Subject: Re: [netatalk-admins] Using netatalk in a large, mission-critica
From: Sean A. Snyder (ssnyder@cecom.com)
Date: Thu Sep 24 1998 - 14:20:21 EDT
Douglas M. MacFarlane wrote:
>
> Do you have an extended cable-rnage configured on your network?
> i.e., did you allocate just 1 appletalk network (cable-range 45-45,
> for example), or did you allocate and extended range (cable-range
> 46-55) which will allow hosts to connect via the high nodenumbers
> theat they want, and just use the "next" network in the range for
> that LAN.
>
> Doug
>
Yes, we do have our network segmented into different cable ranges, and we do
have extended cable ranges defined. The problem that I'm running into is not
a too-many-nodes-on-network type of problem, but more of a
too-many-nodes-trying-to-connect-to-the-same-server problem. Our 500+ Macs
hum along just fine and coexist nicely on our network.
As I expressed in my original message, the problem appears to be with socket
addressing on a single node (and that node happens to be our file server). I
guess my question is this: Is Netatalk dependent upon the 8-bit _socket_
addressing scheme that was inherent in the Appletalk protocol circa 1990, or
is there a fix (for this Appletalk limitation) or a workaround (in Netatalk)
to workaround this?
Thanks!
Sean
-- Sean Snyder (ssnyder@cecom.com)| Systems and Network Engineer | Every new beginning comes from some Campbell-Ewald Advertising and | other beginning's end.... C-E Communications | #include <std_disclaimer.h> |
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Dec 18 1999 - 16:33:18 EST