HP JetDirect 500X printserver
Rob Berkers
Does anyone has experience with the HP JetDirect 500X installed on SCO
Open Server 5.0.5?
If yes, does it work well? What are the bottlenecks? Can you give some
tips how to install the 500X???
Thanks in advance?
Cheers,
Rob.
David H. Funte
Rob Berkers <rber...@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:s96jpsc73ppes9e2u...@4ax.com...
I worked with the 500x print server and finally got it to work. Then I
replaced it with the 170x or 300x single port models.
Why?
Reason #1: the hpnpcfg doesn't directly support the 2nd and 3rd ports. I
wanted a print server that I could install easily without @!#%ing with
interface scripts all day.
Reaon #2: This print server has a ReAlY WeiRd quirk. Ports 2 and 3 are not
available unless port 1 is plugged into a live printer. Port #3 only works
if ports 1 and 2 are pluged into live printers. They solved this problem
with Christmas tree lights years ago. DOH!
The 500x: A good idea, a bad design...
BTW: The 170x is not supported under SCO by HP. Only the 300x is listed as
SCO compatible by HP. WHY? I don't know. Both work fine, and the setup is
identical.
I have gotten HP support on the 170x - but the tech warned me that
the 170x wasn't supported for SCO.
Jeff Liebermann
>Reason #1: the hpnpcfg doesn't directly support the 2nd and 3rd ports. I
>wanted a print server that I could install easily without @!#%ing with
>interface scripts all day.
It takes less than one day and a minimum of @!#%ing around to tweak
the interface scripts. Actually, there's only one number that needs
to change in the scripts. See:
How do I configure the HP JetDirect EX Plus3 Print
Server to use HPNP?
http://www.sco.com/cgi-bin/ssl_reference?105327
>Reaon #2: This print server has a ReAlY WeiRd quirk. Ports 2 and 3 are not
>available unless port 1 is plugged into a live printer. Port #3 only works
>if ports 1 and 2 are pluged into live printers.
Not quite. Ports 2 and 3 only work if the printer on Port 1 is
on-line and powered on. It's not the print server, it's SCO/HP HPNP.
HPNP uses SNMP to get the status of the print server. HPNP only
checks port #1. The easiest fix is to rename /bin/getone to something
else. getone is the SNMP query command. If HPNP can't find it, it
assumes that the print server is always ready.
>The 500x: A good idea, a bad design...
HP 500x. Good print server. HPNP sucks.
>BTW: The 170x is not supported under SCO by HP. Only the 300x is listed as
>SCO compatible by HP. WHY? I don't know. Both work fine, and the setup is
>identical.
No clue. Any print server that supports printing on ports 9100, 9101,
and 9102 should work with HPNP.
> I have gotten HP support on the 170x - but the tech warned me that
>the 170x wasn't supported for SCO.
It should work. The 170x does LPR/LPD and port 9100 printing.
See:
http://www.cruzio.com/~jeffl/sco/lp/
http://www.tkrh.demon.co.uk/netcat.html
for how to use "netcat" for network printing, which methinks is the
right way. Unfortunately, one must play with interface scripts and
config files (but not all day). If it were easy, it would be no fun.
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
831-421-6491 pager 831-429-1240 fax
http://www.cruzio.com/~jeffl/sco/ SCO stuff
David H. Funte
Jeff Liebermann <je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in message
news:46mupsg6mna4pqpvi...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:45:18 -0500, "David H. Funte" <none> wrote:
>
> >Reason #1: the hpnpcfg doesn't directly support the 2nd and 3rd ports. I
> >wanted a print server that I could install easily without @!#%ing with
> >interface scripts all day.
>
> It takes less than one day and a minimum of @!#%ing around to tweak
> the interface scripts. Actually, there's only one number that needs
> to change in the scripts. See:
> How do I configure the HP JetDirect EX Plus3 Print
> Server to use HPNP?
> http://www.sco.com/cgi-bin/ssl_reference?105327
You're right, but, why tweak? I wanted a server that was tweak free so that
less technical people could install it. The installation of the 170/300x
servers is so simple. So why ask for trouble?
>
> >Reaon #2: This print server has a ReAlY WeiRd quirk. Ports 2 and 3 are
not
> >available unless port 1 is plugged into a live printer. Port #3 only
works
> >if ports 1 and 2 are pluged into live printers.
