Re: PPRC between different vendor disk systems
According to this document Copy Service Manager which is typically used to support PPRC supports Hitachi disks https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/system/files/inline-files/sc27854218.pdf On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 10:29 PM Radoslaw Skorupka < 0471ebeac275-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > As far as I know non-IBM disk systems (Hitachi, HPE) have "PPRC > compatibility feature". > I understand it as the replication can be managed using PPRC commands > like CESTPAIR, etc. > > However I just heard it is possible to establish PPRC relation between > HTC and IBM disk system. > Is it true? > If true, is it documented anywhere? > > > -- > Radoslaw Skorupka > Lodz, Poland > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Resetting a z14 HMC - forgot the admin password :-(
I already have IBM TSS on location doing other work for me. They said without the admin password they could not do anything. I was just hoping there might be another option. Do your colleagues have some things the local person could try? On Thu, Jun 6, 2024 at 6:25 AM Kevin McKenzie wrote: > Probably not what you want to hear, but I’ve reached out to some folks > internally; there’s a process, but it differs depending on a number of > different factors, and they can only be performed by an SSR with physical > access to the HMC. I was told “To get the process started, please ask the > customer to perform a Report a Console Report from the z14 HMC (the task is > located under Service Management on the HMC UI. This will open a HW case to > our Support teams to engage our PE team and to schedule an SSR onsite for > the work.” > > -- > Kevin McKenzie > > z/OS Test Services - Test Architect, Provisioning > z/OS Hardware/Software Interlock > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Coupling Facility List structure versus CIC Data Table
I probably read the docs wrong. From this link https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=ixcnote-note-pad-related-limits It seems that there is much space than I had thought/ On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 2:14 PM Mark A. Brooks wrote: > I'm not understanding "XCF Notepad won't work as the data structure is a > largish Cobol Copybook more than 64 bytes". > The "notes' in a note pad can each be up to 1024 bytes. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Coupling Facility List structure versus CIC Data Table
That was the question. I guess it could be a CF List Structure (the data is mapped to a Cobol copybook) or a data table. I think I might have to have the devs write some of the code in ASM since I am not sure the macros can be accessed directly from Cobol. On Sat, Jun 1, 2024 at 4:29 PM Alan Young wrote: > As the application is now using a CICS Data Table, perhaps the Data Table > can be changed to a Coupling Facility Data Table? > > > ____ > From: Laurence Chiu <05c4ba336ee7-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> > Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 14:47 > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Coupling Facility List structure versus CIC Data Table > > We recently fixed a CICS transaction that read some reference data and > stored it in memory in the CWA. It also had some common code that was > used across the application space. But because it used the CWA in a > non-standard way the transaction always had to be called in its region, > rather than run in any region that needed it. > > Finally overcoming developer inertia, I had the application changed to > use > a CICS Data Table which now means the transaction can be called from any > region without a cross region call. > > But the code is also used in batch and the batch version reads a VSAM > file. We have just implemented a parallel sysplex and it would seem an > ideal application for a CF LIst Structure. We could have a > scheduled application load the structure when it changed or across an IPL > and then the data would then be available to any application. This is read > only so applications never need to do more than just read the data. > > We are new to parallel sysplex so any thoughts appreciated. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Coupling Facility List structure versus CIC Data Table
XCF Notepad won't work as the data structure is a largish Cobol Copybook more than 64 bytes On Sat, Jun 1, 2024 at 11:59 AM Mark Jacobs < 0224d287a4b1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > Take a look at XCF Notepad services. It might do what you're looking for > without the need to write lots of code to use a CF list structure. > > Mark Jacobs > > Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email. > > GPG Public Key - > https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com > > > On Friday, May 31st, 2024 at 5:47 PM, Laurence Chiu < > 05c4ba336ee7-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > > We recently fixed a CICS transaction that read some reference data and > > stored it in memory in the CWA. It also had some common code that was > > used across the application space. But because it used the CWA in a > > non-standard way the transaction always had to be called in its region, > > rather than run in any region that needed it. > > > > Finally overcoming developer inertia, I had the application changed to > use > > a CICS Data Table which now means the transaction can be called from any > > region without a cross region call. > > > > But the code is also used in batch and the batch version reads a VSAM > > file. We have just implemented a parallel sysplex and it would seem an > > ideal application for a CF LIst Structure. We could have a > > scheduled application load the structure when it changed or across an IPL > > and then the data would then be available to any application. This is > read > > only so applications never need to do more than just read the data. > > > > We are new to parallel sysplex so any thoughts appreciated. > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Coupling Facility List structure versus CIC Data Table
We recently fixed a CICS transaction that read some reference data and stored it in memory in the CWA. It also had some common code that was used across the application space. But because it used the CWA in a non-standard way the transaction always had to be called in its region, rather than run in any region that needed it. Finally overcoming developer inertia, I had the application changed to use a CICS Data Table which now means the transaction can be called from any region without a cross region call. But the code is also used in batch and the batch version reads a VSAM file. We have just implemented a parallel sysplex and it would seem an ideal application for a CF LIst Structure. We could have a scheduled application load the structure when it changed or across an IPL and then the data would then be available to any application. This is read only so applications never need to do more than just read the data. We are new to parallel sysplex so any thoughts appreciated. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Resetting a z14 HMC - forgot the admin password :-(
I have a couple of HMC's that were used for a Z14 mainframe. The mainframe has been reset and powered off. We forgot about the HMC's and disconnected it from the network. Now we realise we need to reset them before passing them into a new user, and don't know what the admin password is. The IBM engineer has told us, if we just reset the HMC it will restore the old passwords back from internal storage and we are back to square one. Is there a process like factory resetting them so that they go back to their initial settings? Any ideas appreciated. Thanks -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Algol
I cut my teeth on Algol also at university - on a Burroughs B6700 mainframe running MCP. Burroughs at the time were unique in that there was no assembler language. Everything was written in a HLL, MCP was written in ESPOL, the compiler for which was written in DCAlgol. That was just Algol with additional functions for comms handling. Algol was certainly my favourite language at the time and it was cool that Burroughs even provided source code for the compiler which was a great learning opportunity for CS majors. On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 2:33 AM Bob Bridges < 0587168ababf-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > I did a lot of coding in Algol during my time at a local University in the > late '70s. My impression at the time was that it had a serious paucity of > built-in functions, but that it enabled me to write my own and make them > easily available to my programs. So I stuffed a library full of I/O and > string-handling functions and got along just fine, it seemed to me. > > Haven't encountered it since; I don’t know what advances may have been > made in that arena. > > --- > Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 > > /* That sort of wit which employs itself insolently in criticizing and > censuring the words and sentiments of others in conversation is absolute > folly; for it answers none of the ends of conversation. He who uses it > neither improves others, is improved himself, nor pleases anyone. -Poor > Richard’s Almanack, 1756 */ > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of Rupert Reynolds > Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2024 09:07 > > developing a language which is effectively the best bits (IMHO) of > Rexx, C and even older languages such as Algol 68 (much underrated in my > book) and hints of PL/1 > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Getting rid of a z14 zr1 - any value in the host cards?
Hi Thanks for the information. The cards we have are FICON Express16S+SX and FICON Express 16S+LX + OSA-Express 10 GbE SR Larry On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 7:05 AM Radoslaw Skorupka < 0471ebeac275-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > W dniu 27.02.2024 o 04:54, Laurence Chiu pisze: > > Somebody said to me the z14 cards cannot be used in a Z15 or z16 because > of > > a difference in form factor! This seemed like an ill-informed comment to > > me since all the cards probably use some sort of PCI connector and IBM > > would not change them between model Z's. But it would be nice to be able > to > > quote some authoritative source as this person appears to have the ear of > > some of our senior managers. > > I just checked it out: *EVERY* FICON card supported in z14 can be used > in z15. Big one or small one - doesn't matter. > For z16 only two types can be carried forward (means: moved from > existing machine, but not ordered as new build). > Those two cards are FICON Express16S+ SX and FICON Express16S+ LX. FC > 0428 and FC 0427, CCIN C107 and C106. > For z14-z15 migration there are six types of cards, including the above. > Note, SX and LX are considered as two types. > > -- > Radoslaw Skorupka > Lodz, Poland > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Getting rid of a z14 zr1 - any value in the host cards?
Somebody said to me the z14 cards cannot be used in a Z15 or z16 because of a difference in form factor! This seemed like an ill-informed comment to me since all the cards probably use some sort of PCI connector and IBM would not change them between model Z's. But it would be nice to be able to quote some authoritative source as this person appears to have the ear of some of our senior managers. On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 3:19 AM Mike Smith wrote: > I would imagine that the FICON and OSA cards might have value to someone. > These cards can still be used in other z14's, z15's and z16's. With the > hardware WKFM date for z15's having passed, the only way to add an adapter > to a z15 is to acquire it from the secondary market (aka used). You could > try posting them on eBay or contact some of the companies that trade in > used IBM parts. > > Good luck! > Mike > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of Laurence Chiu > Sent: Friday, February 23, 2024 6:08 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Getting rid of a z14 zr1 - any value in the host cards? > > Sorry. Z14 > > On Sat, Feb 24, 2024, 2:59 PM Charles Mills wrote: > > > z14 as in the Subject or z16 as in the body? > > > > CM > > > > On Sat, 24 Feb 2024 12:04:39 +1300, Laurence Chiu > > wrote: > > > > >I need to decommission and remove for potential destruction z16 zr1. > > >It only has one active engine so it's capped at 88 mips which isn't > > >very useful. But for a number of reasons it has a ton of 16G fibre > > >channel cards (6 or 8 I think). They might have some value so I was > > >thinking I would remove them before having the host removed. There > > >are > > also > > >4 OSA Express cards (10G). Our IBM SE said IBM do not support used > > >cards > > in > > >CEC's but that does not mean they won't work? > > > > > >Another thought was it could be used as a sysprog play pen, carving > > >up > > some > > >storage of the DS8K we have and creating a small z/OS image. But how > > >much play can you do in 88 MIPS? > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email > to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Getting rid of a z14 zr1 - any value in the host cards?
I thought that was published in the mailing list. lch...@gmail.com On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 9:56 AM Ed Jaffe < 05acc3c79bf7-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > What is your email address! > > On 2/25/2024 12:25 PM, Laurence Chiu wrote: > > Hi Ed > > > > Drop me a note if you are still interested in the HMC. > > > > > > Laurence > > > > On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 5:18 AM Ed Jaffe < > > 05acc3c79bf7-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > > >> What are you doing with the HMC? I know someone that needs one... > >> > >> On 2/23/2024 3:04 PM, Laurence Chiu wrote: > >>> I need to decommission and remove for potential destruction z16 zr1. It > >>> only has one active engine so it's capped at 88 mips > >>> which isn't very useful. But for a number of reasons it has a ton of > 16G > >>> fibre channel cards (6 or 8 I think). They might have some value so I > was > >>> thinking I would remove them before having the host removed. There are > >> also > >>> 4 OSA Express cards (10G). Our IBM SE said IBM do not support used > cards > >> in > >>> CEC's but that does not mean they won't work? > >>> > >>> Another thought was it could be used as a sysprog play pen, carving up > >> some > >>> storage of the DS8K we have and creating a small z/OS image. But how > much > >>> play can you do in 88 MIPS? > >>> > >>> Ideas appreciated. > >> > > > This e-mail message, including any attachments, appended messages and the > information contained therein, is for the sole use of the intended > recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient or have otherwise > received this email message in error, any use, dissemination, distribution, > review, storage or copying of this e-mail message and the information > contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended > recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies > of this email message and do not otherwise utilize or retain this email > message or any or all of the information contained therein. Although this > email message and any attachments or appended messages are believed to be > free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system > into > which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient > to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the > sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its opening or use. > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Getting rid of a z14 zr1 - any value in the host cards?
Hi Ed Drop me a note if you are still interested in the HMC. Laurence On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 5:18 AM Ed Jaffe < 05acc3c79bf7-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > What are you doing with the HMC? I know someone that needs one... > > On 2/23/2024 3:04 PM, Laurence Chiu wrote: > > I need to decommission and remove for potential destruction z16 zr1. It > > only has one active engine so it's capped at 88 mips > > which isn't very useful. But for a number of reasons it has a ton of 16G > > fibre channel cards (6 or 8 I think). They might have some value so I was > > thinking I would remove them before having the host removed. There are > also > > 4 OSA Express cards (10G). Our IBM SE said IBM do not support used cards > in > > CEC's but that does not mean they won't work? > > > > Another thought was it could be used as a sysprog play pen, carving up > some > > storage of the DS8K we have and creating a small z/OS image. But how much > > play can you do in 88 MIPS? > > > > Ideas appreciated. > > > > This e-mail message, including any attachments, appended messages and the > information contained therein, is for the sole use of the intended > recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient or have otherwise > received this email message in error, any use, dissemination, distribution, > review, storage or copying of this e-mail message and the information > contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended > recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies > of this email message and do not otherwise utilize or retain this email > message or any or all of the information contained therein. Although this > email message and any attachments or appended messages are believed to be > free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system > into > which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient > to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the > sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its opening or use. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Getting rid of a z14 zr1 - any value in the host cards?
Thanks, Will drop them a note. On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 10:59 AM Ed Jaffe < 05acc3c79bf7-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > On 2/24/2024 1:40 PM, Laurence Chiu wrote: > > Any pointers to companies that trade in used IBM parts. Ebay seems like > too > > generic a place to post stuff. > > Donald Oberg > > Global Hardware Suppliers, Inc > > 7595 Mariner Pt > > Maple Grove, MN 55311 > > Phone:(612) 799-1453 > > E-Mail: donob...@comcast.net > > > > > > This e-mail message, including any attachments, appended messages and the > information contained therein, is for the sole use of the intended > recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient or have otherwise > received this email message in error, any use, dissemination, distribution, > review, storage or copying of this e-mail message and the information > contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended > recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies > of this email message and do not otherwise utilize or retain this email > message or any or all of the information contained therein. Although this > email message and any attachments or appended messages are believed to be > free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system > into > which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient > to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the > sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its opening or use. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Getting rid of a z14 zr1 - any value in the host cards?
Any pointers to companies that trade in used IBM parts. Ebay seems like too generic a place to post stuff. On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 3:19 AM Mike Smith wrote: > I would imagine that the FICON and OSA cards might have value to someone. > These cards can still be used in other z14's, z15's and z16's. With the > hardware WKFM date for z15's having passed, the only way to add an adapter > to a z15 is to acquire it from the secondary market (aka used). You could > try posting them on eBay or contact some of the companies that trade in > used IBM parts. > > Good luck! > Mike > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of Laurence Chiu > Sent: Friday, February 23, 2024 6:08 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Getting rid of a z14 zr1 - any value in the host cards? > > Sorry. Z14 > > On Sat, Feb 24, 2024, 2:59 PM Charles Mills wrote: > > > z14 as in the Subject or z16 as in the body? > > > > CM > > > > On Sat, 24 Feb 2024 12:04:39 +1300, Laurence Chiu > > wrote: > > > > >I need to decommission and remove for potential destruction z16 zr1. > > >It only has one active engine so it's capped at 88 mips which isn't > > >very useful. But for a number of reasons it has a ton of 16G fibre > > >channel cards (6 or 8 I think). They might have some value so I was > > >thinking I would remove them before having the host removed. There > > >are > > also > > >4 OSA Express cards (10G). Our IBM SE said IBM do not support used > > >cards > > in > > >CEC's but that does not mean they won't work? > > > > > >Another thought was it could be used as a sysprog play pen, carving > > >up > > some > > >storage of the DS8K we have and creating a small z/OS image. But how > > >much play can you do in 88 MIPS? > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email > to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Getting rid of a z14 zr1 - any value in the host cards?
The two were being decommissioned with the hardware. The initial plan was to physically destroy the disks and then dispose of the chassis but I am open to suggestions. Items are in Australia which might make logistics more difficult. On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 5:18 AM Ed Jaffe < 05acc3c79bf7-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > What are you doing with the HMC? I know someone that needs one... > > On 2/23/2024 3:04 PM, Laurence Chiu wrote: > > I need to decommission and remove for potential destruction z16 zr1. It > > only has one active engine so it's capped at 88 mips > > which isn't very useful. But for a number of reasons it has a ton of 16G > > fibre channel cards (6 or 8 I think). They might have some value so I was > > thinking I would remove them before having the host removed. There are > also > > 4 OSA Express cards (10G). Our IBM SE said IBM do not support used cards > in > > CEC's but that does not mean they won't work? > > > > Another thought was it could be used as a sysprog play pen, carving up > some > > storage of the DS8K we have and creating a small z/OS image. But how much > > play can you do in 88 MIPS? > > > > Ideas appreciated. > > > > This e-mail message, including any attachments, appended messages and the > information contained therein, is for the sole use of the intended > recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient or have otherwise > received this email message in error, any use, dissemination, distribution, > review, storage or copying of this e-mail message and the information > contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended > recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies > of this email message and do not otherwise utilize or retain this email > message or any or all of the information contained therein. Although this > email message and any attachments or appended messages are believed to be > free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system > into > which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient > to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the > sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its opening or use. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Getting rid of a z14 zr1 - any value in the host cards?
Sorry. Z14 On Sat, Feb 24, 2024, 2:59 PM Charles Mills wrote: > z14 as in the Subject or z16 as in the body? > > CM > > On Sat, 24 Feb 2024 12:04:39 +1300, Laurence Chiu > wrote: > > >I need to decommission and remove for potential destruction z16 zr1. It > >only has one active engine so it's capped at 88 mips > >which isn't very useful. But for a number of reasons it has a ton of 16G > >fibre channel cards (6 or 8 I think). They might have some value so I was > >thinking I would remove them before having the host removed. There are > also > >4 OSA Express cards (10G). Our IBM SE said IBM do not support used cards > in > >CEC's but that does not mean they won't work? > > > >Another thought was it could be used as a sysprog play pen, carving up > some > >storage of the DS8K we have and creating a small z/OS image. But how much > >play can you do in 88 MIPS? > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Getting rid of a z14 zr1 - any value in the host cards?
I need to decommission and remove for potential destruction z16 zr1. It only has one active engine so it's capped at 88 mips which isn't very useful. But for a number of reasons it has a ton of 16G fibre channel cards (6 or 8 I think). They might have some value so I was thinking I would remove them before having the host removed. There are also 4 OSA Express cards (10G). Our IBM SE said IBM do not support used cards in CEC's but that does not mean they won't work? Another thought was it could be used as a sysprog play pen, carving up some storage of the DS8K we have and creating a small z/OS image. But how much play can you do in 88 MIPS? Ideas appreciated. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Starting up a LPAR for the first time joining a parallel sysplex
We are building a parallel sysplex. LPAR1 is still in a monoplex with GRS=NONE. It will be shutdown. Then we want to bring up LPAR2 with GRS=STAR and join the sysplex. A couple of questions cropped up. 1. Can LPAR2 be brought up, trying to access the share catalog, RACF database etc when the other LPAR is not up. What are the gotchas to be looking for 2. This will be the first time the LPAR is IPL'd with GRS=STAR and trying to join the sysplex. Would that extend the time for the IPL and what would you be looking for during the IPL? Would it take 2-3 hours to be confident it was working - e.g. CDS are okay, an all other parallel sysplex configurations? 3. What happens when LPAR1 comes up and then joins the parallel sysplex? Thanks -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What happens if you IPL a LPAR defined as being in a parallel sysplex but the CF LPAR is not there
Thanks to all. We do have an emergency single pack LPAR we can use but I would rather be prepared and either have a IEASYSnn setup or have operator instructions ready for people to know what to do when in a DR situation when the pressure is on On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 4:04 AM Burrell, Todd < 0316e668f7df-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > I seem to remember that you can override the system parameters at IPL time > and specify PLEXCFG=MONOPLEX. This should bring you up in a single system > plex. Or you can specify PLEXCFG=XCFLOCAL and not be in a plex at all. > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of Laurence Chiu > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 1:54 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: What happens if you IPL a LPAR defined as being in a parallel > sysplex but the CF LPAR is not there > > It was gold for me and will help me settle a dispute with some local > sysprogs who said there would be no problem. My question is, it says if you > don't have a CF then change GRS=TRYJOIN or =NONE. Problem is, when the > problem occurs, how do you get online to change it? I could not find an > operator command to change it and since the system is able to IPL, you > can't logon to change it. > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 4:18 PM kekronbekron < > 02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > > Awesome, how do we even find such gems with TechDocs being what it is... > > Luckily for this one, I seem to have it bookmarked. > > > > > > On Thursday, November 16th, 2023 at 05:14, Attila Fogarasi < > > fogar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Answered a decade ago including how to continue the IPL and get > > > running (either single system or sysplex without CF) > > > > > https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/system/files/inline-files/Where_is_M > > y_Coupling_Facility.pdf > > > "The paper is being written to provide clear and concise > > > instructions on how to address the sysplex support team’s most > > > common callout. Where is > > My > > > Coupling Facility?" > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 10:42 AM Mark Jacobs < > > > 0224d287a4b1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > GRS will attempt to connect to ISGLOCK, fail and z/OS will go into > > > > a X'0A3' wait state. > > > > > > > > Mark Jacobs > > > > > > > > Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email. > > > > > > > > GPG Public Key - > > > > > > [URL Removed for your safety] > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 15th, 2023 at 5:49 PM, Laurence Chiu < > > > > lch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thinking about a LPAR defined as being in a parallel sysplex > > > > > with GRS=STAR. > > > > > > > > > > What happens if you IPL that LPAR and the CF is not active? Will > > > > > it start, issue a WTOR or just fail? We are wondering what would > > > > > happen if our > > LPAR > > > > > was started at the DR site (off a replicated set of volumes) but > > > > > the > > DR > > > > > CEC > > > > > did not have a CF defined. Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO > > IBM-MAIN > > > > > > > > -- > > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access > > > > instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the > > > > message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > > > > > > > > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO > > > IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email > to lists...@listserv.ua.edu w
Re: What happens if you IPL a LPAR defined as being in a parallel sysplex but the CF LPAR is not there
It was gold for me and will help me settle a dispute with some local sysprogs who said there would be no problem. My question is, it says if you don't have a CF then change GRS=TRYJOIN or =NONE. Problem is, when the problem occurs, how do you get online to change it? I could not find an operator command to change it and since the system is able to IPL, you can't logon to change it. On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 4:18 PM kekronbekron < 02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > Awesome, how do we even find such gems with TechDocs being what it is... > Luckily for this one, I seem to have it bookmarked. > > > On Thursday, November 16th, 2023 at 05:14, Attila Fogarasi < > fogar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Answered a decade ago including how to continue the IPL and get running > > (either single system or sysplex without CF) > > > https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/system/files/inline-files/Where_is_My_Coupling_Facility.pdf > > "The paper is being written to provide clear and concise instructions on > > how to address the sysplex support team’s most common callout. Where is > My > > Coupling Facility?" > > > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 10:42 AM Mark Jacobs < > > 0224d287a4b1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > > > > GRS will attempt to connect to ISGLOCK, fail and z/OS will go into a > > > X'0A3' wait state. > > > > > > Mark Jacobs > > > > > > Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email. > > > > > > GPG Public Key - > > > > https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 15th, 2023 at 5:49 PM, Laurence Chiu < > > > lch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Thinking about a LPAR defined as being in a parallel sysplex with > > > > GRS=STAR. > > > > > > > > What happens if you IPL that LPAR and the CF is not active? Will it > > > > start, > > > > issue a WTOR or just fail? We are wondering what would happen if our > LPAR > > > > was started at the DR site (off a replicated set of volumes) but the > DR > > > > CEC > > > > did not have a CF defined. Thanks > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO > IBM-MAIN > > > > > > -- > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What happens if you IPL a LPAR defined as being in a parallel sysplex but the CF LPAR is not there
That is perfect, thanks. Looks like there is some work to do at the DR site to make sure this does not happen. On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 12:44 PM Attila Fogarasi wrote: > Answered a decade ago including how to continue the IPL and get running > (either single system or sysplex without CF) > > https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/system/files/inline-files/Where_is_My_Coupling_Facility.pdf > "The paper is being written to provide clear and concise instructions on > how to address the sysplex support team’s most common callout. Where is My > Coupling Facility?" > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 10:42 AM Mark Jacobs < > 0224d287a4b1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > > GRS will attempt to connect to ISGLOCK, fail and z/OS will go into a > > X'0A3' wait state. > > > > Mark Jacobs > > > > Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email. > > > > GPG Public Key - > > > https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 15th, 2023 at 5:49 PM, Laurence Chiu < > > lch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Thinking about a LPAR defined as being in a parallel sysplex with > > GRS=STAR. > > > > > > What happens if you IPL that LPAR and the CF is not active? Will it > > start, > > > issue a WTOR or just fail? We are wondering what would happen if our > LPAR > > > was started at the DR site (off a replicated set of volumes) but the DR > > CEC > > > did not have a CF defined. Thanks > > > > > > -- > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
What happens if you IPL a LPAR defined as being in a parallel sysplex but the CF LPAR is not there
Thinking about a LPAR defined as being in a parallel sysplex with GRS=STAR. What happens if you IPL that LPAR and the CF is not active? Will it start, issue a WTOR or just fail? We are wondering what would happen if our LPAR was started at the DR site (off a replicated set of volumes) but the DR CEC did not have a CF defined. Thanks -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: DVIPA question
That is exactly the situation, The second LPAR will be on the same CEC as the first, share OSA adapters and be in a sysplex with XCF being the mechanism to share the VIPA information. From my reading of the docs, when the server application on the primary LPAR is shutdown, and an incoming transaction arrives for it, TCP on the second LPAR will see the primary host and dynamically route the transaction to the server on the second LPAR. By making it dynamic we don't hae to worry about automation moving the VIPA, we can let TCP do that. The second LPAR will be in the same subset as the first. Youi comment about OMPROUTE is noted. Thanks On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 1:05 AM John S. Giltner, Jr. wrote: > In addition to everything Jon has stated a few other questions may help > figure out what needs to be done, or not done. > > Are both LPARS on the same CEC? > > If both LPARS are on the same CEC, do they share OSA's? > > Are the IP addresses you plan to use as VIPA's in the same subnet as the > OSA's IP addresses? > > With certain setups you may need to run OMPROUTE configured for OSPF. > > I think if both LPAR's are on the same CEC and they share OSA's and the > VIPA addresses are in the same subnet as the OSA's, there is not much to > do, but to configure both TCPIP stacks with the same VIPA range and then > with PORT definitions assign what VIPA address you want that application to > use. > > > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: DVIPA question
I am probably not understanding it correctly either. We have one LPAR with static IP and a server on that LPAR that supports both internal and external clients. We want to duplicate that server application on a second LPAR and they will be in a sysplex. If the first LPAR goes goes down, we want incoming traffic not worry about it. This is because automation will startup the server on the second LPAR (they cannot be up at the same time since they need to share a VSAM file and we do not have VSAM/RLS. What we want is for z/OS to move the VIPA to the second LPAR. Since the two TCP stacks on the two LPARs are sharing information via XCF, the second LPAR should see the primary LPAR is down and take over the service. So from my reading of the IBM docs, I need the host IP to be a dynamic VIPA (DVIPA) so that quoting this manual https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.1.0?topic=addressing-static-vipas-dynamic-vipas-distributed-dvipas Dynamic VIPAs have the following characteristics: - They can be configured to be moved dynamically from a failing stack to a backup stack within the same sysplex without operator intervention or external automation. I don't want to have to make any changes to upstream routers, IP changes etc. The goal is to make it transparent. On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 1:15 PM Jon Perryman wrote: > You're confusing dynamic IP addresses with dynamic VIPA. I've never seen > DVIPA use dynamic IP addresses. > > A static IP address is an address that doesn't change. Many people > incorrectly assume it's assigned to a specific machine. You decide how this > IP address is used. > > Talk with your IBM hardware / software reps because you may not even need > to involve your non-z/OS network people. The world has gone to smart > routers and I suspect IBM included IBM smart routers in your configuration. > In that case, everything is in your domain. It wouldn't be surprising if > IBM smart routers automagically changed with DVIPA requirements. I'm more > familiar with Unix these days which has seen improvements in high > availability requirements. > > If you must involve your network people, don't tell them more than they > need to know. You determine your DVIPA setup which is more about you than > them. Let's assume a simple scenario. Let's say you have 10 systems in a > sysplex with IP addresses 192.168.40.#. You have a static IP address > 192.168.40.177 for DVIPA that will be on one or more of those machines. How > will you tell his router the next hop for 192.168.40.177? Does he want to > keep it simple and forward the packets to the next available z/OS system > and let z/OS forward it to the correct system? > > As for DNS, he defines 192.168.40.177 once. DNS doesn't care where or what > machine uses this address. > > If you're network person is insistent about DVIPA, tell him to think about > it as a virtual network adapter but with more capabilities. This is all > very dependent upon how you will use DVIPA. > > On Tue, 17 Oct 2023 10:07:14 +1300, Laurence Chiu > wrote: > > >I am having a debate with a network person (but not z/OS) how DVIPA works. > >We have a LPAR with static IP which many hosts and firewalls know about > it. > >I want to make this host part of a sysplex and so need to make certain IP > >addresses/ports dynamic so they can be switched to the second LPAR if the > >first goes down. This is a typical business requirement for DVIPA. > > > >My view is we change the IP definition of the IP address from static to > >virtual (VIPA) and the make it dynamic - hence DVIPA but it's actual value > >does not change so that we need no firewall changes or DNS changes. > > > >He thinks we need a new IP address for the host and that means firewall > and > >DNS changes. Not not having worked in a static to VIPA environment before > I > >don't know but from my reading of the TCP documentation for z/OS it seems > >we don't need a new IP address - just a change in the way it's defined. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
DVIPA question
I am having a debate with a network person (but not z/OS) how DVIPA works. We have a LPAR with static IP which many hosts and firewalls know about it. I want to make this host part of a sysplex and so need to make certain IP addresses/ports dynamic so they can be switched to the second LPAR if the first goes down. This is a typical business requirement for DVIPA. My view is we change the IP definition of the IP address from static to virtual (VIPA) and the make it dynamic - hence DVIPA but it's actual value does not change so that we need no firewall changes or DNS changes. He thinks we need a new IP address for the host and that means firewall and DNS changes. Not not having worked in a static to VIPA environment before I don't know but from my reading of the TCP documentation for z/OS it seems we don't need a new IP address - just a change in the way it's defined. Appreciate any advice in this area. Thanks -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What happened to GC26-1672 Batch Local Shared Resource(LSR) Documentation?
I asked our sysprogs and it seems we are using batch LSR as well as BMC Mainview Batch Optimizer. So the only potential area of improvement is in CICS. Now we don't have RLS and since most of our VSAM updates are done via EXCI interfaces to CICS transactions, is that really batch now or online? So if there are opportunities for efficiencies I think it won't be in batch LSR but the best use of pools in CICS etc. On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 3:17 PM Laurence Chiu wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 5:35 PM allan winston wrote: > >> I did a lot of work in this area 20 years ago. >> [snip] >> >> CICS is an entirely different ballgame. In the rare event that the VSAM >> files in your shop are still using LSR instead of RLS, then there are >> opportunities for performance improve by appropriate changes to the FILE >> and LSRPOOL specifications using Resource Definition Online or, >> equivalently, via the batch program DFHCSDUP. Never let files with >> significant activity default to pool 1. >> >> >> >> Allan >> >> >> > Our shop is CICS and I am not sure we are even using LSR and certainly no > RLS since there is no parallel sysplex. > > The primary master files are VSAM and we run a lot of batch using CICS > EXCI in order (I am told) to facilitate sharing between online and batch > and also to avoid reproducing of lot of the business logic already in the > online transactions. > > Sounds like to me there could be opportunities to tune our batch > which does run quite slowly, both during the daytime when the onlines are > busy and during evening batch when the onlines have quite load transaction > volumes. > > Where should I go looking? > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: U.S. Federal Reserve Launches FedNow
Paypal stores your credit card information (if you want) and of course wants you to maintain +ve balances rather than move the funds back to your bank account. Possibly they have lots of money in those accounts which they can use to invest and which are not probably FDIC guaranteed. >From my limited understanding FedNow is a messaging service which supports near instantaneous messages between two banks via the Federal Reserve. So a payment from a customer at Bank A goes to the FedNOW system, deducts that amount from the sending bank's Master account at the Fed and deposits that same amount into Bank B's Master account. Then a whole bunch of messages are exchanged to make sure both sides are correctly debited/credited. They are using ISO20020 message format so that is the extent of the information being sent from Bank A to Bank B. Seems like a great service if your bank or CU offers it. On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 4:07 PM Bob Bridges wrote: > I use PayPal all the time. I confess that it's main draw for me is that > I'm giving my banking information to one vendor rather than many, and I > haven't investigated carefully; but it always seemed to me that my payments > to others, and their payments to me, go through promptly. References? > > --- > Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 > > /* As a father, I have a vested interest in seeing my children do well in > school. If they don't, they won't graduate, and will probably wind up > living in my house until they are thirty years old. This will interfere > with my plan to reach retirement age without killing another human being. > -W Bruce Cameron, _Study Habits_ (2001) */ > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of Bill Johnson > Sent: Friday, July 21, 2023 19:44 > > Puts a damper on apps like PayPal who holds onto your money for a period > of time. Plus major banks are FDIC protected unlike those fake banks. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: U.S. Federal Reserve Launches FedNow
This is a great achievement. And a great fillup for MQ. But even in the most apparently innocuous settings conspiracy theories abound. This video outlines some of them and thankfully debunks them. https://youtu.be/s1Dw3_u9FAs On Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 3:33 PM Timothy Sipples wrote: > Congratulations to the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank on its launch of FedNow, > the real-time fund transfer system. FedNow has launched with the > participation of several banks of all sizes including (as large bank > examples:) JP Morgan Chase, BNY Mellon, and Wells Fargo. > > To connect to FedNow participating banks and other financial > intermediaries use freely available IBM MQ clients. (IBM MQ also supports > API access, and that's a future enhancement planned for FedNow.) Several > popular payment-related applications already support FedNow. The message > format is a bespoke ISO20022 XML format. FedNow has a design goal of > continuous service. FedNow is for "small" transactions. The systemwide per > transaction limit is currently $500,000, although participants can choose a > lower limit if they wish. > > — > Timothy Sipples > Senior Architect > Digital Assets, Industry Solutions, and Cybersecurity > IBM zSystems/LinuxONE, Asia-Pacific > sipp...@sg.ibm.com > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What happened to GC26-1672 Batch Local Shared Resource(LSR) Documentation?
