Miklos Szigetvari wrote: >Not really rings the bell, but we have here some UDP applications, and the >TCP/IP UDP settings maybe different, >We had to change some "maxudp..." values in the TCP/IP or OMVS definition .
Hmmm, which leads me to some things: Charles: In TCP/IP, do you collect SMF records 119 for UDPTERM? Do you have UDPCHKSUM defined for your TCP/IP Stack? Is the datagram traffic the same on both your product version? I doubt if it is useful, but can you use CTIEZBxx parmlib member to do traces for TCP/IP? About OMVS, I wonder whether some settings can be too small for your product? For example in RACF, the OMVS segment there are some settings which may be enlarged? Just wondering of course. (Disclaimer, It was a very long time ago that I helped to do TCP/IP traces and even that was for specific ports) Good luck and please tell us if you got a solution. (perhaps by writing version x.3? ;-D ) Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
