Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 05/01/2006
   at 02:36 PM, "Patrick O'Keefe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Well, you're the one with the FAP; I can only argue from what I
>remember,  and that memory is over 15 years old.  My recolection is
>that node type  wasn't code at all; that it was a description of the
>hardware  that  exwecuted the code.

Two different programs on the same hardware can implement two
different protocols. The architecture is determined by behavior, not
by how that behavior is implemented, and it's the software that
determines the behavior, e.g., what is in the XID.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Patrick O'Keefe]

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 23:35:18 -0300, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)  wrote:

>...
>No, you just didn't think it through. The Devil is in the details.
>...
>The entire node is a chunk of code. There is no node type for the
>hardware itself.
>...

Well, you're the one with the FAP; I can only argue from what I remember, 
and that memory is over 15 years old.  My recolection is that node type 
wasn't code at all; that it was a description of the hardware  that 
exwecuted the code.  (About the only thing in SNA that acknowledged the
existance of hardware.)  I know that's how I interpretted it when I wrote 
a brief tutorial on SNA for the company I was leaving.  It won't be the 
first time I've been wrong for over 15 years.

Pat O'Keefe

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/28/2006
   at 03:09 PM, "Patrick O'Keefe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>I think you misunderstood my point. 

No, you just didn't think it through. The Devil is in the details.

>The Finite State Machines in your FAP describe what programs have to 
>do - programs written in whatever is appropriate for the node in 
>question.  a PUCP is a chunk of code executing in the node. 

The entire node is a chunk of code. There is no node type for the
hardware itself.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Patrick O'Keefe) writes:
> Actually, I think it never held up.  As far as I know a node has
> always been hardware and a PU has always bee a program (as described
> in a FAP and probably originally desiged using FAPL).  The PU never
> had to match the node type (although each non-APPN node had a PU
> based on the node's capabilities).  For example, a PU_T1 never ran
> in a node T_1, as far as I know.  (I think a PU_T1 was by definition
> the PU code supporting a device too dumb to have executable code.)
> It always ran on something else - a T_4 (or maybe T_5, but I never
> heard of that implementation).

APPN and SNA were totally different stuff. SNA has been a communication
infrastructure ... that was driven by sscp/ncp (pu5/pu4, vtam/3705).
this was somewhat the communication continuation of the FS objectves
... after FS had been killed
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#futuresys

specific reference regarding major FS objectives:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#16 FS - IBM Future System

despite some of the comments in the above reference ... at the time, I
drew some comparisons between FS project and a cult film that had been
playing non-stop down in central sq. ... at that time I was with the
science center in tech sq., a few blocks from central sq.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech.

in the early SNA time-frame ... my wife and Bert Moldow produced
an alternative architecture that actually represented networking
(being forced to use the label peer-to-peer) ... referred to
as AWP 39. a few past posts mentioning AWP39.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004n.html#38 RS/6000 in Sysplex Environment
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004p.html#31 IBM 3705 and UC.5
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#8 EBCDIC to 6-bit and back
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#15 DUMP Datasets and SMS
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#17 DUMP Datasets and SMS
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005q.html#27 What ever happened to Tandem
and NonStop OS ?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#23 Channel Distances

my wife went on to serve a stint in POK in charge of loosely-coupled
architecture ... where she had numerous battles with the SNA
organization. she was also responsible for peer-coupled shared data
architecture ... which initially saw major uptake with ims hot-standby
... and later in parallel sysplex.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#shareddata

at the time APPN was attempting to be announced, one of the primary
persons behind APPN and I happened report to the same executive. The
SNA organization had non-concurred with the announcement of APPN and
the issue was being escalated. After six weeks or so, there was
finally approval for the announcement of APPN (out of corporate)
... but only after the announcement letter was carefully rewritten to
avoid implying any possible connection between APPN and SNA. The
original APPN architecture was "AWP164".

also, almost every organization that ever built a box to the "official"
(even detailed internal) SNA specifications found that it wouldn't
actually work with NCP ... it first had to be tweaked in various ways to
make it work.

supposedly the drive for FS ... as mentioned in the previous reference
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#16 FS - IBM Future System

had been the appearance of the clone controllers.

this is one of the things that I had been involved with as an
undergraduate in the 60s. I had tried to make the 2702
telecommunication controller do something that it couldn't quite
actually do. this somewhat prompted a project at the univ. to build
its own telecommunication controller; reverse engineer the channel
interface, build a channel interface card, and program a Interdata/3
minicomputer to emulate 2702 functions. Somebody wrote an article
blaiming four of us for starting the clone controller business
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#360pcm

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Patrick O'Keefe]

On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:34:17 -0300, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)  wrote:

>...
>>Actually, I think it never held up.  As far as I know a node has
>>always been hardware and a PU has always bee a program
>
>In such boxen there was no node type or PU type independent of the
>software.
>...

I think you misunderstood my point.  All boxen.  The Finite State 
Machines in your FAP describe what programs have to do - programs written
in whatever is appropriate for the node in question.  a PUCP is a chunk
of code executing in the node.  It may be microcoded, but it's a program.
It may be executing on some other node on behalf of a piece of hardware
that is too dumb to execute a program (like the way NTO let a TTY device
participate in the SNA world.)

Pat O'Keefe

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Chris Mason]

Pat,

Well, you have a point regarding the baggage that the ACTPU[1] may carry. So
you're right that you should check any proposed candidate in order to be
sure it isn't just a "fix" for the benefit of "external" DLUR, for example,
managing the adjacent link station.

[1] I think the DACTPU - hitherto - is baggage-free.

Let us look at the three operands I identified.

a. The F/NF value in the second suboperand of the DISCNT parameter

This is an indicator which - according to the VTAM description[2] - is for
consideration by the remote node. In architectural terms, it is for the PU
to pass to the PUCP of the remote node - as an internal signal as the
developers with an eye to architecture would say - to initiate "discontact"
of the adjacent link station. Whether the type 2 PU bothers or not is an
implementation option.

However I think it's fair to say that the F/NF indicator does involve the
architectural PU.

[2] 

If you code F or use the default, "final-use" status is indicated and the
connection can be ended. If you code NF, "not-final-use" status is indicated
and the connection should not be ended.

Each device has its own requirements regarding "final-use" status. To
determine whether to code F or NF for a given device, consult the
appropriate installation publication for the device.



Of course, it has come to our notice that one implementation of the boundary
function for nodes which can support type 2 PUs *may* (I have not found any
formal documentation for this) pick up the "final-use" indicator and act on
it. This is SNASw.

b. The LUGROUP operand

This causes the PU to learn that whatever local means to support
SSCP-dependent LUs exist on activation should be signaled to the SSCP and
that a local configuration change involving the addition of the means to
support an SSCP-dependent LU should also be signaled to the SSCP. Again by
means of internal processes, the PU learns that an "LU"[3] is available or
becomes available to the node and it sends an NMVT which provides a range of
parameters, including the machine type, to the SSCP over the SSCP-PU
session. VTAM takes this information and drives the ISTEXCSD exit. The
standard supplied, and apparently supported, exit uses the machine type to
map to a model LU statement.

[3] For example, for a 3174, this can be a coax connector to a display
device in one of the coax ports.

