Image Map Image Map
Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 7891011121314 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 133

Thread: EtherDFS - an ethernet drive for DOS

  1. #101

    Default

    My answer seems to have to be checked by an admin before it appears, perhaps I'm still too new to the forum...
    I will try to answer again (possibly this third answer will all come at the same time, but I cannot see the posts I tried to make).

    Yes, I did MKFS.

    I did fiddle around with read/write rights without success. Now, I'm out of ideas. Could it be that freedos, even listed as one of the working DOSes, does not work sometimes? Which other DOS version should I try?

    I'm kind of out of empty 1.2M disks, and it is not that easy to try out new DOS versions, as I have no other computer with an 1.2 drive, so I'd rater be pointed in some direction what gives best success rate, if even this may be part of the problem or if it is completely on the server side. When I finally get the 5170 up and running, I will save some of the disks onto a modern computer and be able to exchange data more easily with this old system...

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    610

    Default

    I have had zero luck using etherdfs and ethflop over wifi extenders. I've tried several. They don't seem to want to pass the data.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Outer Mongolia
    Posts
    2,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JohanLu View Post
    My answer seems to have to be checked by an admin before it appears, perhaps I'm still too new to the forum...
    I will try to answer again (possibly this third answer will all come at the same time, but I cannot see the posts I tried to make).
    Yeah, unfortunately you're held hostage to admin approvals until you hit the 10 post mark.

    Per keenerb's comment, EtherDFS will definitely only work over a network that fully bridges Layer2 packets; it operates directly on the ethernet frame level, it doesn't use wrap the data in standard TCP/IP headers. It works for me over an ethernet/powerline bridge that works on the layer2 level, but wifi extenders are often either layer3 devices (IE, the ethernet port(s) on a separate network from the one the wireless bridge joins and they NAT the clients behind them) or they do "clever" proxyarp bridging that might not recognize nonstandard protocols.
    My Retro-computing YouTube Channel (updates... eventually?): Paleozoic PCs

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chicagoland, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    6,537
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    It's more than just extenders; etherdfs won't work on any wireless at all. Wireless bridges and extenders don't bridge layer 2. Found this out testing with a wireless bridge; had to connect a hard wire cable from my vintage gear to my switch to get etherdfs working.

    A future rewrite to use standard, routable IP is an official feature request.
    Offering a bounty for:
    - A working Sanyo MBC-775, Olivetti M24, or Logabax 1600
    - Music Construction Set, IBM Music Feature edition (has red sticker on front stating IBM Music Feature)

  5. #105
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Outer Mongolia
    Posts
    2,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trixter View Post
    It's more than just extenders; etherdfs won't work on any wireless at all.
    Has anyone tried it with a WDS-compliant bridge? In theory I think that *should* work, but I don't have one lying around to verify. Smaller bridges that act like "normal clients" won't, because the access points generally do not take kindly to multiple MACs on a single client. And there still might be some vendor variability. I remember back in the day Mac-in-folk complained at length that some Wifi access points filtered classic Ethertalk packets, which EtherDFS's traffic is broadly similar to.

    On the *server* side it works for me at least to run ethersrv-linux on a wifi interface, but this might also potentially be an area where your mileage may vary.
    My Retro-computing YouTube Channel (updates... eventually?): Paleozoic PCs

  6. #106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eudimorphodon View Post
    Yeah, unfortunately you're held hostage to admin approvals until you hit the 10 post mark.
    Ah, good, i will soon be up to 10 posts... Did not know of this limitation, but thought it might be something like that...

  7. #107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trixter View Post
    It's more than just extenders; etherdfs won't work on any wireless at all. Wireless bridges and extenders don't bridge layer 2. Found this out testing with a wireless bridge; had to connect a hard wire cable from my vintage gear to my switch to get etherdfs working.
    I moved both devices to the same physical network, though "behind" the wireless bridge... Thought it would work... But it did not. Guess that the traffic, at least some part of it, will go back on the wireless to the true network that handles the DHCP etc. The only places where I did finish the real physical network is down in the basement where cable modem, routers etc are placed and the kids rooms and to a WiFi AP and the TV. I just cannot risk to wake the kids up by suddenly in the middle of the night turn on an old 5170 with the kind of jet sound it produces - that might give them nightmares about old computers. Or disconnect the TV when wife is watching something... But I guess that I need to finish some physical LAN to more places in the house as my wife wants a physical connection when working from home - she has actually asked for it cause a lot more working from home now. At least that is a better excuse to get time to do it than to try to explain that the ancient 5170 needs it

  8. #108
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Outer Mongolia
    Posts
    2,381

    Default

    On another topic, just wondering: has anyone tried EtherDFS under DR-DOS? Not having a lot of luck with it myself.
    My Retro-computing YouTube Channel (updates... eventually?): Paleozoic PCs

  9. #109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eudimorphodon View Post
    I remember back in the day Mac-in-folk complained at length that some Wifi access points filtered classic Ethertalk packets, which EtherDFS's traffic is broadly similar to.
    Good to know, I'm collecting stuff to connect an old MacLC475 (with ethernet card) to a AppleTalk network with at least one MacPlus, to bridge the Plus to the outer world... But the LC475 seem to have TCP/IP already on the HDD. My mother used this Mac when working on the university. It even had a web-browser installed, so it is perhaps newer than the Mac EtherTalk?

  10. #110
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Outer Mongolia
    Posts
    2,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JohanLu View Post
    But the LC475 seem to have TCP/IP already on the HDD. My mother used this Mac when working on the university. It even had a web-browser installed, so it is perhaps newer than the Mac EtherTalk?
    "Ethertalk" refers to Apple's method of packaging Appletalk DDP packets inside of Ethernet frames, IE, the protocol that Macs run on Localtalk connections with Ethernet headers wrapped around it. Under the "Classic" MacOS it's still generally the default for file and printer sharing (AFP, PAP) even if the machine is directly using TCP/IP for other tasks. Apple invented "Appleshare IP" as a method to encapsulate AFP inside of IP packets sometime during the System 7 era for better efficiency routing over large networks and over the internet. (Ethertalk doesn't scale well.) But DDP for file sharing was still around pretty much to the end of the System 9 era.

    All the WiFi WAPs I've ever owned (and that I've actually tried it on) didn't have a problem with passing Ethertalk packets, but supposedly it could be a real problem. It *will* generally not pass through any kind of router or other layer3/proxied hop, like ethernet->wifi adapters.
    My Retro-computing YouTube Channel (updates... eventually?): Paleozoic PCs

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •