"all" works because telnet is a subset of "all" - it is included without being specifically named. Do a "show line" to determine the mapping of line numbers to ports - then do a "show line 1" or whatever. Lots more output! Look on the line that starts "Allowed transports" We are used to configuring terminal servers with ip host mapping a name to an ip and port. A more bare bones implementation would have us "telnet 2002" or whatever port we wished to reach. Try that.
> -----Original Message----- > From: John Neiberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 4:28 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Transport Input Telnet and Terminal Servers [7:33511] > > > I was in a discussion with someone this weekend regarding terminal > server configuration and the following issue came up. CCO states that > on the terminal server, at the very least "transport input > telnet" needs > to be configured, if not "transport input all". Why is this? > > With a terminal server, we are connecting to a console port > that has no > concept of IP or telnet. You connect to the console port using async > serial terminal protocols, *not* telnet. Sure, it may be > called Reverse > Telnet, but the telnet protocol is not end-to-end; it stops at the > terminal server. From the terminal server to the device it > is connected > to you are simply using async serial. So, why do we need transport > input telnet?? > > We did verify that without this command it will not work. Also, why > would the ALL keyword work? As far as I can see, none of the > available > protocols make any sense in this context. > > Just curious. Perhaps I'm suffering from a brain cloud today. :-) > > John Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=33530&t=33511 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
