T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
3533.1 | No, V1.3 should be OK | TOOK::MINTZ | Erik Mintz, dtn 226-5033 | Tue Aug 11 1992 09:14 | 5 |
| The SPD indicates the latest shipping version of required products.
That results in UCX V2.0. However, DECmcc autoconfig runs with UCX V1.3
as well.
-- Erik
|
3533.2 | Testing was done with UCX V1.3 | TOOK::FIGWER | Ulla Figwer LKG2-2/T2 x226-7858 | Tue Aug 11 1992 18:08 | 13 |
|
Hello Guy,
All our testing of IP Autoconfiguration on VMS was done with
UCX V1.3. I believe that one field test site tried using
V2.0, but I am not sure what the results were.
Regards,
Ulla Figwer
DECmcc Autoconfiguration
|
3533.3 | but but... | CGOOA::BARNABE | Guy Barnabe (DIS) Regina/Canada | Wed Aug 12 1992 02:11 | 13 |
| Thanx... but.. then perhaps our TCP network is not set up properly
at the customer site!
What exactly should be in the TCP network for AUTOconfig to work? ie
do we need a TCP router thing configured with an SNMP thing on it...
and what about that ARP thing... and the BIND thing?
What is the TCP Gateway supposed to be?
-- cheers, from ignorant TCP/IP turkey,
Guy
ps you can "ping" me across the head if you want!
|
3533.4 | being answered off-line | TOOK::FIGWER | Ulla Figwer LKG2-2/T2 x226-7858 | Thu Aug 13 1992 15:53 | 5 |
|
This is being answered off-line.
-Ulla
|
3533.5 | UCX 2.0 worked... | CGOOA::BARNABE | Guy Barnabe (DIS) Regina/Canada | Fri Aug 14 1992 03:25 | 7 |
| Customer has just installed UCX 2.0 on his IP network, which
may not be set up properly (missing proper BIND; routing services) and
low and behold the autopology worked!
-- cheers,
Guy
|