Re: LU 6.2 without a 3745?
On Monday, 06/26/2006 at 05:46 AST, David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > VM/VTAM doesn?t do EE, and CCL would either a) burn CPU on the std engine side, > or b) burn CPU on an IFL, which we don?t know if he has (and is still $125K). > In either case (a or b), those CPU cycles are pretty pricy. No, VM/VTAM doesn't do EE, but CommServer Linux (CSL) does. It will perform the APPN-over-IP encapsulation and supports CTC. I.e. VM/VTAM APPN over CTC to CSL then via EE to the PLU. (I couldn't resist all the abbreviations - sorry!) Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Volume with minidisks has no allocation information
I remember hearing about a site that had ALL of its VM volumes available to its MVS system and had MVS datasets for every minidisk defined. They had all of the CP areas listed as minidisks too (Checkpoint, Directory, Page, Spool, etc). I think they did FDR backups and were able to restore full minidisks. /Tom Kern --- "Nix, Robert P." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Only slightly off topic, but long ago, just to see what would happen, we > allocated an MVS dataset, and then mapped a CMS minidisk over the dataset's > allocation, and everyone was still happy and running. > > As long as everyone agrees to what's been done, there shouldn't be any > fussing. > > > -- > Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation > RO-OC-1-13200 First Street SW > 507-284-0844 Rochester, MN 55905 > - > "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but > in practice, theory and practice are different." > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: TOKEN RING setup for remote 6262 printer
--- David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On > > Behalf Of David Boyes > > Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 3:31 PM > > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > > Subject: Re: TOKEN RING setup for remote 6262 > printer > > > > > Has anyone ever set up a Token Ring network on > > > VM/TCPIP in order to drive a 6262 printer that If its TCP/IP then the underlying media is not relevant. > is > > > defined as a COAX attached printer on a VSE > guest > > > machine. If its co-ax attached then does VSE see it as VTAM or local 3270 (not sure if this question makes sense, I don't do VSE). > >As this is all new to me, I am trying > to find > > > the piece I need to put the network together. > > > Any help or examples that anyone is will ing to > share > > > would be most helpful. > > > > I'm not sure this is possible. Do you need to go via VSE? (that is could VM talk directly to the printer), Does the controller the printer is on have TCP/IP support? (this would allow VM to talk directly to the printer) If so could you use LPD support in the controller to allow VM to print via RSCS. If not then can't you add an RSCS printer that talks to the VSE LU? Not sure if this makes sense, (Its been a while since I did this stuff for real). __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Volume with minidisks has no allocation information
Works fine, for now. Just overlaying minidisks (or a minidisk over a full pack minidisk), will work just fine, until the other side tried to write on it. In this case, if you do a CMS Format, your MVS file will be wiped out. If the mdisk doesn't overlay the MVS VTOC, MVS will still report the file exists. But when you open the file to read it, there will be a suprise for you. If you are using an automated tool, such as Dirmaint, (well, it wouldn't let you define overlapping mindisks in the first place), but if you force it, it may do a CMS Format for you. SOL Also, if the MVS volume was a dedicated volume, trying to put a minidisk on it, would do anything. If you try to link to it (or logon if it is defined to a user), you will get a message that the volume wasn't available. No harm, no foul. OTOH, if you map the entire MVS volume and link it to yourself, you can still ACCESS xxx Z, and use CMS utilities to read the datasets. LISTDS Z (EXTENT to see what is out there. Use FILEDEF or DLBL as JCL. And then use CMS programs to read (not write) the data. Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6/26/2006 4:45 PM >>> Only slightly off topic, but long ago, just to see what would happen, we allocated an MVS dataset, and then mapped a CMS minidisk over the dataset's allocation, and everyone was still happy and running. As long as everyone agrees to what's been done, there shouldn't be any fussing. -- Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation RO-OC-1-13 200 First Street SW 507-284-0844Rochester, MN 55905 - "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different."
Re: LU 6.2 without a 3745?
VM/VTAM doesn’t do EE, and CCL would either a) burn CPU on the std engine side, or b) burn CPU on an IFL, which we don’t know if he has (and is still $125K). In either case (a or b), those CPU cycles are pretty pricy. As Alan said, native APPN would also be an option, and VM/VTAM does do that. Using that, you could offload the routing function (and thus the extra CPU consumption) to an outboard router box, but adding a completely new protocol, router software load (to support SNA protocols), and routing infrastructure seems kind of overkill for one link. David Boyes Sine Nomine Associates From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Ray Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 5:16 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: LU 6.2 without a 3745? Have you check into Enterprise Extender or CCL (Communications Controller for Linux) emulated 3745
Re: Volume with minidisks has no allocation information
Only slightly off topic, but long ago, just to see what would happen, we allocated an MVS dataset, and then mapped a CMS minidisk over the dataset's allocation, and everyone was still happy and running. As long as everyone agrees to what's been done, there shouldn't be any fussing. -- Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation RO-OC-1-13 200 First Street SW 507-284-0844Rochester, MN 55905 - "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different."
Re: LU 6.2 without a 3745?
Have you check into Enterprise Extender or CCL (Communications Controller for Linux) emulated 3745 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Boyes Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 4:34 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: LU 6.2 without a 3745? Isn’t the CTC between VM/VTAM and MVS a PU4/5? It’ll burn CPU like crazy compared to doing the routing in the 3745, but it should work. David Boyes Sine Nomine Associates From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Strasser, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 4:30 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: LU 6.2 without a 3745? My SNA networking folks tell me that all our 3745s are going away because the hardware is going out of support. We plan to use CTCs to connect VM/VTAM to an MVS system to route RJE, and most terminal sessions are already TN3270. But we also have a CMS application that uses AVS to talk to an MVS application over LU 6.2., and I was told “For LU 6.2 sessions, there is no alternatives unless you have a PU 4/5.” It frankly seems very unlikely that we are just SOL on LU 6.2 without a 3745. What do we need to make this work?
Re: LU 6.2 without a 3745?
On Monday, 06/26/2006 at 01:11 MST, "Strasser, [EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But we also have a CMS application that uses AVS to talk to an MVS application > over LU 6.2., and I was told ?For LU 6.2 sessions, there is no alternatives > unless you have a PU 4/5.? It frankly seems very unlikely that we are just SOL > on LU 6.2 without a 3745. What do we need to make this work? The CTC is sufficient (PU 5). For connections beyond CTC range, then you can set up an APPN (vs. subarea) network that can use PU 2.1 to carry LU 6.2. APPN connections can be carried over an IP network via Enterprise Extender (EE), which is built into z/OS CS, but not into VM VTAM. To bridge the gap, you will need Communication Server for Linux on zSeries. DLSw can be used by an outboard controller to handle the SNA/IP transformations as well. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: LU 6.2 without a 3745?
Isn’t the CTC between VM/VTAM and MVS a PU4/5? It’ll burn CPU like crazy compared to doing the routing in the 3745, but it should work. David Boyes Sine Nomine Associates From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Strasser, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 4:30 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: LU 6.2 without a 3745? My SNA networking folks tell me that all our 3745s are going away because the hardware is going out of support. We plan to use CTCs to connect VM/VTAM to an MVS system to route RJE, and most terminal sessions are already TN3270. But we also have a CMS application that uses AVS to talk to an MVS application over LU 6.2., and I was told “For LU 6.2 sessions, there is no alternatives unless you have a PU 4/5.” It frankly seems very unlikely that we are just SOL on LU 6.2 without a 3745. What do we need to make this work?
LU 6.2 without a 3745?
