We have had numerous problems with TCP start over the years (especially when
there is an abnormal system end, or some user doesn't sign off before the
interactive subsystem is ended, et cetera.

As such, we have our own application that terminates each TCP service in
order, and then starts each service, checking the result of each command and
retrying when necessary.

On systems where signon choices are 1) use TELNET; or 2) drive 150 miles to
signon to the console and then start TCP, we don't rely on the simplistic
IBM-supplied approach. Weekend upgrades, off-hours work, people not showing
up at the hosting site... all of these things have confirmed the need for a
solid approach. Shame on IBM for supplying such a simplistic approach on
such a wonderful platform! If AIX (or any of the other *IX systems) were so
lax about TCP startup, their systems would never have gotten off the ground!

Dennis Lovelady
"The direct use of force is such a poor solution to any problem, it is
generally employed only by small children and large nations."
-- David Friedman

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 midrange.com 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].