Text 35140, 125 rader
Skriven 2009-08-18 22:16:45 av Grant Taylor (108592.fidonews)
  Kommentar till text 35132 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: FidoNews 26:32 [02/05]: Rebuttals To Previous Articles
==============================================================
  Re: FidoNews 26:32 [02/05]: Rebuttals To Previous Articles
  By: Michiel van der Vlist to Grant Taylor on Wed Aug 19 2009 12:14 am

 > Hello Grant,

Hi Michiel,

 > I can understand why they feel no need to replace that printer now. But
 > will that printer still be in use in five years? Or ten? And if it is
 > replaced with e new network printer would it not be wise to opt for one
 > that can do IPv6 or is at least prepared for it?

Some of the printers I'm talking about, yes it is quite likely the printers
will still be in use in 5 or 10 yeras.  A pair of HP LaserJet 4050 TNs come to
mind with < 25k pages on them.  I consider these printers good for at least
100k pages and upwards of 15 - 20 years.  These printers will very likely still
be in active day to day use for a long time.

Along the same lines I support multiple HP LaserJet 4 and HP LaserJet 4+
printesr introduced in '92 and '94 respectively.  Thus these printers are 15
(+) years in to what I expect to be their 20 (something) year life cycle.

I completely agree that new purchases should be IPv6 compatiable or easily
(read: firmware) upgradeable to support IPv6 in the near future.

 > That depends. I have designed quit a lot of stuff for industrial automation
 > and things were going fast then. Well... it was some time ago...

*nod*

 > Frankly, I haven't seen a working Cobol based system in 30 years.

We can debate the quality of said systems.  The point being that there are
still a number of them in production.

 > FidoNet has not gone away yet, but it does not play a role of any
 > significance any more in the great scheme of things. It was once the
 > largest amateur network and the only global digital communication network
 > available to private individuals. Some 30.000 node, over half a million
 > points and nobody knows how many users. That is history, FidoNet is not
 > gone, but it is a museum piece. I expect IPv4 to go the same awy.

For the most part I agree.  Though I do wonder what sort of hand governments
censoring the internet will have in FidoNet.  If we fall back to modem calls,
it will be much more difficult to censor peoples communications.  ;)

As far as a museum piece, I'm not so sure about that.  It's still in active
(all be it small) use.

 > But there will be other reasons to replace them.

True.  But IPv6 is not the reason.  Thus these systems will continue to exist
as they are running over IPv4 / NetBEUI / IPX/SPX / Dec Phase IV / Dec Phase V
/ etc.

 > My electronic door lock does not do IPv6 either. As a matter of fact, it
 > does not do IPv4 or any other network protocol. It is a stand alone
 > application. So there is indeed no need to replace it for the sake of IPv6.

*nod*

That's why I did not rush out and buy Y2K pencils.  ;)

 > But sooner or later it will need to be replaced anyway, if only becaue I no
 > longer have a working programmer that can program an 68702. Also I no
 > longer have a magnetic card writer. The card codes are hard coded into the
 > EPROM. If the cards that I have now wear out, I am stuck.

I was really referring to building automation systems that do speak IPv4 to a
central controller / monitor.  Like it or not, Ethernet and TCP/IP have won (or
are the current winners) the common networking war that has been raging for the
past two decades.

 > They are, but as I mentioned it is coming to a halt pretty soon now.

I think that the useage will be much like the half life of radio active
material.  It keeps windling until it's to a polint that we can safely say that
it's dead.

 > And you did not tell him to skip to at least XP?

I installed XP Pro SP3.  ;)

I also told them not to mess with Vista, but that we would evaluate Windows 7
after it comes out.  ;)

 > My expectations are different. FidoNet is still around, not because of the
 > superior technology (though in some aspects it IS superior to what is
 > commonly used on The Internet) but because it has become a social entity.

*nod*

 > I do not see that happening to IPv4.

I wonder if there will be IPv4 zellots that will hold on to it and boo IPv6.

 > I doubt they will. In ten years time, everything that connects to the
 > InterNet will be IPv6 capable. Simply because if it does not, it will be
 > severely limited. And when "every one and everything" has IPv6 there simply
 > will be no more reason to keep IPv4 around.

I agree that there will be little enough reason to have an IPv4 internet to
effectively say that there is no reason.  But that is the internet, not IPv4 in
general.  Even in 10 years time, I expect the afore mentioned HP LaserJet 4050
TN printers to still be in use.

 > Ah, good old IPX. Yes, I remember that. I was the system operator for the
 > Novell 3.11 network at the company I last worked for. But that is ages
 > ago...

*nod*

 > I have no idea how many routers still support IPX. I have never actually
 > seen one. The last network I saw that used IPX, was a coax LAN with ten
 > work stations. No hubs, mo routers just a string of coax terminates at end.

Acutally, just about any Cisco router with the proper IOS image (and similar)
will still support it.  And let's not forget about the servers them selves
running multiple IPX networks (in addition to the internal IPX network).



Grant. . . .
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Vertrauen - vert.synchro.net (1:103/705)