to and set up a printer shared resource (as
on page 6-8 of the NOS User's Manual), exit NET_MGR and reboot the
computer. When it comes up, you can then log into it from the first
server and NET USE its printer.
- J Gerring
Date: 05-02-90 (10:49) Number: 3783
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3764
From: JOE TAIBI Read: YES
Subj: NMDM21.ZIP Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
You're welcome. As I said, TNE does all I need in this regard on my
system but since I see so few LAN type utilities out here this one
caught my attention. BTW, from what I've read of LANtastic 3.0 I can
hardly wait to see it! Now the only problem is I don't recall if I
actually sent in my 2.57u reg card? I need to start a habit of mailing
those types of things immediately before they can get buried in a corner
of a drawer!
Date: 05-03-90 (06:18) Number: 3790
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: MICHAEL BROWN Read: (N/A)
Subj: USING A PLOTTER ON LANTAS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
What is the best way to hook up a plotter with a serial interce to
a LANtastic LAN?
Date: 05-03-90 (14:05) Number: 3797
To: MICHAEL BROWN Refer#: 3790
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: USING A PLOTTER ON LANTAS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> What is the best way to hook up a plotter with a serial interce to a
-> LANtastic LAN?
Michael, The best way to do it currently is to hook it to a serial port
on the server, then use the MODE command to redirect one of the unused
LPT ports on your sever to the COM port the plotter is attached to. In
the NET_MGR program, set up an @PLOTTER device that links to the LPT
port you specify in MODE. Then, on your workstations, login to the
server and NET USE one of your local LPT ports as the @PLOTTER device
and tell your plotting program to plot to that local LPT port. The MODE
commands should be run before any of the NOS software, see p. 10-6 of
the NOS User Manual for an example of using MODE to redirect the
server's LPT port to the COM device.
- J Gerring
Date: 05-03-90 (18:53) Number: 3802
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: DAVISON MOORE Read: YES
Subj: BAR CODE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
J., I found the answer to my problem with the entry of function keys.
There is a gizmo know (not to me until yesterday) as a keyboard wedge,
it allows you to program your bar code input so as to fool the keyboard
scan codes. In other words I can scan in a "##" in extended 3-9 and
voila (sic) the program thinks it is receiving a keyboard scan code 44
ie. F10. Ain't science wonderful? In any event if the inquire ever
raises it's ugly head again, thers your answer, and now you know
something more than you did yesterday and so do I. Best regards. Dave.
Date: 05-04-90 (08:00) Number: 3805 (Deleted)
To: DAVISON MOORE Refer#: 3802
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: BAR CODE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Dave, thanks for the followup on the keyboard wedge, I'll have to
remember to keep that one in mind... Thanks again!
- J Gerring
Date: 05-04-90 (11:44) Number: 3808
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: J.C. HASSALL Read: (N/A)
Subj: LAN & DESQVIEW Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
please see file LAN-DV.HLP for descriptioof my machines, and software in
use. Versions of software w/time-date stamp, load sequences are given.
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALP! Thanx! J.C. Hassall
Date: 05-06-90 (14:58) Number: 3815
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: DAVE MARTIN Read: (N/A)
Subj: TOPS/LANTASTIC GATEWAY Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I thought you might be interested to know that a LANtastic client can
also be a TOPS server. This enables MACs on a TOPS network to use the
shared resources on a LANtastic network.
The same thing should be true for Appletalk-DOS. Has anybody out there
tried it??
If you want to do the TOPS on LANtastic trick be sure to set the TOPS
software interrupt to something other than 5C (5D worked for me) also
set any shared resource to a TOPS 'H' device.
Date: 05-06-90 (15:15) Number: 3816
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: DENNIS THOMPSON Read: (N/A)
Subj: PARADOX 3.0 CRASHES Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Help! Paradox 3.0 hangs the system when running under Lantastic if a
DOS shell is done while in Paradox. If I just start Paradox, do a DOS
shell (either manually with Ctrl-O or with the PAL "run" command) then
exit, I get an error message: "Can't start Paradox: unable to record
lock\unlock [path]PARADOX.NET. You may have insufficient access."
If I run a PAL menu as well as do a DOS shell, the system crashes upon
exiting Paradox with no error message.
I checked with the Paradox tech support, but they had no idea what might
be wrong (Paradox doesn't officially support Lantastic).
I've tried it with no memory resident programs, no drivers, with various
Lantastic adapter card settings, and nothing seems to fix this. It
happens only under the circumstances described. Paradox is working fine
under Lantastic for all other operations.
I have the latest version of Lantastic (2.57) running on Laser 286
micros. The only possibility I haven't tested is whether there is
something about this make of micro that conflicts with something this
combination of Lantastic and Paradox operations.
Has anyone done DOS shells in Paradox 3.0 under Lantastic WITHOUT
getting error messages or system crashes? Any ideas about what else I
could try? I really need to be able to run other programs and DOS
commands while in Paradox. Help!
Date: 05-06-90 (16:10) Number: 3817 (Deleted)
To: ALEX KARAHALIOS Refer#: NONE
From: DAVE MARTIN Read: NO
Subj: SERVE REDIRECTED DEVICES? Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Alex,
Hope things are going well for you and you are managing to stay sane in
the midst of the huge expansion which must be causing growing pains at
ARTISOFT.
I've an interest in gatewaying other networks to LANtastic and would
like to find a means for a server to access a redirected device. I
understand that the way that the operating system is written does not
allow this for disk devices (D: etc). How are other DOS devices
treated? A long time ago I recall being successful at the server's
being able to use COM1 as a shared resource. LANtastic seemed to treat
COM1 as a block device I remember. Is there a route to sharing a
redirected drive hidden here somewhere?
I also did a bit of work on setting up a system where a server could
send a client a network path to another server. This worked like a
charm and could ease the management of a large network of networks. As
it presently stands it has some security problems. In a network of
distributed servers one can't expect to keep all usernames and ACLs at
each server. Our solution to this was to assume that if the user could
logon to a server, he had the authority to logon to ANY server, hence
once logged on, his private username was replaced with a globally
accepted username.
This works but screws up security. A solution would be to use the ACL
bit pattern from the first logon attempt as the network username so that
security information is carried with the global access right as kind of
a token which is acceptable network wide. In the present NOS this would
require a very long ACL for each resource. I suggest that you consider
modifying the NOS to accomodate some kind of global naming and security
authorization scheme. Clearly, such an approch is necessary to move
from small to big networks.
We've just acquired MIT's Project ATHENA NOS for a 300 node workstation
network. It uses a security server called KERABOS (the three headed dog
that guards the gates of hell) to control access to the network
resources by means of authenticating a user by a logon procedure then
giving the user a token which allows access to resources wherever they
may be on the network. Security info must be part of that token. I'll
know for sure next week more details of how it works.
I've a line on an extremely good DOS programmer who could work on
projects like this. Unfortunately, he came along after I had committed
all of my funds. This guy writes device drivers that work first time.
The first thing he did for me as a favor was to write a device driver
which disables the keyboard during bootup then re-enables it after
the NOS has been installed to prevent hacker access to the server.
I'm about to be forcably logged off. bye.
Dave Martin .... Let me know if you want some programming.
Date: 05-06-90 (18:06) Number: 3818
To: JOHN CROUCH Refer#: 3682
From: MIKE KING Read: YES
Subj: LAN PHONE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
the next release of lantastic will
Date: 05-07-90 (07:28) Number: 3822
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3762
From: JOHN SOLTOW Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC & LANTASTIC Z Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
>the low-level drivers for Z take about 10K more.
Does that mean that I would be giving up JUST another 10K, or that I
would be giving up an additional 40 or 50K (or whatever it is) and that
the additional memory given up would be 10K larger than a 2MBS TSR.
Date: 05-07-90 (09:08) Number: 3830
To: JOHN SOLTOW Refer#: 3822
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC & LANTASTIC Z Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> Does that mean that I would be giving up JUST another 10K, or that I
-> would be giving up an additional 40 or 50K (or whatever it is) and
-> that the additional memory given up would be 10K larger than a 2MBS
-> TSR.
John, Well, on a server that is currently running a 2Mbps set up, you
will add 10K to the total overhead. On the Z workstation (presumably a
laptop), the full overhead will be about 10K more than a 2Mbps
workstation. Sorry for not being a little more clear on that before...
- J Gerring
Date: 05-07-90 (19:40) Number: 3832
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: LARRY WESTHAVER Read: YES
Subj: TECH.ZIP Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
J, When the new 3.0 NOS is released will there also be a new updated
version of the TECH.ZIP file for those of us who like to roll-our-own
LANtasic utilities? I sure hope so...
One more question, When the AUE_IO value (the 40 bit unsigned binary
number) returned by the GET ACTIVE USER INFO interrupt call reaches its
limit what happens???? Does this 5 byte number simply rollover to zero
or does the NOS go supernova and explode under the weight of such
massive data I/O???? :-) No really.... What happens?
Likewise, what happens to the AUE_requests (the 24 bit unsigned number)
when its limits are exceeded? I need to know since I leave my server
activity monitor (SAM.EXE) running for days at a time and the
AUE_requests count gets way up there. Do I need to log out and log back
in again once in a while to reset the count or am I safe in letting the
number skyrocket?
PS. For any users of SAM, I have a new version that fixes the problem of
the DOS date not being kept current when the server is left running
unattended for several days at a time. I'll upload it as SAM105.ZIP
Thanks in advance,
Larry
Date: 05-07-90 (19:43) Number: 3833
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: LARRY WESTHAVER Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC NOS 3.0 Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
J, I just double checked the bulletins here and I don't see a release
date for NOS version 3.0. When will this version be released to the
existing LANtastic userbase as an upgrade?
Larry
Date: 05-08-90 (07:34) Number: 3835
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: PAUL LAW Read: (N/A)
Subj: TAPE BACKUP & SECURITY Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
We a just getting started in the LAN area. We have just installed
LANTASTIC cards in three machines and want to use them to backup to tape
each night. Can anyone recomend hardware/software that will enable each
of us to backup to a tape drive on the LAN without compromising
security. For example: If the tape drive is in my PC does my boss have
to give me access to all his confidential files in order to backup his
hard disk? Any suggestions?
Date: 05-08-90 (08:05) Number: 3837
To: LARRY WESTHAVER Refer#: 3833
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC NOS 3.0 Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> I just double checked the bulletins here and I don't see a release
-> date for NOS version 3.0. When will this version be released to the
-> existing LANtastic userbase as an upgrade?
Larry, NOS 3.0 is currently scheduled for release at the end of this
month. There is no announced date as of now, so it could slide a
little, but the target date is late this month. Sorry I can't be more
specific...
- J Gerring
Date: 05-08-90 (10:08) Number: 3839
To: LARRY WESTHAVER Refer#: 3832
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: TECH.ZIP Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> When the new 3.0 NOS is released will there also be a new updated
-> version of the TECH.ZIP file for those of us who like to roll-our-own
-> LANtasic utilities?
Of course! Actually, there won't be many changes (if any), but there
will be several additions.
-> When the AUE_IO value (the 40 bit unsigned binary number) returned by
-> the GET ACTIVE USER INFO interrupt call reaches its limit what
-> happens???? Does this 5 byte number simply rollover to zero or does
-> the NOS go supernova and explode under the weight of such massive
-> data I/O?
Well, let's see, that's a 40 bit number, so at 1000 bytes of I/O per
second, it would take about 35 years for it to overflow. Barring a
power outage, and acts of God (which would cause the server to have to
be rebooted and reset the number), it would roll over to zero! <grin>
Just having a little fun, but seriously, yes, it would reset itself...
-> Likewise, what happens to the AUE_requests (the 24 bit unsigned
-> number) when its limits are exceeded?
Same thing, only it's more probable that this would happen during your
career! Actually, it could happen in as little time as a week
(depending on how many requests SAM is making), but it will also roll
over to zero.
Have a good one!
- J Gerring
Date: 05-08-90 (11:58) Number: 3840
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: PING WU Read: YES
Subj: INT9FIX Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I had experienced the "Left-shift-on state becoming active when no shift
key is pressed" phenonmenon on a few of my machines here before becoming
aware of INT9FIX.ZIP, which I have since downloaded and read.
My question is whether this is a possible problem with all machines, or
only (as seems to be inferred in KBFIX.DOC) with AT type machines. I.e.
are PS/2's immune? Are PC/XT's with enhanced keyboards (is such a thing
possible?) immune? Is there something more definitive to determine
whether a machine is susceptible/immune? eg. type of keyboard
controller? Can I determine whether a particular machine is
susceptible/immune by inspecting certain RAM/ROM locations or I/O ports?
Sorry, didn't mean to run-on. I'm sure you've got the drift of my
inquiry.
Look forward to your reply.
Thanks.
Ping Wu.
Date: 05-09-90 (06:45) Number: 3845
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3830
From: JOHN SOLTOW Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC & LANTASTIC Z Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
> Sorry for not being a little more clear ...
Actually your reply was alot easier to understand that the question.
Thanks again. It sounds like it is exactly what we need.
Ò ÖÄÄ·
Ò ºohn ÓÄÄ·oltow
ÓĽ ÓÄĽ
Date: 05-09-90 (08:10) Number: 3849
To: PING WU Refer#: 3840
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: INT9FIX Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> My question is whether this is a possible problem with all machines,
-> or only (as seems to be inferred in KBFIX.DOC) with AT type machines.
-> I.e. are PS/2's immune? Are PC/XT's with enhanced keyboards (is such
-> a thing possible?) immune?
Ping, The problem will most likely occurr with 286, 386, and 486
machines. It's possible that some XTs may have extended BIOS functions
that can talk to an enhanced keyboard. The BIOS has to be able to
understand the enhanced scan codes, and most XTs don't do this. In any
case, you can run the KBFIX program, and it won't install unless it
finds the right code in DOS. It won't hurt anything to run INT9FIX, so
there's no harm in trying it on an XT if you are having the problem
there.
- J Gerring
Date: 05-09-90 (10:31) Number: 3854
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: PING WU Read: YES
Subj: INT9FIX Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Thanks for your quick reply. I will probably do exactly as you
suggested. I have to admit, however, that programs that patch DOS and
depend on specific coding do make me alittle nervous. Is that
understandable?
Nervous enough that I would be willing to trade a few hundred bytes of
RAM for a more traditional TSR approach, if such a thing would work. I
considered, as a result, trying to write a TSR that would intercept the
INT9 vector and then simply disable the keyboard before sending control
back to wherever it was going. (I guess for completeness it should
perhaps insure the keyboard was re-enabled as control was passed back
out.) But time, lack of info, and the fact I have machines ranging from
XT types, to AT types, to PS/2 types, to 386 machines, some of which I
think use completely different keyboard controllers, will prevent me.
Re that last point (that eg. PS/2's use a different keyboard
controller). I guess that's what made me wonder if PS/2's might
be immune, and whether the fix had been tried on PS/2's. I noticed that
at least KBDFIX.SYS basically just checks if the first non-JMP
instruction in the BIOS routine is STI and if so points the vector at
the next instruction after the STI, so even if the keyboard handling
routine was completely different from the expected, it would still
patch. I assume this is safe? Also I know that bypassing the STI is
pretty safe in a standard AT-bios keyboard handling routine since
several CLI/STI pairs are subsequently executed as part of the
interaction with the keyboard controller, but is this also the case with
XT's ? PS/2's ?
Anyway, sorry to run-on, but I was just wondering.
Thanks.
Ping.
Date: 05-09-90 (22:28) Number: 3858 (Deleted)
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: STEVEN PURVIS Read: (N/A)
Subj: NETSEND Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I recently tried the netsend program. Its ok, but does not work well
with Automenu (r), the menu program we use. I've seen other networks
with a chat mode feature that works great with Automenu. Is there a
better "chat" program that will run with LANtastic (the network of our
choice) ?
Date: 05-10-90 (08:30) Number: 3859
To: PING WU Refer#: 3854
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: INT9FIX Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> I would be willing to trade a few hundred bytes of RAM for a more
-> traditional TSR approach, if such a thing would work.
Ping, That's what the program INT9FIX.EXE does, it is a TSR that loads
from your autoexec.bat before any other programs, disables the keyboard
until control passes back through it. If the KBFIX patch to DOS seems
dangerous to you, then this is the program to use.
-> is this also the case with XT's ? PS/2's ?
We haven't seen this problem happen on anything but AT type machines, so
far. If it does happen on an XT or PS/2, then it's much more likely to
be an acutal hardware problem (a dying keyboard), rather than anything
else. So far, we have not had any reports of PS/2s having the problem,
and as far as we know, all XTs that have had a similar problem have been
fixed by replacing the keyboard.
- J Gerring
Date: 05-10-90 (08:51) Number: 3863
To: STEVEN PURVIS Refer#: 3858
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: NETSEND Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> Is there a better "chat" program that will run with LANtastic (the
-> network of our choice) ?
Steve, not yet, but our version 3.0, currently scheduled for release at
the end of this month, does have a chat feature. It should be easy to
add it as an option to Automenu...
- J Gerring
Date: 05-10-90 (11:47) Number: 3864
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: NONE
From: PING WU Read: YES
Subj: INT9FIX Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> We haven't seen this problem happen on anything but AT type machines
-> so far.
Great. Neither have I. So I'll use one of your fixes on my AT types
and leave my PS/2's and XT types alone. Thanks.
I hate to do this, but if you've got the time, I've got a follow-up
question (strictly for my enlightenment only). Why does INT9FIX.EXE
mask IRQ0, which KBFIX.DOC mentions can have various side effects,
rather than inhibiting the keyboard?
Ping Wu.
Date: 05-10-90 (19:26) Number: 3865
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: GARY SAAKE Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC VOICE... Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Just saw an ad for lantastic voice. Is there any literature available?
Is this part of NOS 3.0 or a seperate package? Ok, c'mon guys, give us
an idea of what 3.0 MIGHT include. We promise not tell a soul <grin>.
Gary.
Date: 05-11-90 (08:35) Number: 3866
To: GARY SAAKE Refer#: 3865
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC VOICE... Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> Just saw an ad for lantastic voice. Is there any literature
-> available? Is this part of NOS 3.0 or a seperate package?
Gary, LANtastic voice is both part of NOS 3.0 and a separate package,
depending on how you use it. Voice messaging is built into NOS 3.0, you
just need the voice card to completely enable it. About the only
literature I know of for it right now is the bulletin in this
conference...
-> give us an idea of what 3.0 MIGHT include. We promise not tell a soul
-> <grin>.
Ok, ok, I will! Just read bulletins 2 (v3.0) and 3 (Voice) and you'll
get an idea of what we're doing! <grin back>
- J Gerring
Date: 05-11-90 (09:54) Number: 3867
To: PING WU Refer#: 3864
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: INT9FIX Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> Why does INT9FIX.EXE mask IRQ0, which KBFIX.DOC mentions can have
-> various side effects, rather than inhibiting the keyboard?
Ping, Well, the programmer who wrote it says that it could be done
either way, but he felt the safest way was to mask the timer interrupt
while the keyboard handler was running, that way nothing could interrupt
it (which is one way the scan codes get stepped on). All KBFIX does,
however, is to find the entry point for the keyboard handler in DOS and
tell it to skip one instruction, which is to re-enable the keyboard
interrupt. This happens at the end of the routine also, so there's
really no danger of the keyboard not being able to send scan codes again
later. I hope that's a good explanation, at least it's how I
understood it!
- J Gerring
Date: 05-11-90 (10:21) Number: 3868
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: NONE
From: PING WU Read: YES
Subj: INT9FIX Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Thanks !!
Ping Wu.
Date: 05-12-90 (09:00) Number: 3871
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: FRANK BARTLETT Read: (N/A)
Subj: NETWORK EYE & DESQVIEW Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I have tried to use Network Eye to control a remote system that is
running Desqview. The Network Eye can work with the active/foreground
process, but it will not allow me to change tasks. I have tried
reassigning the Desqview activation key(s), but with no success.
[C[A[A[B[C[C[C[D[D[D[K[B[DThe latest rev. of Desqview
documentation makes reference to being compatible PCAnywhere, so it
would appear that this sort of control should be possible. Can you help
me out in this area?
Date: 05-12-90 (12:41) Number: 3872
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: JAMES WEISS Read: (N/A)
Subj: ARTIFACTS RESOURCE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
This is probably and oooooold trick to most of you, but I'll post it
anyway.
One way to get the most out of this message base is to call every "n"
days and capture all the new messages to a text file. Once offline, dig
out your indexing program, and index the new capture file. Then, once
you have a question about something here, use your indexer to search
your capture files for keywords.
This has two benefits:
1) it saves you $$$ on connect time, and
2) it saves our heroic sysop from answering the same questions over and
over.
It's a great time/frustration saver - try it!
Regards,
Jim
Date: 05-12-90 (14:33) Number: 3874
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: SANDY SILVERBERG Read: (N/A)
Subj: LANTASTIC DIAGNOSTICS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Hey guys. Is there any kind of a monitor and/or diagnostics utilities
under development? Occasionally we get a sticky problem that is very
intermittent and everything we know to check looks OK. Some sort of
monitor would help.
Also, a reference manual on performance and tuning of an installed
network IN TERMS UNDERSTANDABLE BY PEOPLE WHO AREN'T SUPER-TECHIES.
Typical tuning situations could be explained.
Sandy Silverberg, Ideasign, Inc.
Date: 05-12-90 (14:39) Number: 3875
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: SANDY SILVERBERG Read: NO (Has Replies)
Subj: FOXPRO APPLICATION Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I have a customer running a 2-station network using WD Ethernet cards
and AI-NOS. I am getting intermittent server hangs when both machines
(server is non-dedicated 386/25) are using FOXPRO application. The
situation as described to me doesn't seem to be isolatable and the
problem cannot be recreated at will. I am reasonably comfortable that I
don't have any memory conflicts (have checked with System Sleuth and
Manifest) or IRQ conflicts. Hangs do seem to happen occasionally when
printing from either workstation. Any thoughts? If you need more
specific details, I can provide. By the way, both the WD driver,
AI-LANBIOS, and REDIR are being loaded high on both machines using QEMM
V5. Help.
Sandy Silverberg, Ideasign, Inc.
Date: 05-14-90 (02:15) Number: 3876
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3780
From: RON FAIRCLOTH Read: YES
Subj: PRINTER USAGE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Thanks, appreciate your help.
Date: 05-14-90 (02:22) Number: 3877
To: ALL Refer#: 3780
From: RON FAIRCLOTH Read: (N/A)
Subj: IBM DOCTOR'S OFFICE MGR Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
In the bulletin on compatible programs, IBM'S DOCTOR'S OFFICE MANAGER II
(DOMSII) is mentioned, and it's stated that a minor change in the net is
required. What is the change, I can't get the program to find the
network. It keeps telling me to install IBM PC LAN and I'd rather not.
Thanks.
Date: 05-14-90 (08:48) Number: 3879
To: FRANK BARTLETT Refer#: 3871
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: NETWORK EYE & DESQVIEW Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> The Network Eye can work with the active/foreground process, but it
-> will not allow me to change tasks. I have tried reassigning the
-> Desqview activation key(s), but with no success.
Frank, Unfortunately, the current version of TNE won't work with DV.
It is not "DV aware," so it tries to keep control when DV wants it. I
run DV also, and what I do is to use the TNE-USE program in it's own
window. I've set it up so that DV won't close the window when you hit
ALT to exit from TNE-USE, which is what you need to do each time you
want to switch from that window. Then, when I switch back to it, I hit
F3 to recopy the line that invokes TNE-USE. It's not perfect, but it
works for now...
- J Gerring
Date: 05-14-90 (09:00) Number: 3881
To: SANDY SILVERBERG Refer#: 3874
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC DIAGNOSTICS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> Is there any kind of a monitor and/or diagnostics utilities under
-> development? Occasionally we get a sticky problem that is very
-> intermittent and everything we know to check looks OK. Some sort of
-> monitor would help.
Sandy, no, we don't have anything like that under development... Do you
have LANCHECK version 3.0? It's available for download here. Other
than that, what sort of things would you want a mointor program to do?
About the only thing I can think of that could tell you what happened
after an intermittant failure is a debugger, something like Periscope.
If you have some concrete ideas, I can pass them along to engineering as
a suggestion, tho!
-> a reference manual on performance and tuning of an installed network
-> IN TERMS UNDERSTANDABLE BY PEOPLE WHO AREN'T SUPER-TECHIES.
Well, the new manual that will be out with version 3.0 is completely
revised and now has a "user's guide" that's pretty basic and a
"reference manual" that covers everything in more detail. It will be
included in the price of the upgrade, once 3.0 becomes available.