Again I think it's fair to say that the LUGROUP operand involves the
architectural PU.

c. The INCLUD0E operand

This operand has been introduced since I had extensive testing and tracing
facilities to hand so I have to rely on documentation for how it works. This
is what "SNA Formats" says happens when YES is specified:



Sending node requests the DLUR or NCP boundary function to include Network
Name control vectors on ACTPUs and ACTLUs for this PU and its associated
LUs.



Thus it seems it is an instruction carried in the ACTPU to the boundary
function requiring it to add the CV to the ACTPU when it is passed on and
ACTLU requests as they fly by. This is a network management "thing" and so
necessarily involves the PU as the architectural entity responsible for
local node management.

Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Patrick O'Keefe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Friday, 28 April, 2006 7:23 AM
Subject: Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe


> On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 03:35:32 +0200, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> >...
> >The test over whether a parameter/operand really relates to the PU entity
> >rather than the adjacent link station or to the boundary function or to
some
> >function with VTAM is whether it affects a byte or a bit in the ACTPU or
the
> >DACTPU. ...
>
> A very persuasive argument ... if you accept that an ACTPU/DACTPU has
> anything to do with a PU rather than a linkstation, or that the data in
> the ACTPU/DACTPU are used by the PU.
>
> Pat O'Keefe

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Chris Mason]

Pat,

It's interesting that the "independent study" material I dug out of my
basement, dating from 1977, keeps using descriptions such as PU.Tx node,
where x is 1, 2, 4 or 5. This seems to show that back in the early days of
SNA there was a tight association between the PU type and the node type
which, probably only had to be broken when the clever folk who dreamed up
LEN and APPN decided to base the new architecture on the type 2 node and the
associated transmission header format identifier (FID) 2[1] path information
units.

[1] Those reading this who are not died-in-the-wool SNA folk should know
that the fact that the node type number is 2 and the FID number is 2 is
coincidental since, in essence, both belong to different number ranges
running in opposite directions which happen to cross at the number 2.

Reflecting on the issue of what is "hardware" and what is "software", I
remind myself that there's nothing "real" that cannot become "virtual" by
the application of the right "smoke and mirrors".

I thought I'd look through whatever documentation I had on this matter of
the type 1 PU being housed not in the type 1 node but in the boundary
function (only the type 4 node, NCP, boundary function in practice as you
said). All I found was my "Subarea SNA Concepts" presentation originally put
together in 1985 in order to force-feed SNA into VM folk who were going to
have to deal with the then new VM VTAM. However the last change date was
1996 so it could have been modified at any time in over 10 years. It's clear
from some of the diagrams and notes that I was firmly of the opinion that
the type 1 PU was handled completely within the NCP - and I had to squirm a
little to explain why the PUCP and the PU itself were not co-resident in,
say, a 3767.



Logically there is a PUCP function in peripheral nodes so that the resources
representing the link to the subarea node may be activated. SNA architecture
is a little distorted in that a Type 1 node does not contain a PU (the
attached subarea node performs PU functions on the node's behalf) but the
initial activation of the link to the subarea node is logically required.
Perhaps the architectural "bypass" is to postulate that the PU function is
transferred to the adjacent subarea node after the link resources become
active. The PUCP function in peripheral nodes is not significant for
definition purposes.



and later



If the peripheral node were a Type 1 node, the activation request for the PU
would not be propagated to the peripheral node. In fact, there are no longer
any actual devices marketed today which implement a Type 1 node. The only
implementation is in special programming in the NCP ... .



Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Patrick O'Keefe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Thursday, 27 April, 2006 9:57 PM
Subject: Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe


> On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:42:18 +0200, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >...
> >... Thus making the description of the node depend upon
> >the type of the PU it contains, as is implied by "... it is the PU that
> has
> >a type designation and that 'type i node' is an alias for 'PU_Ti node'"
> >obviously breaks down. In the new world where the "PU" entity is
optional,
> >the type designation has to go with the "node" entity - and there's no
> need
> >to drag the type designation of the "PU" entity along with it when the
> type
> >designation of the "node" entity require sub-designations.
> >...
>
> Actually, I think it never held up.  As far as I know a node has always
> been hardware and a PU has always bee a program (as described in a FAP
> and probably originally desiged using FAPL).  The PU never had to match
> the node type (although each non-APPN node had a PU based on the node's
> capabilities).  For example, a PU_T1 never ran in a node T_1, as far as I
> know.  (I think a PU_T1 was by definition the PU code supporting a device
> too dumb to have executable code.)  It always ran on something else -
> a T_4 (or maybe T_5, but I never heard of that implementation).
>
> Pat O'Keefe

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Chris Mason]

Ed,

It was ever thus - or at least as long as I have been contributing to "fora"
such as the IBM-MAIN list/group.

As far as Thomas is concerned I know I am - and I suspect Pat at least is -
twiddling my/his thumbs until Thomas comes back to us with sufficient
details for us to be able to work on as he has more or less promised - see
his post of Monday, 24 April, 2006 6:57 PM - as we eagerly scan each post
with the Subject title.

It's part of the fun of participating in these gatherings that such
wonderful tangents develop and I hope some of the 2000 plus attendees gets
something out of these often arcane discussions. Take the recent - and still
ongoing - one sparked by  needing to resolve the input to the linkage editor
that exposed every last aspect of the REP card. On the other hand there's
been the one about "offensive language" as perceived by the so-called "net
nannies", the tone of which I tried to lift to no avail :-)

I do hope Thomas doesn't consider it "bad form" to drag us back to the
business discussion. We await his next input - but we won't (a)bate our
breath I think.

Actually, it's not at all certain that the contention implicit in your first
sentence is correct, that is, the "using IP" part. That's some indication of
how far we haven't really got with this query.

Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Ed Rabara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Friday, 28 April, 2006 9:01 PM
Subject: Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe


> >On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:34:17 -0300, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
> >
> >>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/27/2006
> >>   at 02:57 PM, "Patrick O'Keefe" said:
> >>
> >>Actually, I think it never held up.  As far as I know a node has
> >>always been hardware and a PU has always bee a program
> >
> >In such boxen there was no node type or PU type independent of the
> >software.
>
> Thomas Lawrence wrote to the list asking for help to define an AS/400 to
> VTAM using IP. Based on the sample he provided, it appears that his
> current VTAM connection is Token-Ring to a 3745 TIC.
>
> Someone suggested that the latest OS/400 might support connecting to VTAM
> using Enterprise Extender. The discussion went off on tangent from there.
>
> Question to Thomas: Have you been able to pose to your AS/400 counterpart
> whether support for Enterprise Extender (EE) is now available on the
> version of OS/400 on the "new" machine? Inquiring minds want to
know.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Ed Rabara]

>On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:34:17 -0300, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
>
>>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/27/2006
>>   at 02:57 PM, "Patrick O'Keefe" said:
>>
>>Actually, I think it never held up.  As far as I know a node has
>>always been hardware and a PU has always bee a program
>
>In such boxen there was no node type or PU type independent of the
>software.

Thomas Lawrence wrote to the list asking for help to define an AS/400 to 
VTAM using IP. Based on the sample he provided, it appears that his 
current VTAM connection is Token-Ring to a 3745 TIC. 

Someone suggested that the latest OS/400 might support connecting to VTAM 
using Enterprise Extender. The discussion went off on tangent from there.

Question to Thomas: Have you been able to pose to your AS/400 counterpart 
whether support for Enterprise Extender (EE) is now available on the 
version of OS/400 on the "new" machine? Inquiring minds want to know.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/27/2006
   at 02:57 PM, "Patrick O'Keefe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Actually, I think it never held up.  As far as I know a node has
>always been hardware and a PU has always bee a program

In such boxen there was no node type or PU type independent of the
software.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Patrick O'Keefe]

On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 03:35:32 +0200, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>...
>The test over whether a parameter/operand really relates to the PU entity
>rather than the adjacent link station or to the boundary function or to some
>function with VTAM is whether it affects a byte or a bit in the ACTPU or the
>DACTPU. ...

A very persuasive argument ... if you accept that an ACTPU/DACTPU has 
anything to do with a PU rather than a linkstation, or that the data in 
the ACTPU/DACTPU are used by the PU.

Pat O'Keefe

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Patrick O'Keefe]

On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:42:18 +0200, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:

>...
>... Thus making the description of the node depend upon
>the type of the PU it contains, as is implied by "... it is the PU that 
has
>a type designation and that 'type i node' is an alias for 'PU_Ti node'"
>obviously breaks down. In the new world where the "PU" entity is optional,
>the type designation has to go with the "node" entity - and there's no 
need
>to drag the type designation of the "PU" entity along with it when the 
type
>designation of the "node" entity require sub-designations.
>...

Actually, I think it never held up.  As far as I know a node has always
been hardware and a PU has always bee a program (as described in a FAP 
and probably originally desiged using FAPL).  The PU never had to match
the node type (although each non-APPN node had a PU based on the node's 
capabilities).  For example, a PU_T1 never ran in a node T_1, as far as I
know.  (I think a PU_T1 was by definition the PU code supporting a device
too dumb to have executable code.)  It always ran on something else - 
a T_4 (or maybe T_5, but I never heard of that implementation).  

Pat O'Keefe

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Chris Mason]

Shmuel,

That is why I added the following explanation/excuse for PU T2.0 being
mentioned (and then explained away as being just the same as PU T2 in that
explanatory note):



I suspect that PU T2.0 is mentioned because of the earlier rule that a node
always has a PU of the same type. Thus when the type 2 node became the type
2.0 node, the architects felt that they were obliged, very, very strictly -
as opposed to only very strictly :-) - to call the PU a type 2.0 PU quite
unnecessarily really since it requires that explanatory note in section 6.1.



The "earlier rule" was the one you mentioned from "the original manuals".

Moreover there's no question that a pure type 2.1 node, that is, one not
containing SSCP-dependent resources, "pure" in the sense that it can quite
happily communicate with other type 2.1 nodes with nary an SSCP in sight,
does *not* contain a PU. Thus making the description of the node depend upon
the type of the PU it contains, as is implied by "... it is the PU that has
a type designation and that 'type i node' is an alias for 'PU_Ti node'"
obviously breaks down. In the new world where the "PU" entity is optional,
the type designation has to go with the "node" entity - and there's no need
to drag the type designation of the "PU" entity along with it when the type
designation of the "node" entity require sub-designations.

I hope that's clear; it doesn't need documentation, only logic.

Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Thursday, 27 April, 2006 4:49 PM
Subject: Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe


> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/27/2006
>at 03:35 AM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >Oh horror! In checking this last item I found the following in the
> >description of the ACTPU request in the "SNA Formats" manual: "PU
> >T2.0|2.1" in the text alongside the X'0E' control vector. The
> >gangrene is spreading into the vital organs!
>
> Except that the original manuals defined node type in terms of PU
> type. The "gangrene", if such it be, is older than PU_T2.1!
>
> -- 
>  Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
>  ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
> We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
> (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/27/2006
   at 03:35 AM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Oh horror! In checking this last item I found the following in the
>description of the ACTPU request in the "SNA Formats" manual: "PU
>T2.0|2.1" in the text alongside the X'0E' control vector. The
>gangrene is spreading into the vital organs! 

Except that the original manuals defined node type in terms of PU
type. The "gangrene", if such it be, is older than PU_T2.1!
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Patrick O'Keefe]

On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 03:35:32 +0200, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>...
>Incidentally what is this web interface with which you are having so much
>trouble?
>...

http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Pat O'Keefe

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/26/2006
   at 10:34 AM, "Patrick O'Keefe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>A search of the web shows an -02 version of
>SNA FORMAT AND PROTOCOL REFERENCE: ARCHITECTURAL LOGIC (SC30-3112).

That's the edition I have.

>If you have a copy of that I'd strongly recommend you hold onto it.

Indeed. But it has quite a few errors in it.

>But I even more strongly recomend you let me keep it safe for you.

Something about cold dead fingers ;-)

Of course, I'll swap it for a complete current set.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Chris Mason]

Pat,

Comments are embedded.

Incidentally what is this web interface with which you are having so much
trouble?

Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Patrick O'Keefe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, 26 April, 2006 5:34 PM
Subject: Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe
...

>
> This is my 4th attempt to reply to this posting.  Please forgive me if one
> or more of the previous copies show up.
>
...
>
> If you have a copy of that I'd strongly recommend you hold onto it.
> But I even more strongly recommend you let me keep it safe for you.
> I haven't seen a copy for about 15 years.

I checked my basement to see if this manual was among the horded items and
I'm afraid it is not. The oldest I found was "SNA Environment - Logical Data
Flow", Modules 1-5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, an independent Study Program from 1977.
(Module 9: 3274 and 3276, 1979). But I also found "SNA Technical Overview",
GC30-3073-04, January 1994, which might help us with what follows.

> The old FAPs and other (redundantly named) SNA Architecture manuals
> indeed mention CPs, but those are SSCP, NCP, and (the seldom mentioned)
> PUCP.  I'm pretty These manuals predated the APPN CP.

CP belongs only to an APPN node or a LEN node.

In the description of SSCP, there's no mention of CP so I guess we need to
keep the understanding that the "CP" in VTAM is an SSCP when it's dealing
with subarea matters and a CP when it's dealing with APPN matters - and also
keep in mind that a supposedly pure VTAM End Node or Network Node always has
a single node subarea "network" inside it ruled by an SSCP.

NCP means "Network Control *Program*" so there's not supposed to be any hint
in the name NCP that it has "CP" capabilities. Of course an NCP does have
the architectural PUCP entity contained within it.

The PUCP is interesting. In strict architectural terms, any subarea or
peripheral node - that is, a node not tainted by these new-fangled ideas
that started with LEN nodes - needs to have either an SSCP or a PUCP.

An SSCP is apparently the source of all activations but, logically, it can't
be. Who, anthropomorphising, is going to be responsible for activating the
link and adjacent link station inside a peripheral node? In architectural
terms, it is the PUCP inside the peripheral node. We need never worry about
this other than acknowledging that it must - logically - exist.