On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 5:35 PM allan winston wrote: > I did a lot of work in this area 20 years ago. > [snip] > > CICS is an entirely different ballgame. In the rare event that the VSAM > files in your shop are still using LSR instead of RLS, then there are > opportunities for performance improve by appropriate changes to the FILE > and LSRPOOL specifications using Resource Definition Online or, > equivalently, via the batch program DFHCSDUP. Never let files with > significant activity default to pool 1. > > > > Allan > > > Our shop is CICS and I am not sure we are even using LSR and certainly no RLS since there is no parallel sysplex. The primary master files are VSAM and we run a lot of batch using CICS EXCI in order (I am told) to facilitate sharing between online and batch and also to avoid reproducing of lot of the business logic already in the online transactions. Sounds like to me there could be opportunities to tune our batch which does run quite slowly, both during the daytime when the onlines are busy and during evening batch when the onlines have quite load transaction volumes. Where should I go looking? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: OSA-ICC question
Thanks. I thought as much as Googled for this but this link didn't pop up. That is pretty conclusive. On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 12:11 PM Joe Monk wrote: > Page 129 > > https://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg245444.pdf > > Joe > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 5:12 PM Laurence Chiu wrote: > > > We are having a LPAR being stood up on an outsourcing company's host. It > > will be for our use but they will manage it via the HMC's and possibly > the > > OSA-ICC port. All regular access to the LPAR will be via 3270 and using > > our accounts. But a question was asked, what about OSA-ICC access. My > > understanding is if the OSA Express cards have been defined in IOCD and > > assigned to the LPAR, and a port(s) configured as OSA-ICC then the > > outsourcer can access it so long as they have IP connectivity to that IP > > address. And Z/OS Communications Manager does not need to be started. > > > > Is that correct? This is not my area of expertise but one of my > colleagues > > said the OSA Express cards are assigned to the hardware and not to the > LPAR > > which of course makes no sense to me at all. After all you can share OSA > > Express cards across the LPARs on a CEC. > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
OSA-ICC question
We are having a LPAR being stood up on an outsourcing company's host. It will be for our use but they will manage it via the HMC's and possibly the OSA-ICC port. All regular access to the LPAR will be via 3270 and using our accounts. But a question was asked, what about OSA-ICC access. My understanding is if the OSA Express cards have been defined in IOCD and assigned to the LPAR, and a port(s) configured as OSA-ICC then the outsourcer can access it so long as they have IP connectivity to that IP address. And Z/OS Communications Manager does not need to be started. Is that correct? This is not my area of expertise but one of my colleagues said the OSA Express cards are assigned to the hardware and not to the LPAR which of course makes no sense to me at all. After all you can share OSA Express cards across the LPARs on a CEC. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Colossal Cave on Android (was: Re: z/OSMF)
With the ubiquity of Amazon devices it's likely the OP has one of these (Echo, Dot etc.) Just say Alexa Play Colossal Cave and it will play the game for you. XYZZY :-) On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 6:19 AM Mike Schwab wrote: > Install Linux on Android, 3270 emulator, Turkey 4-, then the games? > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 12:09 PM Phil Smith III wrote: > > > > Y'all might think about changing subject lines occasionally. ;) > > > > > > > > Alas, the Colossal Cave seems to not be compatible with current Android > versions. I take that to mean the developer has lost interest. Too bad; > seemed like a nice blast from the past time-waster! > > > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA > Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Do you need a coupling facility to implement DVIPA?
Thanks Timothy for confirming that. We are planning to implement a sysplex where we want a critical application to have high availability without a parallel sysplex. The solution being discussed is to install the application on two LPARs but have it active only one at any time due to dataset sharing issues. But since it has to have a fixed IP, the only way we can see how to do that is to use DVIPA and migrate that fixed IP between whichever LPAR is running the applications. Hopefully that can be achieved with some automation. On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 5:20 PM Timothy Sipples wrote: > Here's a quote pulled from an older IBM redbook: > > "Note: Dynamic VIPA and Sysplex Distributor capabilities do not rely on > data stored in structures in the Coupling Facility. Therefore, they can be > implemented using XCF communication without a Coupling Facility (also > called Basic Sysplex connectivity)." > > That's on Page 4 of this redbook: > > https://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg247800.pdf > > But I also found this more modern reference in the IBM WebSphere > Application Server for z/OS documentation: > > https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/was-zos/9.0.5?topic=sysplex-distributor > > Funny how we carried forward the z/OS 1.2 (and prior) caveat. That bit of > text doesn't seem too important for Version 9.0.5 of WAS for z/OS, does it? > :-) > > — > Timothy Sipples > Senior Architect > Digital Assets, Industry Solutions, and Cybersecurity > IBM zSystems/LinuxONE, Asia-Pacific > sipp...@sg.ibm.com > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Do you need a coupling facility to implement DVIPA?
That is what I thought but I get confused since whenever I look at DVIPA discussions like this https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos-basic-skills?topic=addressing-unique-application-instance-dvipa it always shows a CF. But in this preso from IBM at Share https://share.confex.com/share/125/webprogram/Handout/Session17284/Sysplex%20and%20Network%20Technologies%20and%20Considerations%20%28Summer%202015%29.pdf there is no mention of a CF anywhere in the deck. Looks like it just uses XCF to communicate the status of the DVIPA stack between the TCP/IP stacks on each LPAR as you say. On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 1:24 PM Mark Jacobs < 0224d287a4b1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > Not 100% sure, but based on this, likely not. > > In order for TCP/IP to communicate DVIPA status among LPARs, TCP/IP uses > an XCF group called EZBTCPCS. There's no mention of a coupling facility > structure as a requirement. > > Mark Jacobs > > Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email. > > GPG Public Key - > https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com > > > --- Original Message --- > On Wednesday, April 19th, 2023 at 8:53 PM, Laurence Chiu > wrote: > > > > Looking at implementing a basic sysplex where an application will be able > > to run on two different LPARs but only on one instance at a time. > > > > Since it's difficult to change the advertised IP for the application/LPAR > > we plan to use DVIPA. > > > > Is this possible without a coupling facility and only the TCP/IP stake > and > > XCF? > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Do you need a coupling facility to implement DVIPA?
Looking at implementing a basic sysplex where an application will be able to run on two different LPARs but only on one instance at a time. Since it's difficult to change the advertised IP for the application/LPAR we plan to use DVIPA. Is this possible without a coupling facility and only the TCP/IP stake and XCF? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Question for our international friends (mostly)
> > > I have been sayyng kicks for as long as I have been involved in IBM mainframe, starting in the US in 1982 and on and off until now. The US is not my home country so I count myself as international. Note that since CICS came from Hursley and the Brits say kicks, then that is the right pronunciation. But it's very irregular since I used to be an IMS sysprog and I always say eye-em-ess and not ims. Lately I have been hearing people say zos while I say Zed Oh Ess and sometimes Zee Oh Ess -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Ransomware in VSAM and DB2
A client I am working with uses Safeguarded Copy, a feature in IBM Copy Services Manager on the DS8K SANS On Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 12:44 PM Attila Fogarasi wrote: > Also there are various solutions for immutable backups of z/OS data, which > would protect you against ransomware. > > On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 1:27 PM Tommy Tsui wrote: > > > Hi all. > > We are studying to build the tertiary backup. In fact, is it possible to > > hack the VSAM dataset during online period, is there any policy to > protect > > VSAM datasets ? > > > > Thanks for sharing > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's?
This is a vendor package. Upon asking they said they only support RLS for sharing. So there are no other options. On Wed, Mar 8, 2023, 2:58 PM Dale R. Smith > > IBM has a product called "CICS VSAM Transparency for z/OS" that claims you > can migrate VSAM Files to Db2 Tables without having to change any program > code. > https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/ibm-cics-vsam-transparency-zos > > From the web page: > > IBM CICS VSAM Transparency for z/OS > > Helps you migrate valuable data from VSAM files to Db2 tables in a manner > that can evolve as business needs change > > IBM® CICS® VSAM Transparency helps you move valuable data from VSAM files > to Db2® tables. This migration can evolve as your business requirements > dictate, without having to modify your CICS® and batch VSAM application > programs. You can access the Db2® data 24x7, as well as integrate your data > with new and existing Db2® applications, preserving your core investments > and avoiding costly application rewrites. > > I'm sure it's not cheap, but it would allow you to share the data and it > may be cheaper than what you would need to do to share a VSAM file. > > I have no experience with the product so I don't know if it works as > advertised. > > -- > Dale R. Smith > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's?
Hadn't considered that. Based on what the outsourcer has advised us I doubt this has even crossed their mind. On Thu, Mar 9, 2023, 6:19 PM Timothy Sipples wrote: > The only other thing I can think of is that some operators (some > outsourcers for example) might not have — or know how to perform — capacity > measurement, planning, chargeback accounting (ugh!), or contractual > arrangements when running the CFCC on general purpose processors (CPs). > Those are not a technical limitations. You/they can do all of that for CF > workloads straightforwardly. But those "technobusiness" factors might > explain some reticence if you're observing any. > > — — — — — > Timothy Sipples > Senior Architect > Digital Assets, Industry Solutions, and Cybersecurity > IBM zSystems/LinuxONE, Asia-Pacific > sipp...@sg.ibm.com > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's?
That is my view. The application team won't care if the application is performing slowly since this is just a functional test. It means a path to HA on the production server. And in my view it doesn't matter if the engine is an ICF of GP - the load is going to be low on it. On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 3:49 AM Martin Packer wrote: > You don’t need a dedicated engine to test CF – unless your test is a > Performance test. And then possibly a single one wouldn’t be helpful. > Function test should be fine with any old engine. > > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's?
Just to explain why we need two LPARs. The application uses a VSAM dataset which is updated for all incoming transactions. If we want to run two instances of that application on two different LPARs to provide availability even if one of the LPARs goes offline for any reason, then the VSAM dataset needs to be shared across the two instances when both are running to support concurrent access. The only other option for the two LPARs on the same CEC is possibly VSAM ShareOptions but given this is a package from a vendor, it might not be coded to support the right queueing and de-queueing of access to that dataset. > .. > > 2. Just in case there's any confusion VSAM RLS (and Transactional > VSAM, i.e. z/OS DFSMStvs) do(es) not require two or more z/OS instances. A > single z/OS instance with a single CF is the minimum configuration for > those VSAM features. > > 3. If you do run two or more z/OS instances (a "Parallel Sysplex in a > box") that can be a lovely configuration, but just bear in mind if the site > or machine go offline (planned or unplanned) then you lose the whole > Sysplex. Nonetheless a "Parallel Sysplex in a box" provides a great deal of > value in terms of protecting against various software-related issues that > would affect service availability if you only had one z/OS instance. > Hypothetically a single CF could topple over and/or require a planned > outage even without anything else going offline, but even with one CF the > "Parallel Sysplex in a box" is rather good. > > 4. Check for and apply all relevant firmware, z/OS, and middleware updates > (of course). > > — — — — — > Timothy Sipples > Senior Architect > Digital Assets, Industry Solutions, and Cybersecurity > IBM zSystems/LinuxONE, Asia-Pacific > sipp...@sg.ibm.com > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's?
This is very helpful, thanks. Plus I have the document which is an IBM official document. On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 10:07 AM Attila Fogarasi wrote: > Perhaps your outsourcer will accept recommendations by IBM in an official > apar, see https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/apar/II09294 > This says in part "If you can accept slower response times or occasional > slower > > response times and the load is not too great, CFs in shared > LPs may be a viable alternative to running CFs with DEDICATED > CP resources." > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 12:04 AM Allan Staller < > 0387911dea17-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > > Classification: Confidential > > > > The "spare" ICF engine on the "A" box could be shared between *your* > > test/production sysplexes. > > > > HTH > > > > -Original Message- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > > Of Laurence Chiu > > Sent: Friday, March 3, 2023 9:34 PM > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > Subject: Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel > > Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's? > > > > [CAUTION: This Email is from outside the Organization. Unless you trust > > the sender, Don't click links or open attachments as it may be a Phishing > > email, which can steal your Information and compromise your Computer.] > > > > The situation. > > > > We share a couple of Z13's with another (larger client). Z13 B is where > we > > run our development LPARs and Z13 A is production. > > > > For critical business reasons an online application on our production > LPAR > > needs to be highly available and that means in a parallel sysplex. But > our > > outsourcer has told us it cannot be done for the following reasons > because > > there are no spare ICF engines on the host B - all are being used by > other > > CF instances, either to support production Sysplexes or development ones > > (not ours). > > > > Host A does potentially have a spare ICF engine we could use to support a > > production parallel Sysplex but good practice does recommend you create a > > test one first of course. > > > > I then asked the question, if host A has a spare ICF engine, can't it be > > used to support a CF to be used by the test Sysplex on B. I was advised > > this was not possible since there are no spare connections between host A > > and Host B (Infiniband possibly) so the Sysplex on B could not actually > > communicate with the CF on A. > > > > Our requirement for the Sysplex is primarily to be able to share a VSAM > > dataset which is hit every time a transaction comes in with a peak of > about > > 99tps. So we would need VSAM RLS to share the dataset records between the > > two application instances. There is no DB2, CICS or IMS so I think the > only > > structures in the CF are those to support VSAM RLS, maybe some XCF > > structures and core systems. > > > > Knowing that we would only bring up the test sysplex to make sure > > transactions routed correctly across the two LPARs and most of the time > we > > would have one member of the Sysplex off, I suggested that the test CF > > could be built using a CP. To this suggestion I received the following > > (anti) advice > > - there would be MSU costs (we don't care since we think the MIPS load on > > the CF would be low). Plus we would ask that the CF be defined with > Dynamic > > Coupling Facility Dispatch and set DYNDISP=THIN. Since that CF is going > to > > be idling most of the time, MSU consumption is not going to be a major > cost. > > - it's strongly recommended not to do this by IBM. Yet when I read this > > document > > > > > > > https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fdownloads%2Fcas%2FJZB2E38Q=05%7C01%7Callan.staller%40HCL.COM%7C1962ff1c13d7410924a708db1c617020%7C189de737c93a4f5a8b686f4ca9941912%7C0%7C0%7C638134977066659942%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=78DxD9grmMmrALQNItds2OaQ6Eyuv43mGVh5%2BoeqQnk%3D=0 > > the option is discussed in great detail and the only negatives are the > > incurring of MSU costs and some performance degradation if both a z/OS > and > > CF LPAR are trying to use the same CP at the same time. But this can be > > managed. > > > > - that a CF running on a CP would need a dedicated CP engine and there > are > > no spare engines in host B. That totally flies against the information I > > have read from IBM docs. > > > > Of cours
Re: Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's?
