==========
cixnews/information #307, from mat, 1932 chars, Feb 16 14:46 95
----------
Short term work in progress.

There are a number of outstanding issues which we will be dealing with
in within the next month. Much of what we are doing comes under the
heading of load balancing, we are trying to get the largest number of
users we can online at the same time without degrading performance.

1: Making CIX stable.

We believe we have done this to a large extent with the new version of
CIX which went online yesterday. We are also getting a better solution
to the problem of long power outages in the form of UPS equipment.

2: Getting rid of the engaged tones:

We will be gradually making more lines available on 0181 390 1255,
whilst monitoring the system performance. We don't want to get into the
position of having people spending excessive periods of time online for
a simple blink as this will just increase the amount of busy signals
users get. We will be putting more lines onto 0181 390 9787 in time but
before we can do this we need to raise the number of lines connected to
this number.

3: Speeding up the mail system:

We are working on different ways of handling users mail in and out 
baskets, we are approaching this from 2 angles. First is in software,
we are investigating our mail system as a whole with the option of
tuning the way mail is currently handled, or putting in a completely
new mail system (without changing the functionality or the
presentation) whichever would be the fastest and most scaleable
solution.

The other angle is in hardware, we will have a disk unit in for testing
on evaluation to see if throwing hardware at the problem will work
better in the short term, giving us time to design a better way of
dealing with mail in the slightly longer term. 

We may choose to use both these options.

We will attempt to keep CIX downtime to a minimum during this period
though there will be times when we need to take downtime to change over
hardware and some of the software.


==========
cixnews/information #308, from ameoladmin, 237 chars, Feb 17 15:48 95
Comments. 
----------
Registering Ameol
 
If you wish to register any version of Ameol, please mail cixadmin, 
please do not mail ameoladmin, or an Ameol moderator, or any member of 
CIX staff directly, or ameoltech.

Thanks

Bruce Ure
Ameol support manager


==========
cixnews/information #309, from ameoladmin, 118 chars, Feb 17 16:19 95
Comment to 308. 
----------
Note that you can do this automatically by selecting "Help |  Register 
Ameol..." and filling in the details.

Bruce


Joining brief/general (F) 20 new message(s).
==========
brief/general #861, from warthog, 161 chars, Feb  5 14:24 95
Comments. 
----------
Key repeat rate is too fast on a pentium.
I've tried changing it in brief setup and in DOS but nothing slows it 
down! 

Does anyone know a fix for this?


Leo


==========
brief/general #862, from cody, 264 chars, Feb  5 15:03 95
Comment to 861. Comments. More refs to 861.
----------
Buy an 8086 machine?  :-)

I didn't think this was anything to do with the processor but was set in the
BIOS at so many timer ticks (1/18ths of a second).  Is there an option in
your BIOS setup?  Are you using a keyboard driver where this might be
adjusted?

Jon.

==========
brief/general #863, from warthog, 420 chars, Feb  5 18:07 95
Comment to 862. Comments. 
----------
I've messed about with the BIOS settings but Brief doesn't appear to use 
the bios other than for the initial key delay.  The repeat rate is 
selected in the setup program and worked fine on my old DX266 but on my 
new P90 the setting is being ignored and is resulting in a ridiculous 
repeat speed.

This also happens on another P90 at work so I reckon brief's got a 
problem with the pentium.

Any other ideas?


Leo


==========
brief/general #864, from cody, 471 chars, Feb  5 19:10 95
Comment to 863. More refs to 863.
----------
I take it that setting the keyboard repeat to "off" in setup does just that,
rather than letting the BIOS setting take effect?  Haven't tried it myself.
Suggesting a com file using INT 16 to set the keyboard repeat wouldn't be
much use either if that's the case.

Is this the Underware version of Brief we're talking about or the Borland
mess up?  If it's the latter, they may have a work around.  If it's the
former, then I'm afraid it sounds like you're stuffed.

Jon.

==========
brief/general #866, from warren, 100 chars, Feb  6 18:01 95
Comment to 863. Comments. 
----------
Looks like Brief has a problem with the Pentium here too. Cursor moves 
like the wind! :-)

Warren


==========
brief/general #869, from warthog, 194 chars, Feb  9 00:05 95
Comment to 866. Comments. 
----------
Well, I've found a half solution.  As the problem only realy affects the 
cursor keys I've written some macros to perform the cursor movements 
followed by a short delay.  It works!! :-)


Leo


==========
brief/general #870, from cody, 159 chars, Feb  9 02:33 95
Comment to 869. More refs to 869.
----------
Congratulations.  Doncha just love that editor?  :-)

How about uploading the macros so's we can all benefit when we finally get
_our_ Pentium machines?

Jon.

==========
brief/general #871, from warren, 73 chars, Feb  9 10:08 95
Comment to 869. 
----------
What a damn fine idea. I'll do the same here right now.
Cheers,

Warren


==========
brief/general #865, from jritman, 183 chars, Feb  6 09:26 95
Comment to 861. Comments. More refs to 861.
----------
I haven't tried on later versions of Brief but on mine you can set the 
delay & repeat rates by shelling to Dos, it seems Brief does not reset 
them when exiting the Dos shell.

Jon


==========
brief/general #867, from daljit, 142 chars, Feb  8 12:07 95
Comment to 861. Comments. More refs to 861.
----------


Try using something like NCC from norton utilties or any other proggy 
to set the typematic rate outside of the brief enviroment.


-Daljit

==========
brief/general #868, from cody, 97 chars, Feb  8 12:35 95
Comment to 867. More refs to 867.
----------
It's already been pointed out that Brief doesn't use the DOS settings.  Hence
the problem.

Jon.

==========
brief/general #880, from wookie, 36 chars, Feb 18 23:59 95
Comment to 867. 
----------
That'll be handy under OS/2 !!

J/.

==========
brief/general #872, from bfd, 143 chars, Feb 13 20:02 95
Comment to 861. Comments. 
----------
I changed to 50 lines/screen and that slowed it down enough to be
workable for me, I've only goy a cranky old DX4 100Mhz jonnie tho
:)
Martin.

==========
brief/general #873, from bfd, 406 chars, Feb 13 20:04 95
Comments. 
----------
TITLE: Brief V2.1
I've been using Brief V2.1 for ages now with no problems but now I've 
just tried to install it on my new Lapttop a Twinhead Sl550 and it
just hangs when i try to run brief. Sometimes I get a border around
the screen and sometimes just hangs at the Dos prompt. I've tried all 
combinations of flags that I could think of, clean boot etc but still 
no go. Anyone got any ideas ?
  Martin.

==========
brief/general #874, from warren, 119 chars, Feb 15 13:00 95
Comment to 873. 
----------
Try setting an environment variable 'BEMS' to 0, i.e. put 'SET BEMS=0' 
(that's a zero) in your autoexec.bat.

Warren


Joining cixug/general 2 new message(s).
==========
cixug/general #263, from cam, 162 chars, Feb  1 12:38 95
Comment to 248. Comments. 
----------
>We will be having other access points around the country

If I wanted to 'Watch this space', where would be the best place to
hang out for news of this? (here?)

==========
cixug/general #264, from home, 109 chars, Feb  2 07:41 95
Comment to 263. 
----------
You need to be in cixip/announce which is where we will hear next of what 
is going on and hopefully soon.



Joining network/discussion 18 new message(s).
==========
network/discussion #126, from ppadmore, 17 chars, Dec 19 22:00 94
Comment to 125. More refs to 125.
----------
you have mail...

==========
network/discussion #127, from dellison, 4189 chars, Dec 19 22:04 94
Comment to 125. Comments. 
----------
Long message > Long answer
>1. Am I mad, should I tell them to hire an expert - if I can find one?
No, do it yourself. 10 users is a good size to start with. All experts 
have to begin somewhere and I'm sure you'll find that you are more 
familiar with their requirements than an outsider. You'll learn lots and 
enjoy yourself (er, on the whole that is). It helps if you've got a good 
relationship with your dealer who can help you avoid some basic errors 
and answer all the questions here.

>1. Novell 3.1 (3.11?) or Windows NT 3.5 - which is best/easiest
Novell. 3.12 is the latest version. Very solid. Few surprises and easy to 
get help/support/books for. The de facto industry standard? There is also 
version 4.x but I doubt if you need the aggro or the features.

