What's in Honey DanBer

[jhc at mtune.UUCP]

In article <538 at pyramid.UUCP> csg at pyramid.UUCP (Carl S. Gutekunst) writes:
>>I think HoneyDanber is now the standard version of UUCP in S5R3. 
>
>Correct. The current 3B release of SVR2 also includes HDB as standard. (Both
>are woefully lacking in transition tools. *SIGH*) The S5R3 HDB also has a new
>'e' protocol that uses TLI on streams, a small hack that is trumpted all over
>the SVR3 promotional literature. I'd be curious to know who wrote it since it
>doesn't look like Peter & company's work. (It's obvious from the labels that
>the 'e' originally meant Ethernet.... :-)) 

Correct. HDB is in SVR3. Actually a development of HDB uucp, with some
extra features, like the ability to split up Systems/Devices/Dialers,
and being able to specify protocols in Devices, which is the correct
place to do such things.

I think that Carl has it the wrong way round - TLI can use proto 'e',
and TLI is (in SVR3) streams-based. Fortunately I haven't seen the
SVR3 promo blurb.

I tend to agree that 'e' originally meant Ethernet, since 'e' protocol
was originally only included if the system was running UNET. Of
course, it could mean 'express' or 'extra' or enything :-). But surely
the 'e' protocol pre-dates HDB, and at least some sites are offering
it - bellcore for example. I'm sure they only mean to use it over
their X.25 links, but they do offer it if you call them.

BTW proto 'e' is *fast*, running over ISN and STARLAN on UNIX PC's I
get the following results:

9600 baud/proto g:	~750 chars per second
STARLAN/proto g:	~1700 chars per second
STARLAN/proto e:	~26000 chars per second (yes, thousand)

That's from memory - if I remembered wrong then I'll post a
retraction.

-- 
Jonathan Clark
[NAC,attmail]!mtune!jhc

My walk has become rather more silly lately.