That is what I suggested and I was told there were no spare "connections" between the two hosts but they didn't elaborate. I have been asked if those connections are ICA-SR or IFB and reading the manual linked in this thread, I think they are IFB since that is what is supported on the Z13's. If that is the case then it seems they can be shared but I have no way of knowing what the actual connections are. On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 2:04 AM Allan Staller < 0387911dea17-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > Classification: Confidential > > The "spare" ICF engine on the "A" box could be shared between *your* > test/production sysplexes. > > HTH > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of Laurence Chiu > Sent: Friday, March 3, 2023 9:34 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel > Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's? > > [CAUTION: This Email is from outside the Organization. Unless you trust > the sender, Don't click links or open attachments as it may be a Phishing > email, which can steal your Information and compromise your Computer.] > > The situation. > > We share a couple of Z13's with another (larger client). Z13 B is where we > run our development LPARs and Z13 A is production. > > For critical business reasons an online application on our production LPAR > needs to be highly available and that means in a parallel sysplex. But our > outsourcer has told us it cannot be done for the following reasons because > there are no spare ICF engines on the host B - all are being used by other > CF instances, either to support production Sysplexes or development ones > (not ours). > > Host A does potentially have a spare ICF engine we could use to support a > production parallel Sysplex but good practice does recommend you create a > test one first of course. > > I then asked the question, if host A has a spare ICF engine, can't it be > used to support a CF to be used by the test Sysplex on B. I was advised > this was not possible since there are no spare connections between host A > and Host B (Infiniband possibly) so the Sysplex on B could not actually > communicate with the CF on A. > > Our requirement for the Sysplex is primarily to be able to share a VSAM > dataset which is hit every time a transaction comes in with a peak of about > 99tps. So we would need VSAM RLS to share the dataset records between the > two application instances. There is no DB2, CICS or IMS so I think the only > structures in the CF are those to support VSAM RLS, maybe some XCF > structures and core systems. > > Knowing that we would only bring up the test sysplex to make sure > transactions routed correctly across the two LPARs and most of the time we > would have one member of the Sysplex off, I suggested that the test CF > could be built using a CP. To this suggestion I received the following > (anti) advice > - there would be MSU costs (we don't care since we think the MIPS load on > the CF would be low). Plus we would ask that the CF be defined with Dynamic > Coupling Facility Dispatch and set DYNDISP=THIN. Since that CF is going to > be idling most of the time, MSU consumption is not going to be a major cost. > - it's strongly recommended not to do this by IBM. Yet when I read this > document > > > https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fdownloads%2Fcas%2FJZB2E38Q=05%7C01%7Callan.staller%40HCL.COM%7C1962ff1c13d7410924a708db1c617020%7C189de737c93a4f5a8b686f4ca9941912%7C0%7C0%7C638134977066659942%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=78DxD9grmMmrALQNItds2OaQ6Eyuv43mGVh5%2BoeqQnk%3D=0 > the option is discussed in great detail and the only negatives are the > incurring of MSU costs and some performance degradation if both a z/OS and > CF LPAR are trying to use the same CP at the same time. But this can be > managed. > > - that a CF running on a CP would need a dedicated CP engine and there are > no spare engines in host B. That totally flies against the information I > have read from IBM docs. > > Of course for production the CF on host A would be configured to use an > ICF engine (or share one) > > Finally, while I accepted the argument at the time there were no > connections between Host A and Host B, further reading suggests that you do > not need to dedicate channels for communications but use XCF or by using > Infiniband sub channels or sharing the same physical link with more than > one Sysplex. Then the issue of running the CF on a CP goes away since I can > ask for two CF's to be defined on ho
Re: Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's?
That's the debate I'm having. The CF is only to support VSAM RLS and most of the time only one member of the sysplex will be up so the load on the CF is not going to be high. I just can't persuade the outsourcer we don't need a dedicated engine for the CF. On Mon, Mar 6, 2023, 9:49 AM Seymour J Metz wrote: > The issue is performance. Depending on what you are doing, the degraded > performance may be acceptable. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf > of Laurence Chiu [lch...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, March 5, 2023 2:05 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel > Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's? > > The debate I am having with the outsourcer is whether or not it's feasible > or even practical to run a test CF on a general purpose engine. They say it > requires a dedicated engine and I think that is nonsense! > > If I can get that over the line (and that is the challenge) then I can > suggest what you recommended below. And since I don't need one CF, I might > need even fewer resources. > > > On Sun, Mar 5, 2023 at 5:39 PM Mike Schwab > wrote: > > > To avoid impacting other systems, I would drop your LPAR weights by a > > total of 6%, trim your LPAR memory to reuse for the ICFs, then create > > your two ICF partitions with 3% of 1 CPU and the reclaimed memory.. > > > > On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 2:55 PM Laurence Chiu wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for the input. > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 5, 2023 at 7:41 AM Mike Schwab > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F342570694_Coupling_Facility_Configuration_Options_-_Updated_2020=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C436800a18ba54430093908db1daca96d%7C9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb%7C0%7C0%7C638136399655620282%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=HYoo%2FosMEZw5JHKVlB0T%2F2llYz5vokvdUSyxKpIB3Do%3D=0 > > > > > > > > > > I am familiar with that document and even provided a copy to our > > outsourcer > > > to read but clearly they hadn't > > > > > > This is a direct link to IBM for that document. > > > > > > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fdownloads%2Fcas%2FJZB2E38Q=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C436800a18ba54430093908db1daca96d%7C9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb%7C0%7C0%7C638136399655776514%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=tnP0qr0DTsTupn4v2ayadx5%2FmP%2BKlg8RXncytv1PUiA%3D=0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > CF is not counted on SCRT, shown on RMF reports. > > > > Won't cost you on z/OS, may on some vendors. > > > > > > > > > > I don't care so much as this CF is only System B and for development so > > > using a general purpose engine is not an issue for us. The MSU charges > > are > > > going to be low and we are prepared to pay those if it gets us our > > parallel > > > sysplex > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thin CFs go to enabled wait when work is completed, restart when > > > > interrupt says there is work. > > > > > > > > Estimate is 3% light sharing to 13% heaving sharing (of z/OS > workload). > > > > > > > > Thin CF would use internal links so no I/O overhead to another CPU. > > > > > > > > For the testing CF on the same system as the test Sysplex that is > fine. > > > But they say there are no spare links from System B to System A if I > > wanted > > > to run a test Sysplex on System B and access a CF on System A. > > > > > > This is their response I had to manage > > > > > > > > > To give an idea of what I am facing, this is their response to my > > proposals. > > > > > > Using a General Purpose CP (GCP) as a coupling facility on System > B(z13 > > at > > > WithDrawn From Marketing Licensed Internal Code) > > > • There are no spare unallocated GCP on System B i.e no “parked” GCP. > > > • All GCP’s, on System B, are allocated as shared, across all LPARS. > i.e. > > > no dedicated GCP’s. > > > • Sharing GCP’s to use for z/OS and as a coupling facility is strongly > > not > > > recommended F
Re: Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's?
The debate I am having with the outsourcer is whether or not it's feasible or even practical to run a test CF on a general purpose engine. They say it requires a dedicated engine and I think that is nonsense! If I can get that over the line (and that is the challenge) then I can suggest what you recommended below. And since I don't need one CF, I might need even fewer resources. On Sun, Mar 5, 2023 at 5:39 PM Mike Schwab wrote: > To avoid impacting other systems, I would drop your LPAR weights by a > total of 6%, trim your LPAR memory to reuse for the ICFs, then create > your two ICF partitions with 3% of 1 CPU and the reclaimed memory.. > > On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 2:55 PM Laurence Chiu wrote: > > > > Thanks for the input. > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 5, 2023 at 7:41 AM Mike Schwab > wrote: > > > > > > > > > https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342570694_Coupling_Facility_Configuration_Options_-_Updated_2020 > > > > > > > I am familiar with that document and even provided a copy to our > outsourcer > > to read but clearly they hadn't > > > > This is a direct link to IBM for that document. > > > > https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/JZB2E38Q > > > > > > > > > CF is not counted on SCRT, shown on RMF reports. > > > Won't cost you on z/OS, may on some vendors. > > > > > > > I don't care so much as this CF is only System B and for development so > > using a general purpose engine is not an issue for us. The MSU charges > are > > going to be low and we are prepared to pay those if it gets us our > parallel > > sysplex > > > > > > > > > Thin CFs go to enabled wait when work is completed, restart when > > > interrupt says there is work. > > > > > > Estimate is 3% light sharing to 13% heaving sharing (of z/OS workload). > > > > > > Thin CF would use internal links so no I/O overhead to another CPU. > > > > > > For the testing CF on the same system as the test Sysplex that is fine. > > But they say there are no spare links from System B to System A if I > wanted > > to run a test Sysplex on System B and access a CF on System A. > > > > This is their response I had to manage > > > > > > To give an idea of what I am facing, this is their response to my > proposals. > > > > Using a General Purpose CP (GCP) as a coupling facility on System B(z13 > at > > WithDrawn From Marketing Licensed Internal Code) > > • There are no spare unallocated GCP on System B i.e no “parked” GCP. > > • All GCP’s, on System B, are allocated as shared, across all LPARS. i.e. > > no dedicated GCP’s. > > • Sharing GCP’s to use for z/OS and as a coupling facility is strongly > not > > recommended FYI coupling facility engines run CFCC (coupling facility > > control code) rather than z/OS. > > • This possibly I believe is now exhausted. > > > > I think all these points are contestable, specially after reading the IBM > > document from a specialist in this area > > > > I just need to get some authoritative voice onto the case, ideally the > > author of the document but that might not be easy. > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA > Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's?
Thanks for the input. On Sun, Mar 5, 2023 at 7:41 AM Mike Schwab wrote: > > https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342570694_Coupling_Facility_Configuration_Options_-_Updated_2020 > I am familiar with that document and even provided a copy to our outsourcer to read but clearly they hadn't This is a direct link to IBM for that document. https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/JZB2E38Q > CF is not counted on SCRT, shown on RMF reports. > Won't cost you on z/OS, may on some vendors. > I don't care so much as this CF is only System B and for development so using a general purpose engine is not an issue for us. The MSU charges are going to be low and we are prepared to pay those if it gets us our parallel sysplex > Thin CFs go to enabled wait when work is completed, restart when > interrupt says there is work. > > Estimate is 3% light sharing to 13% heaving sharing (of z/OS workload). > > Thin CF would use internal links so no I/O overhead to another CPU. > > For the testing CF on the same system as the test Sysplex that is fine. But they say there are no spare links from System B to System A if I wanted to run a test Sysplex on System B and access a CF on System A. This is their response I had to manage To give an idea of what I am facing, this is their response to my proposals. Using a General Purpose CP (GCP) as a coupling facility on System B(z13 at WithDrawn From Marketing Licensed Internal Code) • There are no spare unallocated GCP on System B i.e no “parked” GCP. • All GCP’s, on System B, are allocated as shared, across all LPARS. i.e. no dedicated GCP’s. • Sharing GCP’s to use for z/OS and as a coupling facility is strongly not recommended FYI coupling facility engines run CFCC (coupling facility control code) rather than z/OS. • This possibly I believe is now exhausted. I think all these points are contestable, specially after reading the IBM document from a specialist in this area I just need to get some authoritative voice onto the case, ideally the author of the document but that might not be easy. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's?
The situation. We share a couple of Z13's with another (larger client). Z13 B is where we run our development LPARs and Z13 A is production. For critical business reasons an online application on our production LPAR needs to be highly available and that means in a parallel sysplex. But our outsourcer has told us it cannot be done for the following reasons because there are no spare ICF engines on the host B - all are being used by other CF instances, either to support production Sysplexes or development ones (not ours). Host A does potentially have a spare ICF engine we could use to support a production parallel Sysplex but good practice does recommend you create a test one first of course. I then asked the question, if host A has a spare ICF engine, can't it be used to support a CF to be used by the test Sysplex on B. I was advised this was not possible since there are no spare connections between host A and Host B (Infiniband possibly) so the Sysplex on B could not actually communicate with the CF on A. Our requirement for the Sysplex is primarily to be able to share a VSAM dataset which is hit every time a transaction comes in with a peak of about 99tps. So we would need VSAM RLS to share the dataset records between the two application instances. There is no DB2, CICS or IMS so I think the only structures in the CF are those to support VSAM RLS, maybe some XCF structures and core systems. Knowing that we would only bring up the test sysplex to make sure transactions routed correctly across the two LPARs and most of the time we would have one member of the Sysplex off, I suggested that the test CF could be built using a CP. To this suggestion I received the following (anti) advice - there would be MSU costs (we don't care since we think the MIPS load on the CF would be low). Plus we would ask that the CF be defined with Dynamic Coupling Facility Dispatch and set DYNDISP=THIN. Since that CF is going to be idling most of the time, MSU consumption is not going to be a major cost. - it's strongly recommended not to do this by IBM. Yet when I read this document https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/JZB2E38Q the option is discussed in great detail and the only negatives are the incurring of MSU costs and some performance degradation if both a z/OS and CF LPAR are trying to use the same CP at the same time. But this can be managed. - that a CF running on a CP would need a dedicated CP engine and there are no spare engines in host B. That totally flies against the information I have read from IBM docs. Of course for production the CF on host A would be configured to use an ICF engine (or share one) Finally, while I accepted the argument at the time there were no connections between Host A and Host B, further reading suggests that you do not need to dedicate channels for communications but use XCF or by using Infiniband sub channels or sharing the same physical link with more than one Sysplex. Then the issue of running the CF on a CP goes away since I can ask for two CF's to be defined on host A, one for production and one for test and DCFC ensures that that production CF is not impacted by the development one. A lot to digest here but I really want to have some authoritative data in order to refute most of the comments being our outsourcer. Thanks -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: How long for an experiened z/OS sysprog to come up to speed on a new environment?
This particular organisation (a bank) doesn't allow anybody to attach USB sticks or download stuff. If you want to download from a non-recognised source you seek approval from the security team who assess the risk and then usually only open up the site for an hour or so for you to download the content. I have yet to sight a process to allow access to USB sticks. On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 8:04 PM Tom Brennan wrote: > I think it's a matter of trust. Right off, a company needs to trust > that I'm honest, otherwise they shouldn't allow me anywhere near their > datacenter or network. But how can they trust that I'm reasonably > competent in the areas I claim to be, and that I won't make mistakes > that cause big problems? That takes time or guesses or references or > maybe just their gut instinct. I don't know. > > On 2/19/2023 9:52 PM, Brian Westerman wrote: > > The USB is just for emergencies, I can download from my phone just as > well, and from my NAS at home if necessary. It seems odd to me to lock > down a systems programmer from getting information that may save the site, > but maybe it's just me. I can honestly say that no one has ever told me I > could not load my stuff, but honestly I can't remember ever asking anyone > if they had a problem with me doing so. > > > > Most things I could probably just retype, especially when I have the > data already displayable. It seems very short sighted to "lock down" use > of a tool that could very well fix a major problem, but again, maybe it's > just that I have never asked anyone if they minded me fixing their site. :) > > > > Brian > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: How long for an experiened z/OS sysprog to come up to speed on a new environment?
The last 3 environments I worked in the USB drives were locked down so you could not use them. And if you did manage to, then your action would be detected and could lead to disciplinary action. So for me at least, that is not an option. On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 1:53 PM Brian Westerman < brian_wester...@syzygyinc.com> wrote: > I carry everything around on a USB drive. All JCL, manuals and source > code and even load libraries that I might ever need. Drives are very cheap > and can hold much more data than I ever would need. I rarely go anywhere > without it because, well, it's attached to my keys. > > Brian > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: How long for an experiened z/OS sysprog to come up to speed on a new environment?
That indeed is the crux of the matter. When we were advised by the incumbent outsourcing the backlog of work that is urgent would take so long to deliver we suggested we could add additional staff. To which the response was it would take at least 6 months for even an experienced systems programmer to come up to speed to be productive and that is what I am questioning. On Sun, Feb 19, 2023, 3:44 AM Paul Gorlinsky wrote: > > > If the vendor is claiming 6 months ... look elsewhere ... IMHO > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: How long for an experiened z/OS sysprog to come up to speed on a new environment?
