On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:55 PM, Cory Smelosky <b4(a)gewt.net> wrote: ​SLIP means you still need the IP stack ​ (serial-line-ip)​ . It ​ ​just replaces an ethernet driver with a serial port. ​Actually there was tool that was almost all in userland to support multiple sessions over single serial line between a Macs a UNIX system. My memory is that it used Chesson's multiplexer (mpx) which is part of stock V7 (his is pre-select system call).​ I wish I could remember the name of that program. But I bet it or something like it could be repurposed pretty quickly to talk to a frontend micro. Biggest issue is interrupt overhead on serial ports on the 11. If this is real HW, see you can find a real DEC DH or better yet - an Able DH/DM. DH style interfaces will be a huge difference over DL's or DZs. DZs were pigs on Vaxen and on an 11 a line at 19.2K continuous could kill it. BTW: I thought of another option. It's not telnet or ftp, but if your desire is move files back and forth without having to use a common physical media and sneaker-net, BSD 2x should have the BerkNET code in it. That will run on an serial line - although my previous comment about the type of interface can matter from a performance standpoint. Clem

Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 01:07:59 -0500 (EST) From: Cory Smelosky <b4(a)gewt.net> I take it you actually understand BERKNET's addressing then? I could never figure it out! BerkNET was its own thing: it was effectively a store & forward batch/file based networking system which could handle E-mail, print jobs, and remote execution of commands for your account on another machine, if you sent the password to the account along. It's somewhat similar to UUCP, actually. Eric Schmidt (of Sun, Novell, & Google) wrote the code as a UCB grad student, because (as I heard it) the Berkeley Computer Center wanted to be paid money every time an operator had to hang a magtape on a tape drive, and the CS department was tired of being bled to move small files around. BerkNet used one single ASCII character designation per machine, originally just 26 allowed, and later extended to numerals for a total of 36 (before Ethernet & TCP/IP obsoleted it). The routing table for BerkNet was a statically-compiled table in every instance of its primary daemon, and if the network topology changed sufficiently, each daemon had to be modified and recompiled. No redundancy allowed in the network, if I recall correctly. Pretty slow convergence for changes to the routing table. Longer names were also allowed as aliases for the single letter, and that's what was sent to the rest of the world in E-mail addresses, e.g. cory:cc-54@berkeley (Computer Club account #54, on the Cory Hall PDP-11/70; I think Cory's letter was "y") was my first ARPANET-reachable E-mail address. There might be some instances of that in the HUMAN-NETS or SF-LOVERS archives from 1981. I suspect that BerkNet's colon separator for host:file was how the rcp command got that syntax, and probably how ssh inherited it. Google turned up the following: http://typewritten.org/Articles/berk-net.html Being RS-232 serial-based, the interrupt loading was horrific ... so they restricted the bandwidth to 1200 baud (plus, there were some rather long RS-232 cable runs between buildings), unless you used a serial interface card that had some input buffering & DMA I/O like the DH-11. The DZ-11 was contraindicated. To further lower overhead, there's even a TTY line discipline for BerkNet, so you don't wake up the daemon until a full packet arrives, even though the TTY interface is set to "raw" mode. I was for a time a system administrator for the "x" machine at UCB: the Onyx Z8002 installed for the undergrads in the basement of Evans Hall (room B50). That's also the machine on which "B news" was written by Matt Glickman. Later, I ran a small BerkNet (before we got Ethernet) at Dual Systems in Berkeley, between the Dual 83/80 mc68000-based S-100 systems in the various departments (engineering, sales, manufacturing/test), before we got an S-100 Ethernet card working and ran thick Ethernet. We were able to run it at 19,200 baud because Dual made some really sweet, 256-byte input buffer, DMA I/O, 4-port serial cards: the SIO-4/DMA, based around the Zilog z8530 DUART. I insisted that we wait for ARP to be done before we deployed Ethernet & TCP/IP, because evil old hack of grabbing a Class A IP network number, pretending that the first three MAC address bytes were always the same (after all, everyone always uses Ethernet interfaces from the exact same manufacturer in every host on a given LAN, right?) and mapping the last three MAC bytes into the host part of the Class A wasn't going to fly in the real world. The hacks we used to do to make these turkeys fly ... Erik <fair(a)netbsd.org>

On 11/25/2014 10:48 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: I seem to recall it was a V7 port. I recall copying (initially with cu and ~%put, later with UUCP and Berknet) over Berkeley tools like vi and porting them. The Z8000 was a 16 bit processor. http://olduse.net/sites/ucbonyx.txt

Erik - nice job. A couple of additions/corrections. On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Erik E. Fair <fair-tuhs(a)netbsd.org> wrote: ​Right , like UUCP you could copy files.​ ​Never heard that story. While there was never a great deal of love between EECS and the BCC, the reason (I believe) was so that folks in Evan's could send email to the ArpaNET. The only connection to the Arpanet was the Ingress (11/70) in Cory.​ UCB did not have it's own IMP, LBL had one up the hill and a "long host adapter" was used between Cory and one of the ports on the LBL IMP. It was not until much later, when UCB finally got a C30 in Evans during the CSRG time that there was much more than email support. Horton lurks on this list and might remember/know for sure. ​I'm not sure what you mean by this. It was a point to point network like UUCP, but unlike UUCP routing was handled by the protocol (as you said - the tables were compiled into the code).​ ​i.e. manually done. BTW: the Arpanet was not much better at the time​ ​Nice idea - but no. Sam & Eric Cooper modeled rcp from the program of the same name at PARC for the Altos.​ PARC is also what gave us routed BTW. ​Right - the 70s mostly had DH11's which were a full "system unit" on the unibus (they are all SSI/MSI TTL - pretty amazing actually). Many Vaxen had DZ's which were a mess. Once the Able DH/DM came out, most of us switched to them and those lines ran at 9.6 or 19.2, but they were short lived, with the entry the 3M ethernet board that linked the CAD group's Vaxen, the Ingress machines and the machine room in Evans.​ ​Sigh - that was me in 1979... when Glaser and I did original IP stack with 3COM (aka UNET) @ Tektronix and since we were not (yet) on the Internet, it did not matter[BTW: look at the HyperChannel code - there are worse addressing hacks in there]. While I knew about MIT's ChaoNet I had never seen the code. The MIT guys did ARP for ChaosNet which quickly migrated down the street to BBN for the 4.1 IP stack. Remember that BBN had the contract to do IP for UNIX and that was the stack a number of us ran on our Vaxen for long time [IIRC - Sam actually did the routed and rcp stuff which the BBN stack, before Joy had rewritten it - created the sockets interface etc]. ​Hey it worked just fine at the time. Clem​

BBN did a second release that used the sockets. At Stellar we used that stack, not the UCB stack, since we were taking System V and adding BSD to it. Since the author of the BBN stack (Rob Gurwitz) was with us, it was felt that the BBN stack was actually better in many ways. In particular, we had a parallel machine and it was felt that the BBN stack would be easier/cleaner to multi-thread. I can ask around, I lost track of the code base after Stellar. tjt might still know. On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Dan Cross <crossd(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Hilariously, I actually do have an enable-34 board in my stash.. Just saw it in the last week or so & will dig it out in next few days. So does that single board contain the memory and everything, or is this a backplane mod/special memory kind of setup? I'd be eager to run Ultrix jut for the extra flavor (I've only done the bsds on my pdp11s thus far), but one of my real desires here is to have the machine behave itself as a pretty normal net citizen, connecting through some sort of ethernet and running legit telnetd and ftpd. That said, I won't be too sad if that's impossible and kludges are required, but it is my initial hope. I guess I need to first ascertain exactly which 11/34 I have, how much ram I can scrounge up, which addressing scheme, etc. then move on to what I can actually do, software-wise, with the kit. With the enable34 board, do I have some hope of getting 2.11bsd on this one? Sounds like that'd avoid a lot of the more sporty software modifications and let me have something that works like a "normal" modern-ish system. But then, I do have an 11/73 I'm working on that could run that build much more easily and appropriately.. I guess I'm up for whatever is most historically appropriate, a good match for the hardware and at least able to be present on a contemporary network without intermediary kludge hardware. thx jake On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:46 AM, Clem Cole <clemc(a)ccc.com> wrote: