P
Phill W.
(Apologies if I'm in the wrong place; feel free to point me elsewhere if
so...)
I have an application currently [still] running on a Windows 200 server.
Client [socket] connections to this application are established using
the host name. The underlying hardware is falling out of its support
contract, so I need to move the application to something shiny and new[er].
My problem is one of timing.
On "Moving Day", I could just move the server application and then spend
the next few days or weeks helping people reinstall their client
application, pointing them to the new host.
I would prefer something a little less intense, along these lines:
Leading up to "Moving Day", my users would reinstall the client
application, but pointing at "another name" for my current host. I'm
thinking a NetBios alias, because my users also access file shares on
the same host.
On "Moving Day", I would move the server application and then "move" the
"other name" across to the new host so that clients, already using the
"other name", would just work.
Does this sound reasonable? practical? barking mad?
Any advice gratefully received ...
TIA,
Phill W.
so...)
I have an application currently [still] running on a Windows 200 server.
Client [socket] connections to this application are established using
the host name. The underlying hardware is falling out of its support
contract, so I need to move the application to something shiny and new[er].
My problem is one of timing.
On "Moving Day", I could just move the server application and then spend
the next few days or weeks helping people reinstall their client
application, pointing them to the new host.
I would prefer something a little less intense, along these lines:
Leading up to "Moving Day", my users would reinstall the client
application, but pointing at "another name" for my current host. I'm
thinking a NetBios alias, because my users also access file shares on
the same host.
On "Moving Day", I would move the server application and then "move" the
"other name" across to the new host so that clients, already using the
"other name", would just work.
Does this sound reasonable? practical? barking mad?
Any advice gratefully received ...
TIA,
Phill W.