Now I see where you're going/went, Lukas. I would agree with you about the remote connections - except the powers that be here have decreed it as verboten. I still don't think that a PC next to (or anywhere near) the system is necessary. Like I said, we have redundancy with two PC's configured for the LAN Console, and I'm seriously thinking of adding a third one on the other side of the building.

Jerry C. Adams
IBM System i Programmer/Analyst
B&W Wholesale
office: 615-995-7024
email: jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lukas Beeler
Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 3:09 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: Hooking up and starting a 520

On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 22:02, Lukas Beeler
<lukas.beeler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 21:55, Jerry Adams <Jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I don't understand what you mean by "avoids a lot of hassles," Lukas. ÂI'm not trying to pick nits here, but I've worked with an Ops Console, too, and it was a hassle having to get my butt out the chair and go to the system.

RDP, VNC, Netviewer, Teamviewer, GoToMyPC

There are _tons_ of ways you can solve that.

As an addition, especially if you're working on the console remotely,
using a direct connection from your PC may cause issues if the VPN
connection breaks. In that case, it's much easier to use a remote
connection to the PC hosting the console, which will always have a
reliable link to your IBM i.

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2020 by and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].