Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 27 Apr 2000 16:37:34 -0400 |
Content-Type: | multipart/mixed |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
We use both a terminal server and a DTC in our remote offices.
The terminal servers allow us to connect to multiple systems.
The DTC's are set to direct connect to a system.
You can set the port on the DTC to be SWITCHED to connect to a system
other than the system that it downloads its configuration from.
Rick Clark
Senior Systems Analyst
WW&R
Cleveland, Ohio
-----Original Message-----
From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
Behalf Of Doug Werth
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2000 12:26 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Encapsulating DTC traffic in an IP packet
Wirt writes:
>
> If you want an unabashedly honest opinion, mine would be that you simply
> abandon AFCP (and implicitly therefore terminals) as soon as possible
and
> move over to a simple TCP/IP, PC- and JetDirect printer-based network.
> Routable AFCP simply isn't worth the time or trouble that you'll put
into it,
> especially compared to what you could have had in a TCP/IP network by
> comparison.
Furthermore, if you absolutely, positively must have dumb terminals you
could replace the DTCs with telnet terminal servers at the remote end.
Doug.
Doug Werth Beechglen Development Inc.
[log in to unmask] Cincinnati, Ohio
|
|
|