>
> Not quite. Ports 2 and 3 only work if the printer on Port 1 is
> on-line and powered on. It's not the print server, it's SCO/HP HPNP.
> HPNP uses SNMP to get the status of the print server. HPNP only
> checks port #1. The easiest fix is to rename /bin/getone to something
> else. getone is the SNMP query command. If HPNP can't find it, it
> assumes that the print server is always ready.
>
Regardless of what/who is causing the problem, the problem is real, and it
makes the 500x useless IMHO.
Don't get me wrong, I love HP's products. Perhaps the 500x is a perfect
solution for a non-sco LAN.
The problem with renaming commands (/bin/getone) is that if I need to
reinstall the OS, that command will come back, and suddenly I'll have an old
problem to fix. The simpler, the better. I've come up with too many
ingenius solutions in my time to know that they often come back to byte me.
There is something to be said for KISS system design...
> >The 500x: A good idea, a bad design...
>
> HP 500x. Good print server. HPNP sucks.
>
> >BTW: The 170x is not supported under SCO by HP. Only the 300x is listed
as
> >SCO compatible by HP. WHY? I don't know. Both work fine, and the setup
is
> >identical.
>
> No clue. Any print server that supports printing on ports 9100, 9101,
> and 9102 should work with HPNP.
BTW: After the HP tech told me this, I checked the Packaging. Sure enough,
the 170x is missing the "SCO compatible" statement on the box. ?????
I only use the 300x when dealing with "Type A" customers. If any problems
come up, I don't want the customer to come back and ask why I sold them a
print server that wasn't SCO compatible. I would prefer to save the
customer a few bucks...and I wish HP would relabel the 170x
Thanks for the input.
Jeff Liebermann
>You're right, but, why tweak? I wanted a server that was tweak free so that
>less technical people could install it. The installation of the 170/300x
>servers is so simple. So why ask for trouble?
Name me one technical device, that is tweak free, works as advertised,
installs correctly the first time, and survives progress without
"tweaks". My truck requires tweaking to keep the engine running. My
VCR requires head cleaning. My air conditioner and heater require
recharge, oiling, filter cleaning, etc. My bicycle seat, car seat,
and store bought cloths require adjustment to fit. You expect far too
much from an operating system.
>Regardless of what/who is causing the problem, the problem is real, and it
>makes the 500x useless IMHO.
So, if you're required to change exactly 4 digits, in two places, to
make a device work, it's declared useless. I'll assume that this is
not some physical limitation, and that you have a phobia against
editing config files. I have the opposite problem. I hate GUI-only
configurations, that can only be performed from the GUI, and cannot be
circumvented with a command line or config file edit. If scoadmin or
webmin had provided a "printer port selection" pull down GUI interface
to change the IP port number, would that make the product acceptable?
I'm in a postition to recommend this for future release suppliments to
5.0.6. (I can't wait to see what you think of Linux which is full of
such tweaks).
>Don't get me wrong, I love HP's products. Perhaps the 500x is a perfect
>solution for a non-sco LAN.
Don't get me wrong, I find HP products to be overpriced, marginally
supported, and largerly over-rated. I'm partial to Axis, Netgrear,
and Linksys, and will only use HP print servers when I need an
internal print server.
>The problem with renaming commands (/bin/getone) is that if I need to
>reinstall the OS, that command will come back, and suddenly I'll have an old
>problem to fix. The simpler, the better. I've come up with too many
>ingenius solutions in my time to know that they often come back to byte me.
Good point exept that I can barely recall the last time I reinstalled
an SCO operating system. I will admit that such non-obvious tweaks
constitute a potential hazard if not properly documented (I have work
logs sitting in the root directory of all my servers). However, I
consider an OS re-install to be a desperation move and more typical of
a Windoze server, which requires regular re-installs just to keep
alive.
>There is something to be said for KISS system design...
There is? I don't see a connection. This is much to be said for SCO
or HP not updating the HPNP code for the last 8 years to work with
print servers that have appeared since HPNP was originally inscribed.
However, there's a point where one must simply stop tweaking and I
guess SCO and HP have decided to leave things alone.
>BTW: After the HP tech told me this, I checked the Packaging. Sure enough,
>the 170x is missing the "SCO compatible" statement on the box. ?????
