> On Jul 17, 2016, at 3:26 PM, Paul Koning <paulkon...@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Jul 17, 2016, at 12:12 PM, John Forecast <j...@forecast.name> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jul 17, 2016, at 11:13 AM, Paul Koning <paulkon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Jul 17, 2016, at 11:06 AM, John Forecast <j...@forecast.name> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> ...
>>>>> I suppose so.  Rumor had it that Phase I only existed on RSX, but it 
>>>>> appears that there was a PDP-8 implementation as well.  Phase II was 
>>>>> implemented on lots of DEC systems, from TOPS-10 to RT-11 to RSTS/E.  My 
>>>>> initial involvement with DECnet was as the DECnet/E kernel guy, upgrading 
>>>>> DECnet/E from Phase II to Phase III.
>>>>> 
>>>>    I worked at a customer site in Sweden which consisted of a pair of 
>>>> 11/40’s running
>>>>    RSX-11D and DECnet Phase I. I’m pretty sure that Phase I only ran on 
>>>> 11D in the RSX
>>>>    family.
>>> 
>>> I'd always heard that.  But recently I found Phase I documents, which 
>>> include protocol specifications of a sort, sufficient to tell that it 
>>> wouldn't be compatible with Phase II and couldn't readily be made to be.  
>>> (In particular, NSP works rather differently.)  And that document was for a 
>>> PDP-8 OS.
>>> 
>>      I meant that RSX-11D was the only supported PDP-11 OS. The RTS/8 
>> DECNET/8
>>      SPD is up on bitsavers with a date of May 1977 so it was already a late 
>> addition to
>>      the Phase I development - I had joined the networking group in the Mill 
>> in Feb 1977
>>      to work on Phase II. The SPDs for those Phase II products were dated 
>> Jun 1978
>>      which seems about right.
> 
> So does that mean that RTS/8 DECnet Phase I was built but not shipped?  Or 
> shipped but not supported?  The document I referred to is a full manual 
> "RTS/8 DECNET/8 User's Guide, Order No. AA-5184A-TA".  A note at the start 
> says "converted from scanned text 1-Jun-1996" and just below that "First 
> printing, February 1977".  Chapter 6 is a fairly detained description of 
> protocol message formats, which look vaguely like NSP as we know it but only 
> vaguely.
> 
        I don’t know if it ever shipped. An SPD would imply that it got pretty 
far along in the
        release process.

>       paul

Reply via email to