@device(x2700)
@make(report)
@blankspace(4 in)
@majorheading{Report on the Responses to

The Operational Requirement for

a Network Level Converter}
@blankspace(2 in)
@heading(April 1988
Release 1 - Draft)
@newpage
@section(Introduction)
This is a report for the JNT on the responses to the 'Operational Requirement 
for A Network Level Converter'.

There were three responses to the OR from Microscope, Netcomm and SEEL and a 
fourth, unofficial response from NETTEL.

Each response is examined in detail later in the report with points 
highlighted where the response
fails to meet the requirements of the OR.  A summary of the conclusions is 
given below.

@section(Summary)

{???????????????????}

@newpage
@majorheading(Microscope)
@section(Introduction)
Microscope provided a very full, detailed and proficient response to the OR,
covering both technical details and implementation plans.

@section[Overview and Functionality]
Microscope are proposing a standalone unit built upon a structure with a number 
of subsystems each with a Z80 compatible processor and DMA chips.

@section[Operation and Management]
The converter can be managed from a directly connected terminal with 
configurations stored in battery backed RAM of 8 kbytes.

It is not clear that operators can modify tables without taking the converter 
out of service.   (???????????????)

@section[Protocols]
X.29 is carried using the Q bit over X.25(84); CONS calls are stated as being 
carried over X.25(84) rather than ISO 8208 as in the requirement.

@section[Title-to-Address Mapping]
Support for the NRS, including the use of NLP is offered but there is no 
explicit statement that both Standard and Abbreviated names will be supported.

@section[Performance and Limitations]
The converter will support two synchronous lines running at a maximum speed of 
64 kb/s.

The converter will support a maximum of 50 simultaneous calls as against a
minimum of 50 required by the OR.

The maximum packet throughput figures are stated, 28 packets/sec at 128 byte 
packets and 48 packets/sec at 16 byte packets.   This figures are at the very 
low end of what would be acceptable in a converter.

@section[Connection Timeout]
The desirable feature of an inactivity timeout has been included, the timer is
configurable.

@section[X.29 and TS29 calls]
The desirable user interface requirements will be met although Microscope wish 
to discuss the exact requirement.

@section(Synchronous Interfaces)
Microscope are prepared to support a configurable DTE/DCE option although a 
system restart would be required.

Microscope will only support V.35 interfaces  which is rather restrictive in 
the current environment.

@section[Network Management - General]
Microscope discuss the management of the converter in a multi-supplier 
environment but it does appear to be restricted to GEC products overall.

@section[Network Configuration Changes]
The network configuration tools appear to be reasonably comprehensive, as noted
above at least certain changes do require a system reload and this area would 
need to explored further to establish whether any 'critical' features also 
require a reload.

@section[Management Protocols]
Microscope will use a proprietary protocol for network management. They do make 
the commitments.

A more serious problem is that some of the management functions @b(require) a 
network management station, they are:
@enumerate{
Set Parameters

Reset and/or return accumulated statistics

Teleload  (Converter operational code)

Load address tables  (links & addresses)

Get Diagnostic Status

Set NRS Call Option

Set Inactivity Timeout Option
}
Whilst some of these are not critical, eg, statistics operations, the rest are
and it may be impossible to run a converter without an NMC.

@section(Delivery and Acceptance)
Microscope have stated that the implementation project will take 8 months, thus
the contract would have to be awarded by the 1st May to achieve the timescale
of 1st January.

@section(Maintenance and Support)
Microscope are offering a hardware and software support service.  A 10 year 
period is implied but not directly stated for the hardware.

The options of a fixed contract, Time and Materials and return to factory 
are offered; the terms of
providing circuit diagrams are stated as @b{none} and Microscope would wish to 
discuss third party maintainers further with the JNT.


@section(Procedures and Special Conditions)
@enumerate{
Specification:  H/W and S/W given, no information on CONS

Price per Unit:  #224,250 for the first
                 #  7,750 for the next four or more

Total Purchase Price: Not stated but is  #255,250

H/W Maintenance price: stated:
The terms for an 8 hour callout are #1134 per annum per converter

S/W support:
The software maintenance is #4360 per annum per converter

Formula: Reviewed Annually

Warranty Conditions: 90 days

Further Units: Price quoted with complex Discount structure
}

@section(Conclusions)
The quality of the Microscope proposal is very high but there are a number of 
problems of which the most serious are:-
@enumerate{
Power:  The number of calls only just fulfils the requirement and the number 
of packets/sec is very low even in relation to the number of calls.

NMC:    The converter appears to require an NMC for some of its management and 
configuration.

Delivery: The probable delivery is after the 1st January 1989

Price: The price is very high
}

@newpage

@majorheading(Netcomm)
@section(Introduction)
Netcomm have responded with a fairly short response (6 pages).

@section[Overview and Functionality]
Netcomm are proposing a standalone unit built upon a
Motorola MC68010 chip and Hitachi HD64180R1P8 chips to handle the synchronous 
links.

@section[Operation and Management]
The converter can be managed from a directly connected terminal,
an X.29 call from the network or via a network management protocol with
configurations stored in non-volatile memory.

It is stated that modifications can be made to name and address tables without 
taking the converter out of service.

@section[Protocols]
Conversion of protocols will be carried out as specified in the OR.  The CONS 
interface will not support Receipt Confirmation, expedited data selection will 
be as required for the YB mapping and Q of S will be supported if the converter
is supplied with the relevant information.

