Re: Sharing unassigned tape
Yes ... After you clarified this is not a 2nd level guest, the "directory entry" certainly no longer applies. However, I think Marcy may have something ... Try it, you'll probably like it! JR JR (Steven) Imler CA Senior Software Engineer Tel: +1 703 708 3479 Fax: +1 703 708 3267 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shimon Lebowitz Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 06:44 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Sharing unassigned tape On 17 Oct 2006 at 14:49, Imler, Steven J wrote: > Shimon, > > Does you z/VM 5.2 guest have "STDEVOPT LIBRARY CTL" in its > directory > entry? Even though DFSMS is not running yet, you may still need it > to > access and use the VTS devices on the guest? > JR, I meant to respond to your post in my last email too, but forgot to. I am fairly sure that the directory option is *not* needed for simple use of the VTS drives. I certainly don't add it wholesale to CMS users, but they are able to use tapes anyway. In any case, I can only check it tomorrow at work. Thanks, Shimon
Re: Sharing unassigned tape
On 17 Oct 2006 at 14:49, Imler, Steven J wrote: > Shimon, > > Does you z/VM 5.2 guest have "STDEVOPT LIBRARY CTL" in its > directory > entry? Even though DFSMS is not running yet, you may still need it > to > access and use the VTS devices on the guest? > JR, I meant to respond to your post in my last email too, but forgot to. I am fairly sure that the directory option is *not* needed for simple use of the VTS drives. I certainly don't add it wholesale to CMS users, but they are able to use tapes anyway. In any case, I can only check it tomorrow at work. Thanks, Shimon
Re: Sharing unassigned tape
On 17 Oct 2006 at 17:46, Mike Walter wrote: > > > Well, we're sort of doing the same thing with a Sun/STK VTS. > > VM:Tape requests the mount, and gets the drive attached to itself. > VM sends a '.MOUNT' command to z/OS to get the tape mounted by z/OS. > When the tape is mounted on the z/OS system (same drive address, not > only a different LPAR, but a different CEC), the interrupt cause > VM:Tape to see the tape and we're off to the races. > > One day when we get it all working very cleanly, we'll document how > we did this using VM:Tape. VM:Operator, and RSCS on VM, and IBM's > automation product and Sun/STK's HSC (?) product on z/OS. > > Mike Walter > Hewitt Associates So it does seem to be possible. That's good to hear. And when it's all documented you can give a talk. :) Shimon
Re: Sharing unassigned tape
I kind of went through a similar thing last week with 2 5.2.0 systems. Try a Detach with a leave option from the writing system, then vary off from there. Then try it on the other system. Marcy Cortes "This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation." -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shimon Lebowitz Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 3:39 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: [IBMVM] Sharing unassigned tape On 17 Oct 2006 at 14:52, Romanowski, John (OFT) wrote: > Shimon, > Is the 5.2 system a guest of 4.4 (not sure from your post)? > If so, I would DFSMSRM MOUNT the tape to the guest userid and on 5.2 > system just ATTACH the tape drive to MAINT at 181 and use the virtual > cartridge. Skip the NOASSIGN stuff. I guess I really was not clear, my apologies. The 4.4 and 5.2 are 2 different LPARs. 5.2 can only run in 64bit mode, and our 4.4 is 31bit, so 2nd level is out. On 17 Oct 2006 at 13:41, Mike Walter wrote: > I'm guessing that the z/VM 520 "ATTACH" command is causing an unload. No, I checked that by doing a REW and DVOL1 from 4.4 *after* the error on 5.2 . The tape was still mounted and readable in 4.4 > Perhaps try attaching the drive on both systems with NOASSIGN, then > mount it on 4.4 and try using it on 5.2. I don't believe it is possible for the DFSMS to mount a tape on a VTS drive without taking it. After the tape is mounted the drive gets attached to the requesting user. That was why I ran the mount in 4.4 first, and then just tried to use the drive as-is on 5.2 Thanks for all ideas! Keep them coming :-) Shimon
Re: Sharing unassigned tape
