RE: VAX FTP to AS/400 (via NT) with packed fields

To my knowledge, you'll need to unpack the fields on the originating machine
before doing the file transfer(s)

Dan Thomas
Sr. VP Information Systems
Medical Distribution, Inc.
4500 Progress Blvd
Louisville, KY  40218-5058
Phone (502) 454-9013 ext 120
email  DThomas@lpw-mdi.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Clarke           3rd x4502 [mailto:clarke@teri.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 1999 12:00 PM
> To:   'midrange-l'
> Subject:      VAX FTP to AS/400 (via NT) with packed fields
> 
> I have a bit of a dilemma on my hands and am turning to 'the list' for
> help, as I so often do when I'm in a jam (and almost always results in the
> answer I was looking for!).  
> 
> We have a servicer who presently provides us with a data file on tape
> which we have no problem processing directly on our AS/400.  The tape is
> created by a program running on a VAX machine, sent to us, copied from
> tape to file (cpyfrmtap), and processed via our Cobol/400 program.  One
> note ... this file contains packed fields.
> 
> In our effort to get away from tapes and human intervention, we have
> turned to FTP (naturally).  However we are having a bear of a time getting
> a file on the 400 that we can actually read!  The process goes like this
> ... servicer creates file on VAX, copies file via FTP to <their> NT based
> FTP server, then copy file via FTP to <our> NT based FTP server, from
> which we copy the file up to the 400 (no FTP on our 400 at this time -
> maybe someday).  We are basically trying 2 methods on our end to get the
> file up to the 400.  The first being to just copy the file to a folder and
> using CPYFRMPCD to copy to file.  The second method is to use NetSoft's
> File Transfer utility to copy directly from PC to AS/400 file.  In either
> case, we can get to a point where we either have good alphanumeric data
> and garbage packed fields, or vice versa.  We have tried literally every
> conversion combination available with each method.  The provider of this
> file swears it is exactly the same as what we receive today on tape.  We
> have also had them try FTP with both ASCII and binary options.
> 
> My question is this ... Does anyone know if this is even a workable
> solution?  Is there something about packed fields that FTP cannot deal
> with?  Am I missing something obvious (I don't mind looking like an idiot
> if it means getting this resolved :-))?  I realize that one obvious
> solution would be to do away with the packed fields, however this is
> something of a 'legacy' application which works well with other servicers
> (whom use direct system to system transfers via SNA and BSC protocols via
> existing dedicated and dial-up lines).  So we don't want to put ourselves
> in a situation where we're maintaining multiple incoming file formats.
> 
> As always, any insight would be greatly appreciated!  Thanks in advance!
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Bob Clarke
>  
+---
| 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
+---