- J Gerring
Date: 05-14-90 (09:14) Number: 3882
To: RON FAIRCLOTH Refer#: 3877
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: IBM DOCTOR'S OFFICE MGR Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> In the bulletin on compatible programs, IBM'S DOCTOR'S OFFICE MANAGER
-> II (DOMSII) is mentioned, and it's stated that a minor change in the
-> net is required. What is the change, I can't get the program to find
-> the network.
Ron, well, one user reported that he was able to get it running by just
copying NET.EXE to a directory called \NETWORK and renaming it to
NET.COM. Others have said it's not this easy, however, and you may have
to have the IBM PC LAN program files in a specific directory also. Can
anyone help me out here? (Paul?)
- J Gerring
Date: 05-14-90 (09:34) Number: 3883
To: GARY SAAKE Refer#: 3865
From: JOHN CROUCH Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC VOICE... Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Check out the latest issue of PC Magazine. I got it in my mailbox
yesterday. They tell all about the new NOS and once again they chose
LANtastic as their editor's choice. Looking at the throughput results
of their tests, LANtastic blows all the others away hands down...
Date: 05-14-90 (10:16) Number: 3885
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: PING WU Read: YES
Subj: OTHER TRAFFIC ON ETHERNE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
On a given Ethernet segment, does all the traffic on the cable have to
be LANtastic traffic?
For instance if I had LANtastic running between say 10 machines and ran
Western Digital's DIAGNOSE program between 2 other machines on the same
segment, would that interfere with or bring down the LANtastic machines?
I'm just using DIAGNOSE as a plausible example, but really my question
is more general. I guess a more clear way of stating my question is: Do
all the packets on an Ethernet segment being used by LANtastic
have to be only packets generated by
LANtastic, or will it correctly ignore packets not generated by
LANtastic? Even broadcast packets not generated by LANtastic?
Basically I'm asking this question to find out if I can take advantage
of the Ethernet cable to do other things as well, since it's already
strung from one end of the office to the other.
Thanks.
Ping Wu.
Date: 05-14-90 (17:22) Number: 3886
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: JASON HERNANDEZ Read: (N/A)
Subj: NOTHGATE OMNIKEY 102 KEYB Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
We have discovered that the LANtastic redirector does not work
correctly with NorthGate OmniKey 102 keyboards. The specific version
that does not work has three exposed dip switches and a cable that can
be removed from the keyboard itself.
The problem is that after issuing a CTRL-ALT-PRTSC to flush the
print buffer, the ALT keys are no longer active. This problem does
not occur on earlier NorthGate keyboards, Fuji, or Keytronic keyboards.
Any ideas how to fix this would be appreciated!
Jason Hernandez
CompuTech Software Services
Boulder, CO. 80301
303-443-7171
Date: 05-14-90 (18:21) Number: 3888
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: FRANK BARTLETT Read: (N/A)
Subj: LANCHECK 3.0 Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I recently downloaded Lancheck 3.0, and have been trying it out on my
network which has yielded some puzzleing statistics.
I have 'laned' together 24 nodes, made up of 8 turbo XTs, 10 ATs and 6
386s, and 1 Lantastic repeater/hub. Five of the systems have the newer
AT slot lan adapter, all of which are useing IRQ 10.
When I run Lancheck 3.0 overnight on all the systems, the percent error
on any given node was zero (this I will take as a good result). What
caught my attention though was the detailed information provided by the
new version of Lancheck revealed a much higher incidence of CRC errors,
Collision, Bad Transmission, and Alignment errors on the systems
equipted with the newer adapters. I realize that this may be rather
picky, but I am none the less curious as to what accounts for the
variance. I would also add that this 'installation' works almost
flawlessly. Its biggest problem is myself, since I am continually
playing/working/tweaking it: if I would leave it alone it would probably
never have a another problem.
Date: 05-14-90 (18:34) Number: 3889
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: NONE
From: FRANK BARTLETT Read: YES
Subj: THANKS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I forgot my manners Jay. Thank you for the response on the TNE and
Desqview problem. I will try that out. Asides from that I have found TNE
to be an excellent, although somewhat confusing tool (confusing in the
sense that I sometimes forget where I am working). I am compelled to ask
if there is any action being taken or considered to include Desqview
'awareness' in TNE? Once again, thanks.
Date: 05-15-90 (07:41) Number: 3891
To: EILEEN DAILY Refer#: NONE
From: BOB KRETSCHMANN Read: YES
Subj: ALEEN-BRADLEY REV 3 Q2 Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Eileen, My report is in ablanv3.txt. Bob Kretschmann
Date: 05-15-90 (10:05) Number: 3893
To: PING WU Refer#: 3885
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: OTHER TRAFFIC ON ETHERNE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> Do all the packets on an Ethernet segment being used by LANtastic
-> have to be only packets generated by LANtastic, or will it correctly
-> ignore packets not generated by LANtastic? Even broadcast packets
-> not generated by LANtastic?
Ping,
LANtastic may work with other programs running at the same time over the
same wire, but it does depend on the type of packets that are being send
over the wire. For example, if LANtastic sent a general broadcast
datagram, then adapters that aren't running the NOS may still try to
decode it, since it was sent as a general message. Unfortunately, the
only way to find out if your application will work with LANtastic up is
to try it...
- J Gerring
Date: 05-15-90 (10:26) Number: 3895
To: FRANK BARTLETT Refer#: 3888
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: LANCHECK 3.0 Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> the new version of Lancheck revealed a much higher incidence of CRC
-> errors, Collision, Bad Transmission, and Alignment errors on the
-> systems equipted with the newer adapters. I realize that this may be
-> rather picky, but I am none the less curious as to what accounts for
-> the variance.
Frank, this one has come up before, but.... The difference is actually
between the LANBIOS and LANBIOS2 programs. This is where the error
statistics are generated, and the LANBIOS program considers less things
to be errors than LANBIOS2 does. This was a change that the programmer
made when writing the latter program; in the old LANBIOS program many
conditions that were "borderline errors," IOW, could be considered
errors but don't affect the LAN performance at all, were just ignored.
In LANBIOS2, they are counted as errors, although they still are not
serious enough to cause any problems on the LAN.
- J Gerring
Date: 05-15-90 (10:30) Number: 3896
To: FRANK BARTLETT Refer#: 3889
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: THANKS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> I am compelled to ask if there is any action being taken or
-> considered to include Desqview 'awareness' in TNE?
Frank, It is one of the suggestions that have been made for future
modifications to TNE. Since TNE is not currently being revised, I don't
know if DV awareness will show up in the next version or not. It
apparently is not difficult to do, however, and DV provides the code you
need to do it for free, so... we can hope! Since I use DV myself, I'd
like to see it also, although I don't know how much weight I pull with
engineering! <grin>
- J Gerring
Date: 05-15-90 (13:46) Number: 3898
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3882
From: BOB COPPERSMITH Read: YES
Subj: IBM DOCTOR'S OFFICE MGR Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I too am having a god-awful time trying to get this up and running. If
anyone else has success running this let me know. Also, since the
patient database seems to be on file about (in this case) 3 megs in size
can this compiled BASIC program allow multiple use of the program's
database? It would seem SHARE would preclude that, unless it has record
locking such as Paradox.
Date: 05-15-90 (14:51) Number: 3900
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: HENRY PERKINS Read: NO (Has Replies)
Subj: HOW DO I DUMP THE SERVER? Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
There are many times when I'd like to set up my workstation as a
server for a while, then dump the Server software. Is there some way
to do this? I've tried MARK and RELEASE, but this usually leaves my
PC hung. I'm using NOS 2.57u on EtherNet, if that matters. If there
isn't a way to do so now, is there going to be a way to accomplish this
in version 3.0?
Thanks,
Date: 05-15-90 (14:57) Number: 3901
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: HENRY PERKINS Read: (N/A)
Subj: TOO MANY REDIRECTIONS OR Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I've frequently been getting a message "Too many redirections or
logins" when attempting to log into a server from the AUTOEXEC-called
batch file I set up to automate the startup process. This also happens
when I attempt the NET LOGIN command from DOS prompt. However, if I go
into the NET program, I'm able to log in with no problems. There are
high values specified for both SESSIONS and NCBS on the server machine.
This seems to happen mostly with servers that haven't been rebooted
for a long time. Workstations talking to the servers tend to undergo
a lot of hard resets due to bugs in the software we're developing. Is
this non-graceful severing of the server connections somehow connected?
