Subject: Re: VAX 6400 booting saga: barred from using MULTINET (sigh!)
To: Robert Schaefer <>
From: Brian Hechinger <>
List: port-vax
Date: 12/08/2001 14:32:57
> > - get a MULTINET license (no inclination unless it's free and
> >    does not require the rest of the VMS system to be set up
> >    properly (it isn't, I can't even do a SYSGEN ...)
> Looks like decus membership ( is still free.  Join up,
> then get a hobbiest pac for VMS & layered products.  Currently it only costs
> your time, (took 'em three or four months to process my app.) then I had to
> manually type in the VMS & UCX pac, then ftp'd the whole layered pac over.

the multinet license is also free to hobbyists.  and multinet kicks the living
crap outta UCX, so you want multinet. :)

> I *heard* but won't swear to it that the hobbiest licenses don't care about
> serial numbers.  I can confirm that a pac I got for my 6310 accepts my 6320
> with a non-matching 2nd processor.

i know the licenses are pretty flexable and i don't think the serial number
matters either.  i don't remember, but i think for a while i was running the
CPU license for one of my VAX 4000 boxes on one of the others.  so don't worry
too much about serial numbers.  i like to put the correct ones in the decus
thing just in case they are keep track.  i want them to know that i as a
hobbyist have several 6000 boxes. :)

> On a side note, are there any benefits to the various EEPROM versions on the
> different processors?  I don't believe my 6320 will autoboot with the
> mismatching eeprom error I'm getting now, but I'd hate to erase a firmware
> upgrade just because I don't know what I'm doing!

whatever you do, be very careful.  but you may want to look into getting the
eeproms the same.  at while you are at it, look at getting the latest versions

> I'm in a similar spot-- I want pacs for my latest haul (VS3100m40), but I
> don't seem to have my decus number wrote down anywhere!

call them and ask.  they are very helpful.

> Two of the three machines I currently have came with the license database
> erased.  I hear there's an unerase for VMS, but it suffers from much the
> same problems as an ffs-filesystem unerase does.

it suffers the same problems that all filesystems unerases suffer.  if you
write stuff over part, or all of the erased stuff, it's gone/broken.

> > Does anyone know about old or new DECnet support on BSD?
> Dunno

it's one of those things that i've been meaning to get around to but just don't
ever have the time right now.