Matthew I've read up a bit about HiperSockets now and I have a question. Are you using DYNAMICXCF in order to exploit your HiperSockets connections or are you coding the definitions manually?
If you are using DYNAMICXCF, the ROUTE statement will be created dynamically from the DYNAMICXCF statement so you will not need to create it yourself. Chris Mason ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew Stitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main To: <IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU> Sent: Wednesday, 18 October, 2006 6:51 PM Subject: Re: I love TCPIP (not!) > 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
