From: lee.matheson@synapse.org (Lee Matheson) 
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.novell
Subject: Experiences with PPP routers???
Date: 12 Nov 92 22:27:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: SYNAPSE BBS - GATINEAU, QUEBEC - 819-561-4321
Reply-To: lee.matheson@synapse.org (Lee Matheson) 

To: bit.listserv.novell
From: lee.matheson@synapse.org (Lee Matheson)

For Gary Flynn,

Saw your message inquiring about about Novell's PPP for WAN router
connections:

GF>Has anyone had any recent experiences with using PPP for
GF>WAN router connections? I would be particularly interested
GF>in multi-vendor environments. Especially Cisco and HP.

I can't say I've had any experience with it, but our office is planning
to implement a network connection with it being a key part:

We are considering connecting our Novell-3.11 network to a
DEC Pathworks (VAX based) Network.

Our Novell network is about 5miles from the DEC Pathworks site.  The
option being considered is to utilize a Cisco Router at the DEC site
to connect to a 486/33 router at the Novell network site, through a
dedicated 56Kbaud line.  We believe it is necessary to run the Novell
Multi-Protocol Router v2.0 and the Novell WAN/LAN Links v2.0 programs
(on the 486/33 router) in order to route TCP/IP packets from the
DEC system to our Novell system.  I believe Novell's WAN/LAN Links
incorporates PPP for WAN router connections.

                 To other
                 facilities
                     |
             TCP/IP  |
             (SMTP)  |
                     |
  ____________    ___|___            ________     Novell-3.11 Network
 | Vax        |  |Cisco  | 56Kbaud  | 486/33 |    ______________
 |(Pathworks )|--|Router |----------| Router |---| Concentrator |
 |____________|  |_______| 5-miles  |________|   |______________|
    |                      (TCP/IP)                |          |
  __|_______               (SMTP)             _____|___   ____|_____
 | many PCs |                                | File    | | many PCs |
 |__________|                                | Server  | |__________|
                                             |_________|  cc:Mail

In order to access the TCP/IP packets
that will now be routed on our Novell Network, we plan to utilize
Novell LAN Work Place for DOS.  Presumably, as a minimum, this will
give us FTP capability (to/from the VAX) and Terminal emulation to the
VAX. We will utilize the terminal emulation in order to run an
Oracle application on the VAX.

There are times when we like to be able to print from the Oracle
application on the Vax, to one of our Novell printers; hence we are also
considering utilizing the Novell Flex/IP package (on our Novell file
server), so that when we run the Oracle VAX based program (from a
Novell workstation), we can print from the VAX, over our 56Kbaud line,
back to our Novell network printer.  Supposedly the Flex/IP package
makes our Novell network printer look like another printer resource
tied in to the VAX system.

While this gives us a minimal capability, ideally we would like to be
able to send e-mail (with ascii/binary file attachment capability) from
our Novell workstation PC's, through the routers, to the VAX Pathworks
mail system (VMS mail based?).  The VAX system personnel tell me they
can send us mail in SMTP format (on TCP/IP) or X400, although they
prefer SMTP.  There are other facilities connected to the Cisco router
besides the VAX that we ultimately would like to send/receive mail and
files to.

On our Novell network we prefer cc:Mail, as that is what our head office
uses (15miles away), and we may eventually link up with them.  Hence
we are considering cc:mail on our Novell site, and using Lotus "cc:mail
link to SMTP" to translate from SMTP to cc:mail.  Our company's technical
staff are fairly certain the combination will work.

I'm also reading up on Pegasus mail and Charon gateway.

Anyway, thats how we hope to integrate the Novell WAN/LAN Links
into our Network.  Most of this was planned for me by our company's
technical staff.  I can't say I really understand why the Novell
WAN/LAN Link is necessary, ... although I am advised that it is.
We haven't implemented the connnection yet, so I can't offer you any
experience.  What are your plans?

Any comments on our approach?  Suggestions?

Thanks,
Lee Matheson.
---
 . OLX 2.1 TD . Black holes really SUCK!
                                                                                                       
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU