Path: utzoo!utgpu!ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca!CUNYVM!IBMTCP-L Date: Fri, 9 Feb 90 16:23:49 EST Reply-To: IBM TCP/IP For VM List Sender: IBM TCP/IP For VM List From: "Justice, James E." Subject: SNA over IP? X-cc: "Daugherty, Allen L." , To: UofToronto LAN redistribution References: Message of 02/09/90 at 15:31:58 from C0298@UNIVSCVM.BITNET Message-ID: <90Feb9.185640est.58758@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca> Newsgroups: list.ibmtcp-l Distribution: ut Approved: devnull@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu >My use of the term 'tunnel' gateway refers to the function of passing >data composed on one protocol stack and transporting it, or them, across >another. This would allow us to, for instance, encapsulate all SNA >traffic on a LAN within IP packets, transport it across our IP backbone, >and then unencapsulate it for use by a T-R 3174 or T-R 37X5. Reverse >traffic follows the same logic. I wonder if such a thing exists and >how feasible it might be to develop the software. Vitalink had a box called a TransSDLC. It didn't use IP, but it did transport 3274 traffic to a 37X5 box. We are using several of the boxes on our Ethernet and they work well. They are more efficient then 3274 direct connect because they don't pass the line poll. They answer at the box tied to the 37X5. They have been replaced with a new box that I don't know the details of but it can do similiar things, perhaps more. In our case we run Vitalink boxes to tie Ethernets all over West Virginia together into one WAN. The TranSDLC boxes set on the Ethernet at remote locations and a 3274 or 3274's are plugged into them. On our side we TransSDLC boxes that run in reverse into our 3745. Each TransSDLC supported 4 lines (coaxes). Each line (coax) going in or coming out could be multi-dropped. If you want all the details about the IBM side of the box talk to Allen Daughtery . For Ethernet side and Vitalink information, I refer you to George Cook .