Re: BDT and JES3 was Re: "Deinstall" software, for example BDT
On 12/18/2013 5:12 PM, Clark Morris wrote: I wish I had thought of that back in the mid 1980s. The BDT requirement was the final straw pushing my shop from JES3 to JES2 (single CPU shop). My division was sold by a company that was predominantly JES3 to one that was predominantly JES2. In your defense, it was not until OS/390 V1 that JES2 started being given out "free" to JES3 installations. Prior to that, it was either/or. -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 831 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: BDT and JES3 was Re: "Deinstall" software, for example BDT
On 12/18/2013 2:13 PM, Tony Harminc wrote: On 18 December 2013 14:02, Ed Jaffe wrote: Since JES2 comes included with the operating system for JES3 customers, I set up a dummy JES2 node called "FSNA" (aka "Free SNA," running as a secondary subsystem) and routed all SNA/NJE traffic through there. I'm not quite managing to imagine how the JES3 and JES2 talk to each other. Is it that JES3 supports/supported all flavours of NJE except SNA? But even then, except under VM there are no virtual CTCs or BSC lines. SNA APPC RJE or something? At that time, JES2 and JES3 could talk to each other through ESCON CTCs configured in IOCP as BCTC devices. These days JES2 and JES3 can talk to each other through TCP/IP, so the "Free SNA" approach still works. This is essentially exactly what Mark Reagan indicated he has done in his post from earlier today. -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 831 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: BDT and JES3 was Re: "Deinstall" software, for example BDT
On 18 Dec 2013 11:02:16 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >On 12/18/2013 10:10 AM, Mark Regan wrote: >> While it is needed to give JES3 NJE over SNA, it is not needed for NJE over >> TCPIP. Since my site has both flavors of JES, we were able to get rid of BDT >> by routing all of our external business partner SNA/NJE connections through >> one of our JES2 SNA/NJE nodes and implementing NJE/TCP on JES2 > >I solved the JES3 SNA/NJE BDT issue *long* before I submitted the NJE >over TCP/IP SHARE requirement. > >Since JES2 comes included with the operating system for JES3 customers, >I set up a dummy JES2 node called "FSNA" (aka "Free SNA," running as a >secondary subsystem) and routed all SNA/NJE traffic through there. > >I presented what I called the "Free SNA" configuration approach at SHARE >to the astonishment of attendees, many of whom were paying for BDT and >learning for the first time that such functionality existed. It wasn't >until I got to the shutdown command that most people finally understood >what it was I was doing. > >I had FSNA JCL procs, IEFSSNxx entries, PPT entries, config files, the >works. As you would expect, the start command was 'START FSNA'. > >But, the shutdown command was '?PJES2.' It wasn't worth the trouble to >zap the JES2 command table to support '?PFSNA'. :D I wish I had thought of that back in the mid 1980s. The BDT requirement was the final straw pushing my shop from JES3 to JES2 (single CPU shop). My division was sold by a company that was predominantly JES3 to one that was predominantly JES2. Clark Morris -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: BDT and JES3 was Re: "Deinstall" software, for example BDT
On 18 December 2013 14:02, Ed Jaffe wrote: > Since JES2 comes included with the operating system for JES3 customers, I > set up a dummy JES2 node called "FSNA" (aka "Free SNA," running as a > secondary subsystem) and routed all SNA/NJE traffic through there. I'm not quite managing to imagine how the JES3 and JES2 talk to each other. Is it that JES3 supports/supported all flavours of NJE except SNA? But even then, except under VM there are no virtual CTCs or BSC lines. SNA APPC RJE or something? Tony H. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: BDT and JES3 was Re: "Deinstall" software, for example BDT
On 12/18/2013 10:10 AM, Mark Regan wrote: While it is needed to give JES3 NJE over SNA, it is not needed for NJE over TCPIP. Since my site has both flavors of JES, we were able to get rid of BDT by routing all of our external business partner SNA/NJE connections through one of our JES2 SNA/NJE nodes and implementing NJE/TCP on JES2 I solved the JES3 SNA/NJE BDT issue *long* before I submitted the NJE over TCP/IP SHARE requirement. Since JES2 comes included with the operating system for JES3 customers, I set up a dummy JES2 node called "FSNA" (aka "Free SNA," running as a secondary subsystem) and routed all SNA/NJE traffic through there. I presented what I called the "Free SNA" configuration approach at SHARE to the astonishment of attendees, many of whom were paying for BDT and learning for the first time that such functionality existed. It wasn't until I got to the shutdown command that most people finally understood what it was I was doing. I had FSNA JCL procs, IEFSSNxx entries, PPT entries, config files, the works. As you would expect, the start command was 'START FSNA'. But, the shutdown command was '?PJES2.' It wasn't worth the trouble to zap the JES2 command table to support '?PFSNA'. :D -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 831 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: BDT and JES3 was Re: "Deinstall" software, for example BDT
While it is needed to give JES3 NJE over SNA, it is not needed for NJE over
TCPIP. Since my site has both flavors of JES, we were able to get rid of BDT by
routing all of our external business partner SNA/NJE connections through one of
our JES2 SNA/NJE nodes and implementing NJE/TCP on JES2
Thanks,
Mark Regan
<><
From: Clark Morris
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 10:39 AM
Subject: BDT and JES3 was Re: "Deinstall" software, for example BDT
On 17 Dec 2013 08:16:49 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main Ed Jaffee
wrote:
Is BDT still needed for JES3 SNA NJE? Is it needed for JES3 TCP/IP if
there is such a thing?
Clark Morris
>On 12/17/2013 6:30 AM, Miklos Szigetvari wrote:
>> How would you "deinstall" (if it is the proper expression) software,
>> for example
>> BDT (Bulk Data Transfer) ?
>
>Like all optional, priced-features of z/OS, BDT never needs to be
>"uninstalled." It should simply be disabled through IFAPRDxx. For
>example, change:
>
>PRODUCT OWNER('IBM CORP')
> NAME(Z/OS)
> ID(5694-A01)
> FEATURENAME(BDTFTF)
> VERSION(*) RELEASE(*) MOD(*)
> STATE(ENABLED) <== THIS!!
>
>PRODUCT OWNER('IBM CORP')
> NAME(Z/OS)
> ID(5694-A01)
> FEATURENAME(BDTFTF)
> VERSION(*) RELEASE(*) MOD(*)
> STATE(DISABLED) <== TO THIS!!
--
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: BDT and JES3 was Re: "Deinstall" software, for example BDT
On 12/18/2013 7:39 AM, Clark Morris wrote: Is BDT still needed for JES3 SNA NJE? Is it needed for JES3 TCP/IP if there is such a thing? No BDT features are used for NJE over TCP/IP. It is a common, JES-agnostic component (IAZ prefix). -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 831 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: BDT and JES3 was Re: "Deinstall" software, for example BDT
EJ's response hopefully does away vwith any need for such locutions as 'deinstall' and the more widely used (and offensive) Windows 'uninstall'. The antonyms 'enable' and 'disable' suffice here. John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