Well, we're sort of doing the same thing with a Sun/STK VTS. VM:Tape requests the mount, and gets the drive attached to itself. VM sends a '.MOUNT' command to z/OS to get the tape mounted by z/OS. When the tape is mounted on the z/OS system (same drive address, not only a different LPAR, but a different CEC), the interrupt cause VM:Tape to see the tape and we're off to the races. One day when we get it all working very cleanly, we'll document how we did this using VM:Tape. VM:Operator, and RSCS on VM, and IBM's automation product and Sun/STK's HSC (?) product on z/OS. Mike Walter Hewitt Associates "Shimon Lebowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" 10/17/2006 05:39 PM Please respond to "The IBM z/VM Operating System" To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: Sharing unassigned tape On 17 Oct 2006 at 14:52, Romanowski, John (OFT) wrote: > Shimon, > Is the 5.2 system a guest of 4.4 (not sure from your post)? > If so, I would DFSMSRM MOUNT the tape to the guest userid and > on 5.2 system just ATTACH the tape drive to MAINT at 181 and use > the > virtual cartridge. Skip the NOASSIGN stuff. I guess I really was not clear, my apologies. The 4.4 and 5.2 are 2 different LPARs. 5.2 can only run in 64bit mode, and our 4.4 is 31bit, so 2nd level is out. On 17 Oct 2006 at 13:41, Mike Walter wrote: > I'm guessing that the z/VM 520 "ATTACH" command is causing an > unload. No, I checked that by doing a REW and DVOL1 from 4.4 *after* the error on 5.2 . The tape was still mounted and readable in 4.4 > Perhaps try attaching the drive on both systems with NOASSIGN, then > mount > it on 4.4 and try using it on 5.2. I don't believe it is possible for the DFSMS to mount a tape on a VTS drive without taking it. After the tape is mounted the drive gets attached to the requesting user. That was why I ran the mount in 4.4 first, and then just tried to use the drive as-is on 5.2 Thanks for all ideas! Keep them coming :-) Shimon The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.
Re: Sharing unassigned tape
On 17 Oct 2006 at 14:52, Romanowski, John (OFT) wrote: > Shimon, > Is the 5.2 system a guest of 4.4 (not sure from your post)? > If so, I would DFSMSRM MOUNT the tape to the guest userid and > on 5.2 system just ATTACH the tape drive to MAINT at 181 and use > the > virtual cartridge. Skip the NOASSIGN stuff. I guess I really was not clear, my apologies. The 4.4 and 5.2 are 2 different LPARs. 5.2 can only run in 64bit mode, and our 4.4 is 31bit, so 2nd level is out. On 17 Oct 2006 at 13:41, Mike Walter wrote: > I'm guessing that the z/VM 520 "ATTACH" command is causing an > unload. No, I checked that by doing a REW and DVOL1 from 4.4 *after* the error on 5.2 . The tape was still mounted and readable in 4.4 > Perhaps try attaching the drive on both systems with NOASSIGN, then > mount > it on 4.4 and try using it on 5.2. I don't believe it is possible for the DFSMS to mount a tape on a VTS drive without taking it. After the tape is mounted the drive gets attached to the requesting user. That was why I ran the mount in 4.4 first, and then just tried to use the drive as-is on 5.2 Thanks for all ideas! Keep them coming :-) Shimon
Fw: SMTP on VM
Marcy, Here is the response from our SMTP developer. Also, posting to the listserv for anyone else who is/was interested. If you have any more questions/concerns please let us know! Regards, Miguel Delapaz z/VM TCP/IP Development - Forwarded by Miguel Delapaz/Endicott/IBM on 10/17/2006 01:42 PM - > Miguel, > > I looked at sections 4.5, 5.0 and 6.0 of RFC 2821 and our SMTP > server certainly meets those requirements. As far as being > compliant with RFC 2821 and RFC 2822, you are correct when you state > that we did not specifically update SMTP for those RFC's. The > original server was designed to meet RFC 821 and 822, but we have > added additional support over the years. Our SMTP server also works > nicely with our IMAP server (which provides an IMAP mailstore using > SFS filespace on z/VM), in case they are interested. > > Joe
MVMRUG Meeting Agenda Addition - Time to Register is Running Out