My SNA networking folks tell me that all our 3745s are going away because the hardware is going out of support. We plan to use CTCs to connect VM/VTAM to an MVS system to route RJE, and most terminal sessions are already TN3270. But we also have a CMS application that uses AVS to talk to an MVS application over LU 6.2., and I was told “For LU 6.2 sessions, there is no alternatives unless you have a PU 4/5.” It frankly seems very unlikely that we are just SOL on LU 6.2 without a 3745. What do we need to make this work? Thanks much, Victor Victor Strasser [EMAIL PROTECTED] VM, Teradata, and Linux Support Unit California Department of Technology Services Phone: 916-464-4522
Re: TOKEN RING setup for remote 6262 printer
> -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of David Boyes > Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 3:31 PM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: TOKEN RING setup for remote 6262 printer > > > Has anyone ever set up a Token Ring network on > > VM/TCPIP in order to drive a 6262 printer that is > > defined as a COAX attached printer on a VSE guest > > machine. As this is all new to me, I am trying to find > > the piece I need to put the network together. > > Any help or examples that anyone is will ing to share > > would be most helpful. > > I'm not sure this is possible. Duh, never mind. You're going the other way (net to VSE). Misread the problem. If that's the case, then use the LPD in RSCS, and send the output to VSE via NJE (or turn around and LPR it to the VSE LPD server). For NJE, you'll need to configure PNET on VSE, get a full RSCS license, and add either a TCPNJE link or a real NJE over CTC link to get the files back and forth. For LPR to VSE, you'll need to configure LPD on VSE and have an IP stack running on VSE. I'd probably use NJE, myself. The LPD example in the Linux printing articles Adam and I wrote a few years back will work fine for this application. Given that configuration, you just need to add LINK and DEVICE statements to your VM TCPIP config to activate the T/R adapter, and you're ready to rock and roll.
Re: TOKEN RING setup for remote 6262 printer
> Has anyone ever set up a Token Ring network on > VM/TCPIP in order to drive a 6262 printer that is > defined as a COAX attached printer on a VSE guest > machine. As this is all new to me, I am trying to find > the piece I need to put the network together. > Any help or examples that anyone is will ing to share > would be most helpful. I'm not sure this is possible. If the printer is currently defined as a attached device over coax, it's got some kind of 3x74 in front of it, which is not IP-capable, and I don't know of any other way to drive a coax-attached 6262 (I've seen network-enabled print boxes for 3287s, but I don't think the 6262 works the same way, and they are *really* expensive). If you have remote 3x74s, you'll either need to do SNA to drive them, or replace the printers as described below. Do they need the impact capability, or just a remote output device? If just a remote output device, replace the printer with a large PostScript-capable laser printer, which will be cheaper to operate/maintain anyway, and lots faster. The supplied RSCS PostScript support is sufficient to do a good job at replacing the 6262 functions if you take the time to define forms and form definitions for RSCS. If they really need the impact capability, replace the printer with a high-speed serial or parallel ASCII line printer (Florida Data still makes them) and use a LPD-capable standalone print server to drive it. Again, RSCS can handle this type of setup pretty well. For the VSE side, define the printers with the ,VM option and put SPOOL entries into the CP directory entry at those addresses. Before you IPL VSE, IPL CMS, SPOOL the devices at those addresses to RSCS and tag them appropriately, and then IPL VSE. As a side note, if you don't have to preserve remote 3x74s, get rid of the token-ring stuff ASAP by specifying Ethernet for the new print servers. It'll cut the cost of the new hardware by a factor of 10 or so. Drop me a note offlist if you want to discuss this in more detail. -- db
Re: TOKEN RING setup for remote 6262 printer
william JANULIN wrote: To list(s): Has anyone ever set up a Token Ring network on VM/TCPIP in order to drive a 6262 printer that is defined as a COAX attached printer on a VSE guest machine. As this is all new to me, I am trying to find the piece I need to put the network together. Any help or examples that anyone is willing to share would be most helpful. I would immediately break this into three problems: can your TCPIP stack talk to the network via the token ring adapter? Can your VSE receive print jobs by IP? Can your VSE talk to the printer? None of those questions dependent upon the others, unless your VSE system is on a subnet routed through your VM system. Good luck, Nick
TOKEN RING setup for remote 6262 printer
To list(s): Has anyone ever set up a Token Ring network on VM/TCPIP in order to drive a 6262 printer that is defined as a COAX attached printer on a VSE guest machine. As this is all new to me, I am trying to find the piece I need to put the network together. Any help or examples that anyone is will ing to share would be most helpful. Regards, Bill J. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Alert: Upcoming end-of-service for z/VM 4.4
Sigh. Peter
OPM zLinux experience
Hi, folks. Jim Marshall, of the Office of Personnel Management (U.S.A. Federal Government) just posted the following over on the IBM-MAIN list: --- I have seen some requests lately for a positive zLinux experience. I am running zLinux under z/VM today with 2 production applications, 45 Virtual Servers in three LPARs providing Production, User Acceptance Test, Development, and SYSPROG TEST. Each application is isolated within a number of V-Lans protected by “Defense in Depth”. Users come through the Corporate Firewall and then must pass through the first Firewall running in a Virtual Machine in z/VM. From there they start the process to get access to the application. Throw in a Web Server, Websphere Application Server, DB2, and a product for user sign-on and it all runs pretty well. The z900 was in place and we had an IFL to contribute. All zLinux DASD is running within z/VM mini-disks. I just returned from an IT Financial conference where I contrasted the costs between running the 45 servers on Intel versus the z/900. I took very conservative costs for the Intel machines ($2K per server), Switches ($10K), and Firewall’s ($10K) and all with no support (this $0). On the Intel side I had Linux for $0 and on the zSeries, I bought SuSe Linux, Novell e-Maintenance, and IBM 24/7 “Support”. The Middleware software was from IBM and it is licensed per processor. This is true of most all Distributed products including Oracle. Using Oracle in this would driven the numbers sky high for it is $40K per processor. Thus on the IFL it is $40K and on Intel it would be $200K and that premised 1-engine Intel machines. So I used the DB2 solution for the comparison. In the end the z- Solution was about $240K and the Intel solution was $840K. As an aside, remember I kept the Intel side of the costs very, very low as possible and the zSeries side I bought Linux with full 24/7 Support. Thus my gut says the number in the Intel side is closer to about $1M+ if one factors in support, increasing the speed of the connections for Switches and Firewalls plus including support for their software and upgrades. The beauty of z/VM is getting all the V-Lans, V-Routers, and V-Firewalls you want for nothing and then all that “V-Cabling” running at memory speeds and also Hypersockets for LPAR connections. It is my conclusions there are a number of reasons why one does not hear many stories about it. One story is those who do it quite well do not want to reveal the competitive advantage they have. Another, is the company is ashamed to admit they get benefit out of the mainframe when there is such a bias against the mainframe. I know of other places who admit the facts, but IT management wants no part of it; this is not what the trade press and their background says is so. Then in most places, Windows and Linux would be done by the Distributed or Network side of IT and not the mainframers; so why give up turf. Besides more and more servers to manage increases the size of management and their paychecks. Lastly why would those who have Windows machines (MSCE) and Cisco hardware (CISCO certified) turn things over to mainframe systems type to replace them. They will fight to the death to hang onto all their turf. Another argument is z/VM is so tough. Back in the late 1980s I was forced over into VM (Dark Side for an MVS Bigot) of IBM systems and mastered the work much, much less than a year where MVS takes years to be able to do most all of it. IBM has a free 4 day z/VM and SuSe Linux school which I sent my z/OS Bigots and they came back able to install, implement and get things running. Bringing up a z/VM system only to run zLinux is by far easier than have many, many VM users using CMS, etc. There are enough zLinux Cookbooks to get things up and running quite quickly. I am not sure what the future will be but with an upgrade to a z9BC my one IFL goes from 238 MIPS to 480 MIPS and my software charges stay exactly the same as they are today. A very interesting situation. The strategy is to run what makes sense over on the zSeries and there is no way I would want to take over 400+ Windows Servers. Once I get a processor license for a piece of software I can bring up many of them virtually with no additional charges. Oh yes, the z/900 IFL is not even breathing hard yet. Jim Marshall --- Just FYI. DJ
