Subj : Installing 32
To : Richard Webb
From : Minh Van Le
Date : Thu May 22 2008 07:45 am
Hello Richard !
On 20-May'08 14:31, Richard Webb wrote to Minh Van Le:
RW> I'm planning some upgrading in the future here once other
RW> business details are sorted out. THough the bbs is for
RW> hobby activity related to emergency communications and ham
RW> radio it will benefit from these upgrades by being able to
RW> offer telnet access as well as pots. POts will always
Man you mean you haven't hooked up NetFOSS or Netserial - what have you been
DOING.
I dunno. Imo using a BBS sounds inappropriate, probably because the words
"hobby" and "emergency" shouldn't be used close together in a sentence.
RW> remain with binkley as front end with max dos underneath,
RW> but haven't sorted out all the issues yet. Your post brings
RW> up some questions, and I'd like your input. Remember I'm
RW> not a real programmer, just a radio op and audio guy who
RW> runs a rather simple installation.
You should have no problems with Maximus/32 if you avoid passing connections
between separate DOS windows.
MVL> That is true. CPU utilisation for DOS programs in
MVL> multitasking OS's like Windows depend on whether the program
MVL> releases time slices to the OS.
RW> NOt an issue for the pots system with binkleyterm and max
RW> dos as it would be on a separate machine, sharing message
RW> and file areas over the lan.
Even if you have POTS on a separate PC, if you intend on setting up telnettable
Maximus you will probably have to use the DOS version of Maximus on Windows, at
which point it will hog the CPU eg. 30% - 50% per active node.
This is because most free telnet servers (TelSrv, GameSrv, Net2BBS) only run on
Windows and require a TCP/IP FOSSIL emulator (eg. NetFOSS) to connect to the
BBS, and only the Maximus DOS binary supports FOSSILs.
Maximus/32 does not support FOSSILs because it uses direct com port access.
(Which means to telnet to Maximus/32 on windows, you will need to use a virtual
modem (Netserial/CompIP/netmodem) (which cost money). If you can afford USD$50
- USD$200 to register virtual modems then there's no problem. (Or you can run
the Maximus OS/2 with VMODEM or Linux binaries which are free options. But then
you will have to use OS/2 and/or Linux. Heh)).
MVL> I run WFC mode using Maximus/32 specifically for scheduling
MVL> BBS maintenance events because it can idle all day without
MVL> CPU utilisation.
RW> This would be advantageous as telnettable max would
RW> probably be on machine with shared message and file areas.
If you need to telnet to Maximus/32 on Windows, you will need to use a virtual
modem eg. Netserial/CommIP/Netmodem (= $).
MVL> The disadvantage of Maximus/32 is its direct com port
MVL> access requirement. If you try to set up a Maximus/32 node
MVL> on a physically non-existant com port, WFC will abort. Also
MVL> anything that requires a FOSSIL will not work in Maximus/32.
MVL> And hot com port passing will not work with Maximus/32 (ie.
MVL> DTR is dropped when passing callers between DOS programs eg.
MVL> BinkleyTerm to/from Maximus) unless you use WinFOSSIL or
MVL> Netserial.
RW> That might make things interesting, as another machine will
RW> be handling all outside connectivity through dsl. iF that's
RW> workable then max32 might still be an option for me, as I
RW> run no doors at this time. Hence we wouldn't need a fossil
RW> driver nor com port sharing.
Yeah that will probably work. Atleast the Maximus multinode stuff eg. online
chat will still work between separate computers regardless of connection type
(dialup/DSL) because IPC is handling the semaphorish exchange between nodes (if
the PCs are networked).
RW> Trying to get a grasp of the issues I'm going to face
RW> before I end up fishing around in the dark. I"m an old dos
RW> dinosaur that doesn't do windows, but have one machine
RW> running 98 that would be usable for this.
Well, you can always use modern technology and substitute your Maximus BBS for
Linux services. Eg. run a PPP and/or TCP/IP connected webserver, gopher, nntp
server etc. There's Apache for Windows and Linux et al. This way you will have
no technological/software/redundancy problems.
And people can use their web browsers (!) And you can show pictures and/or
pornography (!) You can't get all that with a BBS. Plus simple html files load
fast even at 33.6 kbps.
One day Win98 won't even install on a new PC.
RW> AS I said earlier, I don't run any door games, or anything
RW> else in doorway mode at this time. sUggestions are most
RW> welcome.
If you don't require FOSSIL compatibility (usually for doors via Xtern_* exits)
or pass connections between seperate DOS windows, then Maximus/32 will probably
suffice.
MVL> In my experience Maximus/32 without WinFOSSIL or Netserial
MVL> is only useful for local nodes.
Maybe the "UsrRemote Xtern_Run Command.Com_>com%P_<com%P" (ie. OS Shell) option
might work but I don't think so because the command.com doesn't support com
port handles.
RW> I would like to hear if you think this is true in my
RW> application as well.
I haven't extensively tested Maximus/32 but I think as long as the POTS
connection stays within the current Maximus/32 process everything will work
(eg. all Maximus menus & display features including .bbs, .mex etc) because all
the comms stuff is handled internally by Maximus.
I don't know how Maximus/32 will work with virtual modems like Netserial/CommIP
etc. It will probably handle telnet connections with the same forementioned
POTS limitations.
WinFossil should handle any POTS situation Ok. But it's old and cost money. I
don't even know if you can still register it.
I think Netserial does what WinFossil can do but it also cost money, but is new
and actively developed and maintained.
When setting up telnettable Maximus you need to decide between
1) suffering CPU performance problems with Maximus/DOS or
2) paying for virtual modems to use Maximus/32.
