Re: MPTN/Anynet... on V4R1

THANK you Lou,

This is GREAT information. I was on a conference call with our integrator and
Perle and they are UNBELIEVABLY knowledgeable and willing to share info, even if
it DOESN'T make them money.

Chuck

Lou Schmaus wrote:

> Chuck,
>
> We did something similar at on of our customers earlier this year, although
> we only had one remote location. Upgraded the 494E to a 594E(with ethernet
> AND twinax), added a Cisco 1601 on the /400 side, and put an ethernet card
> in the /400. Also, we kept the 56K leased line. The 594E has a way of
> fooling itself into thinking there is a frame connection. So we kept our
> CSU/DSU's, got the /400 talking to the network, and got to start taking the
> twinax cards out of the PC's, all for about $6000-$7000 total. Perle tech
> support was very helpful throughout the process.
>
> By the way, they noticed no degradation in response time, even though they
> added another half a dozen connections to the /400 through the new ethernet
> connection at the remote site.
> Lou Schmaus
> CCA, Inc.
> Jackson, NJ 08527
> lschmaus@link400.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Chuck Lewis <clewis@iquest.net>
> To: <MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 16, 1999 6:33 AM
> Subject: MPTN/Anynet... on V4R1
>
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > We are looking at dumping our 56k leased lines and going with frame
> > relay. We are located in one state and until VERY recently frame was not
> > a good deal. That changed...
> >
> > We have NO LANs (yes) and are using Perle 494E control units. MCI is who
> > we are working with and we will be using a Cisco 2610 here and the
> > 1750's at the remotes.
> >
> > The question comes in how to connect up the Perle control units.
> >
> > Turns out our choice are:
> >
> > (1) "turn MPTN/Anynet on on the 400" and stick ethernet cards in the
> > Perle units. This strips off SNA and routing bits and wraps it in IP.
> >
> > (2) Run DLSW (Data Link Switching) on the routers to enable routing SNA.
> >
> > The down side of this is that it COULD slow things down with the
> > overhead involved. We have sub second response time now but I CERTAINLY
> > do not want to do anything to jeopardize that.
> >
> > We were leaning towards #2 because it was going to be the most cost
> > effective at this time (knowing that it is preferable to do pure IP)...
> >
> > Also, won't either scenario require a NIC card in the AS/400 ?
> >
> > Any thoughts ?
> >
> > TIA
> >
> > Chuck
>
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
> +---

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---