Re: AS/400 Connectivity from Remote Sites

Tim:

We use encrypted access solutions to connect to client systems ... Usually 
dictated by our clients existing provisioning .. Although we have set up 
Client Access with SSL support at a few client sites ... Although we don't 
have the wide experience of a firm that installs VPN products for a 
living, we also don't have much to sell, which may compensate ...

One thing I like about using CA/400 with SSL is that remote users 
typically ONLY get access to the iSeries box through this venue ... (There 
are ways, but not very obvious ones, to go around this limitation, and you 
can control them) ... In other words, they can't see your whole network 
... 

This can be a plus, or a minus, depending on your requirements ....

This choice has been dependable for us, and doesn't cost anything ... 

We also just deployed iSeries Access for the Web, a native solution that 
uses components from Host Publisher and runs on Websphere Application 
Server. This product delivers a green-screen analogue to a web browser. 
It's real handy for providing ad-hoc access to your system, since the 
remote user doesn't need to install anything at their end.

Installation was difficult and time-consuming, the presentation layer is 
only so-so, and WebSphere AS gobbles CPU. It is not something I would use 
for regular access.

On the VPN side, we are using Microsoft native VPN, in which a Win2K 
server performs the LAN gateway function, as well as CheckPoint Systems 
and Cisco VPN products.

CheckPoint has been the most difficult to live with, and one client who 
uses CheckPoint has said that they aren't very happy. I can't recall 
whether I have heard complaints from our clients who use Cisco, but 
rollout at our site hasn't been smooth with either of these products.

For our part, both CheckPoint and Cisco VPN client installation and/or 
operation have been implicated in  workstation stability issues ....In two 
cases forcing us to reload the OS and discontinue use of the product ... 
We finally had to provision Checkpoint at a workstation that nobody uses 
and which has almost nothing else on it, in order to continue serving our 
client site ... It is not a very convenient arrangement ...

We have had no problems with the MS VPN solution ... I cannot, however, 
comment on the strengths or weaknesses of this option from a site security 
point of view. Knowing Microsoft's reputation on such matters, this issue 
may deserve some investigation.

Finally, when running down VPN problems with a tech support representative 
at one of the above companies, the agent said something that rather 
surprised me: Quote ... "We're really taking a beating from NetScreen ... 
it's a much better product than ours."  Coming straight from the horse's 
mouth, as they say, I would be tempted to take a  look at NetScreen ...

Regrettably, I cannot use this as an opportunity to pitch for a VPN 
engagement ... Unless you think CA/400 and SSL sounds attractive .... 
Visit our website anyway, maybe there's something else I could sell you 
...

Good luck!

Regards,



John G. Dyer, CDP
Vice President
Information Management Consultants, Inc.
jdyer@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.imcedi.com
812.421.0045 ext. 203