How to Maximize Your Network Performance While Leveraging your Investment in Twinax Displays and Printers
Contents
¨ Overview
¨ How a Pure TCP/IP Controller Benefits Your Organization
¨ Potentially Eliminate the Need for Active Star Hubs
Overview
For many years now, IBM System/36 and AS/400 users have invested in Twinax infrastructure. This cabling system provided a simple and efficient method of connecting PCs and terminals to the midrange host computer, although access was restricted to interaction with the host computer only, via the Twinax line.
All that changed when IBM released OS/400 V3R7, which supported the Telnet protocol (TN5250e), allowing terminal and printer emulation over TCP/IP. This opened up new possibilities because it enabled Twinax devices to be connected to AS/400s via TCP/IP.
Nowadays, the trend in networking is toward establishing Intranets and Extranets using the TCP/IP protocol. The goal is to move seamlessly forward to a single network protocol, without sacrificing any of the benefits of the current infrastructure. As a result, when designing these systems, organizations may choose to retain all or part of their investment in Twinax. Read on to find out how to leverage your existing Twinax infrastructure while increasing network performance and lowering communication costs.
How a Pure TCP/IP Controller Benefits Your Organization
The e-Twin@x Controller will complement the way your organization does business, and allow you to leverage your existing infrastructure while increasing efficiency and lowering communication costs.
The e-Twin@x Controller is a complete hardware and software solution that provides a secure, encrypted connection to the AS/400 over the Internet or WAN, and empowers your local or remote Twinax network to support TCP/IP. It is the only SNA-free, pure TCP/IP controller in existence! Consider these benefits of the e-Twin@x Controller:
¨ Ensures high availability for Twinax users, thanks to robust backup capabilities
¨ Installs in less than 10 minutes, with no AS/400 configuration required!
¨ Can be configured using a dumb terminal, or PC with browser
¨ Supports any Twinax terminal or printer (SCS or IPDS)
¨ Enables remote management of your Twinax devices from anywhere on your LAN, WAN or VPN
¨ Supports a secure connection via the Internet, enabling you to eliminate leased line charges
¨ Scalable, with local and remote models ranging from single-device Twinax support to 112-devices
The e-Twin@x Controller, with Twinax brick attached
Hidden Costs of Abandoning Twinax
Are you thinking about replacing your Twinax devices with thin clients or PCs with Ethernet terminal emulation? If so, you’re probably doing so to:
¨ update the look and feel of tried-and-true applications
¨ give users access to email and the Internet
¨ replace a costly SNA network with a Frame Relay based network to link remote offices to your AS/400 or iSeries
¨ adopt the TCP/IP network protocol to accommodate non-Twinax groups within the corporation
You’re probably balancing those reasons with the many good reasons to stay Twinax:
¨ your considerable investment in Twinax devices
¨ user and IT familiarity with Twinax
¨ cost of purchasing new devices
¨ safeguarding your secure Twinax environment
¨ retaining user productivity (PC glitches, personal email, web surfing, etc.)
¨ minimizing the strain on limited IT resources
Before you abandon your trusty Twinax environment, consider the following “hidden” costs of such a move:
|
Issue |
|
|
|
|
|
1.
Purchase new terminals (USD$550 each) |
L |
|
L |
L |
|
2.
Re–record Terminal Macros (10mins–30mins) |
|
L |
L |
L |
|
3.
DHCP server requirement |
|
|
L |
L |
|
4.
IP planning |
|
|
L |
L |
|
5.
Citrix? |
L |
|
L |
L |
|
6.
Fat Servers? |
L |
|
L |
L |
|
7.
Boot-up time (Windows takes minutes) |
|
L |
|
|
|
8.
Software license and maintenance costs |
L |
|
L |
|
|
9.
Re-cable? |
L |
|
L |
|
|
10.
Disposal of existing equipment |
L |
|
|
L |
|
11.
Unpacking of new equipment |
|
|
|
L |
|
12.
Program changes for new infrastructure (e.g., Ethernet terminal
printer emulation does not support out queue naming; writers always
autostart) |
|
|
L |
L |
|
13.
Changing from ‘Keyboard only’ to mouse and smaller keyboard |
|
L |
|
L |
|
14.
Learning curve for employees |
|
L |
L |
L |
|
15.
New keyboard objections (any change is cause for complaint) |
|
L |
|
|
|
16.
Downtime |
|
L |
L |
|
|
17.
Network planning |
L |
|
|
L |
|
18.
Increased complexity of existing PC Network |
|
|
L |
L |
|
19.
Potential IP addressing mistakes |
|
L |
|
L |
|
20.
New skills required |
|
L |
|
L |
|
21.
Cost of ownership |
L |
|
L |
L |
|
22.
Virus protection? |
L |
|
|
L |
|
23.
Loss of productivity due to increase in new features to play with |
|
L |
|
|
|
24.
Reliability of Windows-based servers for DHCP etc. |
|
L |
|
L |
|
25.
On going management |
|
|
|
L |
|
26.
Increased bandwidth requirements? |
L |
|
|
L |
|
27.
Loss of central control |
|
|
|
L |
|
28.
Terminal life cycle costs (nobody knows how long a Thin Client will
stay current, Dumb Terminals have not changed substantially for over 10
years) |
L |
|
|
|
|
29.
Software changes brought on by IBM, how will you keep up to date? |
L |
|
|
L |
|
30.
Cable distances? |
L |
|
L |
|
|
31.
Noise issues |
|
L |
|
|
|
32.
Dot matrix to Laser printer |
L |
|
L |
|
|
33.
Bar code reading |
L |
L |
L |
|
|
34.
Download times for Browser based devices |
|
L |
|
|
|
35.
Screen size, Windows based emulators have less viewing area due to menu
bars and status bars. |
|
L |
|
|
|
36.
Cut and paste (will it work the same?) |
|
L |
|
|
|
37.
Split screen (will it be the same?) |
|
L |
|
|
|
38.
Different font (is it what you like? |
|
L |
|
|
|
39.
Hot keys (are they the same i.e. Alt PgUp switch session, etc.?) |
|
L |
|
|
|
40.
More configuration options, more chance for problems (Color mapping,
background changes etc.) |
|
L |
L |
|
|
41.
Dial back up issues for new network |
|
L |
L |
L |
|
42.
Disaster recovery (will it work with the new device?) |
|
L |
L |
|
|
43.
Traffic flow issues for new network infrastructure |
|
L |
L |
|
|
44.
New tools required for problem determination |