Thanks for the input. I raised the question because the outsourcer who would do this work said adding more staff would not help because it would take up to 6 months to know the environment. This seemed excessive to me. I would think the string is about 1 day to maybe 2 months long. Even the longest piece is acceptable to us and it's likely to be shorter. I am an ex sysprog myself albeit in IMS and DB2 and know SMPE and used to code exits in Assembler. It's been a few years but I am sure if given the chance I could be productive in a month. After all, once you have installed and configured one major sub-system, it is not that hard to work on a different one. And given the work that is required is on the z/OS side, some HMC work (creating LPARs etc.) all an experienced z/OS person needs is a TSO logon, documentation on the environment and a buddy to ask questions about the environment and away they go. No subsystems need to be installed - they all exist now. And the Sysplex partner does not need to be built from scratch. Just clone the SYSRES volume for the primary LPAR,, alter SYS1.PARMLIB etc. and go from there (missing a few things here but as they used to say in the maths exercises answers section, the rest is left as an exercise for the reader :-) ) On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 9:19 PM Gibney, Dave < 03b5261cfd78-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > With all due respect, and I do have great respect for you Brian, you do > have a great deal of experience in this kind of work. So, a day or so after > you get access (and I assume you've acquired a number of tools) it is > entirely possible that you would be up to speed. > I do agree with you that the first hurdle would how rapidly the new guy > gets and what level of access they are allowed. > > I think there are several other variables as to how rapidly a given newly > hired yet experienced sysprog learns the ropes at a new site. From what I > have observed here on the list, sites vary quite a bit. > > Personally, I would need a little longer. But, I've only worked at the one > site, even if it was for 40 years. The thing is, I've forgotten more than I > know at any given time. Almost always had to move to the next issue before > any true expertise settled in. It was usually easier the next time a task > or need rolled around, but since it was my site, I knew where I’d last left > the tools and bread crumbs > > > -Original Message- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > > Behalf Of Brian Westerman > > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2023 9:52 PM > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > Subject: Re: How long for an experiened z/OS sysprog to come up to speed > > on a new environment? > > > > [EXTERNAL EMAIL] > > > > I completely agree with one day. You should be productive by then, as > for > > learning all of the sites naming conventions, procedures and standards, > you > > would pick them up as you go. I have found that by the end of the first > > week, I typically know more about how things are "supposed" to be > > managed than the people that are currently employed there. :) > > > > That assumes that everyone knows you are coming in and is prepared for > > you to be there. Things like getting an ID and a place to sit and > instructions > > for VPN's and connections. Those things typically should be done before > > your first day at the site, but unfortunately it rarely happens that > way. So I > > should say that it's about a day after you can actually log onto the > system. > > > > Brian > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: How long for an experiened z/OS sysprog to come up to speed on a new environment?
That might be a bit optimistic. There would be an existing sysprog team who are just overworked and hopefully they can spend time bringing up the newcomer to speed. No SMPE required - this is all infrastructure stuff like IOCDS, networking etc., fibre channel configuration etc. On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 1:44 PM Beverly Caldwell wrote: > One day is usually sufficient. Provided local management doesn't get in the > way and has everything ready for the incoming person. > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2023, 5:37 PM Laurence Chiu wrote: > > > This is probably a how long is a piece of string question but I said I > > would ask management anyway. > > > > Environment > > > > z/OS (of course) > > Z13's and Z15's > > Two sites with DWDM connectivity. > > DS8K SANs and TS77XX VTS > > Parallel Sysplex > > > > DWDM between the sites, Metro Mirror, HyperSwap, VTS grid. > > > > We are running into resource constraints in delivering an > > aggressive development plan which includes' > > - a new Sysplex for an independent business unit > > - moving data off an existing VTS grid and creating a whole new one > > which will require having an existing VTS having its data lost > > - Repopulating the VTS across the DWDM using COPYCAT > > - installing new VTS > > - possibly new DS8K and later one a new Z15 > > > > Assuming we could find suitably qualified z/OS and storage sysprogs, > given > > decent documentation etc. how long would somebody like that take to be > > productive and ease the workload? > > > > As a secondary question, are there companies who specialise in z/OS > > sysprog services as body shops? And I don't mean the usual suspects :-) > > > > Thanks > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
How long for an experiened z/OS sysprog to come up to speed on a new environment?
This is probably a how long is a piece of string question but I said I would ask management anyway. Environment z/OS (of course) Z13's and Z15's Two sites with DWDM connectivity. DS8K SANs and TS77XX VTS Parallel Sysplex DWDM between the sites, Metro Mirror, HyperSwap, VTS grid. We are running into resource constraints in delivering an aggressive development plan which includes' - a new Sysplex for an independent business unit - moving data off an existing VTS grid and creating a whole new one which will require having an existing VTS having its data lost - Repopulating the VTS across the DWDM using COPYCAT - installing new VTS - possibly new DS8K and later one a new Z15 Assuming we could find suitably qualified z/OS and storage sysprogs, given decent documentation etc. how long would somebody like that take to be productive and ease the workload? As a secondary question, are there companies who specialise in z/OS sysprog services as body shops? And I don't mean the usual suspects :-) Thanks -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: PPRC Metro Mirror - do you use Freeze/Stop or Freeze/Go
I recently thought I had sent this question to the list but nobody replied and even my message didn't appear in the list. At the risk of spamming the list I thought I would try again since it seems there must be folks on the list who are using Metro Mirror and have made conscious decisions about freeze/stop and freeze/go Thanks On Sat, Jul 9, 2022 at 2:27 PM Laurence Chiu wrote: > Slowly moving to a full test of a site swap after a successful HyperSwap > exercise. > > Our outsourcers had set Copy Services Manager to choose Freeze/Go versus > Freeze/Stop in the event of a PPRC failure. This is apparently the most > common setting for sites that use Metro Mirror since it's likely the PPRC > failure is due to some sort of comms failure and why stop production > workload when the comms load can be possibly fixed relatively quickly. > > Of course it does mean your DR site is out of sync and if you do lose your > primary site while the rolling disaster is underway, then you could lose > data. > > Discussions with colleagues and we think perhaps if there is a Metro > Mirror failure and we can't of course HyperSwap, we should evaluate the > potential outage time and if appropriate do a site swap to reduce risk of > data loss. > > Just wondering what others do. > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
PPRC Metro Mirror - do you use Freeze/Stop or Freeze/Go
Slowly moving to a full test of a site swap after a successful HyperSwap exercise. Our outsourcers had set Copy Services Manager to choose Freeze/Go versus Freeze/Stop in the event of a PPRC failure. This is apparently the most common setting for sites that use Metro Mirror since it's likely the PPRC failure is due to some sort of comms failure and why stop production workload when the comms load can be possibly fixed relatively quickly. Of course it does mean your DR site is out of sync and if you do lose your primary site while the rolling disaster is underway, then you could lose data. Discussions with colleagues and we think perhaps if there is a Metro Mirror failure and we can't of course HyperSwap, we should evaluate the potential outage time and if appropriate do a site swap to reduce risk of data loss. Just wondering what others do. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: RIsks of sharing FICON adapters between LPARs on the same host
I presume you do this encryption in flight as well as encryption at rest using the native DS8K encryption facilities? So the data could be doubly encrypted? On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 9:22 PM Timothy Sipples wrote: > Laurence Chiu wrote: > >If all data is encrypted before I/O are there any performance impacts on > >say Z14's with lesser capable hardware encryption? > > The IBM z14 models were the first to incorporate the "step change" higher > performance CPACF expressly designed for this mission (bulk data > encryption/decryption). > > z/OS Data Set Encryption is technically compatible with models prior to > z14 (all the way back to z196/z114), but on prior models the performance is > less impressive. Thus on those models I suggest using z/OS Data Set > Encryption only with your most sensitive data sets if you're concerned > about performance impacts. > > — — — — — > Timothy Sipples > Senior Architect > Digital Assets, Industry Solutions, and Cybersecurity > IBM zSystems/LinuxONE, Asia-Pacific > sipp...@sg.ibm.com > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: RIsks of sharing FICON adapters between LPARs on the same host
Thanks. I will raise that as a query. While the DS8K's data is encrypted using SKLM this is at rest and not during transmission. If all data is encrypted before I/O are there any performance impacts on say Z14's with lesser capable hardware encryption? On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 4:31 PM Timothy Sipples wrote: > You can and should *cryptographically* isolate z/OS data sets using z/OS > Data Set Encryption, preferably with protected key cryptography if > available. You can find out more about this feature (and how to implement > it) here: > > https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=sets-data-set-encryption > https://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg248410.html > > With z/OS Data Set Encryption any/all encrypted data sets are encrypted > before I/O. By the time the data (inside the encrypted data sets) reach the > FICON Express adapters they're already encrypted. These cryptographic > separation/isolation boundaries are per individual data set if desired, so > they're highly granular. > > Whereupon you can ask *them* why they aren't encrypting all (or most) > individual files with separate keys (if/as merited), and/or why they're > using clear key encryption. :-) > > — — — — — > Timothy Sipples > Senior Architect > Digital Assets, Industry Solutions, and Cybersecurity > IBM zSystems/LinuxONE, Asia-Pacific > sipp...@sg.ibm.com > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: RIsks of sharing FICON adapters between LPARs on the same host
I won't be opening that can of worms if only trying to explain what CHPID's are is going to be hard enough. On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 2:39 PM kekronbekron < 02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > Somebody mixing up the IODF is a far bigger problem for the LPARs > operationally first... let alone security. > If a CHPID is shared between the 2 LPARs, then yes, the pipe is shared. > > But is it a security "gotcha"? Unlikely to hell and back. > I think this goes down to microcode and I would bet that IBM test these > things out for 'leaks' thoroughly. > > Anyway, if you do let your security know that the CHPID is shared, be > prepared for many months and years of isolated CHPID talk, etc. > > Do correct me if I'm wrong: > > LPAR <-> unit <-> control unit <-> chpid <-> pchid <-> FC switch > > I don't believe there's room for a "whoopsie, I sent to this LPAR instead". > Can't quite explain it clearly. > Someone like Timothy Sipples can do that magic! > > - KB > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: RIsks of sharing FICON adapters between LPARs on the same host
Thanks. That sounds like a really good explanation to me. From way distant memory as each LPAR initiates an I/O eventually a CCW must be created though these days I can't imagine any application program worrying about that. Something you might do in Assembler even though you would probably invoke a MACRO. It was an academic debate and I doubt if I would raise it with the security team :-( On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 3:02 PM Ken Bloom wrote: > The risk is not with the ficon channels as the way CCW’s are sequenced it > would be virtually impossible for info to bleed across lpar’s. Since Dasd > is now virtual in all systems (IBM, EMC, Visara ,Hitachi) there is a > greater chance of the shared file system causing data to be “misplaced”. > Even so, it’s highly unlikely. > > Kenneth A. Bloom > CEO > Avenir Technologies Inc > /d/b/a Visara International > 203-984-2235 > bl...@visara.com<mailto:bl...@visara.com> > www.visara.com<http://www.visara.com/> > > > On Jun 14, 2022, at 10:38 PM, Mike Schwab wrote: > > z/VM can share PCHPIDs. But we always had 4 FICON for every LPAR for > DASD. > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 9:07 PM Laurence Chiu wrote: > > We had an interesting question raised recently in my work place by our > security team. > > They said, if you have multiple LPARs on a Z box and you share FICON > adapters going to the same DS8K is there any data leak issue that could > occur? That is, could LPAR1 inadvertently see traffic to the SAN that is > defined for LPAR2 but sharing the same FICON adapter. Maybe somebody mixed > up the IODF or something like that? > > I thought not and said, isn't that how VMware and Hiper-V work. The > hypervisors share out FC cards etc. to the various VM's and it doesn't seem > to be an issue and z/OS (or is PR/SM) is likely to be a much hardier OS > security wise. > > Anyway I would get the view of the experts on the forum. > > Thanks > > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
RIsks of sharing FICON adapters between LPARs on the same host
We had an interesting question raised recently in my work place by our security team. They said, if you have multiple LPARs on a Z box and you share FICON adapters going to the same DS8K is there any data leak issue that could occur? That is, could LPAR1 inadvertently see traffic to the SAN that is defined for LPAR2 but sharing the same FICON adapter. Maybe somebody mixed up the IODF or something like that? I thought not and said, isn't that how VMware and Hiper-V work. The hypervisors share out FC cards etc. to the various VM's and it doesn't seem to be an issue and z/OS (or is PR/SM) is likely to be a much hardier OS security wise. Anyway I would get the view of the experts on the forum. Thanks -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
ATO gives itself two years to replace IBM mainframe
Seen online is a number of sites. For those who don't know the ATO is the Australian Taxation Office or the Australian equivalent of the IRS. https://www.itnews.com.au/news/ato-gives-itself-two-years-to-replace-ibm-mainframe-579023 Based on some discussions friends of mine have been having regarding outsourcing mainframe services it appears the ATO's only real source for the services would be Kyndryl (erstwhile IBM Global Services). So the ATO is not looking to move to the Cloud (which would be a very long program of work) but move to a consumption type model based on existing technology. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: IBM ZDNT Learner's Edition - beware
There's even a parallel SysPlex version but that might not be in the personal edition. But just how cool is that if you could play with parallel sysplex? On Sun, Oct 31, 2021, 4:29 PM Seymour J Metz wrote: > It may not be everything I want, but IMHO it's a major improvement. It's > much more affordable for HS and college students than ZD > > > > > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: IBM ZDNT Learner's Edition - beware
I knew that but I'm not that desperate to get into a hobby environment by spending that kind of money. $120 is a no-brainer On Sat, Oct 30, 2021, 9:58 PM Sebastian Welton wrote: > On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 16:15:06 +1300, Laurence Chiu > wrote: > > > > > >I get a response and since I am not in the US I have to wait until the end > >of the year; It would be cool to spin up an Ubuntu VM in the cloud > >somewhere and load ZD and then play around from anywhere :-) > > > > There is nothing stopping you doing that now if you're willing to buy the > Personal Edition. > > Sebastian. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: IBM ZDNT Learner's Edition - beware
It's a shame that those of you in the US are not apparently getting responses from IBM since based on what I have seen posted in this group most people would like to have a copy and would need the criteria. I get a response and since I am not in the US I have to wait until the end of the year; It would be cool to spin up an Ubuntu VM in the cloud somewhere and load ZD and then play around from anywhere :-) On Sat, Oct 30, 2021 at 1:38 PM Pommier, Rex wrote: > Reading this thread it almost seems to me like "zDNT" learner's edition is > an acronym for zDoNotTry. I hope I'm wrong because I want to retire some > day and when I do, it would be fun to have a cheap z/OS learning > system/playground to learn about all the stuff my daytime job doesn't offer > me the time to do. > > Rex > > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: IBM ZDNT Learner's Edition - beware
I used my personal email account and yet it looked like the IBM rep who emailed me back is associated with the large corporate bank that I'm currently working for even though I didn't use a work email account nor identify myself as such. And I'm not working on the mainframe side with this bank. Spoke to some colleagues about this and they said IBM knows who you are no matter what identity you use :-) On Sat, Oct 30, 2021, 12:53 AM Mark Regan wrote: > I put in my request on Oct. 21st and still have not heard back from IBM > except for the autoresponse email saying that someone from sales will > contact me. > Regards, > > Mark Regan, K8MTR > > *CTO1 USNR-Retired, 1969-1991* > *Nationwide Insurance, Retired, 1986-2017* > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 5:40 AM Laurence Chiu wrote: > > > I just received information from IBM directly on the product. Currently > > it's on a dark launch in the US only but once that has been sorted out it > > will be made available to the rest of the world by the end of the year. > > > > T's include (I was only provided an image of the T's and I can't post > > this here since apparently the forum strips out images. But in essence > > they are > > > > *What is it?* > > Provide an affordable ZD for individual enterprise developers who want > to > > develop z/OS skills to be part of the mainframe ecosystem and support > them > > in their career success > > > > *How* > > > > Offering access to ZD at $120/year to vetted, advanced users for > > educational purposes > > > > *Vetting Criteria* > > > > z/OS Practitioner badge and Master the Mainframe training complete > > > > OR > > > > 1-3 years of sysadmin or system programmer experience [ I would imagine > > most people on this mailing list would easily fall into this category > :-) ] > > > > *Targeted Segments* > > > > z/OS students and hobbyists who want a personalised zD for learning > > purposes and support their career success. > > > > As an aside, while most of my systems programmer experience has been in > > DB2, IMS and VM, I would like to dabble in CICS or if they offer it, > look > > at parallel sysplex. It's not my current day job and hasn't been for many > > moons so it would be great to get back into into for kicks (CICS :-) ) > > > > On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 6:41 AM Lionel B. Dyck wrote: > > > > > The T's's explicitly state that it is to be used for learning and may > > > NOT be used for any kind of development - including Open Source. > > > > > > I've confirmed that with two sources. > > > > > > Disappointing ☹ > > > > > > > > > Lionel B. Dyck <>< > > > Website: https://www.lbdsoftware.com > > > Github: https://github.com/lbdyck > > > > > > “Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is > what > > > you are, reputation merely what others think you are.” - - - John > > Wooden > > > > > > -- > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: IBM ZDNT Learner's Edition - beware
I just received information from IBM directly on the product. Currently it's on a dark launch in the US only but once that has been sorted out it will be made available to the rest of the world by the end of the year. T's include (I was only provided an image of the T's and I can't post this here since apparently the forum strips out images. But in essence they are *What is it?* Provide an affordable ZD for individual enterprise developers who want to develop z/OS skills to be part of the mainframe ecosystem and support them in their career success *How* Offering access to ZD at $120/year to vetted, advanced users for educational purposes *Vetting Criteria* z/OS Practitioner badge and Master the Mainframe training complete OR 1-3 years of sysadmin or system programmer experience [ I would imagine most people on this mailing list would easily fall into this category :-) ] *Targeted Segments* z/OS students and hobbyists who want a personalised zD for learning purposes and support their career success. As an aside, while most of my systems programmer experience has been in DB2, IMS and VM, I would like to dabble in CICS or if they offer it, look at parallel sysplex. It's not my current day job and hasn't been for many moons so it would be great to get back into into for kicks (CICS :-) ) On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 6:41 AM Lionel B. Dyck wrote: > The T's's explicitly state that it is to be used for learning and may > NOT be used for any kind of development - including Open Source. > > I've confirmed that with two sources. > > Disappointing ☹ > > > Lionel B. Dyck <>< > Website: https://www.lbdsoftware.com > Github: https://github.com/lbdyck > > “Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is what > you are, reputation merely what others think you are.” - - - John Wooden > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: IBM z/OS Learner's Edition
I also put in a request but I also plan to contact our IBM account manager directly to see if he can expedite the process. This would be a great deal. On Sun, Oct 24, 2021, 10:50 AM Kevin Monceaux wrote: > On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 01:59:49PM -0400, Mark Regan wrote: > > > I've done that options #2 process too, and all I have received back is a > > canned response that says: > > > > Contact request confirmation - Your request to be contacted by IBM Sales > > was received. We will contact you as soon as your question is answered. > > > > I'm still waiting for a response from them. > > They may still be working some of the kinks out of the process. Your > request may have been received by someone in sales who isn't familiar with > the program yet and is having to do some research. I sent my request > Thursday night and received the reply with the application Friday morning. > > > > -- > > Kevin > http://www.RawFedDogs.net > http://www.Lassie.xyz > http://www.WacoAgilityGroup.org > Bruceville, TX > > What's the definition of a legacy system? One that works! > Errare humanum est, ignoscere caninum. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: EXTERNAL EMAIL: Re: zPDT Learner's Edition
