Scenario: A client's system is configured with a larger number of ports in order to accomodate the various transmission needs that arise on the GEMS host computer, primarily AccuVote-OS and AccuVote-TS direct and modem uploads. As much as the initial functionality assignments are intended to be static, in the real world - and from my experience - clients tend to change the tasks ports are assigned to.
Direct and modem transmission with the AccuVote-TS R6 requires that RAS be configured over the corresponding ports, whereas AccuVote-OS transmission does not require RAS for transmission. In a Windows NT environment, configuring and stopping RAS is a relatively transparent affair.
In Windows 2000 and XP, on the other hand, stopping RAS over a port requires accessing Windows Administrative Tools, then Services, then stopping the Remote Access Connection Manager. Should we be encouraging our clients to access Services on their GEMS PCs in such a case? Do we tell clients that once they have started RAS on a port, they are never to disable RAS? Or do we allow only company staff to configure ports on GEMS PCs?
These scenarios seems potentially troublesome, considering the amount of time I remember spending over the years configuring clients' systems for transmission.