RE: CA remote command server port

I'd almost bet that the remote command is for licensing (or something), not
authentication. I use PCOMM at home, and it doesn't use remote command -
it's a general-purpose product and does not require host servers, e.g. But
it's still TN5250. The other emulators are the same AFAIK.

Cheers

Vern

At 12:50 PM 11/22/02 -0800, you wrote:

>I've asked, "How do I prevent PC5250 from using remote command
>server?" and "Under what circumstances does a PC5250 session connect
>without making a remote command server request?"  I've requested that
they >explain the difference between the sessions and explain the
circumstances >that would require a remote command server call.

Good luck!   I'm not sure there is anyone at IBM who can, (or wants to)
tell you.  This is really a cluster.

I don't have a problem with the fact that a user has to be
authenticated, my beef is with the idea that in order to use Client
Access a user has to be authorized to execute remote commands.  If all
of the OS commands were locked down from *PUBLIC, this might not be
important, but because *PUBLIC can use a couple thousand commands,
having Client Access and OpsNav use remote commands is a big mess.

If only someone could send you the details on what causes their remote
command to get fired off.

<sigh>

jte