Re: SNA future

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In ,
on 03/30/2012
   at 07:56 AM, "McKown, John"  said:

>VTAM is not the culprit. It is TSO development and their firm
>conviction (20 to life, with no chance of parole) that the 3270 is a
>"half duplex" protocol so you cannot write to an 3270 output area
>while concurrently soliciting input.

TSO is not the culprit either; it's the application code. VTIOC has
had the necessary support for decades.
 
-- 
 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SNA future

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In
,
on 03/30/2012
   at 12:09 PM, Jan Vanbrabant  said:

>*Going back in time, how long did IBM carry forward the 1400
>emulation in the /360 and even the /370 series?*

The 370/158 was the last machine to have a 1401/1410 compatibility
feature, but the emulator program had an option to do a straight
simulation, unlike the 7070, 7080 and 7090 emulators.
 
-- 
 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SNA future

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <4949844032973617.wa.paulgboulderaim@bama.ua.edu>, on
03/30/2012
   at 07:22 AM, Paul Gilmartin  said:

>Will it take VTAM with it?  I understand VTAM is a major culprit in
>the dreadful terminal interaction of the TSO OMVS command/subsystem.

Not so; VTAM and VTIOC have the necessary support, but OMVS doesn't
take advantage of it. If you have access to z/VM, take a look at how
CMS drives the 3270, also going through VTAM.
 
-- 
 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SNA future

[Uriel Carrasquilla]

It is not only SNA I worry about, it is the entire MVS/zOS world.
In two years my company will have moved the last production application out of 
our Mainframe.  
This is a company that has been in businesss for 80+ years with a MF since they 
first became commercially available.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] on behalf of John 
Gilmore [johnwgilmore0...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 4:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SNA future

SNA has certainly been eclipsed, often appropriately, by TCP/IP.

I am not certain, however, that SNA is even moribund; and it would
certainly be premature to prepare the funeral baked meats just yet.

In the interval conflicts with the established uses of 'SNA' as the
stock symbol of Snap-On, Inc. and as an acronym for the Student Nurses
Association have not been problematic.

John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SNA future

[John Gilmore]

SNA has certainly been eclipsed, often appropriately, by TCP/IP.

I am not certain, however, that SNA is even moribund; and it would
certainly be premature to prepare the funeral baked meats just yet.

In the interval conflicts with the established uses of 'SNA' as the
stock symbol of Snap-On, Inc. and as an acronym for the Student Nurses
Association have not been problematic.

John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SNA future

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 12:09:48 +0200, Jan Vanbrabant wrote:
>
>*Re.  Technote T1013032 *
>
>*https://www-304.ibm.com/support/entdocview.wss?uid=isg3T1013032*
>
>*(Switching From DB2 Private Protocol (PP) to DRDA Protocol Question)*
>
>*… … … However SNA is no longer a strategic protocol and customers are
>advised to start converting their applications to TCP/IP. … ... ...*
>
>For sure, we all know that SNA is no longer the strategic network
>architecture.
>
>But such a statement from a major subsystem like DB2 is not negligible as
>such.
> 
I suppose the most important question is, when SNA goes away, will any
three-letter acronyms associated with the product be retired and become
available for reuse?

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SNA future

[Scott Ford]

Agreed John , as a former SNA dude I agree..TCPIP is here to stay

Sent from my iPad
Scott Ford
Senior Systems Engineer
www.identityforge.com



On Mar 30, 2012, at 8:56 AM, "McKown, John"  
wrote:

> VTAM is not the culprit. It is TSO development and their firm conviction (20 
> to life, with no chance of parole) that the 3270 is a "half duplex" protocol 
> so you cannot write to an 3270 output area while concurrently soliciting 
> input. They should talk to the z/OS console DIDOCS people about that. Or grab 
> the 3270 code that SMCS consoles (3270 VTAM consoles) use to run "full 
> duplex".
> 
> --
> John McKown 
> Systems Engineer IV
> IT
> 
> Administrative Services Group
> 
> HealthMarkets(r)
> 
> 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010
> (817) 255-3225 phone * 
> john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com
> 
> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or 
> proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please 
> contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original 
> message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and 
> issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake 
> Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of 
> TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
>> [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
>> Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 7:22 AM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
>> Subject: Re: SNA future
>> 
>> On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 12:09:48 +0200, Jan Vanbrabant wrote:
>>> 
>>> *Re.  Technote T1013032 *
>>> 
>>> *https://www-304.ibm.com/support/entdocview.wss?uid=isg3T1013032*
>>> 
>>> *(Switching From DB2 Private Protocol (PP) to DRDA Protocol 
>> Question)*
>>> 
>>> *... ... ... However SNA is no longer a strategic protocol and 
>> customers are
>>> advised to start converting their applications to TCP/IP. ... ... ...*
>>> 
>>> For sure, we all know that SNA is no longer the strategic network
>>> architecture.
>>> 
>>> But such a statement from a major subsystem like DB2 is not 
>> negligible as
>>> such.
>>> 
>> Will it take VTAM with it?  I understand VTAM is a major 
>> culprit in the
>> dreadful terminal interaction of the TSO OMVS command/subsystem.
>> 
>> -- gil
>> 
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>> 
>> 
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SNA future

[McKown, John]

VTAM is not the culprit. It is TSO development and their firm conviction (20 to 
life, with no chance of parole) that the 3270 is a "half duplex" protocol so 
you cannot write to an 3270 output area while concurrently soliciting input. 
They should talk to the z/OS console DIDOCS people about that. Or grab the 3270 
code that SMCS consoles (3270 VTAM consoles) use to run "full duplex".

