Dear Allison,
   
   You wrote:
> At no time did I say the implementation would be other than fuctional
> SCSI.  I didn't say fast, or bootable, nor perfect, only acceptably
> usable.  No majik, no rabbit, no babble.
   
   Again you are talking about implementing a driver. You don't need to
implement it, it's already there, you only need to find and REMOVE the code
that blocks it! See my response to Antonio.
   
> For a VS2k from where I sit a PIO SCSI driver would be very useable, not
> fast or perfect for everything.  I bet it would solve a lot of problems
> for those trying to get the last ounce of usefulness out of a good but
> old machine who's greatest attribute is simply it's smallness, cheapness
> and good clean fun.
   
   How is this relevant to our discussion of the way VMS and Ultrix treat
the SCSI port on KA410 versus KA42/41?
   
   Sincerely,
   Michael Sokolov
   Phone: 440-449-0299
   ARPA Internet SMTP mail: sokolov@alpha.ces.cwru.edu