QUESTION:
I have a customer who is currently using a model 340 with the 64 Port
Board and 16 Port Concentrators with RJ45 twisted pair connections to
all of their 3151-310 ASCII terminals. My customer is going to get a
model 390 to replace the 340 and is interested in both the 128 Port
Board or the Network Terminal Accelerator with an appropriately configed
number of 7318s. My questions are as follows:
1. Can the customer using his existing wiring and RJ45 pin arrangements
to support connecting his 3151s to the newer 128 Port/16 Controller
devices?
2. My understanding of the Network Terminal Accelerator Board and 7318s
is that allow a large number of devices to be asynch connected to
a single RISC System/6000 by offloading the rlogin and telnet process
from the CPU. If the devices being connected are purely non-dial in
3151s, does the customer still receive benefits by using this hw/sw
over the traditional still 128 Port board offering? What are they?
Thanks for your help.
---------- ---------- ---------- --------- ---------- ----------
A: I will answer your questions in the order they were asked.
1. The connection between the 128-Port/RAN to a terminal is
different than that used by the 64-Port/16-Port Concentrator.
For you information, I will include the pinouts that are used
by each adapter.
64-Port Adapter (16-Port Concentrator to Terminal)--Cable XX
------------------------------------------------------------
+----------------------+------------+-------------+
| System End Connector | Signal | Device End |
| | | Connector |
+----------------------+ +-------------+
| Pin | | Pin (Male) |
+----------------------+------------+-------------+
| 1 | Shield | float |
| | Ground | |
| 2 | RTS | 5 |
| 3 | RxD | 2 |
| 4 | CD | 20 |
| 5 | Signal | 7 |
| | Ground | |
| 6 | TxD | 3 |
| 7 | DTR | 6,8 |
| 8 | CTS | 4 |
+----------------------+------------+-------------+
128-Port Adapter (16-Port RAN to Modem)--Cable NM
----------------------------------------------------
+--------------------------------+------------+-------------+
| System End Connector | Signal | Device End |
| | | Connector |
+--------------------------------+ +-------------+
| Pin (Male) | | Pin (Male) |
+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |
| 4-Pin | 6-Pin | 8-Pin | 10-Pin | | |
| RJ11 | RJ11 | RJ45 | RJ45 | | |
+-------+-------+-------+--------+------------+-------------+
| 1 | RI | 22 |
| *1->8 2 | DSR* | 6 |
| 1 2 3 | RTS | 4 |
| 1 2 3 4 | Chassis | Shell,1 |
| | Ground | |
| 2 3 4 5 | TxD | 2 |
| 3 4 5 6 | RxD | 3 |
| 4 5 6 7 | Signal | 7 |
| | Ground | |
| 6 7 8 | CTS | 5 |
| 8 9 | DTR | 20 |
| 10 | CD* | 8 |
+--------------------------------+------------+-------------+
Key: * If you are using 8-wire RJ45 cabl, this pin goes to pin
8 (CD); it does NOT go to pin 6. In this case just let
pin 6 of the DB-25 Connector float.
As an alternative to ordering new cables (or completely rewiring
your old cables), you can order or make your own converter cable.
IBM sells these 64-Port Concentrator to 128-Port RAN EIA-232
Convertor Cables in packages of four as FC 8135. The pinouts
for this cable is as follows:
64-Port Concentrator to 128-Port RAN EIA-232 Convertor Cable
------------------------------------------------------------
+----------------------+------------+-------------+
| 8 Wire RJ-45 Plug | Signal | 8-Wire RJ-45|
| | | Socket |
+----------------------+ +-------------+
| Pin | | Pin |
+----------------------+------------+-------------+
| 1 | DCD | 4 |
| 2 | RTS | 2 |
| 3 | Chassis | 1 |
| | Ground | |
| 4 | TxD | 6 |
| 5 | RxD | 3 |
| 6 | Signal | 5 |
| | Ground | |
| 7 | CTS | 8 |
| 8 | DTR | 7 |
+----------------------+------------+-------------+
For more information on this cable, you may wish to refer to
ASKQ Document G010518.
2. The 7318 Network Terminal Server is a multiprotocol
communications server that allows you to connect serial and
parallel ports onto the ethernet. There are two different models
of the Network Terminal Server. Both of the models are
physically similar, have the same connections, and must download
their install images from a host on the LAN; however they also
have the following differences:
7318-P10
========
Once the P10 has downloaded its code from its load host, it
acts very similar to the 16-Port RAN. Any device attached to
the P10 will appear as if it is directly attached to the host.
The P10 uses IPX/SPX to communicate with the RISC System/6000.
7318-S20
========
Once the S20 has downloaded its code, it is essentially
independent of a specific host. With the S20, the terminal
is assigned to the S20 and then telnets to the system of its
choice. The S20 uses TCP/IP telnet/rlogin to communicate with
the RISC System/6000.
The advantage of using the 7318 over the 128-Port adapter is that
the 7318 does not require a Micro Channel slot, and it allows
connections on the ethernet.
The 7318 does NOT require the Network Terminal Accelerator Board.
