Here's the crux of the problem. Up to now, the term 'sysplex' has been used as if there were only one flavor. Not so. A sysplex with no CF is a 'basic' sysplex that uses only CTC for intersystem communication.
- Without a CF, XCF on one system does not know for certain when another system has truly left the sysplex. - Without a CF, you will always get a WTOR to verify that an apparently down system really is down. We have one basic sysplex here. It behaves differently from our 'parallel' sysplexes, that is, those sysplexes with CFs. Until someone replies 'down', the whole sysplex can hang. . . JO.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 626-302-7535 Office 323-715-0595 Mobile [email protected] "Klein, Kenneth" <kenneth.kl...@ky FB.COM> To Sent by: IBM [email protected] Mainframe cc Discussion List <[email protected] Subject .edu> Re: Sysplex timeout problems. 07/08/2009 06:46 AM Please respond to IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected] .edu> I should add that this site does _not_ have a CF. XCF is setup and that's about it. The problem is with the distributed systems that use TCP/IP to talk to the mainframe. Apparently the TCP stack freezes while this message is outstanding waiting for the ,down reply and timeouts occur on remote servers. Ken Klein Sr. Systems Programmer Kentucky Farm Bureau Insurance - Louisville [email protected] 502-495-5000 x7011 -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Barbara Nitz Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 8:17 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Sysplex timeout problems. Ups, forgot the SFM policy. (We have it active.) BUT: I have also seen IXC102A *even though* sfm was active. *That* was a bug. The book says: 3. There are instances when this message will be issued and the appropriate action must be taken even though there is an SFM policy active in the sysplex. If SFM cannot successfully isolate the system image being removed, manual intervention will be required. This message will be issued and must be responded to. So I guess the question is if there is an SFM policy active. If so, there should not be any message, and it needs to get investigated why isolation via the CF (this is what SFM actually does) does not work. This may take an IBM ETR to figure out. (In my case it was a mismatch in code, and I think I got it solved by contacting someone in IBM development directly.) If there is no SFM policy, then one should be defined. Ours just contains this: DEFINE POLICY NAME(SFM01) REPLACE(YES) CONNFAIL(NO) SYSTEM NAME(*) WEIGHT(100) PROMPT Best regards, Barbara ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
