From:	CRDGW2::CRDGW2::MRGATE::"SMTP::CRVAX.SRI.COM::RELAY-INFO-VAX" 25-JUL-1989 03:49
To:	MRGATE::"ARISIA::EVERHART"
Subj:	RE: Terminal Server for VMS and UN*X

Received: From KL.SRI.COM by CRVAX.SRI.COM with TCP; Mon, 24 JUL 89 22:41:45 PDT
Received: from ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU by KL.SRI.COM with TCP; Mon, 24 Jul 89 22:10:18 PDT
Received: by ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (5.61/1.37)
	id AA29829; Mon, 24 Jul 89 22:02:33 -0700
Received: from USENET by ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU with netnews
	for info-vax@kl.sri.com (info-vax@kl.sri.com)
	(contact usenet@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU if you have questions)
Date: 25 Jul 89 04:48:29 GMT
From: uhccux!munnari.oz.au!murtoa.cs.mu.oz.au!viccol!dougcc@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (Douglas Miller)
Organization: Computer Services, Victoria College, Melbourne
Subject: RE: Terminal Server for VMS and UN*X
Message-Id: <913@csv.viccol.edu.au>
Sender: info-vax-request@kl.sri.com
To: info-vax@kl.sri.com

In article <217@csv.viccol.edu.au> I wrote:

>I am unfamiliar with the capabilities and operation of terminal servers, so
>I would appreciate any advice on the following:
>
>I have a Sequent Symmetry running Dynix and several VAXes running VMS
>connected via Ethernet.  We use CMU TCP/IP to provide ftp and telnet access
>betwen the Sequent and the VAXes.  I would like to increase the terminal
>port capacity by adding a terminal server(s).   
>
>I want a terminal server that can be configured to serve the Sequent AND
>the VAXes. Is this possible?  Which suppliers should I talk to?


Here is the (belated, sorry) summary of the response.

It seems that there are a number of suitable terminal servers.  The "voting"
panned out like this:

Terminal Server     Protocols      Votes
===============     =========      =====
Annex               TCP/IP         5
Xyplex              TCP/IP,LAT     3
Micom Interlan      TCP/IP,LAT     1
Cisco               TCP/IP         1
Bridge              TCP/IP         2

Thanks to everone who replied.  A summary of received comments follows.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

> The Annex terminal server is the best on the market (TCP/IP), and it will
> support LAT in the 4.2 release I believe.  If you can't do Annexes,
> thenm try Cisco's, but they have no LAT support.  All the other
> LAT/TCP/IP terminal servers are truly lousy and you should stay away
> from them...  I know, we've had experiences with lots of companies...

Milo (medin@nsipo.nasa.gov)

[I asked if Micom Interlan was include in the "lousy" category]

> We had it here at Ames for a test.  The domain support wasn't very good,
> and it's TCP wasn't of very good quality.  Didn't listen to RIP packets
> for routing, so if the default went down you got hosed.  VERY POOR
> security features for access control.  Not very easy to configure/control,
> no SLIP support, etc...
>  
> Maybe I'm just expecting too much after dealing with Annexen.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Provided you're using TCP/IP in the VAX computers, I'd recommend you to
> buy an Annex II terminal server from Xylogics or Encore. They are simply
> the best.

          Robert Claeson      E-mail: rclaeson@erbe.se

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

> We are using 4 Xyplex Cluster Contollers as terminal servers for both VMS 
> & UNIX.  These are stable, fully-functional boxes.  All the problems/bugs 
> we have found have been given quick attention.  (Xyplex even fixed the
> bugs we have found.)  
>  
> The Cluster Controllers we use support the VMS connection via a 
> Xyplex-specific protocol, but Xyplex now supports LAT.

 |{uunet, ucsd, hplabs!hp-sdd, ames!scubed}!megatek!dubb   (619)455-5590 x2253|
 |Howard Airhart    MEGATEK Corporation  9645 Scranton Road San Diego CA 92121|

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> We have four Encore Annex/UX I ethernet terminal servers, and are very
> happy with them.  When we got them, we also had a VMS Vax (with ethernet
> hardware and TCP/IP software from EXCELAN).  We sold our last VMS host (an
> 11/750 four times the size of our B8, and 1/6th the processor power) last
> September, but used the annexes with it for about two years, and found that
> the annex telnet command worked flawlessly.
>  
> As system manager of our five computer systems, I found the annex very easy
> to setup and use.  There is very little normal management required (when
> people move, I must change their baud rate and terminal definitions), and
> this is handled with the "na" network administrator program, which is
> provided in source code, and runs on our Sequents fine.
>  
> The Annex I has 16 serial ports, and the new Annex II has your choice of 16
> or 32 ports.  It has an exhaust fan, which is not loud at all, but isn't
> totally silent (if you try to sneak it in someone office, they will
> notice).  It's all RAM based - there is no disk drive to fail.  It down
> loads it's boot image via ethernet from a designated UNIX host, or another
> Annex that's already booted. They have one Ethernet in, and one ethernet
> out port, so you can daisy chain up to four annexes in a row, or directly
> connect one to a host, without using any other ethernet cable at all.
>  
> You can setup terminal ports to have multiple sessions at one time. 
> Pressing the BREAK key drops you back to the annex, and you use C-shell
> like commands (jobs, fg, bg, kill) to list, connect to, or destroy the
> sessions. 
>  
> You can setup any level of security you want.  The C source code of the
> authorization daemon is supplied, so if you want really facist security,
> you can modify it to check anything as many times as you want.  It is
> possible to have the annex consult the security server before allowing
> access to the command line (kind of like login checking), before allowing
> access to any network entity (for checking of you have access to the host
> you are trying to connect to), and/or for allowing access to the port from
> the network (primarily for dialout modems, or ports that are back-ended
> into a host that doesn't support TCP/IP).
>  
> For terminals in our offices, I don't have any security turned on, and just
> let the UNIX hosts prompt for login and password.  For our dialup modems, I
> have the login authorization turned on, so dialup users have to provide a
> valid login and password before being given access to our network.  These
> login attempts (successful and failed) are logged, and I wrote a little
> PERL script to report on each days activity.  I found it was really painful
> to make UUCP go through the Annex (but it is supposed to be possible), and
> I gave up, and kept one dialup modem directly attached to one of our UNIX
> hosts for UUCP dialups. They do supply a program (rtelnet, or "reverse
> telnet") which is supposed to allow you to connect dialin/out modems and
> serial devices to an annex anywhere on the network, and access them and
> control them directly from any UNIX host, as though it was a local
> device...
>  
> The Annex can be configured to obtain hostnames and addresses from rwho
> packets being broadcast, from the BSD 4.3 BIND nameserver, or from IEN116
> name server software (C source supplied).  Since Sequent does not have 4.3
> BSD (and isn't ever going to), we use a combination of the IEN116 server
> and rwhod broadcast packets, and it works fine.

pwolfe@kailand.kai.com

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Since you've got TCP/IP with telnet on the VMS machines, almost any TCP/IP
> terminal server should work for you. I have some limited but positive
> experience with Interlan servers from Micom. They sell a version which speaks
> telnet - as far as the Ultrix MicroVAX can tell, it's simply carrying on a
> telnet connection with some other host. If the telnet server on your VMS
> machines works okay, it should also be able to make a connection with the
> terminal server.

Mark Adams            Relational Technology, Inc.          Alameda, California
{sun,decwrl,uunet!mtxinu,pyramid,amdahl}!rtech!mca               mca@rtech.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> We use an Annex as a terminal server for our sequent and other
> machines. It works very well and we have had few problems with
> it. We purchased ours in Australia from "Disk" something or
> other. I don't have the address handy (working from home
> today) but can get it if you are interested. They are made by
> Encore, the same people that make the Multimax. Full TCP/IP
> telnet, rlogin, security, bells and whistles.

