> I have a few users using Reflection 1(most using MiniSoft) & not wanting to
> spend $ for NS/Open, I have connected them to the 3K via telnet (host - 5.5
> w/telnet patch).  My question is if anyone is truly using this type of
> connectivity.  I have found a few little quirks, especially with typeahead
> enabled on R1.  Now and then the session locks up & needs a disconnect.  No
> errors in the listener.  Is this method of connectivity not as solid as
> NS/VT?

During our recent fee payment/late registration peak demand, our DTC
TAC reached capacity (40 connections) and I altered the DNS to point
to our host 3000 instead.  It survived that day and into the next,
with a peak load just under 160 total users, ~40 of which were telnet
server sessions (5.5+Telnet server patch).  In contrast, NS/VT is
only used by our staff and some of the library (those which inherited
Reflection TCP+NS Open prior to the Win95 bundled TCP stack).

The only noticeable difference was the absence of the DTC TAC message
when establishing the connection prior to the system prompt.  Hard to
measure much system impact given the additional session load.

Jeff Kell <[log in to unmask]>