[D[D[D[D[D[D Thanks,
Date: 05-15-90 (15:03) Number: 3902
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: HENRY PERKINS Read: (N/A)
Subj: EMAIL PROGRAMS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I'm looking around for a good electronic mail (EMAIL) program for
our group. The top contenders right now are Network Courier, cc:Mail,
and DaVinci eMail. The important considerations for us are, in roughly
this order:
small resident portion
X.400 and other connectivity features
ease of use
ability to use a user-specified editor on mail messages
speed
I'd appreciate any comments.
Thanks,
Date: 05-15-90 (15:08) Number: 3903
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: HENRY PERKINS Read: NO (Has Replies)
Subj: TCP/IP PACKAGES Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Although our group is happy (so far) with LANtastic, our company has
3 different types of networks in other, nearby buildings (Novell
NetWare, a Xenix network, and TOPS). We'll need to talk to them in the
near future. Given the variety of networks, I think TCP/IP is the best
bet for inter-lan communication. Does anybody out there have practical
experience using a TCP/IP package with EtherNet LANtastic?
Just from their literature, it looks like ftp software's package
would work, although I'd have to use their NetBIOS instead of AILANBIOS.
I'd especially appreciate knowing if this WOULDN'T work, so I could save
myself a lot of grief.
Thanks,
Date: 05-15-90 (15:18) Number: 3905
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: HENRY PERKINS Read: (N/A)
Subj: REWRITABLE OPTICAL DISKS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I'm searching for a good way to backup our 21-node network. I'm
leaning toward a rewritable optical disk as a solution, since that would
allow all the workstations to make unattended incremental backups
nightly onto a single disk, which would remove all the hassles of
swapping associated with tape-based backup. Restoring would also be
easy, since the optical disk would look just like a giant Winchester.
Current plan is as follows:
MaxOptics Tahiti-I optical drive
Adaptec 1542A host adapter
Corel SCSI driver software
The MaxOptics engine is faster and higher in capacity than the more
standard Sony SMO-S501 engine (1 gigabyte vs. 650 megabytes per disk),
but it's a lot newer, so I don't know anything about its reliability.
The Adaptec host adapter and Corel software are supposed to be
compatible with the Quantum ProDrives I've ordered for the server
machine. Oh, yes--the server uses DOS 4.01, so there aren't any
restictions to 32 MB partitions.
I'd appreciate any input,
Date: 05-15-90 (21:41) Number: 3907 (Deleted)
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3863
From: STEVEN PURVIS Read: YES
Subj: THANK YOU Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
J Gerring, the people I service as well as myself, are indeed greatful
for the assistance you have given us. We do wish to subscribe to the
BBS Support program of $50.00
Date: 05-16-90 (08:56) Number: 3910
To: BOB COPPERSMITH Refer#: 3898
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: IBM DOCTOR'S OFFICE MGR Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Bob, well.... I really don't have any more info on it other than what I
already relayed to Ron. I know that a couple callers here have
mentioned that they have gotten it to run, at least to some degree, on
LANtastic, but I never have been able to get any clear details. Perhaps
one of them will respond....
- J Gerring
Date: 05-16-90 (09:07) Number: 3911
To: HENRY PERKINS Refer#: 3900
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: HOW DO I DUMP THE SERVER? Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> There are many times when I'd like to set up my workstation as a
-> server for a while, then dump the Server software. Is there some way
-> to do this?
Henry, the only way to clear the server program from memroy is to reboot
the machine...
-> is there going to be a way to accomplish this in version 3.0?
No. The problem is that removing SERVER from memory is not as simple as
removing other general purpose TSRs, i.e. Sidekick. At this point, it's
unlikely that LANtastic will ever have a "removal switch," sorry...
- J Gerring
Date: 05-16-90 (09:24) Number: 3913
To: HENRY PERKINS Refer#: 3901
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: TOO MANY REDIRECTIONS OR Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> This seems to happen mostly with servers that haven't been rebooted
-> for a long time. Workstations talking to the servers tend to undergo
-> a lot of hard resets due to bugs in the software we're developing.
-> Is this non-graceful severing of the server connections somehow
-> connected?
Henry, that is quite possible. A server is supposed to hang up a
session after a short time if it doesn't "hear" from the other end, but
if you have a lot of workstations rebooting in a short period of time,
the server may still be hanging onto an invalid session when the
workstation comes back up (if they boot quickly). That may cause you to
run out of logins, but you can remedy it by increasing the maximum
number of logins in the NET_MGR server start up paramters.
- J Gerring
Date: 05-16-90 (10:04) Number: 3914
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: JOHN RUTKOWSKI Read: (N/A)
Subj: AUTOCAD & LANTASTIC Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Sysop & other Users,
Is there a recommended configuration setting for running AutoCAD on
Lantastic?
I know that FCBS need to be 48,8 but what about SERVER, REDIR & LANBIOS2
arguments?
<<John>>
Date: 05-16-90 (09:59) Number: 3916 (Deleted)
To: STEVEN PURVIS Refer#: 3907
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: THANK YOU Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> the people I service as well as myself, are indeed greatful for the
-> assistance you have given us.
Well, thanks!
-> We do wish to subscribe to the BBS Support program of $50.00
Ok, then all you need to do is use the S)cript program from the menu to
fill out the subscription questionnaire. Type 'S 2' (w/o quotes) at the
menu prompt to get the correct questionnaire.
- J Gerring
Date: 05-16-90 (10:12) Number: 3919
To: JOHN RUTKOWSKI Refer#: 3914
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: AUTOCAD & LANTASTIC Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> Is there a recommended configuration setting for running AutoCAD on
-> Lantastic?
John, check out bulletin number 14 in this conference (updated today),
it has all the best info we have on running Autocad with LANtastic.
Others here may have some suggestions for the NOS settings, tho'.
- J Gerring
Date: 05-16-90 (17:50) Number: 3920
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: DAVISON MOORE Read: YES
Subj: PAYOFF Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Holy cow, what a review. Congratulations, if I didn't know the product
was so good in versioon 2.X I would figure you got to someone on the PC
Mag staff. I guess the gratuitous material about an upgrade path was
inserted to keep the author from looking like an artisoft flack. Did
you promise him a job when he retires from the editorial world? Great
job and good luck. Dave.
Date: 05-16-90 (20:39) Number: 3922
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: DAVE MARTIN Read: (N/A)
Subj: V3.0 PRINTER SUPPORT Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I'm running 2.53 now and anticipating 3.0. It appears that if a
printer's buffer fills and it holds off the despooler that the server
just sits and waits until the printer is free before doing anything.
Is this true or is it just my imagination? If true is it fixed in v3.0?
Thanks in advance.
Date: 05-16-90 (23:09) Number: 3923
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: NATHAN WALPOW Read: (N/A)
Subj: BUFFERS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I'm looking for recommendations for NOS buffers - both the ones on the
REDIR command line and the one in the startup parameters in NETMGR. We
run Q&A with a total of 5 machines - 2 286's as servers and 1 addl 286
and 2 XT's. (Actually, all machines are set up as servers for file
transfer, backup, etc.) There is not a lot of heavy usage of databases
- rarely will more than one other machine be accessing a server at a
time. Also, how about network tasks? Currently it's set for 2 on the
servers, 1 on the others. Running 2.57. Thanks for any and all input.
- Nathan
Date: 05-17-90 (08:02) Number: 3925
To: DAVISON MOORE Refer#: 3920
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: PAYOFF Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> Holy cow, what a review. Congratulations, if I didn't know the
-> product was so good in versioon 2.X I would figure you got to someone
-> on the PC Mag staff.
Dave, well, thanks for the congrats! Yeah, man, we payed 'em lots o'
money fer that <grin>! No, of course we didn't! With performance
results like that (yes they are for real), how could they not think we
were the absolute best? Thanks again!
- J Gerring <a bit o' company pride showing thru>
Date: 05-17-90 (08:06) Number: 3927
To: DAVE MARTIN Refer#: 3922
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: V3.0 PRINTER SUPPORT Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> It appears that if a printer's buffer fills and it holds off the
-> despooler that the server just sits and waits until the printer is
-> free before doing anything.
Dave, I'm not quite sure what your asking here... can you clarify?
- J Gerring
Date: 05-17-90 (20:44) Number: 3929
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3927
From: DAVE MARTIN Read: YES
Subj: V3.0 PRINTER SUPPORT Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
J. I'm sorry that I wasn't clear in my question. It seems that our
network response gets bad when a server is trying to despool to a
printer with a small buffer. It seems most pronounced when we are
despooling to a serial plotter with a small buffer.
Date: 05-18-90 (09:00) Number: 3933
To: DAVE MARTIN Refer#: 3929
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: V3.0 PRINTER SUPPORT Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> It seems that our network response gets bad when a server is trying
-> to despool to a printer with a small buffer. It seems most
-> pronounced when we are despooling to a serial plotter with a small
-> buffer.
Dave, that can happen, especially if the priter server is also your
general network file server... Running a cache would help, but you may
also want to consider moving the printer(s) to another machine. Version
3 will have some better printer buffering, but the more buffering you
add the more RAM overhead you will have...
- J Gerring
Date: 05-18-90 (22:52) Number: 3937
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3692
From: PAUL ANDREASEN Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC WITH 25 MHZ 386 Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Boy, I hope that speed don't count. I am running 2.57 on an Atlas
moth[D[Cerboard officially running at 33mhz (unofficially it has a
36mhz oscilator for the processor) and it loves it.
Date: 05-18-90 (23:02) Number: 3938 (Deleted)
To: BOB COPPERSMITH Refer#: NONE
From: PAUL ANDREASEN Read: NO
Subj: DOMS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Bob, I have 10 DOMS & DOMS II packages running successfully on Lantastic
so far. We have kind of specialized so far. We do consulting for many
medical offices using it. I left some info quite a while ago on how to
do it here. Unfortunately, it requires getting at least the drivers from
PC Lan version 1.2 or 1.3 (depends on what upgrade of DOMS you are
using,.. Upgrade 7 does NOT WORK. It is junk...) if you want some help,
give us a call. If it gets too extensive there is a price tag, as we are
a consulting computer center. Happy to try though, it's not tooo, where
is that Rod Serling when you need him?
Date: 05-18-90 (23:05) Number: 3939
To: BOB COPPERSMITH Refer#: NONE
From: PAUL ANDREASEN Read: YES
Subj: DOMS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Bob, we specialize in consulting for DOMS and Lantastic. If we can help,
call us at 805-735-7967 (fax 805-735-6345)
Paul Andreasen- Mount Desert West Computers Lompoc, CA 93436
Date: 05-19-90 (07:15) Number: 3941 (Deleted)
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: KEN PREVO Read: NO
Subj: 1.09 UPGRADE-MODEL 55SX Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I've been running 2.57 for about a month with few problems. Occasionally
Date: 05-19-90 (07:17) Number: 3942 (Deleted)
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: KEN PREVO Read: NO
Subj: 1.09 UPGRADE -- MODEL55SX Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I've been running 2.57 for about a month with few problems. Occasionally
Date: 05-19-90 (07:18) Number: 3943 (Deleted)
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: KEN PREVO Read: NO
Subj: UPGRADE-IBM 55SX Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I've been running 2.57 for about a month with few problems. Occasionally
Date: 05-19-90 (12:55) Number: 3945
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3910
From: BOB COPPERSMITH Read: YES
Subj: IBM DOCTOR'S OFFICE MGR Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Found this in an archive (here) of old messages...or I may have
downloaded a message base. Anyway here goes:
Date: 03-21-90 (00:15) Number: 3484 / 3878
To: PAUL STEPHENS Refer#: NONE
From: PAUL ANDREASEN Read: NO
Subj: DOMS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Conf: LANT_NOS (1) Read Type: GENERAL (+)version (3.1)
works ok considering who wrote it! It isn't Lantasic by a
long shot, but it is the only one that will work. Try reading some of
the earlier messages on it or calling us at 805-735-7967. We will be
glad to help. Just ask for me. The DOMS s/w actually looks for the IBM
PC Lan programs files BY NAME! before it will run! Paul Andreasen..
I, for one, intend on calling Monday. Luckily a very good friend of
mine not only works for Big Blue, but installs their network once in
awhile.
Bob coppersmith (befuddled in Atlanta)
Date: 05-19-90 (19:03) Number: 3946
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3925
From: DAVISON MOORE Read: YES
Subj: PAYOFF Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Pride is only misplaced if unsubstantiated, all things being as they
seem, you people have a lot to be proud of! I look forward to your
announcement. Regards, Dave.
Date: 05-20-90 (02:58) Number: 3947
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3910
From: RON FAIRCLOTH Read: YES
Subj: IBM DOCTOR'S OFFICE MGR Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Since I had been running DOMS under IBM PC LAN 1.2, switching to
LANtastic didn't seem to be a problem. It recognizes the network and
runs fine with NO alterations. However, I haven't been able to find a
way to successfully get DOMS to load fresh (from scratch) on LANtastic
and this is important as I have a DOMS upgrade that doesn't want to run
on LANtastic. I'll try your earlier suggestions. You do have to be
careful with DOMS and sharing the patient data file. Rather than giving
an error msg to wait, etc. everything just locks up if two users try to
modify the file at the same time.
Date: 05-20-90 (03:03) Number: 3948
To: PAUL ANDREASEN Refer#: 3939
From: RON FAIRCLOTH Read: YES
Subj: DOMS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Is there a patch available for either LANtastic or DOMS (DOMS II PLUS
MOD 7) that will let you load DOMS from scratch and have it recognize
LANtastic as its network and then load as a network? Would appreciate
any information you can provide. Thanks.
Date: 05-20-90 (19:28) Number: 3949
To: J. GERRING Refer#: NONE
From: LAWRENCE HATHAWAY Read: NO
Subj: Q&A V3.0 VS. LANTASTIC Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Notice that your software compatibility bulletin includes Symantec's
Q & A Version 3.0 flat file database. I have an Q & A accounting
application running with Q&A's Network Pak on a LANtastic 2.57 net.
This application involves a "main" database file which uses several
other Q & A files as external lookup tables for account codes, etc.
The problem is that the main database file can be shared just fine
(record locking, screen refresh, etc. all work okay). But as soon as
the main database tries to access an external lookup file which is being
used by another user (or even if it is not being used, but has been
previously accessed during the same session), Q&A throws up an
error message to the effect that the *file* (not the record, and even
if a totally different record is involved) cannot be accessed on the
grounds that it is in use. Symantec says that I need only make sure
that I give each user read/write/delete-file privileges and that it
should work. I have put the identical application up on a client's
Novell 2.15 network and it all works perfectly. I'm pretty new to
this stuff, and especially to LANtastic, so I imagine that I may be
overlooking something, but it sure isn't obvious...
Any ideas?
Also -- the compatibility bulletin suggests that there is "a problem"
when printing Q&A labels across the lan, but that there is a workaround.
But there is no clue as to what the workaround is, or where I would turn
to find it. ?
- leh -
Date: 05-20-90 (21:17) Number: 3951
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: WOLFGANG JOHN Read: YES
Subj: LANCHECK QUESTIONS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Hi Jay,
I downloaded the latest version of LANCHECK and have the following
observations:
1. The main screen shows only one node, to see any of the other ones I
have to press the <Ins> key and enter the node's name.
2. The <F1> key only beeps at me. (So does any other key.)
(I am sorry if this has been talked about on this BBS before.)
Thanks for your kind reply.
<Wolfgang>
Date: 05-21-90 (15:08) Number: 3953
To: BOB COPPERSMITH Refer#: 3945
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: IBM DOCTOR'S OFFICE MGR Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> I, for one, intend on calling Monday.
Bob, yes, Paul had left another message earlier (maybe you didn't see
it) with his phone number also. Good luck!
- J Gerring
Date: 05-21-90 (15:22) Number: 3955
To: LAWRENCE HATHAWAY Refer#: 3949
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: Q&A V3.0 VS. LANTASTIC Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Lawrence, We do run Q&A in house, and haven't run into the situation
you're describing... I'd recommend you give our voice line
(602-293-6363) a call from the site so they can go over the entire
configuration with you to see what may not be correct.
- J Gerring
Date: 05-21-90 (15:30) Number: 3957
To: WOLFGANG JOHN Refer#: 3951
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: LANCHECK QUESTIONS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> The main screen shows only one node, to see any of the other ones I
-> have to press the <Ins> key and enter the node's name.
-> The <F1> key only beeps at me. (So does any other key.)
Wolfgang, sorry, my fault...! The new ZIP has all the correct stuff in
it (the .HLP file was missing...), as well as an updated version of
LANCHECK. Try that one out! <guilty grin>
- J Gerring
Date: 05-21-90 (20:34) Number: 3958
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: DICK MARTIN Read: YES
Subj: COMPATABILITY Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I currently have an older version 2Mbs network. Is the newer version
card compatable with the older software and cards? If not, is the older
version of the card still available?
Date: 05-22-90 (08:38) Number: 3959
To: DICK MARTIN Refer#: 3958
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: COMPATABILITY Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> I currently have an older version 2Mbs network. Is the newer version
-> card compatable with the older software and cards?
Dick, Yes, our software is backwards compatible with every card we have
sold, no worries!
- J Gerring
Date: 05-23-90 (05:52) Number: 3965
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: NONE
From: TIM LOGA Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC QUESTIONS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
We are setting up a 20 user network using the Ethernet
cards. The network will be used mainly for word processing
and E-Mail with some light database and spreadsheet
activity; a WildCat! BBS is also connected. I have quite
a bit of experience using PC's (both hardware and software)
but not much in networking so some of my questions might
be stupid but here goes:
1) Whats the difference, if any, between cable that is
called "thin ethernet", "cheapernet", "RG58", and
"RG59"? Are they all the same? I purchased our cable
from CompuAdd, they advertise it as "cheapernet"; it
seems to work fine (in a 3 station test).
1a) How reliable is this type of cable (cheapernet) compared
to the type of cable that you use on the 2MB adapters
(UTP)? Should I expect more or less "cable problems"
compared to using UTP?
2) The main server is a PC Brand 386/25 with a Conner 3204
300MB drive, 4MB RAM, and 16 bit mono VGA (Cardinal
Technologies, Inc). I plan to divide the hard drive
into two logical drives (100MB each), declare 1MB of LIM,
and use the rest for caching (PC-Tools PC-Cache). Does
this sound like a good way to set the system up or can
you recommend a better way (ie possibly more logical
drives, etc)?
2a) The main server will be on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Any problems with that? (I remember reading some messages
about losing time over the weekends).
3) I noticed that the LANTASTI.NET sub-dir is already
available for linking right after installation. I am not
clear why (and if) it is necessary. I am refering to the
"." (dot).
4) I plan to order a 386 memory manager, either QEMM 386 or
386-to-the-Max. Will both of these allow me to load the
network drivers and NOS into high memory? Can you give
me any cautionary notes about doing this?
5) I noticed on some reviews in Byte and PC that the
network cards had two lights on them, the ones I
purchased do not. Was this something that was dropped
or added late? Will cards I buy later have them?
6) Will the version 3.0 be able to take advantage of the
extended and/or expanded RAM that is on the main file
server?
Again, sorry if some of the questions are stupid or have
already been covered but I am new (but eager to learn) to the
world of networking.
Thanks in advance...
Tim Loga
Mount Prospect, IL
Date: 05-23-90 (06:02) Number: 3966
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: NONE
From: TIM LOGA Read: YES
Subj: NETBIOS ERROR Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
When I came in this morning and tried to log on to drive E: (which is
actually a sub-dir of drive D: on the same computer) I got the message:
The NETBIOS command limit has been exceeded reading drive E
Abort, Retry, Fail
The computer is not yet connected to any other computer (the cable and
cards are being installed as I write this). The computer was left on
overnight.
Can you (or anyone else) tell me what is causing this error message.
Could it possibly be that the card is not connected to anything?
Later...
Tim Loga
Date: 05-23-90 (08:58) Number: 3972 (Deleted)
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: CRAIG CONNOLLY Read: (N/A)
Subj: DISKETTE READ PROBLEMS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Our DP Planning area has two PCs linked together using the token ring
version of LANtastic 2.57. One machine is a PS/2 Model 60 .. the other
a FIVESTAR 386. In recent attempts to load software to the FIVESTAR
from the internal drive in the Model 60 an odd problem arose.
When the first in a series of diskettes is placed into the drive (drive
A, M[DPS/2) and is read from the FIVESTAR ... things appear to be okay.
However, any disks placed in the drive after the initial one are not
being read. If a DIR is done from the FIVESTAR ... it still appears as
if the original diskette is present. When the DIR is issued from the
PS/2 ... everything looks okay ...
What could be causing this ? AND MORE IMPORTANTLY .. what can be done
to alleviate the problem. They are unable to copy any of the disks
except the first one inserted. pretty weird.
Date: 05-23-90 (09:05) Number: 3973
To: TIM LOGA Refer#: 3965
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC QUESTIONS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Tim,
-> Whats the difference, if any, between cable that is called "thin
-> ethernet", "cheapernet", "RG58", and "RG59"?
Thin ethernet and cheapernet describe the same kind of cable, thin
coaxial cable with BNC connectors. RG58 has 50 ohm resistance, RG59 has
75 ohm resistance; you need to use RG58 or RG58A/U cable and NOT RG59.
-> How reliable is this type of cable (cheapernet) compared to the type
-> of cable that you use on the 2MB adapters (UTP)? Should I expect
-> more or less "cable problems" compared to using UTP?
They're about the same, as long as you stay within the recommended
distances, you shouldn't have many problems.
-> The main server is a PC Brand 386/25 with a Conner 3204 300MB drive,
-> 4MB RAM, and 16 bit mono VGA (Cardinal Technologies, Inc). I plan to
-> divide the hard drive into two logical drives (100MB each), declare
-> 1MB of LIM, and use the rest for caching (PC-Tools PC-Cache). Does
-> this sound like a good way to set the system up or can you recommend
-> a better way (ie possibly more logical drives, etc)?
Well, if you've got a 300 MB disk, and partition it into 2 drives, don't
you get 150 MB logical drives? <grin> But seriously... It sounds ok
to me, except that I'm not sure how you are going to "declare 1MB of LIM
and use the rest for caching." I'd highly recommend using either
Golden Bow's Vcache or Super PCKwik for caching, the PC-Cache is not
very effective. In either case, you need to make sure you turn off
"write caching," as this can cause problems on the LAN.
There shouldn't be any problem leaving a server on all the time, unless
it happens to be a machine that forgets the date. It would do this even
without the NOS running.
The "." -> LANTASTI.NET directory is a default device that is always
avaialable right after installation. It can be used like any other
server disk device, and then you can CD to the other devices. It's not
used by most people very often, but it's there for those who find it
useful.
Your message has scrolled out of my scroll-back buffer, so I'll leave
another message to answer the rest...
[continued in future message...]
Date: 05-23-90 (09:11) Number: 3974
To: TIM LOGA Refer#: 3965
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: LANTASTIC QUESTIONS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> I plan to order a 386 memory manager, either QEMM 386 or
-> 386-to-the-Max. Will both of these allow me to load the network
-> drivers and NOS into high memory? Can you give me any cautionary
-> notes about doing this?
Yes, either one will work. The only advice I can offer would only apply
to our 2Mbps adatpers, with the AE2s they should work just fine!
-> I noticed on some reviews in Byte and PC that the network cards had
-> two lights on them, the ones I purchased do not. Was this something
-> that was dropped or added late? Will cards I buy later have them?
Those were more or less "bells and whistles" on the 8 bit NE3 Ethernet
adapter we used to ship, and were dropped from the AE2 design, they
probably won't appear on any of our future adapters.
-> Will the version 3.0 be able to take advantage of the extended and/or
-> expanded RAM that is on the main file server?
No, 3.0 has no special provisions for exdended/expanded memory, other
than that you can load the NOS programs high when using QEMM or 386max
without any problems.
Hope that helps!
- J Gerring
Date: 05-23-90 (09:19) Number: 3975
To: TIM LOGA Refer#: 3966
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: NETBIOS ERROR Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> I got the message: The NETBIOS command limit has been exceeded
-> reading drive E Abort, Retry, Fail
-> The computer is not yet connected to any other computer (the cable
-> and cards are being installed as I write this). The computer was
-> left on overnight.
Tim, well, if it's an Ethernet card, then I could see how this could be
a problem, but with a 2Mbps card it shouldn't matter. If you don't have
a cable connected to an Ethernet adapter but run the NetBIOS software,
then it will get a lot of CRC errors, which could cause any number of
strange error messages after building up overnight...
-> Could it possibly be that the card is not connected to anything?
