Communication Line issues - How to trace?

List,

Please consider the following 2 scenarios:

SCENARIO 1
a) AS/400 at site A with 1 RS232 port connected to a 9.6K modem
b) SDLC 9.6K link connects modem at site A with similar modem at site B
c) Modem at site B is connected to a PC gateway via an EICON card
d) PC gateway is also connected to a LAN at site B
e) Remote users at site B access AS/400 via PC/Support for DOS


SCENARIO 2
a) AS/400 at site A with 1 Ethernet card connected to a CISCO router
b) CISCO router connects to other CISCO router at site B, VIA 64K LINK
c) CISCO router at site B is also connected to a LAN at site B
e) Remote users at site B access AS/400 via Rally under TCP/IP 


Issue is that scenario 2 is having performance problems in a way that is
outperformed by scenario 1, that has a low-speed communication line. I'd
like to set-up something on remote side (site B) to measure the
degradation, that might be either a CISCO router or a link problem. Ideally
this would be done by 2 users requesting same resources for AS/400 at the
same time via different front-ends. (PC/Support x Rally). Different
behaviour would translate into different response times.

Any suggestion to have a automated process for both situations that could
be left running during business hours? Or any performance tools with the
required features to compare apples to apples? I'm pretty sure that the
workload required is an interactive one, which according to my impressions,
turns schedulling more difficult.

Thanks for your insights and hope to be clear enough!


Regards,


Enzo







* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* This is the Midrange System Mailing List!  To submit a new message,   *
* send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".  To unsubscribe from     *
* this list send email to MAJORDOMO@midrange.com and specify            *
* 'unsubscribe MIDRANGE-L' in the body of your message.  Questions      *
* should be directed to the list owner / operator: david@midrange.com   *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *