Re: Telnet sessions with a CISC and RISC AS/400 on the same LAN.

Jim:

I am running V3R2 client access with SF64050.   I have still not
switched all pcs to connect to the new 720 (which is running V4R5).
The thing is the CISC and 720 have separate ip addresses but if both are
connected to the lan, the sessions connecting to either system will get
disconnected randomly when a pc connects to both of them.  But, even if
a pc connects to only the CISC machine, the sessions will drop randomly
when both CISC and 720 are connected to the LAN.  Ditto if only
connecting to the 720. If I yank out the ethernet cable, things become
stable on the machine which is still connected to the LAN and the
sessions dont drop at all.  IBM KB is mum about two systems with telnet.
 I have fooled around with CHGTELNA with no success.  I have even
stopped host servers to see if that had anything to do with this with no
change whatsoever.

>
>
>What version Client Access is the V3R2, and are the pcs connecting to both
>machines? What version is the 720? IBM changed how CA worked with the
>telnet "keep alive" timers worked between releases. Sounds like the v3r2
>session
>are timing out, and the clients and/or the servers are handling recovery
>different.
>IBM Knowlege Base has several docs on telnet keep alive parameters covering
>various releases.
>hth and let us have more detail
>jim franz
>
>
>>Folks:
>>
>>I have two AS/400 a CISC and 720 side by side with different ip
>>addresses and different DSPNETA names.  Both connect fine.  Randomly
>>sessions of different pcs to the CISC machine is lost.  But they still
>>show active on the system.  We need to end these *IMMED.  It will happen
>>again after a few minutes.  When I disconnect the 720 from the LAN
>>everything goes back to normal.  There are no messages,  joblogs (other
>>than the ones generated by *IMMED).  This happens on the 720 5250
>>sessions also.  But unlike the V3R2 machine, this automatically brings
>>up another session.  I disconnected the V3R2 CISC machine from the LAN
>>and the 720 5250 sessions are stable without dropping connection.  It
>>seems there is a conflict between these two.  I have assigned two
>>different ip numbers from the same block in the same subnet.  (x.y.z.2
>>for one and x.y.z.15 for the other with subnet 255.255.255.224).   They
>>are connected to the same switch/hub.  I just need the old one for a
>>couple of weeks, so I can live with this. Annoying though.  This has the
>>BP stumped.  There is nothing in the IBM KB on this.
>>

--
Date: Tue, 7(VII)/2(II)/2002(MMII)

*******************************************
Thank You and Regards
Dave Mahadevan.. mailto:mahadevan@fuse.net
*******************************************
Oxymoron: Team of Independents.
*******************************************