On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 06:44:30 -0500, Chris Mason <[email protected]> wrote:
>... >[3] In principle this applies to APPN nodes also and could be used to >argue that, just because a LEN or APPN node does not have a "visible" >PU, it still has a PU and that the PU could be used to characterise the >type 2.1 node! Nobody has ever used that argument to refute my >insistence that there is no such animal as a "PU 2.1" and it may be >that you are the only person who can see the irony here - or indeed >follow what I am talking about! >... Well, I no longer have access to access to the SNA FAPs and can't find the equivalent APPN architecture definition so I don't know if there is any difference between the PUCP in a node type 2 and the PUCP in a node type 2.1. But in looking at a display of a "PU_T2.1" I see characteristics of the linkstation and maybe the node, but nothing I would associate with the PU. I think you might still be safe saying there is no such thing as a PU_T2.1. :-) Pat O'Keefe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
