<div dir="ltr">The idea is to expand the cisco tunnel configuration management tool I wrote to support multinet and the bridge.<div><br></div><div>Wherever there are endpoints (bridge, multinet) there would be an agent that manages the config driven by a centralized system.</div><div><br></div><div>I was going to re-write the cisco tunnel one anyway, so figured why not expand if people were interested.</div><div><br></div><div>The nice part about this is the people who manage the "hubs" wouldn't have to do anything. It would all be user self service driven.</div><div><br></div><div>With the cisco tunnel thing I can just use SNMP to push config fragments onto the routers. WIth the bridge and multinet that's not an option, so a locally running agent would take up that work.</div><div><br></div><div>Why you ask? I automate things for a living. It's what I enjoy doing. :)</div><div><br></div><div>-brian</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 5:12 PM, Johnny Billquist <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bqt@softjar.se" target="_blank">bqt@softjar.se</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On that topic, why would you be generating code? It's just a config file that needs changing, and then a signal sent to the process. (For the bridge).<br>
<br>
For multinet, it essentially would be a couple of configuration commands under VMS or RSX. I don't get the "output 'C'" comment at all.<br>
<br>
Johnny<span class=""><br>
<br>
On 2018-04-30 01:02, Brian Hechinger wrote:<br>
</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">
I can and that would probably be my fall back option.<br>
<br></span><span class="">
On Sun, Apr 29, 2018, 18:45 Steve Davidson <<a href="mailto:steve@davidson.net" target="_blank">steve@davidson.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:steve@davidson.net" target="_blank">steve@davidson.net</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Can you output "C"?<br>
<br>
-Steve Davidson<br>
<br>
Sent from my iPhone<br>
<br>
> On Apr 29, 2018, at 15:48, Johnny Billquist <<a href="mailto:bqt@softjar.se" target="_blank">bqt@softjar.se</a><br></span><span class="">
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bqt@softjar.se" target="_blank">bqt@softjar.se</a>>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't think I'd be<br>
interested in any kind of automation like that for my systems. I<br>
prefer to know explicitly what I have.<br>
><br>
> Johnny<br>
><br>
>> On 2018-04-29 21:20, Brian Hechinger wrote:<br>
>> Would anyone be interested in some manner of automation for this<br>
similar to what I do for the cisco tunnels?<br>
>> Re-writing that in Go has been on my short list for a while now.<br>
Mayne now is the time to look to expanding it as well.<br>
>> One of the things I was going to add was a web front end so you<br>
can all manage your own endpoints.<br>
>> The bridge will be easy, I can write an agent that can run there<br>
to manage it as those are all unix boxes and so I should be able to<br>
generate binaries for that.<br>
>> Multinet may be a tad trickier since Go doesn’t generate<br>
binaries for VMS/RSX/etc so I may have to pick something else there.<br>
Not sure what I’d do.<br>
>> Thoughts?<br>
>> -brian<br>
>>> On Apr 29, 2018, at 1:54 PM, Steve Davidson <<a href="mailto:steve@davidson.net" target="_blank">steve@davidson.net</a><br></span><span class="">
<mailto:<a href="mailto:steve@davidson.net" target="_blank">steve@davidson.net</a>>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> I can do eastern US like I did the bridge. I have to finish<br>
the Tex build though...<br>
>>><br>
>>> -Steve Davidson<br>
>>><br>
>>> Sent from my iPhone<br>
>>><br>
>>>> On Apr 29, 2018, at 12:23, Jeroen Brons<br></span><span class="">
<<a href="mailto:idiotoflinux@gmail.com" target="_blank">idiotoflinux@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:idiotoflinux@gmail.com" target="_blank">idiotoflinux@gmail.com</a><wbr>>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> i''m Also in the Netherlands, but because of my ISP my IP isnt<br>
exactly static (although it stays the same most of the time...), and<br>
as it's running at home im willing to run a bridge but i cannot<br>
guarantee uptime<br>
>>>>> Op 29 apr. 2018, om 18:19 heeft Hans Vlems <<a href="mailto:hvlems@zonnet.nl" target="_blank">hvlems@zonnet.nl</a><br></span>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:hvlems@zonnet.nl" target="_blank">hvlems@zonnet.nl</a>>> het volgende geschreven:<span class=""><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Johnny<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> My connection to Hecnet is thru your site with your bridge<br>
program. It runs on a Fedora (17) system that also hosts A44RTR.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> None of my systems run Multinet, and A44RTR runs VAX/VMS V7.3<br>
and DECnet phase IV. It may be converted to run phase V if that<br>
would help you.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> My internet connection is ADSL2+ which translates to 11 Mb/s<br>
downstream and less than 400 kb/s upstream. Not bloody useful as a<br>
hub, then again Netherlands is not exactly in southern Europe.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Hans<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Op 29 apr. 2018 om 17:52 heeft Johnny Billquist<br></span>
<<a href="mailto:bqt@softjar.se" target="_blank">bqt@softjar.se</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:bqt@softjar.se" target="_blank">bqt@softjar.se</a>>> het volgende geschreven:<div><div class="h5"><br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Guys. I figure I should try to get a more formalized<br>
handling of connections to HECnet.<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> With my bridge, it's mostly just people connecting to me,<br>
but this is not a solution that scales very well, so in general I<br>
now try to discourage people from this option. When possible, I<br>
prefer to move people away from it.<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Multinet on the other hand scales well. And is possible to<br>
use directly both in VMS and RSX. However, it is silly and<br>
inefficient if all multinet links are to go to me. So I'm thinking<br>
about identifying a few people/places elsewhere in the world, which<br>
can be used for connections where it makes more sense for a somewhat<br>
closer point of connection.<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> So, I would go on dealing with Europe. Might at some point<br>
be that we'd like a second point in the south of Europe, but that is<br>
not a high priority right now.<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> However, for the US, it would be nice if we could identify a<br>
location on each coast, which have a capable system, and normally is<br>
always online, and which have a good bandwidth, and would be willing<br>
to setup connections to new machines that want to come online.<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> So, are there any takers? I'll continue to be the first<br>
point of contact when people come asking, but I'd be happy if I<br>
could redirect them to the appropriate person once we have figured<br>
out a few basic details.<br>
>>>>>> And then these two persons can work on establishing the<br>
actual link.<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Johnny<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> --<br>
>>>>>> Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus<br>
>>>>>> || on a psychedelic trip<br></div></div>
>>>>>> email: <a href="mailto:bqt@softjar.se" target="_blank">bqt@softjar.se</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:bqt@softjar.se" target="_blank">bqt@softjar.se</a>> || Reading murder books<span class=""><br>
>>>>>> pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" -<br>
B. Idol<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus<br>
> || on a psychedelic trip<br></span>
> email: <a href="mailto:bqt@softjar.se" target="_blank">bqt@softjar.se</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:bqt@softjar.se" target="_blank">bqt@softjar.se</a>> || Reading murder books<span class=""><br>
> pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol<br>
<br>
</span></blockquote><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">
<br>
-- <br>
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus<br>
|| on a psychedelic trip<br>
email: <a href="mailto:bqt@softjar.se" target="_blank">bqt@softjar.se</a> || Reading murder books<br>
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>