@section[Title-to-Address Mapping]
The proposal offers support for short and long form names; the support of the 
NLP includes a cache of between 256k and 512k bytes.

The call to the NLP can be either permanent or single shot.

@section[Performance and Limitations]
The converter will support two synchronous lines running at a maximum speed of
500k bits/sec.

The converter will support a maximum of 250 simultaneous calls as against a
minimum of 50 required by the OR.

The maximum packet throughput figures are stated as 200 packets/sec. It is also
stated that the use of DMA copies removes any dependence on packet size.

@section[Connection Timeout]
The desirable feature of an inactivity timeout has been included, the timer is
configurable.

@section[X.29 and TS29 calls]
Support for conversion are as stated in the Transition Report and the 
desirable feature of the use of Annex B of the Green Book will be supported.

@section(Synchronous Interfaces)
Netcomm do not state whether the link interfaces will support both DTE and DCE.

Netcomm will support X.21, X.21 bis (V.28) and a fibre optic interface module. 
It should be noted that V.35 is not supported but this is not a mandatory 
requirement.

@section[Network Management - General]
Netcomm are offering to provide a network management system that will support 
their own products which could be extended to other non Netcomm devices.

@section[Network Configuration Changes]
Netcomm claim that reconfiguration can be achieved without a system reload.

The Netcomm converter can be utilised without the requirement of a network 
management machine.

@section[Management Protocols]
Netcomm use a proprietary protocol for network management. They do make
the commitments.

@section(Delivery and Acceptance)
Netcomm state that delivery will be by the 1st January 1989 provided that the 
contract is placed before the 1st July 1988 and that testing facilities, such
as access to an NLP server and an implementation of Blue Book over CONS, will
also be available in that timescale.

@section(Maintenance and Support)
Netcomm are offering a hardware and software support service.  A 10 year
period is offered.

The hardware support offered is that of a return to factory of either complete 
units or individual boards on either a contract basis or on an individual cost 
basis.  Netcomm do not offer an on-site service.

Details for a site to do their own maintenance is stated.

@section(Procedures and Special Conditions)
@enumerate{
Specification:  H/W, S/W and CONS interface details given.

Price per Unit: #16,905 for the first five units

Total Purchase Price: #84,525

H/W Maintenance price: stated:
5% or 6% for return of boards for a 10 or 5 day turnaround, 1st year is 0% or 
1% for the 10 or 5 day service.

S/W support:
The software maintenance is 5% per annum per converter

Formula: Not stated

Warranty Conditions: 90 days

Further Units: Price quoted of #4,427.50 discounted to #4,312.50 for 5 or more.
}

@section(Conclusions)
Netcomm have answered virtually all of the mandatory points of the proposal and
have offered a converter with a very high capability and throughput.  There 
does not seem any reason to disbelieve them on the basis both of the hardware 
offered and their track record on PADs.

@newpage



@majorheading(SEEL)
@section(Introduction)
SEEL have responded to the OR with an extremely short proposal.

@section[Overview and Functionality]
SEEL are proposing an additional piece of hardware, a Tandon PC, to attach 
to their switch.  This PC could only be used in conjuction with a SEEL switch 
which would need to be purchased by any University which required a converter 
and didn't already use a TelePAC.

@section[Operation and Management]
The PC can be configured either by a local console or vai an X.29 call across 
the network.

Storage of configurations would be on the PC hard disk.

No statement is made as to whether a reload would be necessary after
reconfiguration.

@section[Protocols]
No precise statement is made about the conversions offered.


@section[Title-to-Address Mapping]
No statement is made about the support of NRS style names.
 The proposal states that the NLP will be supported but no detail is given on 
 the mechanisms.

@section[Performance and Limitations]
The form of the connection between the PC and the TelePAC is a synchronous line
running at speeds of up to 128 kb/s.

The converter is proposed to operate by handling only the call connect packets,
once the call is established call rerouting will take effect inside the switch 
and all data packets go through the switch, not the PC.  Thus it is claimed 
that the 'converter' will support the full switch throughput of 500 data 
packets/sec and 1000 simultaneous calls.  However, no statement is made as to 
the packet or call rate capability of the PC itself.

@section[Connection Timeout]
No statement has been made on the desirable feature of an inactivity timeout.

@section[X.29 and TS29 calls]
Recognition is made of some of the requirements of converting X.29 and TS29
calls though not in enough detail to establish whether the specification is
met.

No statement is made on the user interface requirements in the PC.

@section(Synchronous Interfaces)
As the proposed solution is part of a switch this section does not apply.

@section[Network Management - General]
No statements are made about network management strategies or protocols 
although SEEL have agreed to the conditions in the past when approval was first
granted for switches.  In general configuration is achieved by a simple X.29 
call and the indications are that this strategy would be followed for this
proposal.

@section[Network Configuration Changes]
No statement is made as to whether reloads will be necessary after
reconfiguration.

@section[Management Protocols]
See the section above.

@section(Delivery and Acceptance)
No timescales are given.

@section(Maintenance and Support)
It is claimed that the requirements for maintenance and support will be met 
without any specific details.

@section(Procedures and Special Conditions)
@enumerate{
Specification:  Inadequate H/W, S/W and CONS interface details given.

Price per Unit: Not stated

Total Purchase Price: #86,250

H/W Maintenance price: Not stated:

S/W support: Not stated

Formula: Not stated

Warranty Conditions: Not stated

Further Units: Price quoted of #6,325.  No bulk discounts stated.
}

@section(Conclusions)

@newpage


@majorheading(NETTEL)