Thanks, Chris. I made the changes you suggested, and the FTP still failed. I wish I knew what in the GATEWAY statements causes it to work, and what in the ROUTES causes it to fail.
I know that GATEWAY is out-moded, so that is why I am switching to ROUTES. I really appreciate your assistance and patience. On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 02:00:29 +0200, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Matthew > >Here's your GATEWAY statement converted to a BEGINROUTES/ENDROUTES block: > >GATEWAY > > 10.0.0.0 = Z990CH41LNK1 1492 0.255.248.0 0.2.8.0 > 192.0.0.0 = IQDIO1 8192 0.255.255.0 0.0.0.0 > DEFAULTNET 10.2.8.2 Z990CH41LNK1 1492 0 > >to > > BEGINROUTES >; Where is the gateway? > ROUTE 10.2.8.0/21 = Z990CH41LNK1 MTU 1492 >; The internal hypersockets routes > ROUTE 192.0.0.0/24 = IQDIO1 MTU 8192 >; All other traffic defaults here > ROUTE DEFAULT 10.2.8.2 Z990CH41LNK1 MTU 1492 > ENDROUTES > >Note that the number of contiguous bits in the mask is 8 for the first octet >(byte), 8 for the second octet and 5 for the third octet. the third octet is >5 because 248 = 128(1)+64(2)+32(3)+16(4)+8(5). > >In fact your GATEWAY entry for the hypersockets routes is incorrect. 192 is >a class C network, the first in the class C range in fact. Thus the subnet >mask field can be specified as 0 and there will be no subnet value field. > >As this is strictly an "incorrect entry in a GATEWAY statement" I would >expect the following note from 1.2.27, "GATEWAY" in z/OS V1R8.0 >Communications Server IP Configuration Reference to apply: > ><quote> > >1. When an incorrect entry in a GATEWAY statement is encountered, it is >discarded along with the remaining entries in the GATEWAY statement. All >routes defined before the incorrect entry are added to the IP Route Table. >Subsequent GATEWAY statements in the same profile data set, or VARY >TCPIP,,OBEYFILE command data set, are processed. > ></quote> > >Thus I would expect the hypersockets route not to be processed and the >DEFAULT route not to be processed. > >However, you say this GATEWAY statement works so maybe the fact that the >mask is strictly not necessary is ignored, the mask implied by the class of >the network, 255.255.255.0, is "OR"ed with the subnet mask value, >0.255.255.0, and the end result is as required. Syntactically, if not >logically in terms of the IP class rules, the statement is correct. > >Incidentally, your original post said that the IP addresses of your >hypersockets pseudo-LAN., as it appears to be, are 192.10.1.xxx. This isn't >what you are now saying. If 192.10.1.xxx is correct, the internal >hypersockets routes ROUTE statement would be as follows: > > ROUTE 192.10.1.0/24 = IQDIO1 MTU 8192 > >Please post again if you need more help. > >Chris Mason > >----- Original Message ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
