RE: Job separators with Remote Outq

["Leland, David" <dleland@xxxxxxxxxx>]

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
The following page from IBM's website explains the why -
http://www-912.ibm.com/s_dir/slkbase.NSF/0888cc5d18fceca58625680b005dc690/b4
4a2cf4ba778d83862568250053649f?OpenDocument

Some printers only support the RMTOUTQ method.

Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Lovelady [mailto:dlovelady@dtcc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 12:15 PM
To: midrange-l@midrange.com
Subject: RE: Job separators with Remote Outq



You have some valid points, Joe.

There are a lot of limitations to the RMTOUTQ approach.  For example, SAVE
(*YES), PAGERANGE(a b) (to name two functions) are not possible.  Still, I
was thinking there was a way to do this SEPPAGE with remote output queues,
but now I don't see it; can't remember it.

It's been a long time since I was involved in selection of an approach for
such issues, so perhaps I just don't remember the reasons for choosing the
RMTOUTQ alternative.

Certainly it seems simpler to just create an output queue and not have to
worry about varying devices and all that yuckity yuck.  But the tradeoffs
may make the simpler approach not acceptable.

David, can you remind me why the option of creating an IP DEVICE instead of
an IP OUTQ will not work for you?

Thanks,
Dennis






"Joe Pluta" <joepluta@PlutaBrothers.com>@midrange.com on 12/03/2002
12:22:43 PM

Please respond to midrange-l@midrange.com

Sent by:    midrange-l-admin@midrange.com


To:    <midrange-l@midrange.com>
cc:
Subject:    RE: Job separators with Remote Outq


> From: Leland, David
>
> The remote outq can be used on the same machine and that's how
> I'm doing it.
> There is no printer associated with it.  You simply assign an IP
> address to
> it and change a few other parameters.

Ugh.

As you can tell, I don't use IP-based printers.  Still, the remote outq
approach seems like an inadequate way to do things.  Wouldn't it make more
sense to create a device description that automatically sends data to an IP
address?  Please, if this is a stupid question, bear with me - I'm
absolutley useless on these things.  But it would seem to me that the
correct implementation of this setup would be to have a normal output queue
and change the device description to dump data to a TCP/IP port.  Then you
could do all kinds of cool things with the device description to define the
printer (including defining a SEPPGM).

The remote outq directly to a TCP/IP address seems like a "quick and dirty"
solution that only handles a very limited set of circumstances.  Or am I
completely nuts here?




_______________________________________________
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.