mevans@marque.mu.edu (Mike Evans) (05/28/91)
In article <358@gandp> rg@gandp.UUCP (Dick Gill) writes: > >I would like to use existing wiring by running just Transmit, >Receive and Common to each VDT; this would, of course, entail >strapping back the hardware handshake at the RS/6000 (I presume >RTS-CTS and DTR-DSR-CD) and using X-on/X-off for flow control. In my building we are running the IBM 3151 terminals with two wires, Transmit and Receive with a jumper between CD and DTR at the RS/6000 end. We run our terminals at 9600 at distances to 500 feet with no problems. I am also running two terminals at 19.2 at 50 feet. The reason for this distance is my office is that close. I would have no qualms of trying longer distances. The only problem I might be able to attribute to two wires is I have lost a couple of ports, possibly to static. Depending on your IBM SE running none standard wiring can cause IBM to say "must be the wiring, replace it and then we will fix your tape drive" :) Mike Evans
rg@gandp (Dick Gill) (05/29/91)
I have a client who is upgrading to an RS/6000 and adding a number of terminals (3151) for word processing. The current wiring in his building has three wires of UTP available in each office for a terminal. I would like to use existing wiring by running just Transmit, Receive and Common to each VDT; this would, of course, entail strapping back the hardware handshake at the RS/6000 (I presume RTS-CTS and DTR-DSR-CD) and using X-on/X-off for flow control. According to the client, no terminal will be more than 150-200 feet from the RS/6000. I would like to run the terminals at 38k but could fall-back to 19.2k or 9.6k if I had to. The building is stand-alone with no unusual electrical appliances; just a plain office. Any experience from the real world would be highly appreciated. Thanks Ground -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dick Gill Gill & Piette, Inc. (703)761-1163 ..uunet!gandp!rg
tony@jassys.UUCP (Tony Holden) (06/02/91)
rg@gandp (Dick Gill) writes: > > I would like to run the terminals at 38k > but could fall-back to 19.2k or 9.6k if I had to. The building > is stand-alone with no unusual electrical appliances; just a > plain office. Can't help you on the other items, we've now gone to a networked scheme. I tried running a 3151 at 38k and found it to be jerky. 19.2 worked out to be much more usable. This is on a 520 with a 16 port 422 adapter. And with only 2 users logged in. -- Tony Holden live on the edge, tony@jassys Bank in Texas