[Simh] [SimH] Networking support

[Cory Smelosky]

Interesting how the e1000 became a gold standard for emulation, though!

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 13, 2016, at 01:35, Anders Magnusson <ragge at ludd.ltu.se> wrote:
> 
> Den 2016-03-12 kl. 20:50, skrev Paul Koning:
>>> On Mar 12, 2016, at 12:25 PM, Anders Magnusson <ragge at ludd.ltu.se> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Den 2016-03-12 kl. 17:45, skrev Clem Cole:
>>>> FYI:  CDC and Cray's often used HyperChannel adapters; but I suspect have long lost the info on it (very funky SW interface).  Plus I doubt I still have the code we developed for it (the HyperChannel was the other side of the Tektronix TCP/IP for VMS implementation we did in the late 1970's).  My memory is that we dedicated a PP to talking to NOS, so there was very little OS code.    We spliced it into the RJE system and never did much beyond FTP services for it; when I worked on it.   I still talk with the guy that did the the PP work for NOS (Stan Smith whom I will ask).   The Cray port was done by the NCAR guys working with our CDC and VMS code; but that was after I was involved in the work.
>>>> 
>>>> BTW: @ LCC we did some work with DG on their UNIX port; I somehow seem to remember that the Eclipse family used the original AMD ethernet chip set on their network adapter.
>>> DG-UX or MV/UX?
>>> The DG ethernet card has a 82586 on board.  I have two of those cards, but unfortunately no programming specs. Anyone that has?
>> I have a copy of the datasheet -- I can email it if you like (2.4 MB).  It's the chip used on the DEC Pro series DECNA Ethernet card.  It's a truly horrible design, with errors that were well known as things to avoid 15 years earlier.
>> 
>> In the DECNA, you program it directly -- the card is basically just a bus bridge plus a small local memory for the chip to talk to.  If the DG boards are like that, the 82586 datasheet will serve.  But if there's machinery in between that exposes a different API, you'd need those specs instead, of course.
>> 
>> Also: I've seen a NetBSD driver for it, which may also help understand how that chip works.
> I am unfortunately too familiar with the 82586 :-/  Never been a fan of the Intel network chips.
> But I assume DG has abstracted the programming interface on this card beyond recognition, at least based on the number of other chips on the card.
> 
> It seemed to be quite common to add another API to standard chips, the DELUA for example has a LANCE chip but you do not program the LANCE directly.
> 
> -- Ragge
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Simh mailing list
> Simh at trailing-edge.com
> http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh