RE: DRDA Connection Support (was news400 goes negative on IBM?)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Vernon Hamberg
> Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 10:45 PM
> To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
> Subject: Re: DRDA Connection Support (was news400 goes 
> negative on IBM?)
> 
> 
> There is something in, say, SQL Server that responds to 
> requests from ODBC. 
> This is probably some kind of host server thingy, just like 
> the database 
> host server stuff on the 400. I don't think any database has to have 
> something that understands DRDA, the ARD on the 400 needs to 
> understand how 
> to talk with sockets to whatever is listening in SQL Server 
> or MySQL or 
> whatever. Just as an ODBC driver translates the statements in 
> your VB or 
> C++ app to the syntax required for the remote database, so 
> would a DRDA 
> ARD. Then a socket connection is used in both cases to talk 
> probably to the 
> same component of the remote database.
> 
> At least that's what I think is going on - it certainly is in 
> the case of 
> ODBC. And the remote database is not running anything related 
> to ODBC, it 
> is running its own thing. But I can certainly be far off in 
> this matter.

The problem is that the protocol used to talk to SQL Server, Oracle ect. by the 
ODBC driver is not a published standard.

Sure there is at least one open source project that is reverse engineering the 
MS protocol, but that certainly doesn't make it open.

So it is difficult if not impossible for IBM to properly support a ARD that 
talks directly to SQL server or Oracle.

On the other hand, since IBM follows a published standard, it is easy for 
Microsoft and Oracle to talk directly to DB2.

mySQL would be a different matter.  I'd imagine that IBM could support that if 
there was enough demand.

Charles Wilt
iSeries Systems Administrator / Developer
Mitsubishi Electric Automotive America
ph: 513-573-4343
fax: 513-398-1121