NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #19/NN_1992_19.iso/spool/comp/sys/novell/7013

Internet Message Format | 1992-09-04 | 5.2 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!crdgw1!newsun!dseeman
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Seeman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.novell
Subject: Re: Novell Server acting as Appletalk Router
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 4 Sep 92 17:25:16 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (The Netnews Manager)
Organization: Novell Inc., San Jose, Califonia
Lines: 86
Nntp-Posting-Host: db1

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Shahid Sheikh) writes:
>Hi Netters:
>
>I am the AppleTalk network administrator on our campus and I had some concerns
>regarding the internal router in the Novell server.
>
>Now the problem is that we have over a hundred AppleTalk routers on this
>backbone which route AppleTalk to various LocalTalk segment and in some
>cases to other EtherTalk networks too. With more and more people buying
>Novell as a solution for PC filesharing and wanting to do Apple AFP services
>as well, we are having a considerable increase in the AppleTalk subnets and
>AppleTalk routers on the network. Which might not have been a problem if this
>was a perfect world but hey nothing in here is perfect. The real problem
>occurs when someone misconfigures the router for a zone name or something like
>that, and as soon as that router comes up, it supplies that incorrect information
>
does that really mean that it has to run the AppleTalk
>router and create a virtual network inside the machine? It would make
>sense if your server was servering multiple Lans at the same time through
>different network cards but what if there is only one network like in my case.
>It would make sense because you want to have the same access speeds from
>all networks and same ease of accessibilty. However, in case of just one
>network, can the router be bypassed (for AppleTalk only) so that there is
>no need for the management of that router. Moreover we'll be saving a lot
>of AppleTalk subnets and reducing alot of RTMP and ZIP packets. If this is
>not a feature right now, does Novell plan to incorporate this in the near
>future in their AppleTalk NLM?
>
>My suggestion would be to write two different AppleTalk NLM's, one for the
>server connected to multiple networks, and one for server connected to a
>single network which doesnot run an internal router. Another feature that
>would be highly desirable is to have some kind of remote management over the
>router so that you can remotely shut down and bring it back up (just the
>router) from a non-IPX node on the same network. Can this be done with the
>existing SNMP NLM?
>
Hi,

You have covered a few good concepts, so hold on, this will be a fairly detailed
reply.

First of all, the archicture of the NetWare file server establishes an
internal network where all the resident services can exist.  Notice that both
the IPX and AppleTalk stacks require internal network parameter assignments.
At this point, that is what we have to work with.  In order to get to services
like file services and print services, the internal network must exist.

If you LOAD APPLETLK.NLM -i, you can disable the internal AppleTalk network. Un-der these conditions, you will not be able to LOAD AFP.NLM nor can you
LOAD ATPS.NLM.  These *.NLMs initialize services that reside on the internal
AppleTalk net and if that net has been disabled, the services cannot be used.  I
guess the best bit of information I have is this (I know that I am probably
asking you to get a chicken to give birth to a frog or something like that):

The larger your network, the more important becomes centralized network manage-
ment.  This "reqirement" is somewhat of a paradox as the larger your net, the
more difficult it is to manage.  Still the need is there and you will find your
networking problems will only get worse if you do not begin to get a handle on
the growth of your net.

Now, as far as remote management is concerned, there is a utility that will do
just what you are asking for.  RCONSOLE.EXE is a program that (assuming the
accompanying RCONSOLE NLMs are loaded) allows a DOS client to gain access to
the file server console.  When you bring up RCONSOLE and "attach (for lack of a
better term)" to a server, the server's console will appear on that DOS
client's screen.  You can then manipulate that server (like UNLOAD APPLETLK.NLM)
just like you can when you are really typing in commands at the server console.
As far as the NetWare (3.x) servers are concerned then, you can remotely re-
configure your system just like you have suggested.  As far as other routers are
concerned, if they support SNMP and have more than just the PUBLIC community
available, you can write new information to those routers as well.  Of course
you are limited by which applications are available as it is partially dependant
on the application when making changes to a router's MIB statistics.

Finally, I cannot comment on what new features would be available in future
*.NLM releases.  But what I can tell you is that there is no product that we
can put out that would circumvent the need for effective network management.  So
better start getting a handle on your net now, because it will only get worse
the longer you wait to impose management policies.

Hope this information is clear...

Think Peace...AND PLEASE V-O-T-E-VOTE!!!

Dan Seeman
Novell
Walnut Creek, Ca.