This has gone completely off track, and in no way resembles or answers my original questions.
We're running zVM 4.2, not 4.2. We're on a 9672, not a z-series, we have a single OSA interface, shared with a zOS image, and no option for adding hardware interfaces, and we don't have any money budgeted for the trial, not even the $500 for the true trial from SuSE. Answers that involve any of the things we don't have don't help. Sorry to be blunt, but I was really looking for which way I should be going, within the walls I have around me. The answers have been fairly much the same as "Put out your resume, and find a job at a company with a different system..." ---- Robert P. Nix internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mayo Clinic phone: 507-284-0844 200 1st St. SW page: 507-255-3450 Rochester, MN 55905 ---- "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different." > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Thornton [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 11:38 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Virtual network topology questions... > > On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 10:57:41AM -0500, Dave Myers wrote: > > So according to the statements below...I CAN use SUSE SLES7 > > to play the guest lan game, using QDIO instead of virtual hipersockets? > > Am I correct in this assumption? > > Any testimony from someone who has setup guest lans with SUSE SLES7? > > Tia > > Dave Myers > > Yeah, as long as you're running one of the more recent patches that > fixes virtual qeth support, it works fine. > > On a virtual LAN, the only difference is whether you specify it as type > QDIO or leave it unset (in the VM LAN definition statment). > > Then if it's a qdio LAN, you define your virtual NIC to the guest as > TYPE QDIO (which really means OSA, since both HiperSockets and OSA are > QDIO devices). > > Virtual OSAs support broadcast (under z/VM 4.3). HiperSockets don't. > That's pretty much the difference between them. They use the same > driver, but OSA is aliased to interface ethX and HiperSockets to hsiX. > > Here's something from an SLES-based guest... > > r2:~ # ifconfig > eth2 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:00:00:00:00 > inet addr:192.168.130.67 Mask:255.255.255.192 > inet6 addr: fe80::200:ff:fe00:0/10 Scope:Link > UP RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1492 Metric:1 > RX packets:473155 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:553105 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 > RX bytes:45294696 (43.1 Mb) TX bytes:161088571 (153.6 Mb) > Interrupt:17 > > eth2:0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:00:00:00:00 > inet addr:192.168.130.68 Mask:255.255.255.192 > UP RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1492 Metric:1 > Interrupt:17 > > hsi0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:00:00:00:00 > inet addr:192.168.129.4 Mask:255.255.255.0 > inet6 addr: fe80::200:ff:fe00:0/10 Scope:Link > UP RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:8192 Metric:1 > RX packets:2517010 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:1719082 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 > RX bytes:1009596522 (962.8 Mb) TX bytes:276571455 (263.7 Mb) > Interrupt:11 > > hsi0:0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:00:00:00:00 > inet addr:192.168.129.5 Mask:255.255.255.0 > UP RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:8192 Metric:1 > Interrupt:11 > > hsi1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:00:00:00:00 > inet addr:192.168.130.2 Mask:255.255.255.192 > inet6 addr: fe80::200:ff:fe00:0/10 Scope:Link > UP RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:8192 Metric:1> > RX packets:1660330 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:2378314 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 > RX bytes:211072990 (201.2 Mb) TX bytes:977121122 (931.8 Mb) > Interrupt:14 > > hsi1:0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:00:00:00:00 > inet addr:192.168.130.4 Mask:255.255.255.192 > UP RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:8192 Metric:1 > Interrupt:14 > > lo Link encap:Local Loopback > inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 > inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host > UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 > RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 > RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b) > > > Notice that I have one "eth" device and two "hsi" devices. These are > all virtual; this router lives on two HiperSockets and one OSA segment. > Also note the dummy addresses (XXXN:0): this is VRT in action; r1 > contains the other side of the pair, but r2 is currently holding the > virtual addresses. Here's the routing table... > > r2:~ # route -n > Kernel IP routing table > Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface > 192.168.131.0 192.168.130.10 255.255.255.192 UG 0 0 0 hsi1 > 192.168.131.64 192.168.130.10 255.255.255.192 UG 0 0 0 hsi1 > 192.168.130.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.192 U 0 0 0 hsi1 > 192.168.130.64 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.192 U 0 0 0 eth2 > 192.168.129.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 hsi0 > 0.0.0.0 192.168.129.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 hsi0 > > > Adam