This accelerator card only helps offload the overhead associated
with TCP/IP, telnet, and rlogin protocols. In fact, this card
will not provide any benefit with the P10 (since the P10 uses
IPX/SPX). However, if you are using the S20, this card will
help offload the communication overhead between the RISC
System/6000 and the S20. (Note: This is independent of whether
or not you are using a non-dial in 3151.)
Thank you.
---------- ---------- ---------- --------- ---------- ----------
QUESTION:
Thank you for your help. I have one additional question. You indicated
that I could simply replace the 64 Port Board and associated 16 Port
concentrators with the 128 Port Board and 16 Port RANs - IF - I used
one of the convertor cables you mentioned. What if I replace the 64
Port Board and 16 Port Concentrators with either:
A. A Network Terminal Accelerator Board and an appropriate number of
7318s to act as S20 ports.
- OR -
B. An appropriate number or 7318s acting as P10 ports connected to a
standard Ethernet High Performance Adapter.
1. Do I still need the convertor cables to go from the device end to
the 7318 port end? If not, will the existing cables work unchanged?
2. How does the terminal I/O performance compare between the three
possible scenarios (all other parameters being equal and assuming no
additional TCPIP traffic other than that resulting from the 7318s)?
I am not looking for performance numbers, just a ranking of the 3
configurations, ie., 1. S20, 2. P10, 3. 128 Port Asynch Board/RAN.
---------- ---------- ---------- --------- ---------- ----------
A: I will answer your questions in the order they were asked.
1. Both the 7318-P10 and the 7318-S20 use the same cables. The pin
assignments for these cables are different than those used by
either the 64-Port adapter or the 128-port adapter. Therefore,
you will not be able to use the same cables with the 7318.
Also, IBM currently does not make a converter cable for
moving between these adapters and the 7318.
For your own information, I will include the pinouts for the
terminal and modem cables used by the 7318.
DB-25 or DB-9 Terminal Adapter (FC 7904 and FC 7905)
=====================================================
RJ-45 7318 RS-232 DB-25 DB-9
Pin Signal Terminal Pin Pin
Signal
1 DCD DTR 20 4
2 DTR DCD, DSR 8,6 1,6
3 RTS CTS 5 8
4 RD TD 2 3
5,7 RD REF, GND SGND 7 5
6 CTS RTS 4 7
8 TD RD 3 2
Modem Adapter (FC 7903)
=======================
RJ-45 7318 RS-232 DB-25
Pin Signal Modem Pin
Signal
1 DCD DCD 8
2 DTR DTR 20
3 RTS RTS 4
4 RD RD 3
5,7 RD REF, GND SGND 7
6 CTS CTS 5
8 TD TD 2
RI 22
2. Although we do not have exact performance numbers, a general
ranking of performance are:
Throughput RS/6K CPU Utilization
---------- -------------------------------
Throughput Keystroke
----------------- --------------------------
best : 7318 P10 7318 S20 with NTA 128 port or 7318 S20 w/NTA
better : 7318 S20 128 port 7318 P10
average: 128 port 7318 P10 7318 S20 (telnet)
Note: Throughput is important for file transfer applications
while CPU utilization is most important for keystroke
applications.
Thank you.
---------- ---------- ---------- --------- ---------- ----------
QUESTION:
Sorry to reopen this item. My customer asked me a question that after
reading all of the HONE documentation on it, I could not definitively
answer. Does having a Network Terminal Accelerator Board preclude the
necessity of having to have a run of the mill Ethernet High Performance
Adapter? Put another way, I have everything to gain by using the NTA
board vs. the EHPA board, and nothing to loose (except a higher price).
Thanks.
---------- ---------- ---------- --------- ---------- ----------
A: The Network Terminal Accelerator (NTA) card has two IP addresses
associated with it. One IP address is assigned to the HTY interface
and one IP address is associated with the MAC Layer Interface (MLI).
The HTY interface is the specialized ethernet interface that supplies
accelerated telnet and rlogin connections only. The MLI is a regular
ethernet interface that behaves identically to a standard ethernet
adapter's interface (ie. it can do telnet, rlogin, ftp, tftp, etc.)
and does NOT offload any processing from the host.
Thus, using the NTA card it is like getting two ethernet adapters in
one. One for accelerated telnet and rlogin connections and one for
regular ethernet interface. (Note: Both the HTY and the MLI
interfaces use the same physical AUI connector on the adapter and
can be used simultaneously.)
To specifically answer your question, if you use the NTA card, you
do not require a standard ethernet high-performance adapter. The
NTA card will provide this functionality for you.
Thank you.
---------- ---------- ---------- --------- ---------- ----------
This item was created from library item Q665949 CTFBZ
Additional search words:
ACCELERATOR ASYNC BOARD COMPARISON CTFBZ DEVICE HARDWARE IX JUL94
NETWORK NETWORKING OZIBM OZNEW PORT RISCADEV RISCSYSTEM TERM
TERMINAL TP UNDERSTAND 128 7318S
WWQA: ITEM: RTA000045369 ITEM: RTA000045369
Dated: 06/1996 Category: RISCADEV
This HTML file was generated 99/06/24~12:43:17
Comments or suggestions?
Contact us