I would pay that in a heartbeat. I spend $60/month on Youtube TV for which I receive much less benefit :-) But what I would like to see is my current client spend money on the Enterprise version and also IBM Developer for z/OS. There is the complaint that the burning bridge for legacy applications are not the applications themselves (Cobol/CICS/Assembler/VSAM) but the ageing developers :-) With Developer for z/OS and zDPT might be interested in getting a whole new generation of developers into the z/OS platform but without the pain of z/OS, JCL etc. My 2cents anyway. On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 4:03 AM Jerry Whitteridge < jerry.whitteri...@albertsons.com> wrote: > Agreed - $120 is something affordable by most, and I'm really excited to > see this coming out > > Jerry Whitteridge > jerry.whitteri...@albertsons.com > Manager Mainframe Systems & HP Non-Stop > Albertsons Companies > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of Grant Taylor > Sent: Friday, September 24, 2021 8:58 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: EXTERNAL EMAIL: Re: zPDT Learner's Edition > > On 9/24/21 9:41 AM, Tom Brennan wrote: > > Like Ray, for years I've been advocating something free or nearly free > > with every IBM manager I happen to see. No effect so far. If this > > works it could be a big change for future education. > > I feel like $120 / year is well within the reach of any student or > hobbyist that wants to learn. It's *SIGNIFICANTLY* more approachable > than the $5k entry point for other options for professionals from IBM. > > It seems as if the announcement on IBM's site may have been slightly > premature (O(weeks)) as it has purportedly been withdrawn and someone > else in the community has said that it should be available in mid October. > > I'm very much looking forward to seeing how this rolls out. I love the > idea of having an IBM supported way to run contemporary z/OS along side > my well seasoned P/390-E. :-) > > > > -- > Grant. . . . > unix || die > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > Warning: All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the > corporate e-mail system, and is subject to archival and review by someone > other than the recipient. This e-mail may contain proprietary information > and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s). If the > reader of this message is not the intended recipient(s), you are notified > that you have received this message in error and that any review, > dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly > prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the > sender immediately. > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Testing MQ connections using telnet from z/OS to external host
Thanks. Turned out to be a red herring. Packets are reaching the mid-range server, passing through the firewall but I think there is no application (this is an IBMi mid-range box) on the box to act on them so the host thinks the connection was rejected. I am going to cross-post in the mid-range mailing list. On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 1:20 PM Matt Hogstrom wrote: > TRACERTE to the mid-range server will hopefully give you an idea of where > the network is stopping you. > > Matt Hogstrom > PGP key 0F143BC1 > > > On May 2, 2021, at 18:10, Laurence Chiu wrote: > > > > In the process of setting up some new MQ connections from our Z/OS > > mainframe to new mid-range servers. The development team is trying to > check > > if the connection from Z/OS to the mid range service is working by > issuing > > a telnet command. > > > > Telnet ip address. 1414 > > > > Where they have set 1414 as the port on which they want to run MQ. The > > target server has an application firewall in front of it but that source > > and that port is open. > > > > When they try the telnet command from the TSO command line it just times > > out. And there is no traffic received on the firewall. They tell me they > > are able to telnet to their current development host with no problem. > Would > > there be some specific Z/OS TCP/IP configuration for the target host IP > > address and port that needs to be set up? Nobody seems to know so I'm > > hoping this forum can provide some pointers. > > > > But strangely from the mid-range server they can telnet to Z/OS on the > port > > they have defined for MQ with no problem. In this case they're using > 1440. > > > > Thanks > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Testing MQ connections using telnet from z/OS to external host
In the process of setting up some new MQ connections from our Z/OS mainframe to new mid-range servers. The development team is trying to check if the connection from Z/OS to the mid range service is working by issuing a telnet command. Telnet ip address. 1414 Where they have set 1414 as the port on which they want to run MQ. The target server has an application firewall in front of it but that source and that port is open. When they try the telnet command from the TSO command line it just times out. And there is no traffic received on the firewall. They tell me they are able to telnet to their current development host with no problem. Would there be some specific Z/OS TCP/IP configuration for the target host IP address and port that needs to be set up? Nobody seems to know so I'm hoping this forum can provide some pointers. But strangely from the mid-range server they can telnet to Z/OS on the port they have defined for MQ with no problem. In this case they're using 1440. Thanks -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Vector Packed Decimal instructions experiences
Packed decimal has been around since the beginning of time. Having dedicated instructions like the vector packed decimal ones only arrived with the Z14 and later mainframes,l And the point of the article I quoted was, with ARCH(12) and a Z14 Cobol code was timed as running up to 2x as fast as ARCH(11). So as has been said, if you have a Z14 or later and are not recompiling your code, you are potentially leaving MSU's on the table. On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 2:24 PM Steve Beaver wrote: > You are talking about packed unsigned math a that has been around in IBM > CPCS since forever > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Apr 23, 2020, at 21:09, Charles Mills wrote: > > > > I believe the Enterprise COBOL 6 compiler generates code that takes > advantage, assuming ARCH(12) is specified. > > > > If you are *not* specifying ARCH(nn) where 'nn' is the architecture > level of your oldest machine (don't forget DR!) then you are leaving MSU's > on the table. The ARCH(nn) level is two less than the "marketing number": a > z14 is ARCH(12), and so forth. > > > > Charles > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Laurence Chiu > > Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 7:01 PM > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > Subject: Vector Packed Decimal instructions experiences > > > > Just wondering if any shops have taken advantage of these new > instructions > > on the Z14 and Z15 and if so, how is your real world experience? > > > > https://ibmsystemsmag.com/IBM-Z/01/2018/vector-facility-z14 > > > > Looking at IBM's benchmarks they look pretty good and could have a > postive > > effect on reducing your 4HRA. > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Vector Packed Decimal instructions experiences
Just wondering if any shops have taken advantage of these new instructions on the Z14 and Z15 and if so, how is your real world experience? https://ibmsystemsmag.com/IBM-Z/01/2018/vector-facility-z14 Looking at IBM's benchmarks they look pretty good and could have a postive effect on reducing your 4HRA. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: [External] Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus Pandemic
Tried to read all the responses to this thread but I have missed this point. Unless NJ has a decent developer platform like Eclipse(?) or IBM Developer for z/OS Enterprise Edition then they are not only going to require Cobol programmers, but people with Z/OS knowledge like JCL, file system structure etc. Just knowing how to code might not be good enough. Alternatively a good coach who can assist with that stuff while the person focuses on coding. Then of course what is the application written in? Is it CICS/DB2, IMS, VSAM etc. They are skills in their own right. On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 9:30 AM Clark Morris wrote: > [Default] On 13 Apr 2020 11:32:51 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main > rpomm...@sfgmembers.com (Pommier, Rex) wrote: > > >What's the definition of "volunteer"? The articles I've read say they're > looking for volunteers, although I can't believe they're looking for > somebody to work for free! > > I'm considering actually putting a truncated resume online in Linked > In and offering to do things such as review compile options. Given > that I am required to stay home due to Covid-19 and I wouldn't want > any confidential information on my computer, the sort of help is that > which I would provide a fellow SHARE member. For billing concerns > thee only pay project I would consider is in Canada. > > Clark Morris > > > >-Original Message- > >From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of Dan at Poodles > >Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 1:24 PM > >To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > >Subject: [External] Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes > Amid Coronavirus Pandemic > > > >Nobody asked the real question: "What are they paying?". > > > >-Original Message- > >From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Pommier, Rex > >Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 11:22 AM > >To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > >Subject: Re: [External] Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for > Mainframes Amid Coronavirus Pandemic > > > >Yup, this whole thing is akin to somebody complaining that Windows Server > >2019 is ancient as well. I'm sure if you dig a bit, you'll find code > inside it based on NT technology from the 1980s so why aren't people > complaining about that? > > > >-Original Message- > >From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of Seymour J Metz > >Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 10:51 AM > >To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > >Subject: [External] Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes > Amid Coronavirus Pandemic > > > >Sigh! The system may be 40 years old but the computer in the picture is a > lot older. > > > >I suspect that the "40 year old" system is like the ax that has been in > use for 200 years: the handle has been replaced 20 times and the blade has > been replaced 25 times, but it's still the same ax. > > > > > > > >The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from > disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is > not the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for > delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified > that any disclosure, distribution, copying, or any action taken or action > omitted in reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If > you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately > by replying to this message and destroy the material in its entirety, > whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. > > > >-- > >For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > >-- > >For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > >The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from > disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is > not the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for > delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified > that any disclosure, distribution, copying, or any action taken or action > omitted in reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If > you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately > by replying to this message and destroy the material in its entirety, > whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. > > > >-- > >For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > >send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to
Wanted Civil programmers in New Jersey urgently
it seems that the huge increase in benefit request in New Jersey is causing their benefit systems to be overloaded and not able to handle the volume of requests. It doesn't seem like a load issue but more the application needs to be changed. Otherwise you would just throw more MIPS at it https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/04/05/new_jersey_seeks_cobol_volunteers/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: March 18: Exploring z/OS Container Extensions Live Webcast
Let me add my personal recommendation to this session. I was lucky enough to attend one of Timothy's session in person last year and found the session of great interest and had potential in the organization where I'm currently working. Plus it was good to meet Timothy in person having only seen his comments on the forum before this. It's a shame the current travel makes travel impossible but I would urge people to attend virtually if they can. On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, 5:37 PM Timothy Sipples wrote: > Massimo Biancucci wrote: > >it would be really appreciated if you'll post a recording of the event. > > I'll try, but I cannot promise that yet. > > Peter Farley wrote: > >I do see what you saw when I clicked the Attend button, it forces > >you to sign up with Meetup to attend the meeting. > > Your other two choices are to log in with a Google or Facebook account. > > Be aware of the starting time, though: 10:00 a.m. India Standard Time on > March 18, 2020. For example, in New York this'll be starting just a few > minutes before James Corden and Seth Meyers go on the air. > > - - - - - - - - - - > Timothy Sipples > I.T. Architect Executive > Digital Asset & Other Industry Solutions > IBM Z & LinuxONE > - - - - - - - - - - > E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Attitude of companies toward mainframers working from home?
I've been asked in my current organization to check if I can work from home. Many of my colleagues said they'd be happy to do it if the organization gave them lighter laptops to carry home each day. And a couple raised the question could the VPN infrastructure support that many concurrent users. Good questions. On Sat, Mar 7, 2020, 2:54 PM Mark Jacobs < 0224d287a4b1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > It'll be interesting to see how many companies need to enhance their VPN > infrastructure if/when they increase their remote workforce. With the > current coronavirus event, that move to a remote workforce might happen > sooner than planned. > > Mark Jacobs > > Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email. > > GPG Public Key - > https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ > On Friday, March 6, 2020 7:52 PM, Bob Bridges > wrote: > > > Good point; yeah, that's gotta have an effect, though I suppose it may > be slight. > > > > What I've noticed, in the last five or ten years, is the increasing > range of the ~types~ of jobs that are being done remotely. Twenty years ago > I would have been surprised to find that companies were willing to have me > work on their mainframe security from home. Ten years ago I noticed they > were doing it with systems programmers, too. Nowadays I see the occasional > req for remote managers. I suppose there are some jobs that simply cannot > be done from home, forever, but fewer than before. > > > > > --- > > > > Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 > > > > /* The worst thing about new books is that they keep us from reading the > old ones. -Joseph Joubert (1754-1824) */ > > > > -Original Message- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Jesse 1 Robinson > > Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 18:56 > > > > Came across this lengthy thread from last year. No one seemed to mention > the effects of a world-wide pandemic. You just can't think of everything... > > > > > - > > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: IBM names new CEO
Just reporting and not my personal opinion (though I do have some IBM shares) but during her tenure IBM was... https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/31/ibm-was-worst-performing-large-cap-tech-stock-during-romettys-tenure.html On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 7:17 PM Edward Finnell < 000248cce9f3-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-30/ibm-names-arvind-krishna-as-ceo-rometty-to-retire-at-year-s-end > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Defining SCSI in DS8k box
I guess the point I was trying to make somewhat imperfectly is that while the Linux guest might be able to access CKD disks and use SCSI protocols that is all emulated by z/VM so it's difficult to see the advantages of what the OP is asking. On Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 12:39 AM Mike Schwab wrote: > You will need to convert to using Linux containers without the z/VM > layer and FCP to open system volumes. I did this on ESS F20s, should > be similar for DS8xxx. > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 2:44 AM Peter wrote: > > > > CKD are well supported for Linux guest. > > > > But having FBA disk to linux guest will improve any sort of performance ? > > > > On Tue, 17 Dec, 2019, 12:32 PM Laurence Chiu, wrote: > > > > > Slightly outside my area of knowledge but since z/VM is the OS that is > > > attached to the DS8K, it's doing the physical IO. And this is usually > > > FICON. > > > > > > The Linux guest is being provided a virtual disk from z/VM so the disk > > > protocol is probably not relevant. Plus I don't think a Linux guest can > > > actually see a CKD volume - it would all look ike FB. > > > > > > Others feel free to chip in here > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 4:45 PM Peter wrote: > > > > > > > I believe giving a dasd 3390(CKD) to linux guest and internally it > > > converts > > > > that into SCSI. > > > > > > > > So having SCSI alone for Linux guest would be better interns of > > > performance > > > > ? > > > > > > > > On Tue, 17 Dec, 2019, 12:54 AM Laurence Chiu, > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I asked my z/VM and DS8K person this question and he wasn't sure > what > > > you > > > > > were asking. > > > > > > > > > > He said he defines all the storage on his ds8k box as CKD though he > > > could > > > > > have chosen fixed block and assigns all that storage to the z/vm > host. > > > > > > > > > > For each Linux instance that requires storage he just carves out > the > > > hunk > > > > > of storage on Z/VM and assigns it to the Linux guest . > > > > > > > > > > SCSI is irrelevant because the Linux guest is virtual and doesn't > need > > > to > > > > > know about the disk protocol. And his z/VM host is connected via > > > FICON. > > > > > > > > > > He said the only time one might need to go back to the ds8k is if > some > > > of > > > > > the storage on that box hadn't been defined and needed to be > redefined > > > > and > > > > > then attached to the z/vm host. But he's never had to do that in 10 > > > years > > > > > of running that system. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 7:28 AM Peter wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > > Could someone please recommend a manual which describes step by > step > > > > > > procedure to define SCSI on DS8K. > > > > > > > > > > > > I need this procedure to define SCSI disk for my Linux guest > running > > > on > > > > > > zVM. > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > > > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO > > > IBM-MAIN > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO > IBM-MAIN > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO > IBM-MAIN > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA > Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Defining SCSI in DS8k box
Slightly outside my area of knowledge but since z/VM is the OS that is attached to the DS8K, it's doing the physical IO. And this is usually FICON. The Linux guest is being provided a virtual disk from z/VM so the disk protocol is probably not relevant. Plus I don't think a Linux guest can actually see a CKD volume - it would all look ike FB. Others feel free to chip in here On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 4:45 PM Peter wrote: > I believe giving a dasd 3390(CKD) to linux guest and internally it converts > that into SCSI. > > So having SCSI alone for Linux guest would be better interns of performance > ? > > On Tue, 17 Dec, 2019, 12:54 AM Laurence Chiu, wrote: > > > I asked my z/VM and DS8K person this question and he wasn't sure what you > > were asking. > > > > He said he defines all the storage on his ds8k box as CKD though he could > > have chosen fixed block and assigns all that storage to the z/vm host. > > > > For each Linux instance that requires storage he just carves out the hunk > > of storage on Z/VM and assigns it to the Linux guest . > > > > SCSI is irrelevant because the Linux guest is virtual and doesn't need to > > know about the disk protocol. And his z/VM host is connected via FICON. > > > > He said the only time one might need to go back to the ds8k is if some of > > the storage on that box hadn't been defined and needed to be redefined > and > > then attached to the z/vm host. But he's never had to do that in 10 years > > of running that system. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 7:28 AM Peter wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > Could someone please recommend a manual which describes step by step > > > procedure to define SCSI on DS8K. > > > > > > I need this procedure to define SCSI disk for my Linux guest running on > > > zVM. > > > > > > Peter > > > > > > -- > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Defining SCSI in DS8k box
I asked my z/VM and DS8K person this question and he wasn't sure what you were asking. He said he defines all the storage on his ds8k box as CKD though he could have chosen fixed block and assigns all that storage to the z/vm host. For each Linux instance that requires storage he just carves out the hunk of storage on Z/VM and assigns it to the Linux guest . SCSI is irrelevant because the Linux guest is virtual and doesn't need to know about the disk protocol. And his z/VM host is connected via FICON. He said the only time one might need to go back to the ds8k is if some of the storage on that box hadn't been defined and needed to be redefined and then attached to the z/vm host. But he's never had to do that in 10 years of running that system. On Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 7:28 AM Peter wrote: > Hello, > > Could someone please recommend a manual which describes step by step > procedure to define SCSI on DS8K. > > I need this procedure to define SCSI disk for my Linux guest running on > zVM. > > Peter > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Container pricing
That's encouraging. And presumably since dev/test is now fenced off, it doesn't contribute to 4HRA MLC costs? On Wed, Dec 11, 2019, 6:44 PM Salva Carrasco wrote: > We went to dev container 6 month ago. > > Now we have x2 capacity for the same price (only MLC, OTC is the same). > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Container pricing
Just wondering had anybody had any practical experience with container pricing especially with dev/test environments and how did that work out for you? Just looking to see if there is some local application. Thanks -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: OOCoD experiences?
