I've yet to find a scenario that FTP doesn't do better
than IND$FILE. At least, that's my experience using PCOM.
IND$FILE seems clumsy to me and seems to work
differently depending on whether you invoke it
from the READY prompt or from ISPF Option 6.
Setting the options to get the results desired is
also a bit of a crap shoot.
I don't know why using a URL instead of a numeric
IP address would be a problem; it should only have
to resolve a URL once per connection. (Surely they
don't do it inside the loop instead of outside?)
The only time I use IND$FILE is if my customer
won't define an OMVS segment for my userid.
I'm with Ted on this. Given a choice,
I'll use Seagull's FTP every time.
> Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 13:48:47 -0700
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Bandwidth for connectivity with mainframe
> To: [email protected]
>
> I know I'm late catching up on this discussion, but I just wanted to add a
> little tidbit. Using Personal Communications, and sometimes using
> IND$FILE instead of FTP I was finding that IND$FILE uploads were going
> very slowly for me. A friend showed me that changing my link parameters
> configuration to use the numeric dotted IP address of the host instead of
> the host name would speed up my uploads. It did speed them up very
> noticeably. It sped it up so much that instead of using FTP all the time
> and avoiding the IND$FILE used by PCOMM, I now use the IND$FILE upload for
> all but the very biggest files just because of the convenience of having
> the button right there and the templates I have defined for files.
> --Roger
>
_________________________________________________________________
Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary!
http://club.live.com/chicktionary.aspx?icid=chick_wlhmtextlink1_dec
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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