Re: RES: VSE/VSAM for VM
Thank you Mark. This is directed at IBM - Auditors do not care tuppence whether a product is 'stable'. If a product is used to support a production workload they expect it to be *supported*. An auditor's reaction will vary from an 'observation' that an unsupported product is being used, to a recommendation that use of the product be discontinued. In a business environment where auditors' reports can cause a company to lose a contract, no one can afford to use unsupported software. Ian Jones UKOSG - Infrastructure Specialist EDS ITO - UK mainframe Software Services 4 Roundwood Avenue Uxbridge, UB11 1BQ Phone: +44 (0)20 8754 5636 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mainframe.uk.eds.com -Original Message- From: Gillis, Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 June 2006 22:24 Subject: Re: RES: VSE/VSAM for VM I received the following reply from Gerhard Zierl from IBM in April: ...The news is that after assessing the situation the product stays withdrawn from market. Toady VM/VSAM is used in very stable environments by customers who have the product already licensed and installed for a long time, IBM hasn't seen new customers to this product for a long time. Therefore we do not see any problem associated with the withdrawal from market.. z/VM 5.2 customers can use their old VSAM distribution tape which they have received with their current version of z/VM. Same is true for end of service. The last APAR was 2001 (more than 5 years). Before that there was one (new function) APAR in 1999 and 2 defect APARs in 1996. VM/VSAM is a very stable product. In addion VM/VSAM is used by customers in mature and stable environments, no new applications, no major changes, etc... I would assume the same applies to your product. So the risk of encountering a severe problem is extremely low. In case customers decide they have a critical need to have service beyond the EOS-date, then there is in general an option to ask IBM for a charged service extension agreement. Mark.
Re: How can we quickly determine the number of output blocks a file will need on a CMS disk?
Mike Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, this has been an interesting day. One of our commands to copy files into production failed to copy a critical file because the output disk was too full to handle the file. Your DISKSIZE doesn't appear to be dealing with the 2-byte record length prefixes. Is it? They might account for the delta... ...phsiii
Re: IOCP for MP2003-204
Hello all Listers, thanks to all. I think I should let you guys know the outcome of this project. With an IBM ROC helping me all afternoon yesterday, we finally conclued that it may be because of VM/ESA 2.30 is lecking maintenances to be able to handle the newer hardware (MP2003 and IBM 2105-F20 Shark). The VM was been instlled sometimes in October, 1998 and have no services applied to it since. Talking about stable - VM is the best. No matter how we twisted the IOCDS, we were getting the exact DISABLED WAIT PSW. We felt that when CP sends out the reset to all the channels when IPLed, it went into DISABLED WAIT because it does not understands the return code coming back from the channel/hardware. This is a great experience for me to be involved in the middle of a 'lack of planning', 'cold turkey' CPU upgrade project. They backs up the old O/S DASDs, shuts down the old system, rolls in and installs the new hardware, and starts restore. Hopefully the system would run just like in the new hardware. No parallel...no testing... Ummm. We recommanded to upgrade to VVM 4.40 and try again. This time, I will do all the needed preparation before I drop in again. That is enough. I have been taken up a lot of the bandwidth in this List lately. Thanks again for all the help. You guys are the greatest! Regards, ...Roland --- Roland P. Chung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi George, I have 5 CPOWNED volumes. I have used ICKDSF to formated and DDR restored them all. The other 59 DASDs are for user DATA. I just put a volume number on. The DISABLE WAIT PSW is 000A9025 - and the explaination is; SCP initialiated reset of the I/O interface. Maybe something I should not have included in the IOCDS? Let me check. Regards, ...Roland George Haddad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If any - snipped --
How can we quickly determine the number of output blocks a file will need on a CMS disk?
mapped = blocksize/4 /* # of blks mapped by a single ptr blk */ Recall that for RECFM F a pointer to the next level block requires 4 bytes, but for RECFM V 12 bytes are needed (4 bytes for block number, 4 bytes for last record for that block, 4 bytes for the offset into that block). So, I think this divide by 4 is too simplistic. Recall that RECFM V records require 2 additional bytes for the length of the data in the record. So a record that contains 100 bytes of data is 102 bytes long. Richard Corak
Re: RES: VSE/VSAM for VM
We too have been reassured by Gerhard back in April in regards to our Connect Direct product... ...The outcome basically is: I will send you tape cartridge of VSE/VSAM for VM which can be copied and redistributed by Sterling Commerce in case one of your existing customers needs it and has lost their copy. After end-of service of VM/VSAM Sterling Commerce can still send us an e-mail in case there is an issue with the product itself. We would lo ok into it on a best can do base, certainly without any commitment for a fix. I agree to your assessment, that in a stable VM/CMS environment there is very little risk for VM/VSAM customers. Jim told me that your product is very stable and pretty much self contained as well. The fact that we haven't had any defect in the product for many years proofs it. Regards, Gerhard From: Gerhard E. Zierl Manager z/VSE Service Development IBM Systems Technology Group, Böblingen Laboratory -- While this is not the A answer, at least it's something of a compromise . Thanks, Bob
Re: RES: VSE/VSAM for VM
Title: RE: RES: VSE/VSAM for VM Since the product is s stable, then what is the cost to continue to support it? It all looks like smoke and mirrors to me. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU]On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 8:22 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: RES: VSE/VSAM for VM On Tuesday, 06/20/2006 at 11:02 CET, Jones, Ian H [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you Mark. This is directed at IBM - Auditors do not care tuppence whether a product is 'stable'. If a product is used to support a production workload they expect it to be *supported*. An auditor's reaction will vary from an 'observation' that an unsupported product is being used, to a recommendation that use of the product be discontinued. In a business environment where auditors' reports can cause a company to lose a contract, no one can afford to use unsupported software. I'm not sure what you're directing to IBM, Ian. In accordance with the terms of the license agreement, we've given the necessary notice about end of service, as we promised. We've even gone back and reevaluated the decision. I would agree with you that you should should follow your company's policies with regard to the software you use. (BTW, auditors determine whether you comply with the policy; they don't create policy unless there is some area not covered by policy or the policy is too vague.) That does yield some choices (not everyone can choose from all of these): - Reengineer the programs on Power or Intel architecture - Move the programs to z/OS or z/VSE - Reengineer the programs to not use VSAM - Obtain an extended support contract (contact your IBM Business Partner or IBM rep) - Change the policy to allow unsupported stable software - Obtain an approved deviation from policy based on cost/risk - In the dim mists of eons past, there was a mechanism that allowed CMS VSAM requests to be redirected to DB2 for VM VSE (added as an SPE to VM/SP 3, if memory still serves). I have no idea if that option is still available. All good things must come to an end, and change is the inevitable result. In the real world, change costs money. So the question is: Which option (a) costs least, and (b) meets your company's requirements? Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott __ ella for Spam Control has removed VSE-List messages and set aside VM-List for me You can use it too - and it's FREE! http://www.ellaforspam.com
Re: RES: VSE/VSAM for VM
On Tuesday, 06/20/2006 at 08:35 EST, Huegel, Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since the product is s stable, then what is the cost to continue to support it? It all looks like smoke and mirrors to me. It is actually expensive to maintain the support infrastructure. There are a lot of things that must be in place so that you can call the Support Center, send dumps, receive fixes, talk to a human, and so on. There are other areas in which we would prefer to invest our limited dollars. Areas that can provide a better return on investment. Don't get me wrong - we didn't *want* to drop support for CMS/VSAM, but its time has come. :-( And it does illustrate the apparent paradox of investment: You invest your money in growth areas. When they become stable, you take your money and look for new growth. But, naturally, your Happy Campers are located back there in the nice, comfy, stable area... Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: VSE/VSAM for VM
On 20 Jun 2006 at 9:47, Alan Altmark wrote: Don't get me wrong - we didn't *want* to drop support for CMS/VSAM, but its time has come. :-( And it does illustrate the apparent paradox of investment: You invest your money in growth areas. When they become stable, you take your money and look for new growth. But, naturally, your Happy Campers are located back there in the nice, comfy, stable area... And once VSAM is unsupported, should I expect the next version of CMS to have forgotten the DLBL and AMSERV commands?
Upgrade Plan request
I'm looking for a spreadsheet, action plan, or simple list of steps I nee d to do in order to upgrade my VM ESA 2.2 system to Z/VM 5.x and at the sam e time move from an old multiprise 2003/103 to a shiney new IBM Z9. It's been a few years since I've been in charge of a simultaneos VM and hardware upgrade and I can't find any of my old plans. I'm thinking high-level steps here. plan network (TCPIP and SNA) plug in new Z9 somehow get IOCP deck off old box and load to z9 install z/VM copy and modify old SYSTEM CONFIG configure VM and all the products backup both shutdown old VM IPL new VM on new box test fix test etc... Has anyone else recently done this? Do you have a plan you'd be willing to share? One nice thing, this VM is tiny and used only for development, no production. TIA, Bbo Heerdink
Re: IOCP for MP2003-204
FWIW, we definitely ran ESA 2.30 on our MP2003. It was so long ago I can't recall if we needed a PTF for processor support or not, though. Roland P. Chung wrote: Hello all Listers, thanks to all. I think I should let you guys know the outcome of this project. With an IBM ROC helping me all afternoon yesterday, we finally conclued that it may be because of VM/ESA 2.30 is lecking maintenances to be able to handle the newer hardware (MP2003 and IBM 2105-F20 Shark). The VM was been instlled sometimes in October, 1998 and have no services applied to it since. Talking about stable - VM is the best.
OT: Researchers Say New Chip Breaks Speed Record
IBM and Georgia Tech researchers unveil a chip that runs at 500 Ghz when cooled to -451 degrees (F) and at 350 Ghz at room temperature. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/20/technology/20chip.html?ei=5090en=215511bacfc970b5ex=1308456000partner=rssuserlandemc=rsspagewanted=print DJ
TCPIP setup question
To list(s), We are migrating a VM/VSE user to a new system. Currently I am running into some trouble initializing the TCPIP for VSE stack. I am getting a IPL475E message followed by an IPL471 message. On the old system they have DEDICATE statements for addresses C00 thru C0f as follows: DEDICATE C00 B00 . . DEDICATE C0F B0F In their VSE ASIPROC they have ADD C00:C0E,OSA Now, the OSA card on the system here is at address F000. I am thinking that I have to change the dedicate and ADD statements accordingly as well as changing my DEFINE LINK statement in the IPINITxx configs. As I am relatively new in this area, Am I on the right track with this? Thks, Bill J. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Linux IPL volume
Title: Linux IPL volume We are trying to IPL a LINUX guest where we have the volume attached 'CP ATTACH * ' or referenced with a LINK userid statement etc. In other words we don't have it attached to the system (att system). We keep receiving the below message: HCPVMI232E IPL UNIT ERROR; IRB 00404017 00020A78 00200018 0008 HCPGIR450W CP entered; disabled wait PSW 000E 0232 Somewhere in the back of my limited knowledge I remember a reference as to the IPL volume for a guest having to be attached to the system or dedicated to the guest. Is that an accurate statement? The information contained in this message may be confidential and is intended to be exclusively for the addressee. Should you receive this message unintentionally, please do not use the contents herein and notify the sender immediately by return e-mail. Nasa Data Center z/OS390 Systems z/VM Systems Linux on z/VM IFMP Support Marshall Space Flight Center 256.544.0769 I refuse to tiptoe through life... just to arrive unscathed at Death's door! Bernard Hines
Re: TCPIP setup question
Since this is under VM change the Dedicates to DEDICATE C00 F000 . . DEDICATE C0F F00F and your done. Mark D Pace Senior Systems Engineer Mainline Information Systems 1700 Summit Lake Drive Tallahassee, FL. 32317 Office: 850.219.5184 Fax: 888.221.9862 http://www.mainline.com
Re: VSE/VSAM for VM
On Tuesday, 06/20/2006 at 05:03 ZE2, Shimon Lebowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And once VSAM is unsupported, should I expect the next version of CMS to have forgotten the DLBL and AMSERV commands? No. Those commands are part of CMS, not VSAM, and we wouldn't save any support costs by dropping support for them. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system
We have the z/VM 4.4 Tapes but would need something from IBM saying it was ok for us to copy and give to you. Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland P. Chung Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 11:04 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system Hello Listers, sorry to bother you guys again. We called IBM software to order z/VM 4.40. However, the rep. said itwas out of marketing since March 2006. He can'tship itto us. But, he said, if we can get a copy of thedistribution tape, IBM will licence it for us. Please contact me off-list if you are willing to lend a copy of the distribution tape forz/VM 4.40 for 3390 system.Greatly appreciated. With best regards, ...Roland Chung Senior Technical Specialist (S/390,VM/VSE,DB2/VSEVM) MAXC Consultants Inc. Voice/Fax: 416-469-3280 (If busy, call: 416-469-2268) 197 Hastings Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada. M4L 2L6 ** Life is short. Stop once in a while and smell the roses. **
Re: Linux IPL volume
On 6/20/06, Brian Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is the code you get when the device address you IPL'd does not have an IPLable program on it. Yep. If it was supposed to be linked as mini disk, it may not have been from cyl 0. So the IPL program is on the virtual cylinder 0, where that may be. Attach it to system and try to link it again. -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software, Inc http://velocitysoftware.com/
Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system
Hi Tom, yes, only the support part. But for z/VM 4.40, it will be Out of Services on Sept. 30, 2006. Maybe you want to act fast.Regards,...RolandTom Duerbusch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That is interesting.Apparently, IBM (VM group) is no longer supporting 31 bit hardware. Itseems to me that IBM always kept the last release of an OS available fora particular hardware platform available for order. Perhaps it is justsupported.I have a MP3000 client, that I have been hinting that VM would besomething they need to look at, again. If z/VM 4.x isn't available andz/VM 5.x doesn't support 31 bit hardware, I need to do some backtracking.Tom DuerbuschTHD Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6/20/2006 10:03 AM Hello Listers, sorry to bother you guys again.We called IBM software to order z/VM 4.40. However, the rep. said itwas out of marketing since March 2006. He can't ship it to us. But, hesaid, if we can get a copy of the distribution tape, IBM will licence itfor us.Please contact me off-list if you are willing to lend a copy of thedistribution tape for z/VM 4.40 for 3390 system. Greatly appreciated. With best regards,...Roland ChungSenior Technical Specialist (S/390,VM/VSE,DB2/VSEVM)MAXC Consultants Inc.Voice/Fax: 416-469-3280 (If busy, call: 416-469-2268)197 Hastings Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada. M4L 2L6** Life is short. Stop once in a while and smell the roses. **
Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system
Hello Jim, great news!However, at the conference call, IBM rep. said "...I will licence the product ifyou can get a copy of z/VM distribution tape from somewhere else". However, he also said "(getting a copy other than from IBM)... is not condomed nor recommended."That is the "official" position of IBM. So, I am afraid you wouldn't get an "official" OK from IBM. Thanks for your offering.Regards,...Roland"Dodds, Jim" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We have the z/VM 4.4 Tapes but would need something from IBM saying it was ok for us to copy and give to you. Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland P. ChungSent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 11:04 AMTo: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUSubject: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system Hello Listers, sorry to bother you guys again.We called IBM software to order z/VM 4.40. However, the rep. said itwas out of marketing since March 2006. He can'tship itto us. But, he said, if we can get a copy of thedistribution tape, IBM will licence it for us.Please contact me off-list if you are willing to lend a copy of the distribution tape forz/VM 4.40 for 3390 system.Greatly appreciated. With best regards,...Roland ChungSenior Technical Specialist (S/390,VM/VSE,DB2/VSEVM)MAXC Consultants Inc.Voice/Fax: 416-469-3280 (If busy, call: 416-469-2268)197 Hastings Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada. M4L 2L6** Life is short. Stop once in a while and smell the roses. **
Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system
Roland, I am very sorry about IBMs stand on z/VM, but I will be glad to test those 5 3590 type J tapes that you think are bad to see if it is the tape drive or actually the tapes that are bad. Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland P. Chung Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 11:30 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system Hello Jim, great news! However, at the conference call, IBM rep. said ...I will licence the product ifyou can get a copy of z/VM distribution tape from somewhere else. However, he also said (getting a copy other than from IBM)... is not condomed nor recommended. That is the official position of IBM. So, I am afraid you wouldn't get an official OK from IBM. Thanks for your offering. Regards, ...Roland Dodds, Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We have the z/VM 4.4 Tapes but would need something from IBM saying it was ok for us to copy and give to you. Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland P. Chung Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 11:04 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system Hello Listers, sorry to bother you guys again. We called IBM software to order z/VM 4.40. However, the rep. said itwas out of marketing since March 2006. He can'tship itto us. But, he said, if we can get a copy of thedistribution tape, IBM will licence it for us. Please contact me off-list if you are willing to lend a copy of the distribution tape forz/VM 4.40 for 3390 system.Greatly appreciated. With best regards, ...Roland Chung Senior Technical Specialist (S/390,VM/VSE,DB2/VSEVM) MAXC Consultants Inc. Voice/Fax: 416-469-3280 (If busy, call: 416-469-2268) 197 Hastings Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada. M4L 2L6 ** Life is short. Stop once in a while and smell the roses. **
Re: Upgrade Plan request
Don't have a spreadsheet for the cutover but I might be able to help with the hcd. On z/os this is what we did If you go into your hcd dialog select Option 2 activate or process config data then select Option 3 Build IOCP input dataset then select the processors IODF you wa nt Place it in a dataset . tHis will give you a flat file that is transportable you would then load that into the new machine through the HMC I forget the exact steps to do that I'd have to walk out and poke around but I'm sure someone on the board can help. mace
Re: Linux IPL volume
Thanks all, Thanks all Got over that hurdle I attached the volume to the system... ATT A3C7 system Display shows DASD A3C7 CP SYSTEM LXND04 1 Coded mdisk statement MDISK A3C7 3390 0001 END LXND04 MR RVM WVM MVM (NOTE START AT CYLINDER 1, 0 FAILS) Coded link statement LINK LVMMGR A3C7 A3C6 MW And EUREKA! It works. My LINUX machine comes up. Welcome to SUSE LINUX Enterprise Server 9 (s390) - Kernel 2.6.5-7.257-s390 (ttyS0). ndctst01 login: In conclusion If I reference cylinder zero (0) I cannot find my IPL text. If I reference cylinder one (1) it is found -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob van der Heij Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 10:29 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Linux IPL volume On 6/20/06, Brian Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is the code you get when the device address you IPL'd does not have an IPLable program on it. Yep. If it was supposed to be linked as mini disk, it may not have been from cyl 0. So the IPL program is on the virtual cylinder 0, where that may be. Attach it to system and try to link it again. -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software, Inc http://velocitysoftware.com/
Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system
Roland, I am sorry, I thought for sure it was you with the bad tapes. Well if you ever decide you need them checked just let me know I will be happy to do it for you. Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland P. Chung Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 12:22 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system Hi Jim,we arenot having problem with the tapes. Thanks for the offering. Regards, ...Roland Dodds, Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Roland, I am very sorry about IBMs stand on z/VM, but I will be glad to test those 5 3590 type J tapes that you think are bad to see if it is the tape drive or actually the tapes that are bad. Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114
TCPIP INIT problem
To list(s), Whomever answered my question earlier - thank you. I changed my DEDICATE statements to point to the addresses of the OSA (F000-F00F) and my TCPIP/VSE stacks come up cleanly. Problem, I cannot PING to those addresses from my PC and each stack can only PING to itself. The OSA is also used by a zOS LPAR. Has anyone run into this issue? Thks, Bill J. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Can I know how a PROFILE EXEC was invoked?
Title: RE: Can I know how a PROFILE EXEC was invoked? Look at this location in storage, will contain the last command entered from the console and blanks after CMS is IPL'd before anything is typed.. LASTCMND DC CL8' ' Last command issued this is in the NUCON on my release at x'2A0' #cp d 2A0 X'40'= just IPL'd anything else not just IPL'd -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU]On Behalf Of Tom Cluster Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 12:59 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Can I know how a PROFILE EXEC was invoked? Is there a way for me to know, from within PROFILE EXEC, if I've been invoked by the logon process, as opposed to someone typing PROFILE? - Tom. Tom Cluster County of Sonoma Santa Rosa, CA (707) 565-3384 (Tuesdays and Wednesdays only) __ ella for Spam Control has removed VSE-List messages and set aside VM-List for me You can use it too - and it's FREE! http://www.ellaforspam.com
Z890, ZVM 5.2, and ICC
I am finding that using the Z890 ICC and either of my tn3270 clients to connect to our ZVM system is quite a bit slower than using the TN3270 services provided by the TCPIP virtual machine. The two clients I am using are Jolly Giant and Vista. I've configured and tested the clients as models 2, 3,4 and 2E, 3E, 4E. The results are repeatable. The Jolly Giant emulator has an option for host response time. When tcpip is providing tn3270 services, the host response time for a simple logon is about 0.02 seconds. When the ICC is providing tn3270 services, the host response time is about 1.00 seconds. When using a Model 4E session and scrolling forward/backward on a filelist screen, the tn3270 services host response time is about 0.02 seconds. The ICC host response time is about 1.4 seconds. Are there configuration settings to improve the performance of the ICC or is this just a fact of life?? I am willing to experiment if I knew what knobs to twist. Regards, ___ Jim Hughes 603-271-5586 Impossible is just an opinion. Your career is what you're paid for, your calling is what you're made for.
Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system
Title: Message I'm confused, IBM said they'd license z/VM 4.4.0 for you if you could get a copy of the installation tape from another customer, but won't permit other customers to send you a copy of the tape. Am I understanding the situation correctly? IF permissionto borrow an existing customer's tape(s) can be obtained from IBM, I may be able to help. Michael Coffin, President MC Consulting Company, Inc. 57 Tamarack Drive Stoughton, Massachusetts 02072 Voice: (781) 344-9837 FAX: (781) 344-7683 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.mccci.com We employ aggressive SPAM filters. If you cannot reply or send email to mccci.com go to www.mccci.com/spamblockremove.php -Original Message-From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dodds, JimSent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 11:13 AMTo: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUSubject: Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system We have the z/VM 4.4 Tapes but would need something from IBM saying it was ok for us to copy and give to you. Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland P. ChungSent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 11:04 AMTo: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUSubject: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system Hello Listers, sorry to bother you guys again. We called IBM software to order z/VM 4.40. However, the rep. said itwas out of marketing since March 2006. He can'tship itto us. But, he said, if we can get a copy of thedistribution tape, IBM will licence it for us. Please contact me off-list if you are willing to lend a copy of the distribution tape forz/VM 4.40 for 3390 system.Greatly appreciated. With best regards,...Roland ChungSenior Technical Specialist (S/390,VM/VSE,DB2/VSEVM)MAXC Consultants Inc.Voice/Fax: 416-469-3280 (If busy, call: 416-469-2268)197 Hastings Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada. M4L 2L6** Life is short. Stop once in a while and smell the roses. **
Re: Z890, ZVM 5.2, and ICC
Jim Can you tell what speed the OSA ICC card is running? 10 Mbs/100Mbs etc.? eric At 02:47 PM 6/20/2006, you wrote: I am finding that using the Z890 ICC and either of my tn3270 clients to connect to our ZVM system is quite a bit slower than using the TN3270 services provided by the TCPIP virtual machine. The two clients I am using are Jolly Giant and Vista. I've configured and tested the clients as models 2, 3,4 and 2E, 3E, 4E. The results are repeatable.=20 The Jolly Giant emulator has an option for host response time. When tcpip is providing tn3270 services, the host response time for a simple logon is about 0.02 seconds. When the ICC is providing tn3270 services, the host response time is about 1.00 seconds. When using a Model 4E session and scrolling forward/backward on a filelist screen, the tn3270 services host response time is about 0.02 seconds. The ICC host response time is about 1.4 seconds.=20 Are there configuration settings to improve the performance of the ICC or is this just a fact of life?? I am willing to experiment if I knew what knobs to twist. Regards, ___ Jim Hughes 603-271-5586 Impossible is just an opinion. Your career is what you're paid for, your calling is what you're made for. Eric Schadow Mainframe Technical Support www.davisvision.com The information contained in this communication is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. It may contain information that is privileged or confidential, and may be protected by State and/or Federal Regulations. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please return it to the sender immediately and delete the original message and any copy of it from your computer system. If you have any questions concerning this message, please contact the sender.
Re: Z890, ZVM 5.2, and ICC
Its 100 Mbs, full duplex. There was no change when we changed FROM AUTO to 100 Mbs Full Duplex. ___ Jim Hughes 603-271-5586 Impossible is just an opinion. Your career is what you're paid for, your calling is what you're made for. =-Original Message- =From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On =Behalf Of Eric Schadow =Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 2:57 PM =To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU =Subject: Re: Z890, ZVM 5.2, and ICC = =Jim = =Can you tell what speed the OSA ICC card is running? 10 Mbs/100Mbs etc.? = =eric = =At 02:47 PM 6/20/2006, you wrote: =I am finding that using the Z890 ICC and either of my tn3270 clients to =connect to our ZVM system is quite a bit slower than using the TN3270 =services provided by the TCPIP virtual machine. = =The two clients I am using are Jolly Giant and Vista. = =I've configured and tested the clients as models 2, 3,4 and 2E, 3E, 4E. = =The results are repeatable.=20 = =The Jolly Giant emulator has an option for host response time. = =When tcpip is providing tn3270 services, the host response time for a =simple logon is about 0.02 seconds. When the ICC is providing tn3270 =services, the host response time is about 1.00 seconds. = =When using a Model 4E session and scrolling forward/backward on a =filelist screen, the tn3270 services host response time is about 0.02 =seconds. The ICC host response time is about 1.4 seconds.=20 = =Are there configuration settings to improve the performance of the ICC =or is this just a fact of life?? = =I am willing to experiment if I knew what knobs to twist. = =Regards, = =___ =Jim Hughes =603-271-5586 =Impossible is just an opinion. =Your career is what you're paid for, your calling is what you're made =for. = =Eric Schadow =Mainframe Technical Support =www.davisvision.com = = = =-- -- =The information contained in this communication is intended =only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. It may =contain information that is privileged or confidential, and =may be protected by State and/or Federal Regulations. If =the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, =you are hereby notified that any dissemination, =distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of =its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received =this communication in error, please return it to the sender =immediately and delete the original message and any copy =of it from your computer system. If you have any questions =concerning this message, please contact the sender. =-- --
TELNET Problem Between TWO VM systems
We are having problems telnetting from one z/VM system to another z/VM system. The network between the systems is through a netscreen that creates a VPN tunnel. We can telnet from a pc on the vlan to each of the host systems but we cannot telnet from one system to the other in either direction. There is a vswitch on each z/VM system managing to OSA connections. Both systems are running z/VM 5.1. We can ping between the systems but not telnet...Any ideas?
Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system
On 6/20/06, Schuh, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems to me that permission to get implies permission to send. However, I don't think the stated permission to get is official, and probably cannot be thought reliable unless stated in writing and signed by the appropriate people. Let us know when you get that J Back in the old days as a customer, I have more than once assisted our friendly IBMer with a copy of some installation tape that he would take to a customer for whatever reason he felt appropriate (like when someone misplaced the order for a proof of concept). But have one customer ship copies of licensed materials to another potential customer directly does seem a bit beyond the license agreement. From what I remember, you could also install from CD (that emulates 3420) or use a copy of the ADCD set. Those are probably easier to locate and handle by friendly IBMers. Rob --
Re: RES: VSE/VSAM for VM
I think the mechanism for redirecting VSAM requests to DB2 VM was the SUBSYS operand on the FILEDEF command that allowed a VSAM emulator to be provided. I was hoping that this might provide a mechanism for us to do something for NetMaster in VM, but unfortunately the facility was never provided for GCS. Mark. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Tuesday, 20 June 2006 11:22 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: RES: VSE/VSAM for VM On Tuesday, 06/20/2006 at 11:02 CET, Jones, Ian H [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you Mark. This is directed at IBM - Auditors do not care tuppence whether a product is 'stable'. If a product is used to support a production workload they expect it to be *supported*. An auditor's reaction will vary from an 'observation' that an unsupported product is being used, to a recommendation that use of the product be discontinued. In a business environment where auditors' reports can cause a company to lose a contract, no one can afford to use unsupported software. I'm not sure what you're directing to IBM, Ian. In accordance with the terms of the license agreement, we've given the necessary notice about end of service, as we promised. We've even gone back and reevaluated the decision. I would agree with you that you should should follow your company's policies with regard to the software you use. (BTW, auditors determine whether you comply with the policy; they don't create policy unless there is some area not covered by policy or the policy is too vague.) That does yield some choices (not everyone can choose from all of these): - Reengineer the programs on Power or Intel architecture - Move the programs to z/OS or z/VSE - Reengineer the programs to not use VSAM - Obtain an extended support contract (contact your IBM Business Partner or IBM rep) - Change the policy to allow unsupported stable software - Obtain an approved deviation from policy based on cost/risk - In the dim mists of eons past, there was a mechanism that allowed CMS VSAM requests to be redirected to DB2 for VM VSE (added as an SPE to VM/SP 3, if memory still serves). I have no idea if that option is still available. All good things must come to an end, and change is the inevitable result. In the real world, change costs money. So the question is: Which option (a) costs least, and (b) meets your company's requirements? Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: RES: VSE/VSAM for VM
Can I second this. This will also my employers plans to ditch VM as the auditor will not allow us to use unsupported software on mission critical systems --- Jones, Ian H [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you Mark. This is directed at IBM - Auditors do not care tuppence whether a product is 'stable'. If a product is used to support a production workload they expect it to be *supported*. An auditor's reaction will vary from an 'observation' that an unsupported product is being used, to a recommendation that use of the product be discontinued. In a business environment where auditors' reports can cause a company to lose a contract, no one can afford to use unsupported software. Ian Jones UKOSG - Infrastructure Specialist EDS ITO - UK mainframe Software Services 4 Roundwood Avenue Uxbridge, UB11 1BQ Phone: +44 (0)20 8754 5636 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mainframe.uk.eds.com -Original Message- From: Gillis, Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 June 2006 22:24 Subject: Re: RES: VSE/VSAM for VM I received the following reply from Gerhard Zierl from IBM in April: ...The news is that after assessing the situation the product stays withdrawn from market. Toady VM/VSAM is used in very stable environments by customers who have the product already licensed and installed for a long time, IBM hasn't seen new customers to this product for a long time. Therefore we do not see any problem associated with the withdrawal from market.. z/VM 5.2 customers can use their old VSAM distribution tape which they have received with their current version of z/VM. Same is true for end of service. The last APAR was 2001 (more than 5 years). Before that there was one (new function) APAR in 1999 and 2 defect APARs in 1996. VM/VSAM is a very stable product. In addion VM/VSAM is used by customers in mature and stable environments, no new applications, no major changes, etc... I would assume the same applies to your product. So the risk of encountering a severe problem is extremely low. In case customers decide they have a critical need to have service beyond the EOS-date, then there is in general an option to ask IBM for a charged service extension agreement. Mark. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
SMTP question
We are trying to figure out if we can use Lotus NOTES relay email from VM out to the internet. We would send the correct info to SMTP, SMTP would forward it on to NOTES and NOTES would send it out to the internet. Is this type of thing doable with VM (5.2) and NOTES? Thanks. Steve G.
Re: SMTP question
Why do you want to send via notes instead of direct? --- Steve Gentry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to figure out if we can use Lotus NOTES relay email from VM out to the internet. We would send the correct info to SMTP, SMTP would forward it on to NOTES and NOTES would send it out to the internet. Is this type of thing doable with VM (5.2) and NOTES? Thanks. Steve G. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: SMTP question
Steve, Yes, we did just that for a little while. You need to configure TCPIP 198 file SMTP CONFIG parameter IPMAILERADDRESS with the IP address of your Notes MTA (I'm not sure what that stands for but its the Notes server which receives non-Notes email) server and VM SMTP will forward any non-local email to that address. Its then becomes that server's responsibility to forward it outside the company. We had to quit using it, however, because our auditors were able to break into it and it looked like it would take an exit to stop them; and it wasn't worth that. There were also other issues around the corner involving validation of the VM email sender. It just got too messy for what it would have bought us. And, in response to Dave Wade, you might want to take this indirect route if your VM system doesn't have direct access to the Internet. Dennis Schaffer
TCP/IP messages on console
Hello I need to learn how to reduce messages from TCP/IP Server machine that are showed in zVM OPERATOR user (main console). Since TCP/IP server machine runs disconnected, I defined in directory a secondary console, but a lot of messages rolls due tcpip traffic. There is a configuration option to reduce (let´s say show just ERROR/WARNING messages, not INFORMATIONAL messages) on OPERATOR console? Thanks in advance Carlos
Re: SMTP question
We had to quit using it, however, because our auditors were able to break into it and it looked like it would take an exit to stop them; and it wasn't worth that. There were also other issues around the corner involving validation of the VM email sender. It just got too messy for what it would have bought us. The trouble with SMTP is that the E-Mail sender is (usually) not verifiable. If you are just using NOTES to relay out to the Internet this shouldn't be an issue. However if you are going to allow Notes = VM then it can be an issue for the Notes users. I think the moral is that even on internal systems only trust digitally signed e-mails, and then only if you trust the PKI. And, in response to Dave Wade, you might want to take this indirect route if your VM system doesn't have direct access to the Internet. Using NOTES in this way seems a bit of a sledge hammer to crack a nut, but I guess if you already have NOTES on the internet its a good start. Trouble is that if I had NOTES on the internet, I would make sure the bridge head MTA (thats the one that talks SMTP) was not visible to the internal network via SMTP, only via Notes protocols, to minimize the spoofing mentioned above... Dennis Schaffer Dave. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: SMTP question
The trouble with SMTP is that the E-Mail sender is (usually) not verifiable. If you are just using NOTES to relay out to the Internet this shouldn't be an issue. However if you are going to allow Notes = VM then it can be an issue for the Notes users. I think the moral is that even on internal systems only trust digitally signed e-mails, and then only if you trust the PKI. Another good reason to use a Linux guest for this. It's relatively straightforward to add headers supplying the originating spool info with the modern Linux SMTP MTAs (we did it in SMTPPLUS as part of the spool support, so I know it can be done w/o lots of rocket science), and there are fairly easy ways to determine if the purported originating ID actually exists in the CP directory and dump the message if the originator is bogus. You also pick up SMTP authorization, transport encryption, endpoint authentication, Kerberos support...etc, etc, etc all the things that VM SMTP never got taught to do. -- db
Volume with minidisks has no allocation information
Hello, VM experts, I'm preparing myself for teaching the mysteries of VSE and VM systems work and I'm reminded that when one prepares to teach something one discovers many holes and uncertainties in one's own knowledge. Today I thought I'd educate myself about IPL bootstrap records in case one of my students asks about them. My theory, which I wanted to test, was that they're written by ICKDSF whenever an INIT is done (for MVS and VSE volumes) or a CPVOL FORMAT is done (for VM volumes). Based on what I've seen today, this seems to be true. But while looking around our system I discovered a volume that had originally been created for VSE use as a full-pack minidisk. In other words, it had been prepared using ICKDSF INIT (which would have created a vtoc). However, somewhere along the way it was decided that this volume would have several minidisks on it. In other words, it was no longer to be a full-pack minidisk. CPVOL FORMAT was never used on this volume, so cylinder 0 was left unchanged, with no allocation information. (If it were to have allocation information, it would have been PERM for the whole volume.) My initial reaction was surprise, but then I figured that possibly CP can tolerate a volume without allocation information as long as its sole use is PERM. It sure seems to be true that such a volume needs only a VOL1 label to make CP happy. My question is this: is there any reason to be concerned about such a volume not having an allocation map? - Tom P.S. The IPL bootstrap records are different between VSE and VM, but since we're not IPLing using this volume, that isn't an issue. Tom Cluster County of Sonoma Santa Rosa, CA (707) 565-3384 (Tuesdays and Wednesdays only)
Re: Volume with minidisks has no allocation information