I'm sure if there were ways to use this facility illegally Timothy would not describe them on this forum! On Tue, Dec 3, 2019, 8:05 AM Tony Harminc wrote: > On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 04:14, Timothy Sipples wrote: > > > > > There's also now Instant Recovery on IBM z15 machines, with z/OS System > > Recovery Boost. There is no software reported capacity associated with > > legal/valid z/OS System Recovery Boost(s). > > > > Timothy, > > Your mention of "legal/valid" z/OS System Recovery Boost(s) suggests that > there can be "illegal/invalid" ones. Can you explain what those might be? > It seems far-fetched to think that a customer would re-IPL multiple times > in order to briefly boost performance of some actual business workload > without paying for it. What would be a real example of an illegitimate use > of this facility? > > Thanks, > > Tony H. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: OOCoD experiences?
Yes discussions have been initiated On Sat, Nov 30, 2019, 11:59 PM Parwez Hamid wrote: > Have you actually asked IBM how they can help meet your out of country DR > requirements? > > The CoD offering has been around since the G3 Servers. Started life as EBU > (Emergency Backup), later became CBU and got further enhanced with CIU. CPE > etc etc. All these changes/evolution were driven by customer requirements. > So if the current offerings don't meet your requirements, no harm in asking > IBM. > > Regards > > Parwez Hamid > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf > of Laurence Chiu > Sent: 29 November 2019 20:02 > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: OOCoD experiences? > > Understand that. But IBM should recognize that some organisations might > want an out of region DR site and not want to buy a mainframe with half > their production MIPS that's hardly ever going to be used. CBU is fine in > country but for some reason but outside country. > > After all their DS8K Copy Services Manager provides replication support > with Global Mirror. > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019, 9:40 AM Parwez Hamid > wrote: > > > The reason for the CBU capability to upgrade to any capacity with the > > limits of the physical installed capacity is to enable customers to 'CBU' > > multiple systems e.g. Customer might have 3 systems and only one DR > system. > > As long as the DR system has sufficient capacity, they have the > possibility > > of bringing up all LPARs on the 3 systems. Normally when customers plan > for > > DR they tend to do so for critical and important business workload. Sys > > progs sandpits and test systems tend to get the chop. Again it all > depends > > on the 'nature' of the disaster at the primary DC. > > > > On/Off CoD is generally meant to cater for 'peak' or unexpected workloads > > e.g. month/qtr/year end processing or even sales on a Black Friday :-0 > > Hence the limit of 2 times of the purchased capacity. > > > > Regards > > > > Parwez Hamid > > > > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf > > of Laurence Chiu > > Sent: 28 November 2019 18:48 > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > Subject: Re: OOCoD experiences? > > > > Thanks. I looked at the IBM documentation > > > > > > > https://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg28c04fa949ae402ed85258194006c7b9b=1 > > > > Not an easy read by any means and it seems the 72 hours limit on CPE > won't > > work for our environment. > > > > So the only option appears to be OOCoD. > > > > Interesting for CBU you can upgrade from a base machine to any model so > > long as it does not require adding more hardware but for OOCoD you can > only > > go up 100% > > > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019, 12:49 AM Parwez Hamid > > wrote: > > > > > Adding my 2 cents worth: > > > > > > Within the Capcity on Demand (CoD) offering for Z, there are a number > of > > > options available for different types of situations. Some have already > > been > > > mentioned. A couple of useful docs: > > > > > > 1. IBM Redbook. Capacity on Demand SG24-7504. Almost 10 years old. > > > Apart from some 'enhancements' to the offering (mainly to do with > > > pricing/maintenance charges and entitlement to carry foward 'options' > > when > > > upgrading to a newer Z system) and adding of the System Recovery Boost > > > (SRB) option for the z15, the main content is still relevant. > > > 2. zSystem Capacity On Demand User’s Guide - SC28-6943 > > > > > > All the CoD options i.e. CBU, CIU, CPE, On/Off CoD and SRB have T > Key > > > point about the contracts is that some may be localised for an > individual > > > country. In addition, different CoD records have different time > > > limits/expiration dates. > > > > > > Some additional points: > > > > > > 1. Its a given that to activate the additional capacity, the > physical > > > resource is already available in the system. > > > 2. CPE has been mentioned. CPE is temporary access to capacity > > intended > > > to replace capacity lost within the enterprise due to a planned event > > such > > > as a facility upgrade or system relocation. CPE is similar to CBU in > that > > > it is intended to replace lost capacity; however, it differs in its > scope > > > and intent. Where CBU addresses disaster recovery scenarios that
Re: OOCoD experiences?
Understand that. But IBM should recognize that some organisations might want an out of region DR site and not want to buy a mainframe with half their production MIPS that's hardly ever going to be used. CBU is fine in country but for some reason but outside country. After all their DS8K Copy Services Manager provides replication support with Global Mirror. On Fri, Nov 29, 2019, 9:40 AM Parwez Hamid wrote: > The reason for the CBU capability to upgrade to any capacity with the > limits of the physical installed capacity is to enable customers to 'CBU' > multiple systems e.g. Customer might have 3 systems and only one DR system. > As long as the DR system has sufficient capacity, they have the possibility > of bringing up all LPARs on the 3 systems. Normally when customers plan for > DR they tend to do so for critical and important business workload. Sys > progs sandpits and test systems tend to get the chop. Again it all depends > on the 'nature' of the disaster at the primary DC. > > On/Off CoD is generally meant to cater for 'peak' or unexpected workloads > e.g. month/qtr/year end processing or even sales on a Black Friday :-0 > Hence the limit of 2 times of the purchased capacity. > > Regards > > Parwez Hamid > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf > of Laurence Chiu > Sent: 28 November 2019 18:48 > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: OOCoD experiences? > > Thanks. I looked at the IBM documentation > > > https://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg28c04fa949ae402ed85258194006c7b9b=1 > > Not an easy read by any means and it seems the 72 hours limit on CPE won't > work for our environment. > > So the only option appears to be OOCoD. > > Interesting for CBU you can upgrade from a base machine to any model so > long as it does not require adding more hardware but for OOCoD you can only > go up 100% > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019, 12:49 AM Parwez Hamid > wrote: > > > Adding my 2 cents worth: > > > > Within the Capcity on Demand (CoD) offering for Z, there are a number of > > options available for different types of situations. Some have already > been > > mentioned. A couple of useful docs: > > > > 1. IBM Redbook. Capacity on Demand SG24-7504. Almost 10 years old. > > Apart from some 'enhancements' to the offering (mainly to do with > > pricing/maintenance charges and entitlement to carry foward 'options' > when > > upgrading to a newer Z system) and adding of the System Recovery Boost > > (SRB) option for the z15, the main content is still relevant. > > 2. zSystem Capacity On Demand User’s Guide - SC28-6943 > > > > All the CoD options i.e. CBU, CIU, CPE, On/Off CoD and SRB have T Key > > point about the contracts is that some may be localised for an individual > > country. In addition, different CoD records have different time > > limits/expiration dates. > > > > Some additional points: > > > > 1. Its a given that to activate the additional capacity, the physical > > resource is already available in the system. > > 2. CPE has been mentioned. CPE is temporary access to capacity > intended > > to replace capacity lost within the enterprise due to a planned event > such > > as a facility upgrade or system relocation. CPE is similar to CBU in that > > it is intended to replace lost capacity; however, it differs in its scope > > and intent. Where CBU addresses disaster recovery scenarios that can take > > up to three months to remedy, CPE is intended for short-duration events > > lasting up to three days, maximum. > > 3. On/Off CoD. On/Off CoD is available for up to twice the ‘purchased’ > > capacity of a given machine. On/Off CoD upgrades are allowed for any > > processor configuration, up to the limit, as long as the number or > capacity > > level of the processors is increased. Upgrades that decrease the number > or > > the capacity level of processors is not allowed. > > > > In his response below, Tim mentions Instant Recovery. This is the same as > > System Recovery Boost (SRB). A few poinst about this option: > > > > 1. The name can be bit mis-leading. The 'instant' applies to the > > capability of ACTIVATING additional CAPACITY during/after an IPL - > planned > > or unplanned.. > > 2. This is limited to a short duration i.e. minutes/hours rather than > > days! > > 3. Some the documentation states 'speed'. Remember, this refers to the > > 'speed' of bringing down/up of the OS and sub-systems. This is done by > > ACTIVATING ADDITIONAL capacity and not by changing the GHz of the > processor. > >
Re: OOCoD experiences?
Thanks. I looked at the IBM documentation https://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg28c04fa949ae402ed85258194006c7b9b=1 Not an easy read by any means and it seems the 72 hours limit on CPE won't work for our environment. So the only option appears to be OOCoD. Interesting for CBU you can upgrade from a base machine to any model so long as it does not require adding more hardware but for OOCoD you can only go up 100% On Fri, Nov 29, 2019, 12:49 AM Parwez Hamid wrote: > Adding my 2 cents worth: > > Within the Capcity on Demand (CoD) offering for Z, there are a number of > options available for different types of situations. Some have already been > mentioned. A couple of useful docs: > > 1. IBM Redbook. Capacity on Demand SG24-7504. Almost 10 years old. > Apart from some 'enhancements' to the offering (mainly to do with > pricing/maintenance charges and entitlement to carry foward 'options' when > upgrading to a newer Z system) and adding of the System Recovery Boost > (SRB) option for the z15, the main content is still relevant. > 2. zSystem Capacity On Demand User’s Guide - SC28-6943 > > All the CoD options i.e. CBU, CIU, CPE, On/Off CoD and SRB have T Key > point about the contracts is that some may be localised for an individual > country. In addition, different CoD records have different time > limits/expiration dates. > > Some additional points: > > 1. Its a given that to activate the additional capacity, the physical > resource is already available in the system. > 2. CPE has been mentioned. CPE is temporary access to capacity intended > to replace capacity lost within the enterprise due to a planned event such > as a facility upgrade or system relocation. CPE is similar to CBU in that > it is intended to replace lost capacity; however, it differs in its scope > and intent. Where CBU addresses disaster recovery scenarios that can take > up to three months to remedy, CPE is intended for short-duration events > lasting up to three days, maximum. > 3. On/Off CoD. On/Off CoD is available for up to twice the ‘purchased’ > capacity of a given machine. On/Off CoD upgrades are allowed for any > processor configuration, up to the limit, as long as the number or capacity > level of the processors is increased. Upgrades that decrease the number or > the capacity level of processors is not allowed. > > In his response below, Tim mentions Instant Recovery. This is the same as > System Recovery Boost (SRB). A few poinst about this option: > > 1. The name can be bit mis-leading. The 'instant' applies to the > capability of ACTIVATING additional CAPACITY during/after an IPL - planned > or unplanned.. > 2. This is limited to a short duration i.e. minutes/hours rather than > days! > 3. Some the documentation states 'speed'. Remember, this refers to the > 'speed' of bringing down/up of the OS and sub-systems. This is done by > ACTIVATING ADDITIONAL capacity and not by changing the GHz of the processor. > > Regards > > Parwez Hamid > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf > of Timothy Sipples > Sent: 28 November 2019 09:14 > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: OOCoD experiences? > > Jerry Whitteridge wrote: > >We looked at this before I moved to IBM and had > >to rule it out as the Hardware side only bills you > >for the Capacity by the day activated (e.g. Use OOCoD > >for 7 days and get charged for the 7 days at higher > >capacity) BUT software is billed by the month so you > >get the full month at the higher capacity even if you > >only turned on OOCoD for an hour. > > First of all, what you describe was never true, not the way you describe it > anyway. > > 1. Sub-capacity Monthly License Charge (MLC) IBM software was/is based on > the monthly peak *four* hour rolling average (4HRA). A *one hour* OOCoD > activation is not four hours, so it was/is mathematically impossible for > your MLC to report a 4HRA equal to or even particularly near the total MSU > capacity inclusive of the one hour OOCoD activation. > > 2. "One-Time Charge" (OTC) IBM software, a.k.a. IPLA software, allows daily > OOCoD pricing -- "per MSU day." > > 3. You were/are also allowed to set softcapping on machines across OOCoD > activation(s), and with some potential "white space" (free) capacity > utilization. Sub-capacity reports will never report above the softcap(s). > > Laurence Chiu wrote: > > >I think there might be a software deal in the mix also based > >on Tailor Fit Pricing but it's good to know all the ramifications. > > Yes, that's right. With Tailored Fit Pricing peak MSUs (4HRA or otherwise) > no longer matter
Re: OOCoD experiences?
Thanks for that. I think there might be a software deal in the mix also based on Tailor Fit Pricing but it's good to know all the ramifications. CBU won't work because the site is out of country. On Thu, Nov 28, 2019, 10:24 AM Jerry Whitteridge wrote: > Be aware of using OOCoD that there is a difference in the billing records > for Hardware and Software. We looked at this before I moved to IBM and had > to rule it out as the Hardware side only bills you for the Capacity by the > day activated (e.g. Use OOCoD for 7 days and get charged for the 7 days at > higher capacity) BUT software is billed by the month so you get the full > month at the higher capacity even if you only turned on OOCoD for an hour. > CBU also provides test activations without financial impact where as OOCoD > will not. > > Jerry Whitteridge > Delivery Manager / Mainframe Architect > GTS - Safeway Account > 602 527 4871 Mobile > jerry.whitteri...@ibm.com > > IBM Services > > IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote on > 11/27/2019 02:16:44 PM: > > > From: Laurence Chiu > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > Date: 11/27/2019 02:17 PM > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] OOCoD experiences? > > Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > > > > Just asking the list has anybody had experience using OOCod to double > their > > MIPS on their mainframes? > > > > Looking at out of region (country) backup solution so cannot use CBU > > records. So the idea is to buy half of what the MIPS might need to be and > > then provision the other half capacity using capacity on demand for a > > maximum of a week for testing or live to save the purchase price of the > > box. > > > > Thanks > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
OOCoD experiences?
