On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 06:48:46 -0600, Len Rugen wrote: >I think I missed something, WHY does the Cicso CIP need to be replaced? > >At one point in our history, TN3270 was a significant load on our processor >(then MP3000). We were using a Cisco CIP for a IP connection, but not >offloadint TN3270 (FUD of CIP CPU load etc). We did the offload and saved >a LOT of CPU, of course, that box didn't have an OSA. > >When we went to z800, we replaced the general IP link thru the CIP with the >OSA, but we have left the TN3270 on the CIP. OSA is faster than the old >way >for FTP etc, the CIP 3270 is slightly slower for TN3270, but either >are quite acceptable. > >So, if the CISCO CIP is going away or someting, I may need to "onload" >myself. (Sounds like a buffet....) I believe the OP was being driven by announcement material from Cisco; bottom line is that it appears as if the CIP end of life is soon for many Cisco boxen (and has already passed for many others). The OP's site has requirements that all software (and hardware) be currently supported by the various vendors... and Cisco's announcements meant that it was time to move along. Also, OP made it quite clear that "onload" was not the correct direction. "Offload options" was (and is) the subject for this thread. -- Tom Schmidt Madison, WI
---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