Tom Cluster wrote: Hello, VM experts, I'm preparing myself for teaching the mysteries of VSE and VM systems work and I'm reminded that when one prepares to teach something one discovers many holes and uncertainties in one's own knowledge. Today I thought I'd educate myself about IPL bootstrap records in case one of my students asks about them. My theory, which I wanted to test, was that they're written by ICKDSF whenever an INIT is done (for MVS and VSE volumes) or a CPVOL FORMAT is done (for VM volumes). Based on what I've seen today, this seems to be true. But while looking around our system I discovered a volume that had originally been created for VSE use as a full-pack minidisk. In other words, it had been prepared using ICKDSF INIT (which would have created a vtoc). However, somewhere along the way it was decided that this volume would have several minidisks on it. In other words, it was no longer to be a full-pack minidisk. CPVOL FORMAT was never used on this volume, so cylinder 0 was left unchanged, with no allocation information. (If it were to have allocation information, it would have been PERM for the whole volume.) My initial reaction was surprise, but then I figured that possibly CP can tolerate a volume without allocation information as long as its sole use is PERM. It sure seems to be true that such a volume needs only a VOL1 label to make CP happy. My question is this: is there any reason to be concerned about such a volume not having an allocation map? - Tom P.S. The IPL bootstrap records are different between VSE and VM, but since we're not IPLing using this volume, that isn't an issue. Tom Cluster County of Sonoma Santa Rosa, CA (707) 565-3384 (Tuesdays and Wednesdays only) Do not be concerned. The CP Owned volumes are the only ones that need the allocation map. As for the ipl bootstrap records, they are written by the SALIPL process for VM. It has been too many years for me to remember how they are written on the MVS based systems. Even if I remembered, it would probably still on it be current. Suffice it to say that they are written only on volumes that are explicitly intended to be IPL volumes, not on every volume. As long as a volume has been initialized with a volser that CP can read, the volume can be attached to SYSTEM and have minidisks on it. When a volume is changed from being OS or VSE format to one housing minidisks, it is probably advisable to format cylinder 0 with CPFMTXA (ICKDSF under the covers) to insure that it is not usable by that other platform as that could lead to data integrity problems if a dataset were to be allocated and written on the volume by mistake. While formatting cyl. 0, change the volume serial, also, as an extra measure of caution..
Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system
Well, that is IBM. Reading between the lines: customer cannot order a copy of z/VM 4.40 because it has been pulled from marketing. The system just don't accept the order. But, if the customer can get a copy from other places, IBM will let the customer uses it as long as the customer registers the software with IBM and is paying the licence fee. IBM wouldn't ask where the customer obtained the copy from. ... this pratice (of getting a copy of the software from other customer other than from IBM) is neither recommended or condomed (by us). So, any taker? I promise I wouldn't tell IBM you give me a copy of z/VM 4.40. I also promise my customer would register with IBM and pay the licensing fee. Please contact me off-list. TIA. It will be greatly appreciated. Regards, ...Roland --- Schuh, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems to me that permission to get implies permission to send. However, I don't think the stated permission to get is official, and probably cannot be thought reliable unless stated in writing and signed by the appropriate people. Let us know when you get that :-) Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Michael Coffin Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 11:56 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system I'm confused, IBM said they'd license z/VM 4.4.0 for you if you could get a copy of the installation tape from another customer, but won't permit other customers to send you a copy of the tape. Am I understanding the situation correctly? IF permission to borrow an existing customer's tape(s) can be obtained from IBM, I may be able to help. Michael Coffin, President MC Consulting Company, Inc. 57 Tamarack Drive Stoughton, Massachusetts 02072 Voice: (781) 344-9837FAX: (781) 344-7683 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.mccci.com http://www.mccci.com/ We employ aggressive SPAM filters. If you cannot reply or send email to mccci.com go to www.mccci.com/spamblockremove.php http://www.spamabuse.org/images/anti-spam.gif -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dodds, Jim Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 11:13 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system We have the z/VM 4.4 Tapes but would need something from IBM saying it was ok for us to copy and give to you. Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114 _ From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland P. Chung Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 11:04 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system Hello Listers, sorry to bother you guys again. We called IBM software to order z/VM 4.40. However, the rep. said it was out of marketing since March 2006. He can't ship it to us. But, he said, if we can get a copy of the distribution tape, IBM will licence it for us. Please contact me off-list if you are willing to lend a copy of the distribution tape for z/VM 4.40 for 3390 system. Greatly appreciated. With best regards, ...Roland Chung Senior Technical Specialist (S/390,VM/VSE,DB2/VSEVM) MAXC Consultants Inc. Voice/Fax: 416-469-3280 (If busy, call: 416-469-2268) 197 Hastings Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada. M4L 2L6 ** Life is short. Stop once in a while and smell the roses. **
Re: We need a copy of z/VM 4.40 installation tape for 3390 system
On Tuesday, 06/20/2006 at 11:07 AST, Roland P. Chung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Reading between the lines: customer cannot order a copy of z/VM 4.40 because it has been pulled from marketing. The system just don't accept the order. But, if the customer can get a copy from other places, IBM will let the customer uses it as long as the customer registers the software with IBM and is paying the licence fee. IBM wouldn't ask where the customer obtained the copy from. ... this pratice (of getting a copy of the software from other customer other than from IBM) is neither recommended or condomed (by us). I've talked, like, a million times about READING your license agreement, which is a binding legal document. It's a short document and worth the effort. The IBMer who told you that it was ok is wrong. It is not ok, not in the fashion you describe. There does exist a legal method that (a) approves getting a copy from a 3rd party, and (b) gives the 3rd party permission to give you a copy of the software. It, too, is a legal document signed by IBM lawyers, your lawyers, and the 3rd party lawyers. If anyone wants to give you IBM software, encourage them to their BP or IBMer and tell him/her that they want a 3rd party agreement. (This is how your software is licensed for use at a DR site, btw.) Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
