From: news@cct-net.co.uk   
      
   On 11/10/2025 12:35, Dan Cross wrote:   
   > In article <10cauq9$20cl$1@dont-email.me>,   
   > Simon Clubley   wrote:   
   >> On 2025-10-10, Dan Cross  wrote:   
   >>> In article <10c89re$2n78q$1@dont-email.me>,   
   >>> Simon Clubley   wrote:   
   >>>> On 2025-10-08, Arne Vajhøj  wrote:   
   >>>>> VSI has published final agenda:   
   >>>>>       https://events.vmssoftware.com/bootcamp-2025/agenda   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> That's a very interesting range of topics. It's starting to feel   
   >>>> like the old DECUS conferences of yesteryear.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> One thing of special interest is that the rewrite of the TCP/IP stack   
   >>>> is back on the WIP list. This was tried in the past by VSI and then   
   >>>> dropped. Interesting that the FreeBSD stack was chosen as the starting   
   >>>> point for this.   
   >>>   
   >>> I'm curious as to your thoughts on the FreeBSD stack.  My sense   
   >>> is that it is one of the better implementations out there, and   
   >>> has had a ton of work done on it (including recently).  It also   
   >>> has a permissive license that makes it suitable for integration   
   >>> into a proprietary system like VMS.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> That's exactly my point. It's an excellent starting point for   
   >> a VMS-specific TCP/IP stack.   
   >>   
   >> It's vastly better than the original UCX disaster area and looks to   
   >> be far better than whatever they used for the UCX 5 (TCP/IP Services)   
   >> rewrite.   
   >   
   > Agreed.  Where does Process Software fit in all of this?   
   > Multinet always seemed very good.   
   >   
   > 	- Dan C.   
      
   Wasn't there talk of them collaborating with VSI to produce an updated   
   stack?   
   I have never used Multinet, but used and liked TCPWare   
      
      
   --   
   Chris   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)