Just asking the list has anybody had experience using OOCod to double their MIPS on their mainframes? Looking at out of region (country) backup solution so cannot use CBU records. So the idea is to buy half of what the MIPS might need to be and then provision the other half capacity using capacity on demand for a maximum of a week for testing or live to save the purchase price of the box. Thanks -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Sysplex
Without knowing the specific requirements sounds like the CF would be the ideal place to store this information. https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/JZB2E38Q On Thu, Nov 28, 2019, 6:32 AM Seymour J Metz wrote: > The same applies to virtual machines in an LPAR; each has its own memory. > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf > of Charles Mills > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 12:29 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Sysplex > > Each LPAR is from the OS's point of view another box on the other side of > the computer room. (Yes, you can quibble with that but it is a good way of > thinking about it for most practical purposes.) z/OS on LPAR A has almost > no knowledge of or visibility into LPAR B. LPAR B, after all, might not be > running z/OS: it might be running Linux, or VSE, or VM, or a standalone > dump, or some new OS that I am writing in my spare time. > > Charles > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of R.S. > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 12:20 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Sysplex > > SP231 is a part of address space. It is virtual memory. LPAR is > "hardware", so LPAR memory is real memory with no concepts like subpool, > Common Area, PVT, etc. More: LPAR can host any operating system, > including zLinux, which has no address spaces, SP231, LPA, etc. > To repeat: NO z/OS MEMORY MAPPED TO PHYSICAL LPAR MEMORY CAN BE SHARED > IN SYSPLEX. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: IBM Z Development and Test Environment (zD)
That doesn't sound promising. My thought was to use the environment development (Cobol and some Assembler), target CICS with VSAM and DB2. This is a RACF shop with third party SCM. Then the developers might get better response time for their development and test batch jobs. I certainly would not expect developers to manage the environment that would be the role of the Sysprog so if we could clone an LPAR on the mainframe to bring down, then there shouldn't be too much work to do hopefully. We are not a Sysplex shop so that would not be an issue for the moment. Standing up Linux boxes would not be an issue since the place uses AWS extensively so I could just ask the Digital guys to spin up some Linux image for us and we do the rest :-) I might broach the topic with the developers just to gauge interest. On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 7:00 AM Frank Swarbrick wrote: > You just expressed all of my concerns. I personally would be happy to do > a lot of "systemish" things in this environment, but I can't imagine it > makes sense for most developers. > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf > of Jousma, David <01a0403c5dc1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2019 11:56 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: IBM Z Development and Test Environment (zD) > > So, we took a peek at licensing zD We did a trial on it, and stood a > couple instances up. As others have mentioned, it is the ADCD image, and > has all products. The "problem" for us, is that we don’t have an all blue > software stack.So to do anything meaningful, that might resemble what > you are already running you'll have to roll-your-own image. IBM does > provide utilities to clone a MF based image, and build a zD image.We > happen to be all parallel sysplex. To keep things simple, I'd have to > build a stand-alone environment to clone from, or go to the effort of > building a VM environment on ZD, and then stand up an emulated CF, and > LPAR. Then what about security? WE happen to be a CA-TSS shop, but even > if you are a RACF shop you cannot just load your RACF database to the ZD > image, otherwise nothing IBM provided will run since none of the tasks, etc > would be the same names. > > So, then you are faced with basically reproducing your entire system > environment in this space. While IBM allows you to use all of their > products, we've found out that the other vendors aren’t quite so generous. > The other big problem for us, is that we just don’t have the staffing at > this time to provide all the care and feeding building and maintaining it > will require.The other problem that we see is that an image that a > developer spins up wont have the knowledge let alone sysprog access to > start/stop regions, etc, etc, etc. IBM's answer was just give them the > access, if they screw it up, just wipe it out, and reclone the image. The > problem is you are asking developers to do things in this environment that > they would have not access to do on the "real systems" and would generate > endless calls to my team for support. > > About the only use case we can find is for DB2 development work, testing > queries, table design, etc. > > > > _ > Dave Jousma > AVP | Manager, Systems Engineering > > Fifth Third Bank | 1830 East Paris Ave, SE | MD RSCB2H | Grand > Rapids, MI 49546 > 616.653.8429 | fax: 616.653.2717 > > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of Matt Hogstrom > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2019 1:34 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: IBM Z Development and Test Environment (zD) > > **CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL** > > **DO NOT open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or > unexpected emails** > > The customer has to provide the host Linux environment. The images will > vary depending on where you sourced your images. There is no magic on > creating the customized environments. Someone needs to define the > resources (IMS, tables, load modules,...). This could be the system > programmer or the developer or tester. > > Think of it more as a pipeline where the each person does their part DBA > theirs, etc.). > > Once you have the flavor of what you want you can copy the volumes for > each user’s instance. Ideally you’ll have automation to recreate them. > There are a set of tools as part of ZD that can assist > > I believe there is docker support as an alternative to running heavier > weight VMs. Docket is interesting as it allows you to amortize the base > image cost across multiple instances > > Matt Hogstrom > +1 (919) 656-0564 > > > On Oct 11, 2019, at 08:42, scott Ford wrote: > > > > Frank: > > > > We are in Partnerworld , this one is new to me . I *ASSUME ( I know ) > > that the customer has to have the Linux hardware for the Deploys , etc. > > Can someone
Re: Mainframe environment on AWS
That wouldn't be an impediment to us if it could help make our developers more productive or encourage more people from the other side of the development shop to start looking at mainframe development. On Wed, Oct 9, 2019, 5:27 AM John McKown > $5,070 per user per year. OUCH! And you supply the PC hardware running a > supported Linux distro (or maybe any Linux). > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Regards, Gord Tomlin > > Action Software International > > (a division of Mazda Computer Corporation) > > Tel: (905) 470-7113, Fax: (905) 470-6507 > > Support: https://actionsoftware.com/support/ > > > > -- > I find television very educational. The minute somebody turns it on, I go > into the library and read a good book > -- Groucho Marx > > Maranatha! <>< > John McKown > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Mainframe environment on AWS
That's very interesting. Looks like the personal edition might be a good tool to get new developers familiar with the environment. And then maybe Enterprise edition if we want to offload some development work from the host. However is not clear to me how you would do applications development on the platform if you were using a third party source code management product. Would you be able to install that on the environment or have to download all the source code and copy books to this environment to be able to do test compiles? Also does all IBM software run on the environment or only a subset? Also one of the projects we would be looking at is spinning up our first sysplex. It would be cool to be able to do that using ZDG Parallel Sysplex but the application we want to test in this Plex is not from IBM and I have no idea how you would get it to run. Still food for thought. On Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 9:44 PM Sebastian Welton wrote: > They are pretty much the same product, ZD uses zPDT as the underlying > emulator but depending upon which version you use, has many enhancements to > provide a DevOps experience. As already pointed out, zPDT is only for ISVs > and ZD is available to commercial entities but you are bound by the usage > which tends to be only development, testing and education: from IBM: > > > It creates an environment for mainframe application demonstration, > development, testing, and employee education without Z mainframe hardware > > ZD cannot be used for production workloads of any kind, nor robust > development workloads, production module builds, preproduction testing, > stress testing, or performance testing. > > > There are 3 versions of ZD: > > ZD Personal Edition - this enables a single user to run an IBM® Z > distribution on a personal computer. > ZD Enterprise Edition - this enables enterprises to host an IBM Z > distribution on low-cost Intel-based x86 machines. Enterprise Edition > provides a web-based interface. You can extract, deploy, and manage the > application images from an existing Z or ADCD packages. > ZD Parallel Sysplex - can be used to enable a Sysplex environment that > is running within z/VM > > zPDT on the other hand, provide qualified PartnerWorld Independent > Software Vendors (ISVs) with z/OS, z/VM, z/VSE and associated middleware > products. You need to go through an approval process in order to get it. > > Sebastian > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Mainframe environment on AWS
I'm new to z/OS in X86. What's the difference between zPDT and ZD? The documentation I could find is not clear. Looks like something that might be useful in the shop where I'm currently working. On Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 9:01 AM Sebastian Welton wrote: > I've run both zPDT and ZD succcessfully in both AWS and Azure. In fact > ZD, if not PE (Personal Edition) only works with a remote license server > although all versions of zPDT and ZD will also work with a remote license > server. ZD EE (Enterprise Edition) does not allow for the use of a > hardware token. > > Sebastian. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Buying an IBM mainframe
He's now managed to power it up and access the SE and HMC which is impressive. https://blog.mainframe.dev/2019/07/powering-mainframe.html I wonder if he wants to run z/OS since getting a licence could be tricky On Fri, Jul 19, 2019, 2:56 PM Mike Schwab wrote: > Newer HMC code can control 1,2, perhaps more generations back of z > processors. Older HMC code cannot control newer z processors. This > prevents the need for one HMC for each generation at a site. > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 2:20 AM Laurence Chiu wrote: > > > > This blog resonated a lot with me since the generation of Z box being > built > > is more recent. > > > > Having just put a Z14 ZR1 in the points he raised were quite relevant > even > > today. > > > > https://blog.mainframe.dev/2019/05/buying-ibm-mainframe.html > > > > Good luck to him. > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA > Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What is my home PC IP address
Whenever I've setup a SFTP server at home assuming the server has a NAT
assigned IP address like 192.168. I've had to put a routing rule in the
router to send Port 22 traffic to that PC.
Otherwise the traffic hits your external IP but nobody is there to listen
to Port 22 traffic which is SFTP.
If you're doing FTP then it would be Port 21
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019, 3:07 AM Rupert Reynolds wrote:
> Indeed, setting up a VPN can play havoc with the routing table, for
> example. I was hoping my reply would help to bring such issues to light.
>
> Roops
>
> On Mon, 29 Jul 2019, 16:23 Paul Gilmartin, <
> 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 13:51:07 +0100, Rupert Reynolds wrote:
> > >
> > >It depends on where your VPN endpoint is. If you VPN to the site where
> MVS
> > >is running, then you should have an IP address on that subnet, as well
> as
> > >the public IP address you started with. Any traffic through that tunnel
> is
> > >encrypted as far as the endpoint.
> > >
> > I have used VPN provided by such a site where the required desktop client
> > completely usurped the desktop's IP stack, preventing all the desktop's
> > connection to the Internet other than through VPN and the site's firewall
> > and proxy. This was to prevent any bridging of the site's intranet to
> the
> > Internet. It was particularly frustrating to users who couldn't use
> their
> > local network printers while connected to VPN.
> >
> > Of course while they connected to that VPN their public ("home PC") IP
> > addresses were inaccessible from the Internet.
> >
> > -- gil
> >
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Buying an IBM mainframe
This blog resonated a lot with me since the generation of Z box being built is more recent. Having just put a Z14 ZR1 in the points he raised were quite relevant even today. https://blog.mainframe.dev/2019/05/buying-ibm-mainframe.html Good luck to him. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Mobile pricing query
Hi Andrew Thanks for the information. I am making further enquiries about the way our CPU is charged. The red book is particularly interesting because it seems to suggest that you can identify mobile workload without having to make any changes to your applications but use WLM and RMF instead. That might remove a major barrier to the possibility of proceeding down this path. On Sat, Jun 22, 2019, 6:05 AM Andrew Sica wrote: > Hi Laurence, > > Jumping in here with a bit of general info: > > Mobile Workload Pricing is a way of mitigating the impact from mobile > requests to the rolling four-hour average. It's a sub-capacity offering > (and only really makes sense in that space), so you need to have > implemented sub-cap SW pricing (i.e. AWLC, CMLC, etc.). > > Basically, you need to be able to tag and track the CPU time consumed by > mobile transactions. They need to be isolated from work stemming from other > sources and originate on an approved mobile device (a smartphone, for > example). The redbook I link below discusses the criteria for isolation. > > If you can easily do this (and meet any qualification criteria) it may > very well be a no-brainer. If not easily done, you'd need a deeper analysis > to understand what work is necessary to architect the required isolation > and how much benefit it would actually buy you (i.e. whether and by how > much it would lower your peaks). > > The least amount of work to implement mobile comes with the ability to tag > workloads within WLM. Details on that and more can be found here: > https://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redpapers/pdfs/redp5359.pdf > > Here is an updated (2016) US announcement letter for mobile pricing: > https://www-01.ibm.com/common/ssi/cgi-bin/ssialias?subtype=ca=an=897=ENUS216-321 > > If you have additional questions, please feel free to reach out. > > You might also take a look at the options under Tailored Fit Pricing for > IBM Z, which can provide models that are alternatives to the rolling > four-hour average. It's worth at least understanding what your options are > - for additional info, see: > https://www.ibm.com/it-infrastructure/z/software/pricing-tailored-fit > > > Take care, > Andrew Sica > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Mobile pricing query
Thanks for the responses. I am looking at this page on mobile pricing. https://www-01.ibm.com/common/ssi/ShowDoc.wss?docURL=/common/ssi/rep_ca/0/877/ENUSZP14-0280/index.html=en_locale=en I think we use AWLC but need to check. But given our workload seems to be growing from digital devices not so much increased customer base, then this seemed like an option to investigate. It seems our existing customers are interacting with us much more from a digital device then they used to be from a desktop or the call centre. On Fri, Jun 21, 2019, 9:53 AM Lizette Koehler wrote: > I think that would depend on what is "MOBILE" > > Is it retrieving reports, > > Is it looking up financial data > > Is it the app dev teams logging on to the mainframe with a mobile device > to review application issues? > > Probably other areas as well to investigate > > > > I have not seen any documentation suggesting how to charge for mobile > access. You may not get many answers > > Some shops may absorb those costs and charge it out through other venues. > > From personal experience with other apps. Most that I use charge based on > MB used/downloaded/uploaded > > Beyond that - I sometimes pay for the privilege of downloading and using > their app (20/year - 10 one-time charge) > > Lizette > > > > -----Original Message- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > Behalf Of > > Laurence Chiu > > Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 1:29 PM > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > Subject: Mobile pricing query > > > > Looking at the options of using mobile pricing as a way to manage our > > increasing CPU cost, just wondering if readers of this list have > implemented > > mobile pricing and if so, was it hard to do and the benefits worthwhile? > > > > I'm trying to counter some arguments internally that the reporting > > requirements including potential application coding changes to tag the > > workload, would outweigh any pricing benefits. > > > > I'm just interested in general experiences, nothing specific. > > > > Thanks > > > > Larry > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to > > lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Mobile pricing query
Looking at the options of using mobile pricing as a way to manage our increasing CPU cost, just wondering if readers of this list have implemented mobile pricing and if so, was it hard to do and the benefits worthwhile? I'm trying to counter some arguments internally that the reporting requirements including potential application coding changes to tag the workload, would outweigh any pricing benefits. I'm just interested in general experiences, nothing specific. Thanks Larry -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: DR Failover
I need to check with our account manager again but this is my understanding. We just replaced our DR mainframe with a Z14 ZR1. Part of the acceptance testing was running our full DR suite at the DR site. So we activated a CBU which lasted 14 days I am told and ran our tests. The purchase of the new mainframe included 5 years of CBU licences, 2 a year for tests and a number we can activate if we experienced a real DR event. For a test we can run 14 days (we got close to 14 days on our last test since we had some issues that dragged out the testing) and if we were in a real DR event we can run for 90 days. I have been informed that should we ever have to run in DR for real, then IBM software is licensed and our our ISV's would provide temporary keys for us to run for that period of time on the understanding that we are now not running at the production site. In fact during the DR acceptance we had to apply some temporary keys for the third party software. As usual YMMV. On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 3:19 AM Jim IBMMain wrote: > We had worked out "In Theory" how we would do it. > > About 18 months after we opened our second data center, Our Main Data > Center needed to shutdown over a long weekend, for 100% shutdown power > maintenance. > > After the Online's were shutdown Friday Night, We waited for all the DASD > & Tape to sync to the "other" site, and shut down the site. (100% > Powerdown). We then did our "Plan" (Mostly the DR "real" Plan) and brought > Powered Down Center up in the sister site, and ran the normal Batch > Production workload. Saturday Morning the Online's came up (2hr later then > normal), we ran until Monday afternoon, when we then shut down the Online's > (early, Was a holiday and was not a work day but there is limited activity > even on S/S/H. Then Ran the Monday Night Batch back in the original > DataCenter. > > We were prepared to keep production running in one location, if there was > a issue with the power upgrades until the next weekend (or they fixed it). > > Our Active - Active Servers switched over without any issues, as they were > suppose to. (Except the Voip-PBX) > > The only issue we noted is the VOIP Did not transfer the active calls to > its "sister" VOIP/PBX it hung up on the few calls that were in progress, > but all were able to redial the calls and connect thru its Sister/PBX. > > Few months later we tested the sister site fail over (Test/Dev) to the > main site and ran for the weekend, "Just for the Fun of it" > > In 2012 Hurricane Sandy took out the Powerlines to the Main DataCenter, > The DC was running on the Generators but facilities management was not able > to get more fuel, and we were in danger of running out of fuel, and having > to move the work load to the sister site, We started to make plans for > "When" to do the switch, But we were able to get fuel and did not have to > do the movement of the workload. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
