Re: Mainframe floating point math implementation.

2016-03-28 Thread Noel Chiappa
> From: Charles Anthony > the missing piece of the rounding algorithim has been identified: > Only round if the mantissa was shifted more then 71 bits. Wow. I'm really impressed that they implemented that in hardware, back then! Then again, they threw so many gates at the Multics

Re: AT&T Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old)

2016-03-28 Thread Noel Chiappa
> From: Jerry Weiss > Disabling IPV6 was the cure. I was _extremely_ amused to hear that. (Backstory: I'm a long-time detractor of IPv6 - I've always thought it's a rolling ball of digestive byproduct, to be blunt. In fact, if I had still been on the IESG when it came around, I'd have ca

Re: AT&T Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old)

2016-03-28 Thread Charles Anthony
On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Jerry Weiss > > > Disabling IPV6 was the cure. > > I was _extremely_ amused to hear that. > > (Backstory: I'm a long-time detractor of IPv6 - I've always thought it's a > rolling ball of digestive byproduct, to be blunt. In fa

Re: Mainframe floating point math implementation.

2016-03-28 Thread Charles Anthony
On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 7:26 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Charles Anthony > > > the missing piece of the rounding algorithim has been identified: > > Only round if the mantissa was shifted more then 71 bits. > > Wow. I'm really impressed that they implemented that in hardware

Re: AT&T Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old)

2016-03-28 Thread Robert Johnson
> > On Mar 28, 2016, at 7:45 AM, Charles Anthony > wrote: > > I think that having HTTP use DNS was the big one; it changed the role of > DNS from finding computers by name to the being the innocent victim of the > land rush of domain name marketing. > > Followed closely by NAT being used make

Re: AT&T Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old)

2016-03-28 Thread Robert Johnson
> > On Mar 28, 2016, at 7:32 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > >> From: Jerry Weiss > >> Disabling IPV6 was the cure. > > I was _extremely_ amused to hear that. > > (Backstory: I'm a long-time detractor of IPv6 - I've always thought it's a > rolling ball of digestive byproduct, to be blunt. In fact,

OT RE: AT&T Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old)

2016-03-28 Thread Jay West
TSIA -Original Message- From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Robert Johnson Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 1:36 PM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: j...@mercury.lcs.mit.edu Subject: Re: AT&T Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old) > > On Mar 2

Re: AT&T Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old)

2016-03-28 Thread Charles Anthony
On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Robert Johnson wrote: > > > > On Mar 28, 2016, at 7:45 AM, Charles Anthony > wrote: > > > > I think that having HTTP use DNS was the big one; it changed the role of > > DNS from finding computers by name to the being the innocent victim of > the > > land rush of

OT: was: Re: AT&T Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.(old)

2016-03-28 Thread Tapley, Mark
On Mar 28, 2016, at 2:08 PM, Charles Anthony wrote: > On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Robert Johnson > wrote: > >>> >>> On Mar 28, 2016, at 7:45 AM, Charles Anthony >> wrote: >>> >>> I think that having HTTP use DNS was the big one; it changed the role of >>> DNS from finding computers by

Re: AT&T Uverse IPv6 vs. Mac OS X 10.6

2016-03-28 Thread Rick Murphy
At 12:36 AM 3/28/2016, Tapley, Mark wrote: On Mar 26, 2016, at 5:19 PM, Jerry Kemp wrote: > Just curious if something specifically is broken or non-fixable with the 10.6.8 IPv6 stack?] No, there's nothing broken with OSX. I have a functioning IPv6 network here at home, with OSX 10.4 and 10.

Z8-02 demo PCB (was Re: Running a Z8-02 MPD on a breadboard)

2016-03-28 Thread Eric Smith
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 1:41 AM, Eric Smith wrote: > I designed a simple QUIP adapter for use with solderless breadboards, > and wired up a Z8-02 MPD along with a 28C16 EEPROM for the program > memory, a 62256 static RAM, address latch, and decoder. I programmed a > copy of the Z8671 Basic/Debug i