When we come to type 4, NCP, nodes, it becomes a little more interesting.
I'm not precisely sure when the PUCP inside the NCP needed to become
acknowledged. Clearly the same issue arises that, in order for the first
SSCP to be able to activate resources inside the NCP, it must have an active
route to the NCP PU and its subordinate resources. This can happen only when
the PUCP has activated the link and adjacent link station *towards* the type
5, VTAM, node containing this first SSCP. This activation was assumed for
NCP channel resources until channels were defined as GROUP/LINE/PU. It was a
requirement to define this activation by means of the MONLINK operand for,
initially, SDLC links. With the MONLINK operand came the recognition that
the PUCP exists. When the MONLINK operand could specify CONTINUOUS, that is,
the PUCP ownership was not given up when an SSCP also activated the link and
adjacent link station, it was even important that the status of the PUCP was
recognised as being the equal of an SSCP. Thus, if MONLINK=CONTINUOUS
somewhere, the BUILD statement MAXSSCP operand needed to take the PUCP into
account.

Having got that out of the way - based on my lecture notes, I turned to the
"SNA Technical Overview" manual. Here the PUCP is given a very lowly role.
It is not acknowledged in the Glossary but does appear, as "physical unit
control point", in the Index. Looking up where it is mentioned it appears in
small print as a footnote in the section on "Hierarchy of Subarea Network
Activation" - although it's right there in the middle of each box
representing a type 4, NCP, node and, what luck!, tucked away at the bottom
of each box representing a type 2.0 peripheral node, where, in the box
alongside representing a type 2.1 node, CP appears - which takes us neatly
to the next point.

> I think the point Chris was making about the PU type is that a PUCP was
> never an architected part of a T-2.1 node so any PU emulator running on
> a T_2.1 node is, by definition, emulating a T_2.0 PU.

Absolutely, there's no need for a PUCP in a type 2.1, LEN or APPN, node
since they necessarily have a CP to do all the activation work and, in fact,
all the functions that were previously performed by the PU except, of
course, having to be activated by an SSCP prior to the SSCP activating the
LU resources. W

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Patrick O'Keefe]

On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 11:09:30 -0300, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)  wrote:

This is my 4th attempt to reply to this posting.  Please forgive me if one 
or more of the previous copies show up.

>...
>>I think the text you found logically, if not chronologically,
>>precedes the introduction of the type 2.1 node and the introduction
>>of the "control point" as the entity managing the node rather than
>>always the PU.
>
>Chronologically, which is why I made sure to mention that it was old.
>But the PUCP was already there. If you have a recent FAPL manual, is
>there a section on nomenclature around p I-8?
>...

I think all pre-APPN FAPs are very old.  A posting on another forum
nmentioned that they had never been copied to a (modern) electronic 
format.  They were only available in hardcopy and never went through
very many updates.  A search of the web shows an -02 version of
SNA FORMAT AND PROTOCOL REFERENCE: ARCHITECTURAL LOGIC (SC30-3112).

If you have a copy of that I'd strongly recommend you hold onto it.
But I even more strongly recomend you let me keep it safe for you.
I haven't seen a copy for about 15 years.

The old FAPs and other (redundantly named) SNA Architecture manuals
indeed mention CPs, but thoses are SSCP, NCP, and (the seldom mentioned)
PUCP.  I'm pretty These manuals predated the APPN CP.

I think the point Chris was making about the PU type is that a PUCP was
never an architected part of a T-2.1 node so any PU emulator running on
a T_2.1 node is, by definition, emulating a T_2.0 PU.  

I'm pretty sure Chris is right, but he unfortunately has a world of
implementations and documentation arrayed against him.  (Sort of like 
trying stamp out misuse of "USS" as the name of Unix on z/OS.)  Every 
PU-type parameter I've ever seen allows (and ignores) the meaningless
.0 or .1 qualification.  And VTAM displays of PUs show the node type
rather than PU type.

This misuse seems to fit, though.  Almost every parm on almost every PU
definition has nothing to do with a PUCP.  They are almost all parms 
for linkstations, not PU.  Since almost every other description of a
PU is bogus, why should PY-type be an exception?  (I say "almost"
because Chris has almost convinced me that a couple of the VTAM and NCP
parms on a PU definition actual relate to the PU.  Almost.  I'd check 
that if I only had a copy of the FAP.)

Pat O'Keefe

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Patrick O'Keefe]

On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 00:37:11 +0200, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:

>...
>I'm copying what came into my reader. Did you hit the wrong button
>somewhere. I can't see anything new.
>...

I use the web interface to IBM-Main.  This has recently been restructured, 
and has the "Quote Original Message" button right above the "Send" button.
I've been known to hit Send instead of Quote, resulting in an empty post.
This time I it looks like I quoted but did nothing else.  I'm not sure
what I did.  Too bad.  I'm sure it was a truely brilliant posting, but I 
must have abandoned it.  (Maybe that was where I begged Shmuel to sell me 
his copy of the SNA FAP.)

Pat O'Keefe
 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Chris Mason]

Pat,

I'm copying what came into my reader. Did you hit the wrong button
somewhere. I can't see anything new.

Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Patrick O'Keefe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Monday, 24 April, 2006 10:57 PM
Subject: Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe


On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 11:09:30 -0300, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/24/2006
>   at 02:26 AM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>>I think the text you found logically, if not chronologically,
>>precedes the introduction of the type 2.1 node and the introduction
>>of the "control point" as the entity managing the node rather than
>>always the PU.
>
>Chronologically, which is why I made sure to mention that it was old.
>But the PUCP was already there. If you have a recent FAPL manual, is
>there a section on nomenclature around p I-8?
>
>--
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
> ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>;
>We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
>(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Patrick O'Keefe]

On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 11:09:30 -0300, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) <[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]> wrote:

>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/24/2006
>   at 02:26 AM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>>I think the text you found logically, if not chronologically,
>>precedes the introduction of the type 2.1 node and the introduction
>>of the "control point" as the entity managing the node rather than
>>always the PU.
>
>Chronologically, which is why I made sure to mention that it was old.
>But the PUCP was already there. If you have a recent FAPL manual, is
>there a section on nomenclature around p I-8?
>
>--
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
> ISO position; see ;
>We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
>(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
>Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
>=

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Thomas Lawrence]

Some of these questions I am asking the originator of the project and have
not gotten an answer yet. 

Some I can answer: Yes, all of the sessions are 5250/3270, some are
printers, but they are still considered 'of that type'.

The other 3 questions will remain unanswered for now. 
Sorry.



On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 09:14:52 -0300, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/21/2006
>   at 06:20 PM, Thomas Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>>Does this help?
>
>It still leaves a few questions un answered.
>
>Are all of the sessions on the AS/400 either 3270 or 5250? If not,
>what other types of session do you run?
>
>How will the *new* AS/400 be connected?
>
>What is the relevance of the IP addresses?
>
>Do you, or do you plan to, run TN3270 on your PC's? Do you need 3270
>access from real terminals as opposed to only from PC's?
>
>--
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
> ISO position; see 
>We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
>(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
>Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
>=

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Thomas Lawrence]

USSTAB - fine - but why only some of the LUs?

To reply to that question only, you don't need USSTAB's for printers. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/24/2006
   at 02:26 AM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>I think the text you found logically, if not chronologically,
>precedes the introduction of the type 2.1 node and the introduction
>of the "control point" as the entity managing the node rather than
>always the PU.

Chronologically, which is why I made sure to mention that it was old.
But the PUCP was already there. If you have a recent FAPL manual, is
there a section on nomenclature around p I-8?
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Chris Mason]

Shmuel,

If this were clearly documented anywhere I could come down somewhat harder
on those who propagate these supposedly qualified descriptions of the PU
entity.

