From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <44B26F00.8040707@lanl.gov>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 09:15:12 -0600
From: Ronald G Minnich <rminnich@lanl.gov>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.8-1.1.fc4 (X11/20060501)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Planning a two-machine heterogeneous LAN
References: <3803a2bc5699df802e8c1b21315d86cc@quanstro.net>	<56363d1331a640d0e6455424d51a6e6a@mail.gmx.net>
	<283f5df10607100214k2ffd551dob45d15a008341f@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <283f5df10607100214k2ffd551dob45d15a008341f@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7c2c302a-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

LiteStar numnums wrote:
> I'm not so sure about that, since the KVMs I have here are 'powerless',
> yet work fine with
> everything I've thrown at them (including FreeVMS & colorFORTH). Plan9
> is equally
> congenial with the switches I have here, but obviously your mileage will
> vary.

dumb kvm's are the best. The smarter they get, the higher the chance
they'll screw up. that's been our experience here anyway.

ron