Probably so, I wouldn't really worry about it unless the problem happens
after you have the adapter cabled into the LAN...
- J Gerring
Date: 05-24-90 (21:29) Number: 3980
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: CHERYL DANIEL Read: (N/A)
Subj: CD ROM COMPATIBILITY Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
IS THERE A LIST OF COMPATIBLE CD ROM DATABASES? IN PARTICULAR, DO
YOU KNOW IF LANTASTIC WORKS WITH FAST TAX AND/OR BENDER'S FEDERAL
TAX SERVICE? BENDERS FED TAX SERVICE REQUIRES MICROSOFT EXTENSION...
ALSO IS THERE ANY DOCUMENTATION ON USING CD ROM DRIVES WITH LANTASTIC?
ARE THERE DRIVES THAT ARE NOT COMPATIBLE? THERE IS AN ARTICLE IN PC WEEK
JAN 8 1990 THAT IS NOT TOO FLATTERING... ANY REPLY? I REALLY APPRECIATE
YOUR HELP.
CHERYL DANIEL
Date: 05-25-90 (06:14) Number: 3981
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: DAVISON MOORE Read: YES
Subj: UPGRADE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Is it ready yet? Huh, can I have it, is it ready? Dave.
Date: 05-25-90 (09:03) Number: 3986
To: DAVISON MOORE Refer#: 3981
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES
Subj: UPGRADE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> Is it ready yet? Huh, can I have it, is it ready?
Not yet ..............................................................
......................................................................
- J Gerring
Date: 05-25-90 (12:18) Number: 3987 (Deleted)
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: 3986
From: DAVISON MOORE Read: YES
Subj: UPGRADE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
J, didn't you mean to say,"not yet, yousniveling little
M%^$#&#."
Date: 05-25-90 (14:43) Number: 3988
To: CHERYL DANIEL Refer#: 3980
From: JAY GERRING Read: NO
Subj: CD ROM COMPATIBILITY Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
-> IS THERE A LIST OF COMPATIBLE CD ROM DATABASES? IN PARTICULAR, DO
-> YOU KNOW IF LANTASTIC WORKS WITH FAST TAX AND/OR BENDER'S FEDERAL TAX
-> SERVICE?
Cheryl, You can download the file BLT3 from here, it is the Artisoft
compatibility list and has several CD ROM products listed.
Unfortunately, neither Fast Tax or Bender's have been tested.
-> ALSO IS THERE ANY DOCUMENTATION ON USING CD ROM DRIVES WITH
-> LANTASTIC?
It's pretty much the same as using a regular disk drive, but on the
server side you have to set the CD ROM flag on the device definition (in
NET_MGR, Network access information) to YES, and run the MSCDEX.EXE
program between REDIR and SERVER (this info is on pp. 6-9 and 7-7 of the
NOS User Manual, also). You don't need to run the CD ROM extensions on
the workstations.
-> THERE IS AN ARTICLE IN PC WEEK JAN 8 1990 THAT IS NOT TOO
-> FLATTERING... ANY REPLY?
Well, yes... One of the problems with CD ROM software vendors is that
they tend to write their software to not be LAN ready. What this means
is that the software expects the CD ROM extensions to be running on any
machine that it is running on. This is what the PC Week reviewers were
referring to in their article; workstations running our NOS won't be
able to access the CD ROM since they don't have a local CD ROM and don't
have the MSCDEX.EXE program installed (but you have to have a local CD
ROM device to install it... Catch-22). Anyhow, there is a way around
this which we are currently testing, and should be available soon... and
make us compatible with many more CD ROM applications.
- J Gerring
Date: 05-25-90 (15:29) Number: 3990
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: SAMUEL BROQUE Read: NO (Has Replies)
Subj: "TIME SHARING A MODEM" Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Is there anyone who cares about this problem? or has solved it?
I want to use a communications program in the background as a host for
interoffice file transfers while leaving up the network without a hitch.
I thought of using an AUTOEXEC that loads Desqview, initiates the domm
program, then loads the rest of my usual batch file, leaving me at the
WordPerfect Office Shell. The idea behind this is to leave the main
server available for file transfers whilst using all other features,
programs, etc., in the workstations (each of which is also available,
but not typically used as, a server).
In doing this, I would have the shell everyone is familiar with on duty
for transparent use, yet be able to pop in and out of the comm program
that is central by using Desqview.
Well, any geniuses???
thanks-------
Sandy
Date: 05-25-90 (15:53) Number: 3991
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: GARY SAAKE Read: NO (Has Replies)
Subj: IDEAS ANYONE... Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
This question doesn't concern LANtastic really but I thought someone out
there might have some ideas for me. Our firm operates a 40 station
LANtastic network (Ethernet). We will be renting some space in a
building across the street (about 200') and I'm faced with the problem
of getting the two buildings systems tied together. I really need
on-line access to databases, so night-time file tranfer via modem isn't
an answer. Has anyone had experience with short haul radio (microwave)
or optical links???? Any ideas are welcome.
Thanks in advance,
Gary.
Date: 05-25-90 (16:01) Number: 3992
To: JAY GERRING Refer#: NONE
From: GARY SAAKE Read: YES
Subj: CURRENT VERSIONS.... Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Jay:
I'm using WD8003 ver 1.04 and AI-LANBIOS 1.06. I understand these are
not current versions. Will the upgrade to NOS 3.0 take care of this or
should I order updates to this seperately?
Gary.
Date: 05-25-90 (16:47) Number: 3993
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: JAY GERRING Read: YES (Has Replies)
Subj: RBBS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Ok, all you SysOps out there, I've helped you, now I'm looking for some
help! <grin> I would like to find out all I can about running an RBBS
BBS (I feel like I'm stuttering...) multi-node with LANtastic,
specifically LANtastic over Ethernet. If there's ANYONE out there who
is doing this or knows of someone who may be doing it, please let me
know. Thanks!
- J Gerring
Date: 05-25-90 (19:15) Number: 3994
To: SYSOP Refer#: NONE
From: JOHN O'SHEA Read: YES
Subj: BBS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
The Chicago Computer Society's BBS runs on LANtastic. Sorry, I am not
a member and do not have a number for them (we didn't sell them their
LANtastic) but you can probably follow up on this lead and find them.
Oh yes, Harry Goldman who works at Baxtor Travenal near Chicago is
an officer of the CCS. He will know how to put you in touch with the'
SYSOP.
Date: 05-27-90 (03:58) Number: 3997
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: JOE O'LOUGHLIN Read: NO (Has Replies)
Subj: LOGIN HELP Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I just installed a LANtastic Net at the College I work at. As we say...
everything is fine - BUT - either I don't understand well enough or what
I think I am seeing just isn
sorry
isn't enough....... The password security just isn't enough to handle
what I want to do. It is ok up to a point but the control I need just
doesn't seem to be available. I want to assign individual passwords
and assign them to a group - much like you would do with a mini. I have
been looking around for a "front end" that I could use to then talk to
the LANtastic security system as a secondary control point. I also shop
sorry
hope the front end will give me something MUCH more convenient to use to
set up passwords etc. I MUST have something that will allow me to
assign large volumes of passwords in a convenient manner. What is in
LANtastic is probably fine for 10-20 users but I have 800-1000 users to
handle every 15 weeks and NO reasonable way to apply good security and
still leave me time to do other things beside maintaining passwords.
Does anybody have any ideas? ..... or maybe the new 3.0 upgrade will
address the problem?
Date: 05-27-90 (17:55) Number: 3998
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: BILL KENNON Read: (N/A)
Subj: WINDOWS & NEW RAM BOARD Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I just installed the new RAM Daughterboard on the server.... excellent
product, the server now has 530K Free with all the bells and whistles.
I am using the latest unlimited software, but Windows stopped
functioning
on the server. If I do not load the lanbios2 and redirector it works,
but the moment I load those Windows is dead - total system lockup.
Sometimes I need to run Windows. Any ideas? Using Rambase A000 on an
EGA 80286 system for the runhigh utility, and B000 Rambase for Lanbios2.
Bill
Date: 05-27-90 (20:36) Number: 3999
To: JOE O'LOUGHLIN Refer#: 3997
From: MARK DAHMKE Read: YES (Has Replies)
Subj: LOGIN HELP Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
What you need is a DOS-level password protection scheme... have you
looked into any of the security programs available for DOS?
Comments
Post a Comment