Maybe I can demonstrate in a negative way. Searching for 2.1 in the SNA
Formats manual gives 4 hits.

The first, strangely enough, is in the description of ACTPU and refers to
the Format 1 ACTPU being used only by a type 2.1 node which indicates in the
format 3 XID that the "PU Capabilities" vector may be present.

The second is actually quite helpful. It is in 6.1, "Introduction to Request
Units", point 8:



A type 2.1 (T2.1) node contains a control point (CP) rather than a physical
unit (PU). However, it can support SSCP-PU T2.0 flows, in which case the
designations "SSCP -> PU T2" or "SSCP -> PU" in the RU descriptions should
be assumed to apply to the T2.1 node as well.



I can't really explain the third hit but the 2.1 refers neither to a PU nor
a node.

The fourth hit is a section reference.

Since the helpful second hit mentioned that "type 2.1" is abbreviated as
"T2.1", I checked hits using "T2.1" also. The 9 hits here were all for T2.1
nodes (except one where the entity is a "link station" rather than a
"node").

I think the text you found logically, if not chronologically, precedes the
introduction of the type 2.1 node and the introduction of the "control
point" as the entity managing the node rather than always the PU. (I know,
if you look hard enough you'll be able to find references to an SNA entity
called the PU control point, PUCP.) In the simple days of pure subarea
networking, there was the type 5 node with its SSCP and type 5 PU (VTAM),
the type 4 node with its type 4 PU (NCP) and the type 2 node with its type 2
PU (all the peripheral nodes except a few rather basic ones). The basic
nodes were type 1 nodes with a type 1 PU which, oddly enough, stayed within
the NCP. Also whenever NCP needed to provide a home for an internal LU, the
structure of a type 1 node was built internally as, for example, with the
NTO "add-on" product.

Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Sunday, 23 April, 2006 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe


> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/22/2006
>at 07:02 PM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >[5] A PU is always type 2. There is no qualification possible for the
> >"2". There are masses of misleading instances of the horrible term PU
> >2.1 - it hurts my fingers to type it - out there, some of it
> >shamefully at the hands of VTAM developers who know they know better
> >- just try asking one. The only trivial excuse is that "PU' takes up
> >less space than "node". In other words, it's "node" that can be
> >qualified as type 2.0 or type 2.1, not "PU".
>
> Do you have documentation for that/ While admittedly old, my copy of
> Format and Protocol Reference Manual claims that it is the PU that has
> a type designation and that "type i node" is an alias for "PU_Ti node"
>
> -- 
>  Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
>  ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
> We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
> (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/21/2006
   at 06:20 PM, Thomas Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Does this help?

It still leaves a few questions un answered.

Are all of the sessions on the AS/400 either 3270 or 5250? If not,
what other types of session do you run?

How will the *new* AS/400 be connected?

What is the relevance of the IP addresses?

Do you, or do you plan to, run TN3270 on your PC's? Do you need 3270
access from real terminals as opposed to only from PC's?
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/22/2006
   at 07:02 PM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>[5] A PU is always type 2. There is no qualification possible for the
>"2". There are masses of misleading instances of the horrible term PU
>2.1 - it hurts my fingers to type it - out there, some of it
>shamefully at the hands of VTAM developers who know they know better
>- just try asking one. The only trivial excuse is that "PU' takes up
>less space than "node". In other words, it's "node" that can be
>qualified as type 2.0 or type 2.1, not "PU".

Do you have documentation for that/ While admittedly old, my copy of
Format and Protocol Reference Manual claims that it is the PU that has
a type designation and that "type i node" is an alias for "PU_Ti node"
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Chris Mason]

pendent LU 6.2 LUs that there is a guarantee that, having
started sessions, a total of three sessions can be started without needing
to scrap with other LU 6.2 session sets for additional control blocks. You
will need two sessions for "change number of sessions" (CNOS) purposes, the
SNASVCMG sessions, and so there will be 1 additional control block reserved
for a "business", QPCSUPP, session.

A much better approach than worrying about how many additional session
control blocks to try to reserve is to use the "dynamic pool" capabilities
in NCP, associated with the BUILD statement DYNPOOL operand. This way you
can expand LU 6.2 session control block requirements into the general,
probably unconstrained, buffer pool.

-

I notice you have only one SSCP-independent LU. It may be useful to know
that you can use the CP as an application LU. The CP function, operating
through the LU logic in the node, distinguishes itself by use of the CPSVCMG
mode name. There is no reason at all why the "business" sessions shouldn't
use the same LU name as the CP. This would avoid defining the
SSCP-independent LU on the AS/400. Of course, I expect this appears to be
such a trivial matter as not to be worth considering as excessive work when
dozens of SSCP-dependent LUs have to be defined.

Note that only some mainframe applications need static definitions of the
LUs which will be used to establish sessions with the application LU(s).
CICS used to be such a mainframe application but, thankfully, the
"autoinstall" function was provided. NetView in the form of NOSP used to
many decades ago. TSO never has and HCF, which I see mentioned, never has
either.

---

Desi,

Now the comments, additional to the above, where relevant, on your
definitions.

Do you match the connecting AS/400 with the switched PU definition based on
CPNAME or the IDBLK and IDNUM combination? I can't tell from your
definitions since it depends on the SWNORDER start option. The default is
SWNORDER=(CPNAME,FIRST) meaning that the first attempt at matching is on the
CP name and only afterwards on the node identification field (IDBLK/IDNUM).
It may be you really don't need the IDNUM and IDBLK operands.

BATCH became obsolete in NCP V4R3 which takes us back to the days before the
3745 became the workhorse of SNA.

It is a mystery why PASSLIM was ever a switched PU operand. It is all about
SDLC multipoint operation: how many SDLC frames to send to one secondary
station on the multipoint line before starting to send frames to another. A
switched line only ever has one station so the operand cannot possibly ever
apply. (The same goes for IRETRY.) Unfortunately I wasn't paying close
attention when switched support was introduced to VTAM and NCP sometime in
the late 1970s. It may be that it was introduced together with the closely
related "dynamic reconfiguration" function. The same control vector (CV),
the famous X'43', Extended SDLC station", is used for both and it may be
that the VTAM developer saw that PASSLIM and IRETRY had fields in the CV and
so provided operands for them in the switched PU statement. Pure
speculation.

The appearance of GID and PID are rather odd. I rather doubt you intend to
use the VARY PATH command to enable and disable your token ring switched
path definitions - but what do I know of your installation.

I see you have only the one SSCP-independent LU definition. This is
definitely a situation where using the CP LU, as I described above, might be
found less work.

I think the RESSCB=1 does not more than make sure you can start the two
SNASVCMG, CNOS, sessions which may not be what you intended.

Since you have only this one SSCP-independent LU definition, the
SSCPFM=USSSCS specification isn't doing anything for you.

Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Thomas Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Saturday, 22 April, 2006 1:20 AM
Subject: Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe


> So many responses, so little I know. I believe the project (as my boss is
> wont to call it) to connect the 'new' as400 to the mainframe, is probably
> (but I'm not completely sure of this) going to be running the same
programs
> the older one did. They did mostly inhouse apps of a database nature, and
> some ftp. That probably will not change. The reason they need to connect
to
> the mainframe is that their 'terminals' (read pc's) do double duty, i.e.,
> they are mainframe terminals (CICS mainly) and also AS400 terminals when
the
> need arises. So, in effect, the AS400 is one menu selection off a USSTAB
> provided by VTAM. In addition, there are AS400 terminals which access
> applications on the mainframe. The following is the SWNET definition
> currently in effect:
> 
> *
> H29C881 VBUILD TYPE=SWNET

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Chris Mason]

aps what's happened is that it's so long ago anyone had to
work with this environment all the skills have been forgotten.

Just reading your 3 posts together one more time, be sure that an IP address
never replaces a CP name, they are "chalk and cheese".

Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Thomas Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Saturday, 22 April, 2006 1:20 AM
Subject: Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe


> So many responses, so little I know. I believe the project (as my boss is
> wont to call it) to connect the 'new' as400 to the mainframe, is probably
> (but I'm not completely sure of this) going to be running the same
programs
> the older one did. They did mostly inhouse apps of a database nature, and
> some ftp. That probably will not change. The reason they need to connect
to
> the mainframe is that their 'terminals' (read pc's) do double duty, i.e.,
> they are mainframe terminals (CICS mainly) and also AS400 terminals when
the
> need arises. So, in effect, the AS400 is one menu selection off a USSTAB
> provided by VTAM. In addition, there are AS400 terminals which access
> applications on the mainframe. The following is the SWNET definition
> currently in effect:
> 
> *
> H29C881 VBUILD TYPE=SWNET,MAXGRP=2,MAXNO=4
> *
> P29C881  PUADDR=13, REQ'D, BUT NOT USEDX
>CPNAME=S1023743, AS400 NETA CPNAME  X
>PUTYPE=2,BECOMES T2.1 AFTER XID3X
>MAXPATH=4,  X
>MAXOUT=1,SHOULD MATCH MODE QPCSUPP  X
>DISCNT=NO,   MAY NEED TO CHANGE X
>ISTATUS=ACTIVE, X
>SSCPFM=USSSCS,   USSSCS RECOMMENDED X
>MODETAB=ISTINCLM,   X
>DLOGMOD=SNX32702,DEFAULT FOR EM5250 DEVSX
>VPACING=0
> *
> *
> D29C881  PATH  GRPNM=TRNLG1,   X
>DIALNO=0008400012923743, TIC/DSAP/AS400 LCLTRADDR   X
>REDIAL=7,THE DEFAULT IS 3   X
>USE=YES
> *
> AS400C   LULOCADDR=0,   AS400 APPN LCLLOCNAME  X
>MODETAB=AMODS400,WHERE QPCSUPP IS DEFINED   X
>DLOGMOD=QPCSUPP, QPCSUPP IS REQUIREDX
>RESSCB=2 # OF SCB RESERVED IN NCP
> *
> *
> *   FOLLOWING LU'S GIVE AS/400 TERMS ACCESS TO MAINFRAME
> *   THE AS/400 IS RESPONSIBLE FOR 3270 EMULATION. THESE
> *   ARE 'REAL' DEVICES.  THEY NEED TO BE DEFINED TO THE
> *   MAINFRAME APPLICATIONS WHICH THEY WILL ACCESS.
> *
> T29C8812 LULOCADDR=2JB M00-0463
> T29C8813 LULOCADDR=3JB M00-0463
> T29C8814 LULOCADDR=4JB M00-0463
> T29C8815 LULOCADDR=5JB M00-0463
> T29C8816 LULOCADDR=6,USSTAB=USS03S11
> T29C8817 LULOCADDR=7,USSTAB=USS03S11
> T29C8818 LULOCADDR=8,USSTAB=USS03S11
> T29C8819 LULOCADDR=9,USSTAB=USS03S08
> T29C881A LULOCADDR=10   *HCF/DHCF TERMINAL
> T29C881B LULOCADDR=11,USSTAB=USS03S11
> T29C881C LULOCADDR=12,USSTAB=USS03S11
> T29C881D LULOCADDR=13,USSTAB=USS03S11
> T29C881E LULOCADDR=14,USSTAB=USS03S11  PO 10/24/94 M940394  E239 T
> T29C881F LULOCADDR=15,USSTAB=USS03S27
> T29C881G LULOCADDR=16,USSTAB=USS03S27
> .
> .
> .
> 
> I'm not going to quote the whole thing, but you get this idea. This AS400
is
> connected off a TIC on the 3745, TRNLG1 is a LINE GROUP, H29C881 is a SW
SNA
> MAJ NODE.
>
> Does this help?
>
> And thanks for all the suggestions so far.
> TL

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Thomas Lawrence]

So many responses, so little I know. I believe the project (as my boss is
wont to call it) to connect the 'new' as400 to the mainframe, is probably
(but I'm not completely sure of this) going to be running the same programs
the older one did. They did mostly inhouse apps of a database nature, and
some ftp. That probably will not change. The reason they need to connect to
the mainframe is that their 'terminals' (read pc's) do double duty, i.e.,
they are mainframe terminals (CICS mainly) and also AS400 terminals when the
need arises. So, in effect, the AS400 is one menu selection off a USSTAB
provided by VTAM. In addition, there are AS400 terminals which access
applications on the mainframe. The following is the SWNET definition 
currently in effect:

*
H29C881 VBUILD TYPE=SWNET,MAXGRP=2,MAXNO=4
*
P29C881  PUADDR=13, REQ'D, BUT NOT USEDX
   CPNAME=S1023743, AS400 NETA CPNAME  X
   PUTYPE=2,BECOMES T2.1 AFTER XID3X
   MAXPATH=4,  X
   MAXOUT=1,SHOULD MATCH MODE QPCSUPP  X
   DISCNT=NO,   MAY NEED TO CHANGE X
   ISTATUS=ACTIVE, X
   SSCPFM=USSSCS,   USSSCS RECOMMENDED X
   MODETAB=ISTINCLM,   X
   DLOGMOD=SNX32702,DEFAULT FOR EM5250 DEVSX
   VPACING=0
*
*
D29C881  PATH  GRPNM=TRNLG1,   X
   DIALNO=0008400012923743, TIC/DSAP/AS400 LCLTRADDR   X
   REDIAL=7,THE DEFAULT IS 3   X
   USE=YES
*
AS400C   LULOCADDR=0,   AS400 APPN LCLLOCNAME  X
   MODETAB=AMODS400,WHERE QPCSUPP IS DEFINED   X
   DLOGMOD=QPCSUPP, QPCSUPP IS REQUIREDX
   RESSCB=2 # OF SCB RESERVED IN NCP
*
*
*   FOLLOWING LU'S GIVE AS/400 TERMS ACCESS TO MAINFRAME
*   THE AS/400 IS RESPONSIBLE FOR 3270 EMULATION. THESE
*   ARE 'REAL' DEVICES.  THEY NEED TO BE DEFINED TO THE
*   MAINFRAME APPLICATIONS WHICH THEY WILL ACCESS.
*
T29C8812 LULOCADDR=2JB M00-0463
T29C8813 LULOCADDR=3JB M00-0463
T29C8814 LULOCADDR=4JB M00-0463
T29C8815 LULOCADDR=5JB M00-0463
T29C8816 LULOCADDR=6,USSTAB=USS03S11
T29C8817 LULOCADDR=7,USSTAB=USS03S11
T29C8818 LULOCADDR=8,USSTAB=USS03S11
T29C8819 LULOCADDR=9,USSTAB=USS03S08
T29C881A LULOCADDR=10   *HCF/DHCF TERMINAL
T29C881B LULOCADDR=11,USSTAB=USS03S11
T29C881C LULOCADDR=12,USSTAB=USS03S11
T29C881D LULOCADDR=13,USSTAB=USS03S11
T29C881E LULOCADDR=14,USSTAB=USS03S11  PO 10/24/94 M940394  E239 T
T29C881F LULOCADDR=15,USSTAB=USS03S27
T29C881G LULOCADDR=16,USSTAB=USS03S27
.
.
.

I'm not going to quote the whole thing, but you get this idea. This AS400 is
connected off a TIC on the 3745, TRNLG1 is a LINE GROUP, H29C881 is a SW SNA
MAJ NODE.

Does this help?

And thanks for all the suggestions so far. 
TL

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 04/20/2006
   at 10:10 AM, Thomas Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>I hope I don't sound too stupid here, but I am trying to define an
>AS400 to the mainframe (a z/os system).

Define as what?

>Previously this AS400 was defined using a
>SWNET definition which pointed to a TIC off a 3745.

Defined as what? An SLU in an APPN network? An IP address?

>Now the AS400 has been replaced and only has an IP address 
>to identify it.

Who was talking to the AS/400? As what? Do they support TCP/IP?

>Someone been this route?

You haven't given enough information to know what route you're
referring to. It might help if you could post relevant snippets of
your NCP and VTAM definitions.

-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Chris Mason]

Tim,

I know my posts tend to be rather long, particularly so when I need to guess
many possibilities from sparse input.

However, if you read them fully you'll see that on both my responses to this
query I managed to find an excuse to mention Enterprise Extender.

We all await clarifications from Thomas.

Meantime perhaps someone can quote chapter and verse regarding the level of
AS/400 operating system which begins support for Enterprise Extender since I
believe I have seen mention of such support only relatively recently.

Never mind - it's a challenge - and I came up with the following from
(
http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=nas1ed75fbb6841d9f718625710a004963a3&rs=110
 )



Configuring EE (Enterprise Extender) between Two IBM System iT Systems
 Technote

This is a sample configuration for EE (Enterprise Extender) between two IBM
System i5T systems at R540 or above.

SYSTEM A and SYSTEM B

Step 1: Ensure "Allow HPR Transport Tower Support" (ALWHPRTWR) is enabled in
Network Attributes.

a To view the parameter: DSPNETA
b To change the value: CHGNETA ALWHPRTWR(*YES)

Step 2: Display the Network Attributes ( DSPNETA ) of each system and gather
the following information.

a Local Network ID (LCLNETID)
b Local Control Point Name (LCLCPNAME)

Step 3: Get the IP addresses for each system.

Use CFGTCP, Option 1 to view the local interfaces and select the IP
addresses you wish to use for this connection.

Step 4: Create the APPC controller ( CRTCTLAPPC ).



SYSTEM A  SYSTEM B
Local IP Interface Address = 1.1.1.1  Local IP Interface Address = 1.1.1.2
Local Network ID = APPN  Local Network ID = APPN
Local Control Point Name = SYSTEMA  Local Control Point Name = SYSTEMB

CRTCTLAPPC  CRTCTLAPPC
LINKTYPE = *HPRIP  LINKTYPE = *HPRIP
RMTINTNETA = 1.1.1.2  RMTINTNETA = 1.1.1.1
LCLINTNETA = 1.1.1.1  LCLINTNETA = 1.1.1.2
RMTNETID = APPN  RMTNETID = APPN
RMTCPNAME = SYSTEMB  RMTCPNAME = SYSTEMA

Note: At the time of this writing, a value must be specified in the
LCLINTNETA other than *SYS. A virtual APPN controller is created called
QAPEND, and this is where the APPC device is attached. The original APPC
controller that is created above will be at a Varied On state and that is
normal.

Step 5: The configuration object

QAPEND controller status of ACTIVE
APPC device status of ACTIVE

Original APPC controller status of VARIED ON.

Caution: When using Enterprise Extender across a network that traverses
firewalls, ensure UDP ports 12000-12004 are open to successfully establish a
connection.



... and it even includes your warning!

Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Tim Hare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Thursday, 20 April, 2006 9:24 PM
Subject: Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe


> I think everyone so far is overlooking a possibility:  that this new
> AS/400 is configured to support Enterprise Extender.  In that case, the IP
> address is sufficient to connect to it, as long as you have EE running in
> your Communication Server.  You will also need to make sure that UDP ports
> 12000-12004 (yes those are five digit numbers) are open in any firewalls
> between the AS/400 and your box.
>
> Tim Hare
> Senior Systems Programmer
> Florida Department of Transportation
> (850) 414-4209

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Hal Merritt]

Aha! This has nothing to do with the AS/400. Rather, you are asking how
to acquire/install/activate/configure Enterprise Extender. EE appears to
be a suite of products offered by Cisco and IBM that do SNA over IP
networks.   

I would start here:

http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg245957.html

Or here:

http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/networking/technology.html


I also saw some configuration examples on the Cisco web site that appear
to cover both the Cisco boxes as well as MF TCP/IP and VTAM. 


HTH and good luck.
  

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Hare
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 2:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the
mainframe

I think everyone so far is overlooking a possibility:  that this new 
AS/400 is configured to support Enterprise Extender.  In that case, the
IP 
address is sufficient to connect to it, as long as you have EE running
in 
your Communication Server.  You will also need to make sure that UDP
ports 
12000-12004 (yes those are five digit numbers) are open in any firewalls

between the AS/400 and your box.

Tim Hare
Senior Systems Programmer
Florida Department of Transportation
(850) 414-4209
 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Tim Hare]

I think everyone so far is overlooking a possibility:  that this new 
AS/400 is configured to support Enterprise Extender.  In that case, the IP 
address is sufficient to connect to it, as long as you have EE running in 
your Communication Server.  You will also need to make sure that UDP ports 
12000-12004 (yes those are five digit numbers) are open in any firewalls 
between the AS/400 and your box.

Tim Hare
Senior Systems Programmer
Florida Department of Transportation
(850) 414-4209

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Hal Merritt]

The question does not compute. 

We still don't know what the business mission(s) might be. We know there
was some sort of connectivity, but here is nothing to say the connection
was actually used for anything: it was just there. 

Perhaps you are talking nothing more than 3270 green screen. In which
case you simply point your emulator to the IP address. The mainframe is
no longer involved. 

A very likely scenario is that all you have to do is plug the old cable
into the new AS/400. The IP address is not relevant to anything in this
context and no host definitions need changing. 

But, again, I am just guessing as to what you are trying to accomplish.

HTH 

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Thomas Lawrence
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 12:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the
mainframe

Perhaps I need to explain further. To put your fears at rest, our 3745
is
alive and well. We have several other AS400's defined and still
functioning
through the 3745. They are all defined as SWNET type applications. Even
the
AS400 which is being replaced is still defined there, however it is/has
been/will be replaced.  I think we defined these SWNET appls about 10
years
ago. I may have defined them myself, maybe not. Anyway, it's been
awhile. 