I'll let you judge the risks and weight the value of this information.
>I only use the 300x when dealing with "Type A" customers. If any problems
>come up, I don't want the customer to come back and ask why I sold them a
>print server that wasn't SCO compatible. I would prefer to save the
>customer a few bucks...and I wish HP would relabel the 170x
Good point. I have a few of those customers that started out
insisting that everything be done by the book. Comments like:
"Show me where it says you can tweak that file"
were epidemic. Open Source software was totally out of the question.
It made life interesting but they paid well to have me accomidate
their rediculous level of paranoia. However, the same paranoid
customer will fill their Windoze machines with all manner of
non-standard, non-MS approved, and probably dangerous software,
without the slightest 2nd thought. When I started enforcing the
paranoid policies that they imposed on the network, on their
workstations, the hypocricy became obvious. We've negotiated a
suitable compromise and lived happily ever after. Methinks you need
to re-evaluate your position of running a totally stock, out of the
box virgin system, and fabricate a suitable compromise.
David H. Funte
The slings and arrows of outragious tweaking will be thine own downfall me
thinks....
BTW: You have to tweak a bike seat? Air conditioner? truck? Does all this
carry the Hyundai label by any chance?
thanks for the debate...
Jeff Liebermann
>To tweak, or not to tweak, THAT is the question...
>The slings and arrows of outragious tweaking will be thine own downfall me
>thinks....
Yea verily. T'is a question of great import.
Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble.
Fire burn, and cauldron bubble.
Eye of newt, toe of frog,
Wool of bat, and tongue of dog.
(...)
Doth thou suggest that said witches brew be sufficiently efficacious
when used out of the box exactly as supplied by the Pack-n-Save
witches brew ready mix? Certainly not. For one thing, Bill
Shakespear did not specify the proper quantities and ratios of the
ingredients. Same with SCO Unix. Kernel tuning, network tuning,
feature adjustments, and the addition of open source ingredients, are
what make a useful system. Installed out of the box, SCO Unix is
insipid at best, and insufficiently optimized to be enchanting.
>BTW: You have to tweak a bike seat? Air conditioner? truck? Does all this
>carry the Hyundai label by any chance?
Bicycle is an old Miyata 620 with open source components. I built it
up from the frame so NOTHING is standard. My current padded seat (I
have 3ea seats) is by Specialized. The Shimano seat post has a quick
release to optimize its height for various levels of suicidal riding
habits. To avoid getting sore, I constantly tweak the seat
adjustments.
I have no air conditioner as it was sacrificed in the name of
preserving the ozone layer.
The truck is a Dodge D50 diesel made by Mitsubishi. It has 250,000
miles on it. I attribute its longevity to careful maintenance which
methinks could be considered tweaking. The toothed rubber timing belt
that runs the fuel pump does stretch. I tweak the fuel pump timing
about every 50,000 miles.
No Hyundai in sight.
>thanks for the debate...
Thanks for the entertainment.
Scott Taylor
>
> Hi group,
>
> Does anyone has experience with the HP JetDirect 500X installed on SCO
> Open Server 5.0.5?
>
> If yes, does it work well? What are the bottlenecks? Can you give some
> tips how to install the 500X???
>
> Thanks in advance?
>
> Cheers,
> Rob.
Were is that HP Jetdirect printer server? Oh yeah, I sent it back and
got the Netgear PS110. Nice little blue box with one Cat5 in and 2
Parallel ports out. Very easy to set up, just FTP to it, get the config
file, edit the config file to change name, IP address etc., and put the
file back. A couple of lines (2 ports: L1 & L2) to add to /etc/printcap
and add the printer to the spool and away you go.
Takes me less than 5 minutes to add one to my OSR5 server and they keep
running and running. With a 10/100Mbit NIC in them, I don't notice any
lag.
The first one I got was a bit tricky, but they have a very helpful tech
support, unlike HP's hell desk that kept asking me to connect my
_network_ printer to the back of my Winblows workstation to test it.
Duh! Anyone ever see a Parallel to Cat5 converter? Oh yeah, that's the
Netgear PS110. ;o)
One problem I did find with them though, if you have any network issues,
like a bad route or something, they like to stall, but it's as simple as
(fix the network first) unplugging it and plugging it back in, your OS
print spool should take care of the rest.
I have six of them on my WAN and they just work.
Sorry I didn't have anything nice to say about JetDirect, but apparently
you have to tweak them. HAHA! Those other post were entertaining if
not informative, Thanks Jeff and Dave. :o)
--
Scott Taylor
MIS, MAAX Westco Inc.
Jeff Liebermann
wrote:
>Were is that HP Jetdirect printer server? Oh yeah, I sent it back and
>got the Netgear PS110.
Good print server. I have a PS104 (one port 10baseT model) in my
palatial office. See:
http://www.cruzio.com/~jeffl/sco/lp/netgear.htm
for how to set it up using "netcat".
>Sorry I didn't have anything nice to say about JetDirect, but apparently
>you have to tweak them.
I do. HP JetDirect print servers have more features than the cheaper
Netgear or Linksys print servers. SNMP, JetAdmin management, ftp
printing, reverse telnet printing, Internet Printing Protocol support,
Service Location Protocol, and generally good HP quality. They also
seem to work better in multi-protocol environments where the print
server is getting jobs from via netbeui, ipx/spx, and tcp/ip at the
same time. My Linksys sometimes goes comatose when hit with these,
but recovers by itself after about a 1 minute timeout. The ancient
J2550 internal print server doesn't do that. I prefer Axis print
servers, which have all the features of the HP print servers and then
some, but their prices are also starting to approach HP's.
Scott Taylor
>
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:01:52 -0700, Scott Taylor <gsta...@usa.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Were is that HP Jetdirect printer server? Oh yeah, I sent it back and
> >got the Netgear PS110.
>
> Good print server. I have a PS104 (one port 10baseT model) in my
> palatial office. See:
> http://www.cruzio.com/~jeffl/sco/lp/netgear.htm
> for how to set it up using "netcat".
Great How-To Jeff! See how simple Netgear is? :o)
> >Sorry I didn't have anything nice to say about JetDirect, but apparently
> >you have to tweak them.
>
> I do. HP JetDirect print servers have more features than the cheaper
> Netgear or Linksys print servers. SNMP, JetAdmin management, ftp
> printing, reverse telnet printing, Internet Printing Protocol support,
> Service Location Protocol, and generally good HP quality. They also
> seem to work better in multi-protocol environments where the print
> server is getting jobs from via netbeui, ipx/spx, and tcp/ip at the
> same time. My Linksys sometimes goes comatose when hit with these,
> but recovers by itself after about a 1 minute timeout. The ancient
> J2550 internal print server doesn't do that. I prefer Axis print
> servers, which have all the features of the HP print servers and then
> some, but their prices are also starting to approach HP's.
>
Kewl, thanks Jeff. I wasn't aware of all those features. I stick
strictly to TCP/IP on my networks and I think simple is best, that's why
I like the Netgear PS's.
I do have a couple of HP 2100tx printers, and they are solid. They have
their own NIC and built in PS, but I don't use JetDirect on them because
I find Windoze does better with out more bloatware, so I spool them
through my OSR5 servers and share the printers with the Windoze stations
via CIFS (SMB & FacetWin). It is kinda kewl to be able to "tweak" and
setup the HP printers through my browser though.
Bill Vermillion
Jeff Liebermann <je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
>I do. HP JetDirect print servers have more features than the cheaper
>Netgear or Linksys print servers. SNMP, JetAdmin management, ftp
>printing, reverse telnet printing, Internet Printing Protocol support,
>Service Location Protocol, and generally good HP quality. They also
>seem to work better in multi-protocol environments where the print
>server is getting jobs from via netbeui, ipx/spx, and tcp/ip at the
>same time.
You forgot Appletalk :-). Works well too along with the netbui and
tcp/ip - but had no ipx/spx on that system.
My Linksys sometimes goes comatose when hit with these,
>but recovers by itself after about a 1 minute timeout. The ancient
>J2550 internal print server doesn't do that. I prefer Axis print
>servers, which have all the features of the HP print servers and then
>some, but their prices are also starting to approach HP's.
>
>
>--
>Jeff Liebermann je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
>150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
>831-421-6491 pager 831-429-1240 fax
>http://www.cruzio.com/~jeffl/sco/ SCO stuff
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com