.....  which may seem like a wasteful restating of the obvious....

BUT:  We have been running the "standard" HP JINETD.NET.SYS
job to provide TELNET access to our 959KS/200 ever since host-
based TELNET became available.  Seems to work pretty well.

BUT:  Until I just happened to pick the "d" queue indication out of
an MPEX LISTJOB display, somehow we never noticed that the
as-provided HP JINETD job does not have a "; PRI=CS" attached
to the first line....  so of course our system does just what it is told:
Runs JINETD in the job default "D" queue..  and with users coming
in via host-based TELNET, running JINETD in the "D" queue didn't
seem like a good idea (TELNET is the only thing we significantly
dependent on under JINETD right now, AFAIK (but I guess FTP is
moving under INETD in 6.0...) ).

NOW:  It's true that once TELNET user sessions get logged on,
their session shows up in the "C" queue just like NS/VT users do,
even if JINETD is running in the "D" queue...

BUT:  I noticed that every time someone logs on via host-based
TELNET, the JINETD spoolfile gets another line in it that says:
"Received call for: telnet tcp".  So the job does something for
every TELNET logon, and writes to the spoolfile.

SO:  Seems to me that on a heavily loaded system, at least in
theory TELNET sessions might get "stacked up" waiting for
service from a JINETD running in the "D" queue if there was
heavy "C" demand.

SO:   I switched our JINETD job to the "C" queue (in which we
already have a number of in-house background jobs running
during normal production).


QUESTION # 1:   Anybody know how much of a difference the
above might make ??  Just a little ??  Some ??  A lot ??

QUESTION # 2:   If answer to Q # 1 above is "Some" or "A lot",
should we be asking HP to change the as-provided JINETD job
to include the ": PRI=CS" as the default ??...   If they don't and
many sites should have JINETD running in the "C" queue, we will
of course be faced with the usual problem of having to try and
remember to go back after every system update and change the
HP - supplied version of JINETD to bump up the priority...

BUT:  I can happily live without knowing the answer to the above
questions until next year:  This swing-shifter is OUT OF HERE
FOR THE YEAR.   Fini, 1998...

And Happy New Year to one and all....

Ken Sletten