Thanks. If there were a problem with the TCP/IP network, RSCS provides an alternative way to send files and Passthru provides another way into the VM.
If cheap enough, we'd probably want them. Just because other unix systems only have IP doesn't mean we have to settle for that. Actually we have a home grown software maintenance facility that uses RSCS to send files to a service machine that upgrades software on the remote node. Like some other folks we erroneously assumed we'd be able to have RSCS NJE links from our legacy VM systems to the new VM system on the IFL. We're old time VM'ers and know RSCS and Passthru would be nice to have if not a lot of money. On the other hand, we have to keep the cost down on VM and LINUX/390- don't want to make the mainframe look expensive and we would sacrifice the RSCS links and Passthru if needed. Alan Altmark wrote: > On Monday, 04/22/2002 at 02:05 AST, Ann Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Keeping both machines could incur additional software and hardware > costs. > > For now, I just need IBM to verify z/VM 3 really can't run in an IFL. > > If it really can't, we'll just have to deal with it. > > z/VM V3 really CANNOT run on IFLs. And, if I may ask, what do you need > RSCS and PVM for that cannot be handled by FTP or Telnet? (Given that > this is a Linux workload, not traditional apps.) > > Alan Altmark > Sr. Software Engineer > IBM z/VM Development