>2. Can client machines share access to a CD-ROM located on the server?
Yes.  The best way is to use a thingy called a DiskPort (700?) to attach 
your CD RoM drive to the server. Many Compaq servers these days come with 
an internal CD ROM drive which speeds up software loading as you don't 
have to swap diskettes. I understand it can be shared around the network 
but I haven't done this myself as we use the DiskPort with a multiple 
disk CD drive.

>3. Can you share access to a fax/modem and route incoming faxes.
Yes. There are several network fax packages worth looking at: Delrina 
Winfax Pro seems to be the most commonly used. A simple solution might be 
to buy the whole shebang: modem and software for Windows, in a package 
called FaxNow! from Iconographic Systems which I recently read about in a 
mag. It gives you everything you need to do what you describe. Their 
phone no is 0908 222255.

>4. Can Client A see Client B's drives with Netware/NT?
No. Best avoided.

>5. Is centralised data storage the best bet or should I leave the data > 
  on client machines and pull it across the network for backup?
Store the data on a central server with a big disk which is up to the job 
rather than on users' PCs. You never know where anything is if you 
encourage them to keep things on their PCs. Another thing is that backing 
up from individual users PCs takes longer and requires more expensive 
software. Also data is more secure from prying eyes locked away on a 
server. Use disk mirroring on the server if your budget will stretch to 
it.

Use a DAT tape drive for fast backups. Sometime software comes with them 
(Mountain, Maynard, Irwin) or you might have to get your own with eg: 
Hewlett Packard. Try ArcServe - very good and lets you back up users PCs 
quite easily.

>6. Roughly how big should my server be (piece of string I know)?
Taking into account your 10k budget, you might look at a 486DX2/66 
server with 24 or 32Mb RAM and 1 Gigabyte disk. If you can afford it buy 
two disks and mirror them. Make sure you get a fast 32 bit network card 
for your server. Probably Compaq or IBM is out of your client's price 
range but don't go too far down market: it is the road to misery in the 
long run. Dell are good.

>7. What can I do to future proof the design?
Buy everything bigger and faster than common sense dictates. For instance 
a Gigabyte might seem over-generous for 10 users but you will outgrow it 
sooner than you think. Get a server which has room for more disks and 
memory. A lot depends on what the business will do in the next two or 
three years. For the size of network you want it might be better to get a 
second hand ethernet or token ring mau which may be old technology but at 
least you can throw it away when the business expands or when you've got 
more money to invest in structured cabling etc. 

>8. Who invented liquid soap and why? (plaudits to anyone who can 
identify >   the movie that came from)?
You've stumped me there, I'm afraid.

Books? There's one called Networking Windows by Que which I thought was 
good but I can't tell you any more about it because I lent it out and 
never got it back.

Aside from that, there are any number of books in big bookshops which 
explain networking for all levels of expertise. You might have enough to 
read however once you get the Novell manuals.

Now let's see what everybody else has to say...

David


==========
network/discussion #128, from dbuckley, 210 chars, Dec 20 18:25 94
Comment to 127. More refs to 127.
----------
gee, you saved me a load of typing.

I'd concur with all of that.

mail ccomley, and ask him to price up a suitable server with DAT backup, and
you'll also get the benefits of grillions of cix-rows experience.

==========
network/discussion #129, from customisedinfo, 206 chars, Dec 20 18:57 94
Comment to 127. Comments. More refs to 127.
----------
Route incoming faxes

I didn't know this was possible with current standards. How's it
acheived ? Presumably the sender has to be in the know or is all 
recieved by the receptionist and forwarded ?

Robert

==========
network/discussion #130, from dellison, 74 chars, Dec 20 21:13 94
Comment to 129. Comments. More refs to 129.
----------
Somebody has to forward the faxes in any solution I've ever heard about.


==========
network/discussion #133, from pr, 403 chars, Dec 21 18:39 94
Comment to 130. 
----------
I've seen systems which OCR the incoming fax and attempt to send it to 
the right person (has the big disadvantage that "dear personnel manager, 
I'm about to sack Bloggs" gets sent to Bloggs!). There are also snazzy 
DDI-type systems where effectively you have a range of numbers which all 
ring the same fax "machine" - the exchange passes the number to the fax, 
which uses it to onward route.

