![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Perle
Controller 594e, Perle 594T, and Perle 594M vs. the e-Twin@x Controller |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perle offers three controllers that compete with the e-Twin@x Controller: the 594e; 594T; and 594M. The difference between these Perle controllers is essentially the number of devices supported. The 594M supports up to eight Twinax devices only (maximum configuration), while the 594e starts at 28 Twinax devices and goes up to 168. The Perle 594T also requires optional IP routing software to enable TCP/IP over Twinax, and to eliminate an external IP Router. Perle offers an integrated IP router with these controllers, and this is both good and bad. On one hand it eliminates the need for an extra box, however the performance is limited to 128K. Perle is not known for its expertise in routing and it has a proprietary DOS configuration program that many think is not particularly user-friendly. All devices appear on the AS/400 via Anynet, which is known to be an unstable and slow protocol that requires additional configuration on the AS/400. BOScom's e-Twin@x Controller is the only device which offers 100% IP without SNA. This is the reason for its speed, stability and ease-of-use. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2 SNA encapsulation is the only other way of connecting Twinax
devices to the AS/400. With this method, all Twinax traffic is converted
to SNA, and then encapsulated into TCP/IP. The TCP/IP packets are
sent to the network connection on the AS/400. The AS/400 then extracts
the SNA from the TCP/IP and then decodes the SNA to find out which
transaction is needed. SNA includes a great deal of control logic
as part of the protocol that is not required when using TN5250.
This means that the TCP/IP messages are larger, and extra processing
is required both on the controller and in the AS/400. SNA is also
timing critical, therefore if the remote site is connected over
a long distance, where timing is longer, devices (IP Sessions) tend
to drop off line. Due to the extra overhead of using SNA, AnyNet
is much slower than TN5250. 3 Whilst Perle claims that they support DHCP, the way in which
AnyNet works makes this unusable. DHCP allocates an IP address to
any new device on the network. If the IP address changes, (Which
with DHCP it can) the Host Table entry needs to be modified before
any devices can be reconnected. 4 These days new remote sites are connected
with TCP/IP routers, enabling PCs at the remote site to share information
on a LAN, as well as connect to the AS/400 using TCP/IP emulation.
It is very rare to see a new site use only Twinax, i.e. most environments
require at least LAN access. Twinax is usually used when legacy
applications are used and non-programmable terminals are needed
to keep the cost of ownership down. The main market is replacing
old SNA controllers with IP- based ones to increase efficiency and
simplify the TCP/IP connection. 5 This is an optional extra. The BOScom
controller already includes the hardware in the unit, however it
is software disabled. Perle’s controller requires that an
additional ISA card be fitted.
|