Stephen Frede, Softway Pty Ltd
ACSnet: stephenf@softway.oz	UUCP: ...!uunet!softway.oz!stephenf

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> If you can telnet to the Vaxen, then get cisco terminal servers.  They
> talk to anything that speaks telnet or rlogin, have 16-96 ports, are
> easily configurable, and are very reliable.  An ASM/2-96EM costs around
> $20,000, I think - $200/port.  You can buy a 16 port system and add
> additional 16-port boards as needed to expand.  They also have a range
> of other sizes, down to a 10-port non-expandable system.  We looked at
> everything on the market last year, and cisco was the clear choice.
> Encore Annex was a distance second, followed by everyone else far, far
> behind.

	--Carl Rigney
	cdr@amdcad.AMD.COM
	{ames decwrl gatech pyramid sun uunet}!amdcad!cdr

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> We're using an Encore Corp "Annex" box. I'd reccommend it highly.
> The only problems we've had have been to do with being unable to apply
> the patches they supply for rlogind and telnet as we've only got
> binaries on the sequent.
>  
> Another nice feature the Annex has is the ability to configure a serial
> port as a SLIP gateway.

Chris Maltby - Softway Pty Ltd	(chris@softway.sw.oz)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

> I would really recommend the Annex server by Encore or Xylogics.  Encore
> sold the Annex to Xylogics recently.  It makes a great terminal server
> for us.  We have been using them here for about 3.5-4 years now for
> about 80 terminals and/or modems.  Machines are Sequents, Encore, Alliant,
> Suns (many many), Ardent, Cray, Intel, VAX8700/VMS VAX750/VMS, IBM-FAL ...
> you get the idea.

  Gene, rackow@skeeve.mcs.anl.gov
  MCS- Argonne National Lab

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Bridge Communications makes a nice line of terminal servers.  The NCS/150 is
> a server with a floppy drive that can store boot info for any number of
> "dumb" servers (i.e., without floppies).  The CS/200 can boot from the
> NCS/150.  The NCS/150 can be a name server, allowing terminals to connect to
> any of your hosts.

Brian Fenske
Boeing Commercial Airplanes

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

> There are a few companies who sell terminal servers that will talk telnet
> over TCP/IP. The companies I know of are mostly American - Bridge (now
> part of 3Com), Encore, and Cisco. A Scottish firm - Spider Systems - also
> make and sell these boxes.
>  
> We have Bridge boxes and they've not given us any problem in over 4
> years of use. The Encore servers offer extra goodies such as having a
> Centronics printer port and support for remote printing.

		Jim Reid, jim@computer-science.strathclyde.ac.uk

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

> I strongly recommend looking at a Xyplex Maxserver.  This terminal
> server comes in two flavors:
>  
>         Maxserver 4500:  up to 32 ports from one box;
>                          LAT and TCP/IP compatible
>                          (simultaneously)
>  
>  
>         Maxserver 5500:  same as 4500 model, plus:
>  
>                         -  up to 120 ports
>                         -  dual fault-tolerant power supply
>                         -  dual fault tolerant Ethernet
>                            connections
>  
> Cost break-even point on the Maxserver 5500 vs DECServer 200s
> (which cannot handle TCP/IP and LAT sessions at the same time)
> is 40 ports.


Viki Harkey
Network Analyst, ISA, Inc.
crash!viki@nosc.mil

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

> I am also a satisfied Xyplex customer. I have a 32 port server
> talking to an 11/785 and 4 Sun boxes. Users are very pleased with
> this configuration. Xyplex customer assistance is great, if you
> need help setting up your servers. There are now several other
> vendors selling TCP/LAT servers but Xyplex has been doing it longer
> than the others.

Bruce Budd (budd@inmet.UUCP)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

