Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!mailrus!purdue!decwrl!labrea!rutgers!caip.rutgers.edu!scarter
From: scarter@caip.rutgers.edu (Stephen M. Carter)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: Ethernet terminal servers
Message-ID: <Jan.26.23.27.41.1989.8766@caip.rutgers.edu>
Date: 27 Jan 89 04:27:42 GMT
References: <6556@fluke.COM> <Jan.16.20.43.00.1989.3121@geneva.rutgers.edu> <13718@cup.portal.com> <Jan.20.21.32.16.1989.540@geneva.rutgers.edu>
Reply-To: scarter@caip.rutgers.edu (Stephen M. Carter)
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 19

In article <Jan.20.21.32.16.1989.540@geneva.rutgers.edu> hedrick@geneva.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick) writes:
>Here are some advantages and disadvantages of a terminal server
>compared with directly connected terminals and modems.  

To add two more items to Chuck's advantages:

1) Host maintenance contracts are usually on per board basis.   Some vendors
charge very little for RS232 port boards, some charge a rather extreme
amount.  Almost enough to support a terminal server with an equal number
of ports.

2) Both original O.S. costs, and monthly software support are sometimes
calculated on "number of users".  This is usually tied to number of
hardwired RS232 ports.  This is mostly true in the Unix world where AT&T's
Unix license did not define virtual connections (eg terminal server) as
a "user".

Thus, it can be much cheaper to have as few RS232 ports as possible on
any given host.