-pR


==========
network/discussion #132, from dbuckley, 288 chars, Dec 21 18:23 94
Comment to 129. Comments. 
----------
I know of 2 schemes that both work reliably:

1) use DDI to a bank of fax numbers (say 50), forwarding onto (say 10) fax
lines of a suitably clever fax system.

2) Supply barcode stickers to your sendee's, who affix them to each fax
before sending.  Incoming faxes are routed by barcode.

==========
network/discussion #136, from dellison, 190 chars, Dec 22 01:43 94
Comment to 132. Comments. 
----------
It occurred to me that something like that might be possible but I've not 
seen it done. Is it all done within the PBX?

Must say I don't fancy the cunning OCR idea much that pr mentioned.


==========
network/discussion #139, from dbuckley, 449 chars, Dec 23 18:22 94
Comment to 136. 
----------
Not really.

For the DDI scheme, the PABX must be capable of sending DTMF routing tones.
This is primarily done for voice mail.  ie 30 incoming DDI 'lines', 6 POTS
lines from PABX to voice mail system, when a divert to VM happens DTMF info
is sent down the POTS line to say what number was originally dialled, so the
VM system plays the right greeting.

The fax system must be capable of accepting and processing incoming DTMF
info.  most won't be.

==========
network/discussion #131, from robbiee, 1577 chars, Dec 21 02:01 94
Comment to 127. Comments. 
----------
How much extra aggro is version 4.0 ?

As far as my researches tell me version 4.0 has built in support for 
CD-ROM (a key requirement), well worth the extra 200 quid for a ten user 
pack if it will save me 700 quid on that Diskport thingy.  Although 
further complicating (maybe simplifying) this picture, someone told me 
today that if the CD-ROM is hanging off a SCSI controller then sharing 
access to it under 3.12 is no problem.  Anyone know if this is so?

Having said that some of the extra 'features' of version 4.0 look fairly 
groovy, especially the directory services, the disk compression stuff and 
the on-line documentation.

If my client's going to get a better system then I don't mind extra grief 
provided I can get the thing to work properly, and I don't mind if some 
of my time is non-chargeable - after all these are good skills to 
acquire.  What I don't need is a mass grief not getting the thing to work 
and giving my client conniptions.

Whatever I do I'm on a learning curve.  The big question is: how much 
steeper is the v4.0 over the v3.12 curve ?

Also, does anyone know why typically a 5 user pack of Netware is way less 
than 50% of the 10 user pack price ?  Can I read into this the sinister 
possibility that if my client outgrows her 10 user pack I can't just turf 
another 5 user pack into the pot, but instead have to go out and buy a 25 
user pack.

Another line, same movie, bit later on, for all you tip of the tonguers 
out there.

'I'm a good looking guy, you're a good looking guy, we're all three good 
looking guys.'

TIA

Ian.


==========
network/discussion #134, from pr, 1230 chars, Dec 21 18:39 94
Comment to 131. Comments. 
----------
V4 is quite a bit more hassle than 3. It doesn't really gain you a huge 
amount, either. 

You can share CD-ROMs with either 3.12 or 4, so there's nothing in it 
there. The difference between a solution like DiskPort and a shared 
CD-ROM on the server is that with DiskPort you can lock the server in a 
cupboard somewhere, and people can still get at the server. With Novell's 
CD-ROM support, the CD-ROM drive must be physically attached to the 
server, and you have to use server console commands to mount a new CD. 
Novell's stuff is OK, but you'll probably "outgrow" it - its not very 
quick and not very friendly. There are third-party CD-ROM sharing 
software solutions - SCSI Express is very widely used, but I've never 
tried it.

The directory services look pretty, but on a LAN with one server and ten 
users, they just make admin harder. Compression is nice, but with disk at 
400 quid a gigabyte, hardly earth-shaking. Documentation is on-line for 
any NetWare version.

You can't "add up" NetWare licences - if you have 11 users, you must have 
a 25-user copy of the software :-(. You can upgrade, say, a 10-user copy 
to a 25-user one, but it costs quite a bit.

Sorry, the quotes have baffled me totally :-)

-pR


==========
network/discussion #135, from robbiee, 279 chars, Dec 21 22:04 94
Comment to 134. More refs to 134.
----------
Thanks all.

I'll stick with v3.12 then.

The film in question starred two baby faced actors who have gone one to 
make it fairly big:  Anthony Edwards, last seen starring in Northern 
Exposure, and John Cusack, last seen all over the place in Hollywood 
sub-blockbusters.

Ian


==========
network/discussion #137, from dellison, 2128 chars, Dec 22 01:43 94
Comment to 134. Comments. 
----------
I agree with all of that. 

The networks that I'm responsible for connect several hundred users in 
six different countries with Netware,Unix, AS400, HP and Mainframe hosts. 
Yet there is still no _really_ good reason to move to Netware v4. 3.12 
works terribly well and it's easy to find people to maintain it.

If we do upgrade it will probably be to make administration a bit easier 
and because it looks nice on the CV (to be perfectly frank).

A salutory tale:
A few years ago when Microsoft were touting LAN Manager as the NOS of the 
future and saying that Netware had had its day, the company I worked for 
were persuaded into buying it from a large dealer who wanted the 
experience of 'the next big thing'. What a time we had! At the time 
LANMan couldn't share printers properly, much less modems. It was hard to 
find out how to make various bits of software work with it, eg: Lotus 
123! If ever we reported a problem to any software helpdesk, they always 
pointed the finger at the NOS because it was an unknown quantity to them. 
The server became diskbound for no good reason until we discovered that 
hardware cacheing was practically de rigueur for LANMan (with Novell you 
can just throw more memory at it). I could go on.

I doubt if choosing Netware 4 could be as bad as that but it's worth 
remembering that an awful lot of people can show you where the bears in 
the woods lurk with v3.12 whereas v4 is not nearly so widespread yet. 
It's true that we were the first kid on the block with the latest NOS. 
These days however I much prefer to be the _second_ kid on the block with 
any new technology.

Incidentally, it's not really relevant but, a well known data recovery 
company told me that the top three reasons for people using their 
services to recover data from corrupt tapes or disks were:

a) whenever Novell bring out a new version and
b) people not having tested their backups before actually needing them and
c) disk head crashes

...in that order

I didn't mean to go into a luddite rant against anything new but I reckon 
for your purposes 3.12 will be just fine and dandy.

Cheers
David


==========
network/discussion #138, from robbiee, 164 chars, Dec 23 03:27 94
Comment to 137. Comments. 
----------
OK, OK, Netware 3.12 it is.

I still have a lot of questions though.  Watch this space.

Chestnuts roasting on an open fire, Jack Frost nipping at your toes.

Ian


==========
network/discussion #140, from pr, 121 chars, Dec 24 19:50 94
Comment to 138. 
----------
> I still have a lot of questions though.  Watch this space.
If you aren't there already, j netwire/nware_3 et al.

-pR


==========
network/discussion #141, from mfletchera, 1242 chars, Jan  4 15:44 95
----------
TITLE: Windows/Unix Client Server Integration.


Help Please !!!

As a gradual process of moving our COBOL - Unix based product to
Client Server architecture we are looking at how to add WIN front
ends to existing $'lroutines. For example we have a routine which
starts a UNIX based spreadsheet. We woul xlike  to drop the UNIX
spreadsheet and staot excell on a workstation. i.e. there is no NFS
so we need to move the file to the workstation, start excell, detect
excell closing copy the file back to the unix server and return the
focus back to the terminal emulator.

Any ideas ? We have to avoid using any non standard software trying
to do as much as possible with Windows & TCP/ip.
(The windows side of things ca n be as complicated as required
providing it is Visual Basic).

The current suggestion is a "listner" on the workstation which
detects the arrival of a file (via FTP), when the file starts Excell
is started by the listner. At the moment we havent worked out how to
detect that the file has been closed by excell and it is therfore
safe to close excell and transfer back to Unix.

We cant be the first people to do this so someone must be able to
give me a few pointers. Share the benefit of your experience ?

Thanks

Mark

