What infrastructure was required?

TurboAPI required an IBM z/OS system with TCP/IP installed. It enhanced the existing TCPaccess API, so that API had to be present.

For mainframe products: Did this run in an LPAR?

TurboAPI ran within an LPAR on z/OS. It was dependent on the z/OS operating system and its TCP/IP stack.

Did this extend/enhance another product?

TurboAPI extended and enhanced the existing TCPaccess API. It was not a standalone product but rather an add-on.

What other products or components had to be present for this to work?

TurboAPI required TCPaccess to be present. It also needed the standard z/OS TCP/IP stack to function.

What was the business value of using TurboAPI?

The business value of TurboAPI was improved application performance due to faster TCP/IP communication. This translated to reduced processing time and better user experience.

What would happen if an organization did not use this product?

Without TurboAPI, organizations might have experienced slower application performance and increased network latency on their z/OS systems. This could lead to business inefficiencies and user dissatisfaction.

How did TurboAPI address security?

Security aspects of TurboAPI would have been related to ensuring authorized access to the enhanced TCP/IP functionality. Standard z/OS security mechanisms would likely have been used.

How was this product typically deployed?

TurboAPI was typically deployed on-premise as part of the z/OS environment. It required technical expertise to install and configure.

What level of technical expertise was required to implement it?

Implementing TurboAPI required knowledge of z/OS, TCP/IP networking, and the TCPaccess API. Experienced mainframe systems programmers were needed.

What ongoing operational requirements existed?

Ongoing operational requirements included monitoring the performance of TCP/IP applications and ensuring the stability of the z/OS environment. Regular maintenance was necessary.

Share Your Product Experience

Help the community by sharing your experience with mainframe products. Your insights help others make informed decisions.

Share Your Experience

TurboAPI

Name: TurboAPI
Availability: InStock

Interlink Computer Sciences Not Supported z/OS

Performance Networks and Communication

Vendor

Interlink Computer Sciences

Product Overview

TurboAPI was designed as a TCP/IP performance enhancement solution for IBM z/OS environments. Its primary function was to optimize the TCPaccess API, thereby accelerating network communications for applications running on the mainframe. The architecture involved intercepting and modifying TCP/IP calls to improve efficiency.

Key components included the API enhancement module and configuration files that controlled optimization parameters. Given the end of support for TurboAPI, a migration strategy is essential. The architectural blueprint should consider several alternatives: First, modernizing the IBM z/OS Communications Server to leverage built-in performance enhancements.

Second, integrating a third-party TCP optimizer that can provide similar or better performance gains. Third, re-architecting applications to use more efficient communication patterns. The migration should include a phased approach, starting with non-critical systems and gradually moving to core applications.

Thorough testing and monitoring are crucial at each stage to ensure stability and performance.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does TurboAPI do?

TurboAPI aimed to improve TCP/IP performance on IBM z/OS systems by enhancing the TCPaccess API. It was designed to provide faster network communication for applications using TCP/IP.

Is this a system, application, or tool?

TurboAPI is best described as middleware. It sits between applications and the TCP/IP stack, optimizing network communication.

What types of organizations used this?

Organizations that needed faster TCP/IP communication on their IBM z/OS systems were the target users. This included enterprises in finance, insurance, and other industries reliant on mainframe applications.

When should we have considered TurboAPI?

Companies considered TurboAPI when they experienced performance bottlenecks with their existing TCP/IP infrastructure on z/OS. If applications were slow due to network latency, TurboAPI was a potential solution.

What are the alternatives to TurboAPI?

Alternatives to TurboAPI include other TCP/IP optimization products, network acceleration hardware, and upgrading the underlying network infrastructure. Modern TCP/IP stacks often incorporate similar optimizations.

Help Improve This Directory

Notice outdated information? Have insights about this product? Help the mainframe community stay informed with accurate, current data.

Report Issue Suggest Product Share Event

Are You a Vendor? Claim Your Listing

Take control of your product listings. Add verified information, showcase updates, and unlock a Claimed Vendor badge across the directory.

Claim Your Listing Now

Share Your Product Experience

TurboAPI

Product Overview

Frequently Asked Questions

What does TurboAPI do?

Is this a system, application, or tool?

What types of organizations used this?

When should we have considered TurboAPI?

What are the alternatives to TurboAPI?

What infrastructure was required?

For mainframe products: Did this run in an LPAR?

Did this extend/enhance another product?

What other products or components had to be present for this to work?

What was the business value of using TurboAPI?

What would happen if an organization did not use this product?

How did TurboAPI address security?

How was this product typically deployed?

What level of technical expertise was required to implement it?

What ongoing operational requirements existed?

Related Products

More from Interlink Computer Sciences

e-Control

Interlink

TurboFTP

TurboTelnet

Similar Products

2cIP

2cSNA

3770Link

3780Link

4Tune

ACF/NCP

Help Improve This Directory

Are You a Vendor? Claim Your Listing