Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

SDLLC-DLSW possible using 5394 type controllers?

I've done STUN/BSTUN for 5294/5394 types, SDLLC-DLSW for 5494 (appn) SDLC types and DLSW for 5494 (appn) ether types. Is it possible to do SDLLC-DLSW with 5394 SDLC (sna only-dumb) controllers? To complicate things, we must terminate the DLSW at site B, hop on a Motorola Vanguard to get to the AS/400 at Site A. The MOT is data center supplied and not negotiable. MOT techs indicated they will bridge the DLSW across to the AS/400. If possible, is my terminating MAC addr at site B still the AS/400 or is it now the MOT? I will have Cisco gear in the lab soon to test, but the MOT is still an unknown. Any insight would be great.

2 REPLIES
New Member

Re: SDLLC-DLSW possible using 5394 type controllers?

Russ, 5394 controllers can be either PU1 or can be PU2.1 with an IBM RPQ installed (you didn't indicate what it was). Cisco DLSw+ supports PU1 just fine in the following fashion: 5394 PU1-sdlc-DLSw+-sdlc-AS/400. In other words the AS/400 will not allow a PU1 to be defined on a LAN port upstream (you don't have this restriction with 5394 PU 2.1).

I really can't say with any certainty what will happen with the MOT DLSw routers in the picture (or how MOT DLSw supports SDLC attach devices if the 5394 is PU1), obviously you would need to test this. You should be aware, however, that ONLY Cisco routers support DLSw plus.

New Member

Re: SDLLC-DLSW possible using 5394 type controllers?

I have quite a bit of Motorola and Cisco SDLC, SDLLC, DLSw, bridging experience. What can I say, Pittsburgh companies are slow to get rid of SNA. Anyway, I would be willing to help if you could email a drawing to chartford@dpsciences.com

263
Views
0
Helpful
2
Replies
CreatePlease login to create content