RE: SNA over TCP/IP

[Chris Bipes <chris.bipes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Once I had to send a 2GB save file across a WAN.  This was a 128k private
Frame Relay connection.  We also have a 56K PTP Leased line from V.35 to
V.35 on the two AS400's.  Because of the FR being 2+ times faster and FTP
has less overhead than SNADS, I thought that I would FTP the file.  After
two attempts failed 2hrs into transmission, with no recovery possible,  I
decided to SNADS the file.  Took 4 hours and completed with out a hitch.  I
now am running *anynet over the FR and SNADS works great.  FTP still fails
about half way thru.  Seems our carrier has issues with us pushing data past
our purchased rate which our routers will use all available band with on the
FR circuit.  Yes the SNADS get interrupted during the transfer but does not
drop, it RECOVERS and CONTINUES.  FTP drops the connection and it is back to
square one.

Chris Bipes

-----Original Message-----
From: PaulMmn

Although I prefer SNADS to DDM by a wide margin, remember that a 
well-written pair of send/receive programs can give better throughput 
than SNADS.  SNADS has a lot of error-correction and recovery built 
in: "Neither rain nor snow..."  your file -will- get to the other 
end!  But all that protection does come at a price.

Years ago we built ourselves a pair of programs that send a save file 
from machine to machine.  They're simple send/receive programs, but 
have next to no recovery.  Our machines are in the same room, so 
transmission problems are very few.  I suspect that running SNA via 
TCP/IP (with its built in error recovery) would give fairly good 
protection, but you'd have to start any retransmissions by yourself.