JDWWms Jan 14, 2007   9:56 AM GMT

You should not use a QPADEV* as a static name for a device. The QPADEV* names are assigned on a first come first serve basis. Using the Avoid duolicate option won't help as that is designed to add characters to the end of the name and the QPADEV* names are already 10 characters.

0 pointsBadges:

IdratherBEFishing Jan 15, 2007   9:02 AM GMT

Agreed that you shouldn't assign names that begin with QPA as they are the pool of names that the system uses. However the check boxes that I suggest to be checked will solve the problem and the system is aware that there is a limit of 10 characters and will do whatever is necessary to the assigned name to prevent problems when both are checked.

0 pointsBadges:

Cgraves Jan 15, 2007   11:56 AM GMT

My "static" workstation names are NOT Qpadevxxxx. They are named something like RG07DSP100, yes this name will suddenly be assigned to someone who would normally get a QPADEVxxxx device ID. So the question is...Why would these name suddenly start to appear in the "pool", after several years of using Client Access.

5 pointsBadges:

Cgraves Jan 15, 2007   12:01 AM GMT

The response to check the boxes to "avoid duplicate names" in the Client Access config will NOT work, because the static workstation names are all 10 characters in length....i.e. RG07DSP100. Checking these boxes attempts to add 1 or 2 characters to the static name which is a naming violation and will not work

5 pointsBadges:

MODMOD Jan 15, 2007   12:38 AM GMT

Two complete shots in the dark here... Probably not your case, but, in our shop, the network admin is responsible for doing installs. Any time they have someone new start installs, we can expect atleast one oddity to occur with the as/400 display devices. I'm not sure how your system is set up, and this is a complete shot in the dark, but, how active is your system, and do you clean up your QPADEV* devices? a while back I noticed we had thousands of QPADEV* devices created on our system. It seems the devices were being created, and a nightly process we ran was making them unusable, so each day the system would add even more devices. I fixed the problem, and the time between an accepted connection, and the login screen displaying dropped from about 45+ seconds to

0 pointsBadges:

IdratherBEFishing Jan 15, 2007   1:34 PM GMT

Uncle already. I have not had the problem described here. Of course I have not used full 10 character assigned names. I have used 5 or 6 character assigned names and checked the boxes and there is no problem. We use the assigned names to make various workstations end up in certain subsystems that are defined almost exactly like Qinter. This way the offices or departments have their own interactive subsystems and when one department or office needs to be out of the system we have the ability to take their associated interactive subsystem without affecting the other users.

0 pointsBadges:

Cgraves Jan 15, 2007   2:14 PM GMT

Problem Discovered.... There are two (or more) workstation controllers which control this...QPACTL01 and one or more "virtual" controllers...QVIRCD0001 & QVIRCD0002. The controller QPACTL01 should contain ONLY QPADEVxxxx entries, while the "virtual" controllers should contain any static workstation ID's. I have static ID's under the QPACTL01 controller. My guess is that I copied QPADEVxxxx devices to create a workstation device for a statically assigned device name because I needed the device to exist for other reasons, before the device ever actually signed-on. This caused the static ID to be added to the wrong controller description......In the words of the NTSB...."pilot error"

5 pointsBadges:

IdratherBEFishing Jan 15, 2007   3:57 PM GMT

Glad to hear of the real source of the problem. I did a little checking and the checking of the 2 boxes ALWAYS Prevents this problem because it won't allow an assigned name greater than 8 in order to allow for extensions/differences. Depending on your security needs you could always turn off autoconfig devices and control sessions down to the mac level. I've done this at 2 sites that had more than 22,000 devices. We made sure the PC we expected was the only one who received that session and verified not only the AS400 Id by not allowing QUSER or any genaric ID but we also verified a biometric scan BEFORE giving a signon screen.

0 pointsBadges: