Re: R: Changing protocols

[Pete Massiello <pmassiello@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with Robs assessment, and would like to add that you can also run SNA 
over IP (Its a Dog) after you
convert to IP.  This gives you the ability to still have SNADS functionality, 
as well as continue to use the
commands SAVRSTOBJ, etc, without having any SNADS traffic.


    Pete Massiello

rob@dekko.com wrote:

> Client Access over TCP/IP still supports selection of fields and records.
> Straight FTP does not.
>
> What you may have to change is if you are using the following commands:
> SAVRST, SAVRSTOBJ, SAVRSTLIB... to distribute objects from one 400 to
> another you'll have to come up with a FTP equivalent.  They're out there,
> just not IBM supplied.
>
> You'll change from using STRPASTHR to TELNET.
>
> You'll change from getting "route to specified location not found x'0009'"
> to a more robust solution.  Instances in which the comm drops for a brief
> interval and the user might not ever know it.
>
> You'll change from maxing out the number of SNA PC controllers you can have
> configured on your lan (somewhere around 254), to the sky being the limit.
>
> You'll change from being tied in to only Client Access and Client Access
> lookalikes to perform data or terminal access to, not only having Client
> Access still available, but also having a host of other opportunities, like
> the free ftp provided with MS.
>
> You'll change from having to do things which make your router people puke
> (supporting SNA over the router) to straight TCP/IP.
>
> Live free or die!
>
> The question also comes up.  Is SNA dead?  Is IBM enhancing only TCP/IP?
> While I prefer TCP/IP, it doesn't seem that IBM abandoned SNA.  After all,
> the commands SAVRST* for SNA are relatively new yet IBM hasn't supplied a
> TCP/IP equivalent.
>
> Your question is independent of the hardware:  Token Ring versus Ethernet.
> I've always been a big fan of Token Ring but it's getting harder and harder
> to find the latest switches and whatnot that will support Token Ring.  And
> if you do 'settle' on a model because it still supports Token Ring you
> might lose other functions.  Also the cost of token ring equipment versus
> Ethernet is quite a disparity.  But again, the hardware is independent of
> ip versus sna.
>
> Rob Berendt
>
> ==================
> Remember the Cole!
>
>
>                     Finucci Domenico
>                     <Domenico.Finucci@Fid        To:     
>"'MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com'" <MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com>
>                     italia.it>                   cc:
>                     Sent by:                     Subject:     R: Changing 
>protocols
>                     owner-midrange-l@midr
>                     ange.com
>
>
>                     02/14/01 03:07 AM
>                     Please respond to
>                     MIDRANGE-L
>
>
>
> Yes, you will loose at least the chance of choosing  fields, records while
> downloading/uploading  files .
> Sincerely
>
> Domenico Finucci
> Fiditalia , Milano, 02- 4301-2494
> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: Frank Reiss  [mailto:freiss47@yahoo.com]
> Inviato: martedì 13 febbraio 2001  22.42
> A: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> Oggetto: Changing  protocols
>
> Question, We are in the process of moving from an SNA environment to an
> IP. Do we lose anything is doing this, in terms of the AS/400?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Frank
>
> Do You Yahoo!?
> - Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - only
> $35 a year!
>
>

--
Pete Massiello
OS Solutions International
Phone: (203)-744-7854  Ext 11.
http://www.os-solutions.com
mailto:pmassiello@os-solutions.com


+---
| 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
+---