Alan, That is certainly a possibility. Another listserv member mentioned that yesterday in a direct email to me.
This VM system was formerly configured as PRIROUTER until our z/OS network administrator had a temporary requirement to define a hipersockets connection to another z/OS system; at that point, I had to change my VSWITCH definitions to NONROUTER because the z/OS systems are IPLd first and I also changed my TCPIP DEVICE definitions to SECROUTER. Those changes did happen since our last test. In converting the TCPIP definition to standard OSA, I would have retained the SECROUTER option, which I understand would have allowed me to assume PRIROUTER status had another PRIROUTER system not been active. There was some confusion about whether any z/OS systems were sharing the OSA port with VM during the test; I heard two different answers to the question. So, it seems plausible that SETing the VSWITCH definition to specify PRIROUTER might have corrected this problem. Its too bad VSWITCH doesn't support a SECROUTER option similar to TCPIP itself. Thanks for the suggestion. Dennis "Alan Altmark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ibm.com> To Sent by: "The IBM IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU z/VM Operating cc System" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject ARK.EDU> Re: Disaster Recovery VSWITCH Networking Issues 10/26/2006 10:01 PM Please respond to "The IBM z/VM Operating System" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ARK.EDU> On Thursday, 10/26/2006 at 03:33 EST, Dennis Schaffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can anyone suggest specific documentation I should gather in the event this > problem occurs during our next DR test? As a guess, the VSWITCH is defaulting to NONROUTER. If you're going to attach a virtual router to the VSWITCH, then you must have PRIROUTER. Remember, the Guest LAN IP addresses are not known to the OSA; only those on the VSWITCH are registered. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott