What happened to the Linux SNA Project? 14
Blip asks: "Last time I visited the
Linux SNA Homepage, it was still there.
But now it seems that some commercial guy
has taken over. What happened to the GPLed
code? Is it all Commerceware now?"
Re:SNA is (not) dead ? (Score:1)
On the other hand, it seems unlikely that many people are setting up new SNA networks, and it's getting harder and harder to find people who know how to run one, which over time will make running SNA expensive or impossible. It'll be a long time before all SNA is dead, but the handwriting is on the wall.
Re:Does anyone run SNA anymore? (Score:1)
Re:SNA is (not) dead ? (Score:1)
Various AS/400 + SNA links... (Score:1)
http://www.blarg.net/~mmadore/
These 2 pages have lots of links to stuff.
From what I understand, linux-sna.org was true vaporware... never had working code. So an old version is pretty worthless.
Not a trace... (Score:1)
That being said, from what I can tell, most (if not all) of the Linux-SNA code was written by the one person. So if he wants to privatize it, well, it's only his work he's doing it to. But surely there most be a version of the old code floating around out there?
Speaking of which, what happens when a GPL project with multiple members wants to get taken commercial / closed by its "owner"? In most cases, I assume, development would fork, with the last free version going its way, and the non-free version going its own way. But what happens when there are no copies of the free code around?
(One also wonders what the IceLinux-Samba 'software' he sells really is...)
SNA is dead ? (Score:1)
I don't have that kinda cash!! (Score:1)
I looked at the web site and they're wantin better than $3K for it? Way too much if you ask me. Sounds like they know they they don't have any competition for Linux/SNA networking software and want to get what they can from it. But, at least you get an unlimited license, and they provide the source with it.
Anyway, I think a GPL'd SNA stack would be better. It's IBM protocol, and they're supposed to be interested in Linux now so.....
Shatter
Re:SNA is (not) dead ? (Score:1)
Re:SNA is (not) dead ? (Score:1)
As far as being obselete, IPv6 is supposed to have several features that SNA has had for years. SNA is one example of classic IBM over-engineering (kinda like those heavy guage, double-shielded serial cables I have around here somewhere, vintage IBM), it has error correction on almost every level, so SNA packets are almost never lost or damaged as they sometimes are in TCP/IP.
In the last few years, IBM has added more and more TCP/IP features to their systems. But given a choice, most sys admins in charge of IBM systems will choose SNA to link them together.
Shatter
Re:Not a trace... (Score:1)
Re:I don't have that kinda cash!! (Score:2)
As for the price, I imagine, since most people don't have an IBM mainframe in their basement, this is almost exclusivly for business use, $3G isn't alot of money for businesses that can afford Mainframes.
However judging from my experience, I used to work in a shop that used to use an SNA stack on HP (SNApplus 2). I would have possibly used the Linux SNA stuff on a proof of concept project that may not have be able to get the $3G funding needed. A lower cost or free SNA kit would be useful
Does anyone run SNA anymore? (Score:2)
Honest question - I thought most modern mainframes could run TCP/IP and the older SNA protocols were encapsulated.
--