Be that as it may, I was given the task to allow access to the new AS400
and
was only given an ip address in the form of n.n.n.n as an identifier.
What I
think I need to do is define this new AS400 using the IP address in some
fashion instead of CPNAME. Not really sure about this but I was hoping
to
get some pointers. As far as Anynet and MTPN go, no we do not use that,
AFAICT. 

Are there any questions that I need to ask the originator of this
request?
Bear in mind, he or she is probably PC computer knowledgeable but
probably
not mainframe knowledgeable. 

Thanks for your reply.

TL
 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Harry Riedel]

Are you trying to configure the AS/400 with an IP host address that can
talk to a z/OS IP stack? What do want to do? FTP?


Disclaimer: The information contained in this communication is confidential and 
only for the use of the intended addressee(s).  If you have received this 
communication in error, any disclosure or use of such information is strictly 
prohibited.  Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies.  
Thank you.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Chris Mason]

Thomas,

I thought we were making progress - until I got to the last paragraph. This
looks as if it might be a PC user who is trying to access an SNA application
on the AS/400 (and need to access the AS/400 through the mainframe?) - or -
who is trying to access a mainframe application using the AS/400 as an
intermediary.

Now I'm really lost.

I'm glad to hear the 3745 is still there and doing sterling work - although
you're going to have to deal with the issue of replacing it before too
long - maybe not you personally.

If one of the steps in this task is to arrange for another AS/400 to be
connected in SNA terms to the mainframe through the 3745 token-ring
facilities, you are going to need another switched PU statement definition
in one of the active switched major nodes[1] You probably want to define it
in much the same way as you define your other AS/400s. You are obliged to
use CPNAME if you want to be up-to-date - for about 10 years or more now.
There is an alternative characterised by the IDBLK and IDNUM operands but
that is, in essence, a step back in time of 30 years[2].

[1] I guess it's some version of that peculiar AS/400 terminology that
causes you to describe a switched PU statement in VTAM as "a SWNET
application". But then I expect some of the VTAM terminology is equally odd
to the AS/400 world.

[2] However, support of "internal" DLUR - which is quite modern - requires
IDBLK/IDNUM - just to confuse everybody. 

I assume the way you use these switched PU statement definitions is by
initiating the connection from the AS/400. If you were initiating the
connection from VTAM/NCP (the latter running in the 3745), you would have a
PATH statement and that would have some identification of the AS/400 link
station which included the MAC and SAP addresses. Using the techniques I
mentioned in the last post, the IP address can sort-of replace the MAC and
SAP addresses. (Actually with Enterprise Extender, there's also a SAP
address.)

I'm sorry but we seem to have moved further away from knowing how that IP
address fits into the picture.

Well, let me have another stab at it. It's possible that the mainframe and
the 3745 do not need to be in the picture. It may be that the PC person can
access the AS/400 directly using the IP network but doesn't know how.
Perhaps he/she is only dimly aware of having been assigned an IP address.
You need to find out what this PC person really wants to do and take it from
there.

Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Thomas Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Thursday, 20 April, 2006 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe


> Perhaps I need to explain further. To put your fears at rest, our 3745 is
> alive and well. We have several other AS400's defined and still
functioning
> through the 3745. They are all defined as SWNET type applications. Even
the
> AS400 which is being replaced is still defined there, however it is/has
> been/will be replaced.  I think we defined these SWNET appls about 10
years
> ago. I may have defined them myself, maybe not. Anyway, it's been awhile.
>
> Be that as it may, I was given the task to allow access to the new AS400
and
> was only given an ip address in the form of n.n.n.n as an identifier. What
I
> think I need to do is define this new AS400 using the IP address in some
> fashion instead of CPNAME. Not really sure about this but I was hoping to
> get some pointers. As far as Anynet and MTPN go, no we do not use that,
AFAICT.
>
> Are there any questions that I need to ask the originator of this request?
> Bear in mind, he or she is probably PC computer knowledgeable but probably
> not mainframe knowledgeable.
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> TL

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Thomas Lawrence]

Perhaps I need to explain further. To put your fears at rest, our 3745 is
alive and well. We have several other AS400's defined and still functioning
through the 3745. They are all defined as SWNET type applications. Even the
AS400 which is being replaced is still defined there, however it is/has
been/will be replaced.  I think we defined these SWNET appls about 10 years
ago. I may have defined them myself, maybe not. Anyway, it's been awhile. 

Be that as it may, I was given the task to allow access to the new AS400 and
was only given an ip address in the form of n.n.n.n as an identifier. What I
think I need to do is define this new AS400 using the IP address in some
fashion instead of CPNAME. Not really sure about this but I was hoping to
get some pointers. As far as Anynet and MTPN go, no we do not use that, AFAICT. 

Are there any questions that I need to ask the originator of this request?
Bear in mind, he or she is probably PC computer knowledgeable but probably
not mainframe knowledgeable. 

Thanks for your reply.

TL

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe

[Chris Mason]

Thomas,

Normally this would be for the IBMTCP-L list/group but you've started it
here so we'll continue here. In any case I get the impression that most who
are active on IBMTCP-L are active here also.

It's implied that you run SNA applications on your AS/400 so the first thing
we need to know is whether or not you continue to run SNA applications on
your AS/400. For example, it's possible though something like
infinitesimally unlikely that you run the MPTN (Multiprotocol Transport
Network) socket programming over SNA function on your AS/400 and mainframe
so that all the applications you care about are IP-based applications.

The next question worth asking is, if you need to continue to run SNA
applications, how did the person who was managing the discontinuation - as
they say - of the 3745 manage to forget about your poor AS/400. Perhaps a
number of other SNA requirements have been forgotten about. You might like
to ask around, gang up together, and halt the decline into chaos.

Having got this far into your post, I'm a bit lost. If the AS/400 has been
replaced why are you worrying? What is this about identity?

I can only proceed by making the assumption you still have an AS/400 and
that the rather careless person who is supposedly managing the replacement
of the 3745 is giving you an IP address in order - somehow - to identify the
mainframe.

It's possible that the person managing the change at the mainframe has done
a good job and that you don't really understand what you are being told. It
may be that he/she has set up one end of the reverse MPTN "trick" which is
AnyNet SNA over IP, the mainframe end has been set up and he/she is
expecting you to set up the AS/400 end, one key parameter of which would be
the associated IP addresses on your corporate IP intranet, I expect.

Just to muddy the water, there is another way to perform this task of
transporting SNA over an IP network - I'm not considering DLSw - which is
Enterprise Extender. Again, key parameters would be the IP addresses. What's
a bit complicated about this in your circumstances is that I believe the
AS/400 range (aren't we supposed to call it the iSeries these days?) has
only just got Enterprise Extender support.

I think you'd better post again after clarifying your situation somewhat and
probably you'd better make it a joint exercise with the relevant mainframer.

Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Thomas Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Thursday, 20 April, 2006 5:10 PM
Subject: Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe


> I hope I don't sound too stupid here, but I am trying to define an AS400
to
> the mainframe (a z/os system). Previously this AS400 was defined using a
> SWNET definition which pointed to a TIC off a 3745. Now the AS400 has been
> replaced and only has an IP address to identify it. Someone been this
route?
> Thanks.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html