| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 513.1 | Try Singapore | JUMP4::JOY | Happy at last | Thu Mar 26 1992 09:42 | 5 |
| Contact ZPOVC::RAMARAJ. There is a customer in Singapore who is running
this same type of config.
Debbie
|
| 513.2 | > Any experience with Wellfleet? < | GLDOA::HALLBERG | Dr. Detroit Lives! | Tue Apr 07 1992 21:34 | 8 |
| We are looking for the same type information for an account in the
U.S. earlier notes (May 1990) said there were interoperability
problems but no one posted a resolution. I will contact both the
author of .0 and the referenced name in .1 but if anybody can confirm
that our concentrators work with FDDI routers from Wellfleet, NSC, etc.
PLEASE do so....
<Art>
|
| 513.3 | > Any News? < | GLDOA::HALLBERG | Dr. Detroit Lives! | Thu Apr 16 1992 12:28 | 6 |
| I see from the resounding responce that don't have much of a story
to tell....
PLEASE, does anyone in the U.S. have Wellfleet routers and Digital
workstations and/or concentrators on the same FDDI LAN?
<Art>
|
| 513.4 | Check in LKG | JUMP4::JOY | Happy at last | Thu Apr 16 1992 12:39 | 11 |
| You might try checking with Chip Duval, network manager for the LKG
facility. Last I knew, there were Wellfleet routers in that building
and the entire building backbone is our FDDI equipment.
BTW, the customer in Singapore is a government (read- high security)
installation so they wouldn't be referenceable anyway, but they DO have
that config.
Debbie
|
| 513.5 | > THANK YOU!!! < | GLDOA::HALLBERG | Dr. Detroit Lives! | Thu Apr 16 1992 12:40 | 1 |
|
|
| 513.6 | | MIPSBX::thomas | The Code Warrior | Thu Apr 16 1992 16:17 | 1 |
| No wellfleets on FDDI here at LKG.
|
| 513.7 | x-ref to note 540 | MUDIS3::DPOLZIN | Damned the torp's, full speed ahead | Wed Apr 22 1992 08:00 | 6 |
|
I had a chat with a wellfleet guy some days ago (see 540.*). He was not
aware of any interop problem in general, but asked me routing/bridging
questions. Is that the interop problems mentioned in .2 ??
*donald
|
| 513.8 | Wellfeets in Norway | OSLACT::BJORN | Why are diper's so wet? | Wed Nov 11 1992 08:08 | 16 |
| We have one customer running Wellfleet Routers connected to our DECconcentrator
They are routing IP and IPX via the WF, but have disabled DECnet routing and
bridging, because of stragegies for WF on the FDDI-ring.
They have some problems that has to do with DECnet, and some performance
problems they can't resolve. They suspected our DECbridges, but found a loosely
coupled cable which caused some problems. After what I've heard lately, they
still have som problems with too high utilization of the FDDI. They have
measured up to 100% utilization, and they saw a lot of VOID-frames being
generated from one of the DECbridges.
I'm not updated on the status of the problem, so I can't tell you more. It
doesn't seem to be problems with the Wellfleets.
Bj�rn Olav Haugom
Oslo, Norway
|
| 513.9 | | KONING::KONING | Paul Koning, A-13683 | Wed Nov 11 1992 11:34 | 20 |
| Void frames come from the ring purger (if enabled) and also from bridges when
they forward traffic. Correctly designed nodes ignore those, as required
by the FDDI standard. If Wellfleet has trouble because of void frames, their
product violates the standard. If not, then the quantity of void frames is
irrelevant.
What measurements are supposed to show "100% utilization"? It's POSSIBLE to
achieve that, but it's hardly likely. I wonder if someone is misinterpreting
the measurements.
Is the network operating as desired now? Your note isn't clear, but it sounds
like you've turned off some things that were supposed to have been on (such
as DECnet) to make it work -- and then concluded that "it doesn't seem to
be a problem with the Wellfleets". I would conclude the opposite. DECbridges
are transparent, and support extremely high loads. If there are performance
problems, it's far more likely to be the Wellfleet than the DECbridge, and
if there are protocol related problems, it's almost a certainty that it is NOT
the DECbridge.
paul
|