Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: oceansoul on 18 February 2009, 16:48:54
-
At work we have some bits of kit and no one is really sure what they do. As a whole we know what there for, but not what each unit actually does. Im hoping someone will recognize the units and know what they do ;)
(http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/410/dscn1437om6.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)
(http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/dscn1437om6.jpg/1/w800.png) (http://g.imageshack.us/img522/dscn1437om6.jpg/1/)
Theres a cisco Switch,
a cisco 800 box, a cisco 1700 box and 2 bt kilostream box's.
The 800 is connected to the switch via ethernet and then goes to an ISDN socket. the 1700 is connected to the switch via ethernet, then has a 25 pin (i think) and a chunky cable going to another 25 pin on the back of the top kilostream. that then goes into another ISDN. the 2nd kilostream has an empty 25 pin but nothing to go into it, this goes into a 3rd isdn.
-
Its all black magic mate ;D
Just leave it alone ;)
Im sure TB will be along shortly to enlighten you....if you get stuck tho....ive a mate whos qualified in Cisco stuff.....so i can ask him what the various bits do.
Mind if your using ISDN to just connect to the internet, must be costing a blinking fortune in phone bills :o
Only other reason I can think of ISDN usage is for connecting to remote sites pushing internal emails about.... :-/
-
Right.
The catalyst is just a (expensive managed) network switch
The 800 is a router, sounds like it has ISDN WIC.
The 1700 is also a router, sounds like it has a serial card and an ISDN fallback WIC, with serial going off to the kilostream...
All old, all shite. Will fetch a few quid from ebay...
-
Ah, seen its all powered up, presumably you are still using this. You need the configs off them to be able to tell what they're all doing.
If you're supporting them, brush up on Cisco IOS, if you need to do clever things with catalyst (other than straight switch), brush up on CatOS
-
Lol, do people still use Kilostream....!
Did a bit of circuit work on that many years ago
-
Lol, do people still use Kilostream....!
Did a bit of circuit work on that many years ago
Yes, kilostream is still massively popular :-X
-
oh ok. well its a SCADA comms link back to a control center via 256k ISDN lol not used for internet/intranet or emails or anything. There all used still :P What it is, we manage the PLC's and the control side of things i.e. modem comms out to remote sites, but the systems guys manage all that cisco stuff and the comms back to the control room. Although we have now been told we have to "look after" the systems stuff. Systems are still there but are cut back abit. Any major problems and we call them lol
-
I have to say that you have a very amateur install there.....crap wiring and cabling practice
-
I have to say that you have a very amateur install there.....crap wiring and cabling practice
its a shocking install, thats why i initially thought it was all for sale :-[
-
Lol, do people still use Kilostream....!
Did a bit of circuit work on that many years ago
And until recently too.
Two sites in NI 128k link between them, two server main office and the root and the satellite a branch on an NDS tree, both were running ADS with distributed database files.
All got ripped out when they downgraded to Windows 2003 - kept distributed but then VPNed over the internet, and we moved from IPX (fast) to IP (slow)
-
Lol, do people still use Kilostream....!
Did a bit of circuit work on that many years ago
And until recently too.
Two sites in NI 128k link between them, two server main office and the root and the satellite a branch on an NDS tree, both were running ADS with distributed database files.
All got ripped out when they downgraded to Windows 2003 - kept distributed but then VPNed over the internet, and we moved from IPX (fast) to IP (slow)
IPX works well on LANs, but doesn't scale too well. Its a pretty antisocial protocol as well. Trust me, used to look after the largest NDS tree on the planet ;)
-
Lol, do people still use Kilostream....!
Did a bit of circuit work on that many years ago
And until recently too.
Two sites in NI 128k link between them, two server main office and the root and the satellite a branch on an NDS tree, both were running ADS with distributed database files.
All got ripped out when they downgraded to Windows 2003 - kept distributed but then VPNed over the internet, and we moved from IPX (fast) to IP (slow)
IPX works well on LANs, but doesn't scale too well. Its a pretty antisocial protocol as well. Trust me, used to look after the largest NDS tree on the planet ;)
Was that BT?
I remember reading about it
IP vs IPX - with dos apps using a thunking layer for IP, IPX wins every time. With Win32 apps no problem either way.
-
Anyone else got totally lost as soon as the words finished in the original post and the piccys appeared?? :o :o :o :o
-
Was that BT?
I remember reading about it
IP vs IPX - with dos apps using a thunking layer for IP, IPX wins every time. With Win32 apps no problem either way.
TCP/IP stack on a DOS machine and it's pretty much 100% utilised. ;D
IIRC, IPX was more efficient on half duplex links because it's not windowed so less collisions. Increase the RTT and it crawls along though. Crikey! this brings back some memories.
Kevin
-
actually the switch is a catalyst 3550 layer 3 switch, it is end of sale but still supportable for a year or so. The routers on the other hand are end of sale and end of support, so really should be replaced if they are mission critical.
cheers Tom
-
Was that BT?
I remember reading about it
IP vs IPX - with dos apps using a thunking layer for IP, IPX wins every time. With Win32 apps no problem either way.
TCP/IP stack on a DOS machine and it's pretty much 100% utilised. ;D
IIRC, IPX was more efficient on half duplex links because it's not windowed so less collisions. Increase the RTT and it crawls along though. Crikey! this brings back some memories.
Kevin
I have played with a few dos client server clients and some were deadful.
Slowest was an AS/400 client (WIN/400), the AS/400 disk thrashed and the Clipper app dragged along.
Due to problems with the AS/400 they dropped in a Netware 4.10 server with ADS went like stink. We ran accounts link to AS/400 and most of our data on the Netware box, with 2 C/S links.
The move to AS/400 never took place and eventually the AS/400 accounts system was replaced with a PC system.
Fastest by far with Clipper was IPX client with hot Netware server and ADS 7.1.
-
the cabling and all that is how it was left by systems. Were in the process of tidying up the cabinet :p thats why we was intrested in what it does lol
-
actually the switch is a catalyst 3550 layer 3 switch, it is end of sale but still supportable for a year or so. The routers on the other hand are end of sale and end of support, so really should be replaced if they are mission critical.
cheers Tom
I wouldn't mind betting its configured and set up as a layer 2 switch.... ...which would be a waste when I'm after replacing a 2900XL with a layer 3 one (my 2900 is old one, no layer 3 capability)
-
Was that BT?
I remember reading about it
IP vs IPX - with dos apps using a thunking layer for IP, IPX wins every time. With Win32 apps no problem either way.
TCP/IP stack on a DOS machine and it's pretty much 100% utilised. ;D
IIRC, IPX was more efficient on half duplex links because it's not windowed so less collisions. Increase the RTT and it crawls along though. Crikey! this brings back some memories.
Kevin
I have played with a few dos client server clients and some were deadful.
Slowest was an AS/400 client (WIN/400), the AS/400 disk thrashed and the Clipper app dragged along.
Due to problems with the AS/400 they dropped in a Netware 4.10 server with ADS went like stink. We ran accounts link to AS/400 and most of our data on the Netware box, with 2 C/S links.
The move to AS/400 never took place and eventually the AS/400 accounts system was replaced with a PC system.
Fastest by far with Clipper was IPX client with hot Netware server and ADS 7.1.
A lot of that is the quality of the stack. The original monolithic netware driver was far quicker than the later odi ones (though an utter bitch to manage).
Used to look after some dos boxes that had 3 NICs, 1 for IPX to talk to a Novell Knitware server, 1 for IP for remote management, and one with OSI TP4 for X400 connectivity. And the application needed about 400k memory - that was always a challenge with the 3 stacks!
-
actually the switch is a catalyst 3550 layer 3 switch, it is end of sale but still supportable for a year or so. The routers on the other hand are end of sale and end of support, so really should be replaced if they are mission critical.
cheers Tom
I wouldn't mind betting its configured and set up as a layer 2 switch.... ...which would be a waste when I'm after replacing a 2900XL with a layer 3 one (my 2900 is old one, no layer 3 capability)
most of them are TB, I have a couple in my rack at home, what do you need exactly? If you have the cash there is a 8port 3560 layer3 with poe now I was thinking of getting for the house I can get a price for you if you want.
tom
-
Was that BT?
I remember reading about it
IP vs IPX - with dos apps using a thunking layer for IP, IPX wins every time. With Win32 apps no problem either way.
TCP/IP stack on a DOS machine and it's pretty much 100% utilised. ;D
IIRC, IPX was more efficient on half duplex links because it's not windowed so less collisions. Increase the RTT and it crawls along though. Crikey! this brings back some memories.
Kevin
I have played with a few dos client server clients and some were deadful.
Slowest was an AS/400 client (WIN/400), the AS/400 disk thrashed and the Clipper app dragged along.
Due to problems with the AS/400 they dropped in a Netware 4.10 server with ADS went like stink. We ran accounts link to AS/400 and most of our data on the Netware box, with 2 C/S links.
The move to AS/400 never took place and eventually the AS/400 accounts system was replaced with a PC system.
Fastest by far with Clipper was IPX client with hot Netware server and ADS 7.1.
A lot of that is the quality of the stack. The original monolithic netware driver was far quicker than the later odi ones (though an utter bitch to manage).
Used to look after some dos boxes that had 3 NICs, 1 for IPX to talk to a Novell Knitware server, 1 for IP for remote management, and one with OSI TP4 for X400 connectivity. And the application needed about 400k memory - that was always a challenge with the 3 stacks!
Hmm extended memory linkers :)
-
Was that BT?
I remember reading about it
IP vs IPX - with dos apps using a thunking layer for IP, IPX wins every time. With Win32 apps no problem either way.
TCP/IP stack on a DOS machine and it's pretty much 100% utilised. ;D
IIRC, IPX was more efficient on half duplex links because it's not windowed so less collisions. Increase the RTT and it crawls along though. Crikey! this brings back some memories.
Kevin
I have played with a few dos client server clients and some were deadful.
Slowest was an AS/400 client (WIN/400), the AS/400 disk thrashed and the Clipper app dragged along.
Due to problems with the AS/400 they dropped in a Netware 4.10 server with ADS went like stink. We ran accounts link to AS/400 and most of our data on the Netware box, with 2 C/S links.
The move to AS/400 never took place and eventually the AS/400 accounts system was replaced with a PC system.
Fastest by far with Clipper was IPX client with hot Netware server and ADS 7.1.
A lot of that is the quality of the stack. The original monolithic netware driver was far quicker than the later odi ones (though an utter bitch to manage).
Used to look after some dos boxes that had 3 NICs, 1 for IPX to talk to a Novell Knitware server, 1 for IP for remote management, and one with OSI TP4 for X400 connectivity. And the application needed about 400k memory - that was always a challenge with the 3 stacks!
Hmm extended memory linkers :)
Not poss - all 16 bit stacks, and 16 bit app... ...you're stuck with the 700Mb you can make available....
-
You're all reminding me that I have my CCNP switching exam on Wednesday and I really need to do some revision ;D