Nigel Kendrick wrote:
> I have just inherited four sites linked via BT Kilostream circuits.
>
> Theres some old Cray DCX 818 and BT multiplexers connected to the
> Kilostream NTEs and the end result is that the remote sites have async
> terminal access to a central computer system.
>
> Although everything works OK, the muxes are temperamental - they are
> maintained by BT but are often in need of attention.
>
> Not having worked with such circuits for many years, I would like to
> open up the following questions to the floor...
>
> What modern kit could replace the muxes?
>
> What are the pros and cons of replacing the Kilostream circuits with
> broadband? I would expect Kilostream to actually be more reliable but
> obviously slower.
>
> Can you get an ADSL async stat mux?
>
> Thanks
>
> NK
I suspect most people would consider upgrading the terminal
equipment at the same time. If the computer can run telnet,
it could be accessed from any networked PC, though youd
have to watch out for compatible terminal emulations and
protocol support. If not, there are Terminal Servers that
can provide async access via IP networks. They can be used
end-to-end like the stat-muxes. Some can provide remote
telnet access to a central bank of async ports. Costs are
from around Ł100 per port.
Security via the Internet would be more complicated. That
could be addressed with a firewall/VPN set-up, not
necessarily cheap for a professional solution, but youd be
looking at something that would be compatible with a
long-term networking strategy so you wouldnt be left with
even more legacy equipment when the applications eventually
migrate to a modern platform.
An intermediate solution would be to bridge/route the LANs
via the Kilostream circuits, using TS hardware described
above, then migrating to DSL later. If the applications are
stuck with low-speed terminals, this might give adequate
performance and the network would stay private.