--
John McKown 
Systems Engineer IV
IT

Administrative Services Group

HealthMarkets(r)

9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone * 
john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or 
proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact 
the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. 
HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the 
insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance 
Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The 
MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
> Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 7:22 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re: SNA future
> 
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 12:09:48 +0200, Jan Vanbrabant wrote:
> >
> >*Re.  Technote T1013032 *
> >
> >*https://www-304.ibm.com/support/entdocview.wss?uid=isg3T1013032*
> >
> >*(Switching From DB2 Private Protocol (PP) to DRDA Protocol 
> Question)*
> >
> >*... ... ... However SNA is no longer a strategic protocol and 
> customers are
> >advised to start converting their applications to TCP/IP. ... ... ...*
> >
> >For sure, we all know that SNA is no longer the strategic network
> >architecture.
> >
> >But such a statement from a major subsystem like DB2 is not 
> negligible as
> >such.
> > 
> Will it take VTAM with it?  I understand VTAM is a major 
> culprit in the
> dreadful terminal interaction of the TSO OMVS command/subsystem.
> 
> -- gil
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> 
> 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SNA future

[Knutson, Sam]

I take as more an obvious observation than a statement of direction and have 
not seen anything in kind from Communications Server.
TCP/IP has been made the strategic direction by customers for some time.
Like most we have been steadily moving away from SNA especially SNA hardware 
3746 FEPs are almost gone as applications are migrated to Enterprise Extender 
or updated to use web services or MQ connections.  RACF provided support for 
TCP/IP links for RRSF previously only APPC.  
The war if there ever was one is over and TCP/IP won.
SNA specific skills are short supply.

VTAM won't go away but some things like IBM support for 3746/3745 are going 
away. IBM has announced end-of-service dates for Japan, Europe and the Middle 
East, but has not yet announced end-of-service for the Americas and parts of 
Asia.IBM has a good history of providing compatibility and a migration path 
for applications I expect they will continue to do so.  That is one of the z 
values.

    Best Regards, 

    Sam Knutson, GEICO 
    System z Team Leader 
    mailto:sknut...@geico.com 
    (office)  301.986.3574 
    (cell) 301.996.1318  
    
"Think big, act bold, start simple, grow fast..." 


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of 
Jan Vanbrabant
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 6:10 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: SNA future

Hi,
*
*
*Re.  Technote T1013032 *
*https://www-304.ibm.com/support/entdocview.wss?uid=isg3T1013032*
*(Switching From DB2 Private Protocol (PP) to DRDA Protocol Question)*
*... ... ... However SNA is no longer a strategic protocol and customers are 
advised to start converting their applications to TCP/IP. ... ... ...*

For sure, we all know that SNA is no longer the strategic network architecture.

But such a statement from a major subsystem like DB2 is not negligible as such.
Is there kind of a directional statement of IBM about SNA's life cycle?
*(Not a SOD/SOI kind of thing while they just have a life span of 1 to 2
years.*
*Going back in time, how long did IBM carry forward the 1400 emulation in the 
/360 and even the /370 series?*
*Another example is the migration from CICS macro-level programming style to 
the command-level style, who took over 10 years (1980-199x) (Command-level-only 
CICS being introduced in the early 1990s.))*

*
*

Jan

This email/fax message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this
email/fax is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
destroy all paper and electronic copies of the original message.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SNA future

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 12:09:48 +0200, Jan Vanbrabant wrote:
>
>*Re.  Technote T1013032 *
>
>*https://www-304.ibm.com/support/entdocview.wss?uid=isg3T1013032*
>
>*(Switching From DB2 Private Protocol (PP) to DRDA Protocol Question)*
>
>*… … … However SNA is no longer a strategic protocol and customers are
>advised to start converting their applications to TCP/IP. … ... ...*
>
>For sure, we all know that SNA is no longer the strategic network
>architecture.
>
>But such a statement from a major subsystem like DB2 is not negligible as
>such.
> 
Will it take VTAM with it?  I understand VTAM is a major culprit in the
dreadful terminal interaction of the TSO OMVS command/subsystem.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

SNA future

[Jan Vanbrabant]

Hi,

*
*

*Re.  Technote T1013032 *

*https://www-304.ibm.com/support/entdocview.wss?uid=isg3T1013032*

*(Switching From DB2 Private Protocol (PP) to DRDA Protocol Question)*

*… … … However SNA is no longer a strategic protocol and customers are
advised to start converting their applications to TCP/IP. … ... ...*




For sure, we all know that SNA is no longer the strategic network
architecture.

But such a statement from a major subsystem like DB2 is not negligible as
such.



Is there kind of a directional statement of IBM about SNA’s life cycle?

*(Not a SOD/SOI kind of thing while they just have a life span of 1 to 2
years.*

*Going back in time, how long did IBM carry forward the 1400 emulation in
the /360 and even the /370 series?*

*Another example is the migration from CICS macro-level programming style
to the command-level style, who took over 10 years (1980-199x)
(Command-level-only CICS being introduced in the early 1990s.))*

*
*

Jan

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN