× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.


  1.  Home
  2. MIDRANGE-L
  3. February 2005

RE: SNA over IP (Anynet) Versus Native SNA

I did not see much of a difference when I switched to *Anynet from raw SNA.
Though I went from a 56K SDLC to two 128k FR circuits.  I find that SNADS
will use both routes while FTP will make use of only one.  Also both AS400's
at one location can connect directly to a third at a remote location instead
of passing through the direct connected one.  Really do not think that CPU
is hit but perhaps it will drive up the IOP CPU usage.

Chris Bipes

-----Original Message-----

I'm looking for information on SNA over IP versus native SNA in regards
to performance.  For example, it takes 1 hour to do a SAVRSTLIB while
hooked up using native SNA, how much longer would it take to do the same
SAVRSTLIB over anynet.   What kind of overhead are we looking at?  Any
information is appreciated.  Thank you.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...
Follow-Ups:
Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.