| Title: | POLYCENTER Console Manager |
| Notice: | Kits, Scans, Docs on CSC32:: as PCM$KITS:,PCM$DOCS:, PCM$SCANS: |
| Moderator: | CSC32::BUTTERWORTH |
| Created: | Thu Aug 06 1992 |
| Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 1541 |
| Total number of notes: | 6564 |
Hi,
One of our customers wants to check whether it is possible to setup the
PCM under the following condition:
There will have around 15 systems to be monitord using a single PCM
workstation. The PCM workstation can be a VAX or an Alpha wkstation
running OVMS.
In general, there should be no problem to monitor such number of
systems by connecting all the console ports to the terminal servers.
However, now the customer wants to monitor six critical systems by
directly connecting them onto the PCM workstation (assume there is a
adaptor which can provide six serial ports installed on the PCM
workstation) because they are afraid the failure of the network and the
terminal servers. Will this configuration work for PCM provided there
is a six serial ports adapter? Do we really offer such an extended
serial port adapter card on VAX or Alpha wkstation?
Thanks for any suggestions.
Edmond
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 870.1 | CSC32::BUTTERWORTH | Gun Control is a steady hand. | Mon Jul 17 1995 23:32 | 19 | |
Theres no problem doing what you want. The only issue might be
availability of an async terminal line board for the system that
your customer chooses. I was looking in the SOC for such an option for the
VAXSTation 400 model 96 and I don't find one. The Microvax 3100's list
the DHW42 8 line async board but this doesn't appear to be an option
for the 4000-96. The SOC i have is only a supplement though.
I would also suggest an alternative. Consider putting the PCM engine
and the terminal servers it uses on their own separate LAN segment and
bridge that segment to the rest of the customers network. Properly
setup this kind of environment would be just as reliable as using local
async lines. Remember that there will always be a single point of
failure using terminal servers or async lines. Creating an isolated
LAN segment is your best bet in my opinion as you can use any kind of
system that you want and properly setup you LAT connections will be
immune to any LAN failures outside the isolated segment.
Regards,
Dan
| |||||
| 870.2 | It's better. Any more suggestions? | HGOVC::EDMONDLEUNG | Wed Jul 19 1995 17:33 | 16 | |
Dan,
Thanks for your input. As you mentioned the most difficulty is to
source the async card which can be used on the VAXstation or
AlphaStation. Besides Digital products, do you know where I can find
some of this adaptor card from third party (with the correct drivers on
VAX and Alpha)?
For you suggested alternative, do you mean I've to put the most six
critical systems connected to the terminal servers which are on a separate
network segment with the PCM engine so that this configuration can be
more protective from the other segments? However, we still encounter
the single point of failure situation. Any more suggestions?
Rgds,
Edmond
| |||||
| 870.3 | CSC32::BUTTERWORTH | Gun Control is a steady hand. | Wed Jul 19 1995 22:44 | 36 | |
> Thanks for your input. As you mentioned the most difficulty is to
> source the async card which can be used on the VAXstation or
> AlphaStation. Besides Digital products, do you know where I can find
> some of this adaptor card from third party (with the correct drivers on
> VAX and Alpha)?
No I don't. I would try and find a comprehensive systems and options
catalog. Also, have you considered using a server as the engine? You
could then use any existing Vaxstations/Alphastations the customer has
for a GUI display. I checked the SOC and I see the CXI01 EISA based
async MUX. I believe you can get these in 8 line or 16 line versions.
Like I said I don't have a comprehensive SOC.
> For you suggested alternative, do you mean I've to put the most six
> critical systems connected to the terminal servers which are on a separate
> network segment with the PCM engine so that this configuration can be
> more protective from the other segments?
That would be the minimum. I would recommend that *all* the terminal
servers that PCM uses be on the isolated segment.
>However, we still encounter the single point of failure situation.
>Any more suggestions?
I think you misunderstood what I said in -2. You will *ALWAYS* have a
single point of failure with any connection method. The async
board can be just as prone to failure as a terminal server. For that
matter, a bad terminal cable is a single point of failure, the actual
console port on the serviced system could fail etc.
I would pursue the isolated segment solution if it was up to me.
Regards,
Dan
| |||||