Talk:Console server

Merge proposal

There is a proposal to merge "Console Server" and "Console server." Good catch on finding the duplicate articles. I support this proposal and in fact don't believe it requires further discussion. Both articles are identical, except for a spam link which should be deleted anyway. I will just go ahead and redirect "Console Server" to this article. JonHarder 02:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge again

I have merged Serial console server into this article, and rewritten it to be more encyclopedic. As part of the rewrite, I have removed this bit of the article:

Console servers are typically used with serial devices such as routers and GNU/Linux servers, but can be discussed as part of a wider concept; including industrial and automation devices, out-of-band management, logging and monitoring.

I'm not saying this doesn't belong here, but much more needs to be said about it, or more done to integrate it into the article; as it was, it didn't add any real information to the article for anyone who wasn't already familiar with the subject. (If it had done, I might have been able to do it myself)

-- jhf 06:28, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

I just read the article on Console Servers without knowing what they were. One thing that isn't clear from this description is why you would want a Console Server i.e. if you have ssh access to the boxes, why have a Console Server. Some deduction suggests that it's so that you can access to boxes prior to there being a network stack or if there is a problem with the networking (network card, firewall, etc.). I'm not sure that it is so obvious that it should be left off the description. Dkfn (talk) 16:21, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear

"The consoles of the connected devices can be accessed by connecting to the console server, maintaining survivable connectivity that allows remote users to log in the various consoles" ...that's a lot of connecting of consoles, and i get lost reading it. --Jerome Potts (talk) 09:00, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And: "An alternative approach is to null-modem wire and daisy-chain consoles to otherwise unused serial ports on nodes with some other primary function." ..."null-modem wire" ? Is "null-modem" an adverb ? and what's a "node" ? --Jerome Potts (talk) 09:12, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You want to use a console server because it gives you the ability to access your servers or networking devices out of band, meaning if your network goes down you access it through your console server which is connected to the server via serial port which is outside the network. If you need more non bias information on console server go to http://www.consoleserversolutions.com. They have dozens of brands and models of console servers and are not bias or devoted to anyone brand of console server. They also have hundreds of pin-outs and manuals to thousands of console servers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnbruno3 (talk • contribs) 00:43, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal (round 3)

I propose merging this article with terminal server. It is perhaps not as clear cut as the mergers above in that at some level the two devices are different, conceptually at least. Whereas a console server (from the articels presented here) is primarily concerned with providding access to device consoles from the network, a terminal server is more concenred with providing access network access to serially conencted devices. However, terminology is not enitrely uniform in this regard - a console server amy be referred to as a terminal server for example. Many, if not most, devices can operate in either mode, often at the same time on different ports.

A further indication of overlap is the terminal server article's reference to reverse telnet - a feature of a "console server" rather than a "terminal server". I feel these devices should therefore be considered as two sides of the same coin and merged together. I'm not really bothered where the resulting article ends up provided appropriate redirects are left in place. Crispmuncher (talk) 11:42, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I generally support this merger, with some reservations. In my understanding, terminal servers and console servers are unique concepts, implemented with essentially identical hardware. Maybe we could call the combined article Serial port server. Are there any terminal or console servers that do not use serial ports in some way? -- Austin Murphy (talk) 16:50, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I support merging "Console server" into "Terminal server". I think the name should remain "Terminal server" since that is the name that was commonly used for these devices in years past. Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 15:56, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A console server has added feature above and beyond a typical terminal server, usually a terminal server is just a communications pipe, while a console server usually offer further features such as port logging, NFS mounts for logs, custom menus, remote authentication, granular levels of user permissions, snmp traps, the ability to send emails on its own if it sees defined character strings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjgogo (talk • contribs) 21:19, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]