[HECnet] Is this the most up to date version of DECnet OS numbers?

[John Forecast]

> On Nov 8, 2021, at 10:16 AM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
> 
> On 2021-11-08 15:57, Paul Koning wrote:
>>> On Nov 7, 2021, at 6:40 PM, Thomas DeBellis <tommytimesharing at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> ...
>>> On the other hand, I don't remember my FAL/NFT/DAP blowing up on the wrong system, either (they blow up on plenty of other stuff...)  It would appear that there are two (2) separate lists of system type bytes, one for NRT and the other for DAP, viz:
>>> ...
>> I don't know why DAP includes an OS type code at all.  When I was working on DECnet architecture I repeatedly argued that DAP implementations that do OS type checks are broken, because they are assuming that they can correctly deduce the properties of some remote system from its OS code.  The correct way -- which is supported, in detail, by DAP -- is to look at the feature flags to determine what the OS can and cannot do.  And if those flags are insufficient for a particular case, the solution is to extend the protocol to add the missing information.
>> In other words, a client should conclude "the server can do X because it told me it supports X" and not "the server can do X because it is running OS Y".
> 
> Absolutely agree. And I wonder if any software really do make use of the OS codes in DAP. But it is nice that I can check what other systems report from RSX. :-)
> 

I believe TOPS-10 may look at the OS field to determine how to format directory output. I see a comment in the FAL version I wrote for Linux to this effect and it did not like the user-reserved value  (192) I had assigned for Linux. The current fix is to claim to be Ultrix-32 if the remote system is TOPS-10.

  John.

>  Johnny
> 
> -- 
> Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
>                                  ||  on a psychedelic trip
> email: bqt at softjar.se             ||  Reading murder books
> pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol