On 18 Dec 2013 11:02:16 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >On 12/18/2013 10:10 AM, Mark Regan wrote: >> While it is needed to give JES3 NJE over SNA, it is not needed for NJE over >> TCPIP. Since my site has both flavors of JES, we were able to get rid of BDT >> by routing all of our external business partner SNA/NJE connections through >> one of our JES2 SNA/NJE nodes and implementing NJE/TCP on JES2 > >I solved the JES3 SNA/NJE BDT issue *long* before I submitted the NJE >over TCP/IP SHARE requirement. > >Since JES2 comes included with the operating system for JES3 customers, >I set up a dummy JES2 node called "FSNA" (aka "Free SNA," running as a >secondary subsystem) and routed all SNA/NJE traffic through there. > >I presented what I called the "Free SNA" configuration approach at SHARE >to the astonishment of attendees, many of whom were paying for BDT and >learning for the first time that such functionality existed. It wasn't >until I got to the shutdown command that most people finally understood >what it was I was doing. > >I had FSNA JCL procs, IEFSSNxx entries, PPT entries, config files, the >works. As you would expect, the start command was 'START FSNA'. > >But, the shutdown command was '?PJES2.' It wasn't worth the trouble to >zap the JES2 command table to support '?PFSNA'. :D
I wish I had thought of that back in the mid 1980s. The BDT requirement was the final straw pushing my shop from JES3 to JES2 (single CPU shop). My division was sold by a company that was predominantly JES3 to one that was predominantly JES2. Clark Morris ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
