RE: Hmmmm.....$1 Billion

> 
> It is not that simple Charles.  Once the user signs on to the
> interactive subsystem there are all of these restrictions, ( multi
> threading, 5250 limitations )  which make it almost theoretically
> impossible to give the user the interactive usage of the system that
> they want.
> 
> Which means you have to scrap interactive entirely and start from
> where? I understand the whole Java / client access thing but that all
> entails a large framework that I have to buy into.    I want to code
> .NET front ends to the as400.  It is all doable and a lot of fun to
> work on, but there is a lot of infrastructure that the programmer is
> responsible for in that setting. There is also a real question of how
> secure are your connections between the client and server.   When your
> server program on the as400 listens on a private port on the 400 for a
> private data stream from the PC client, how sure are you that that
> link is secure?
> 
> The interactive subsystem provides a secure framework from which
> programs can run.  IBM should enhance the interactive subsystem so it
> works in the client / server setting.
> 
> -Steve

What??

This makes absolutely no sense.

There's no special about the "interactive" subsystem, QINTER.  Subsystem simply 
provide a way to segregate workload.  You can run batch jobs in QINTER and you 
can run 5250 jobs in QBATCH.

Interactive on the 400 simply means the job uses 5250.

If 5250 is to restrictive, then move on to thick or thin client.  Would your 
users really prefer the type of functionality you are asking for in a 
green-screen application vs. a GUI?

There's nothing inherently secure about interactive 5250.  In fact, I'd argue 
the opposite.  You can't secure 5250 unless you are using 5250 emulation and 
SSL.  How is that any different than SSL between your custom server and client?


IBM is doing its best to kill off 5250, they are not going to make the 
enhancements you are asking for.


Charles