Cross posted to MVMRUG-L, IBMVM-L and LINUX-390 I am please to say that we will have added a short presentation on Mainstar's Provisioning Expert product to the agenda for the upcoming MVMRUG meeting in Columbus, Ohio on October 27. The full slate now includes: Update on z/VM Tools Tracy Dean, IBM OMEGAMON XE on z/VM and Linux Mac Holloway, IBM Performance and System Management Scenarios Tracy Dean and Mac Holloway, IBM Provisioning Expert speaker to be determined, Mainstar TCP/IP Routing as Implemented in z/VM TCP/IP Alan Altmark, IBM F. FREE-FOR-ALL During this regularly scheduled session, let the assembled VM gurus answer your VM or CMS questions. For additional details on the agenda, location, registration, and how to get a free lunch, please refer to our web site at http://www.mvmrug.org/nextmtg..html. Please make every effort to have your registration in by this coming Monday. Terry This message and any attachments are intended for the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not forward, copy, print, use or disclose this communication to others; also please notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system. The Timken Company / The Timken Corporation
Re: Sharing unassigned tape
You message was unclear. Is z/VM 5.2 running as a guest of z/VM 4.4? If it is is XMSL the userid that z/VM 5.2 is running in? If both questions are yes then on the z/VM 4.4 system you need to have as the response to "Q 0A10" be "TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO XMSL 0A10 R/W" The tape needs to be attached to the guest with the virtual address the same as the real address if you want to use the real address in commands on the guest system. In your message you used the real address in the commands that you were entering on the z/VM 5.2 system. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After mounting the tape in 4.4, I see this: TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO XMSL 0181 R/W NOASSIGN Then I go to the 5.2 system, and simply attach it: Q A10 TAPE 0A10 FREE ATT A10 * 181 NOASSIGN TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO MAINT 0181 Q A10 TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO MAINT0181 R/W NOASSIGN -- Stephen Frazier Information Technology Unit Oklahoma Department of Corrections 3400 Martin Luther King Oklahoma City, Ok, 73111-4298 Tel.: (405) 425-2549 Fax: (405) 425-2554 Pager: (405) 690-1828 email: stevef%doc.state.ok.us
Re: SMTP on VM
The IBM z/VM Operating System wrote on 10/17/2006 11:41:24 AM: > Hi Miguel. > > I have this from the powers that be: > Certified systems, at a bare minimum, are required to fulfill the > minimal functionality requirements described in Section 4.5 of RFC > 2821, the address-handling requirements described in Section 5 of > RFC 2821, and the problem detection and handling requirements > described in Section 6 of RFC 2821. > > The links for those are: > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2822.txt > > That's the short version of the description - I have a long version > in word doc format that I could send to you off list. > > Marcy Cortes Marcy, I've forwarded this information to our SMTP developer and asked him to take a look at whether or not our server fulfills these requirements. If not, we'll have to get a requirement opened for you. You can send the word doc off list if you like, I can forward that to him as well. BTW: I find the IETF tools website (http://tools.ietf.org) makes RFC reading much more palatable :-) See: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2821 Coupled with Firefox & the Document Map extension (https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/475/), it's very powerful. Regards, Miguel Delapaz z/VM TCP/IP Development
Re: Sharing unassigned tape
Shimon, Is the 5.2 system a guest of 4.4 (not sure from your post)? If so, I would DFSMSRM MOUNT the tape to the guest userid and on 5.2 system just ATTACH the tape drive to MAINT at 181 and use the virtual cartridge. Skip the NOASSIGN stuff. This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shimon Lebowitz Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 2:30 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Sharing unassigned tape Hi, I am starting to set up z/VM 5.2, and I got to the step that says to take a backup of NSS files. Since our tapes are VTS, and the 5.2 system does not yet have DFSMS set up, I figured I could mount a tape on a VTS drive in my 4.4 system, using the NOASSIGN option of DFSMSRM MOUNT, and then use it in 5.2 After mounting the tape in 4.4, I see this: TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO XMSL 0181 R/W NOASSIGN Then I go to the 5.2 system, and simply attach it: Q A10 TAPE 0A10 FREE ATT A10 * 181 NOASSIGN TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO MAINT 0181 Q A10 TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO MAINT0181 R/W NOASSIGN The problem is... it won't work. :-( rew 181 HCPDPB899I REWIND NOT PERFORMED READY(00899); T=0.01/0.01 16:25:20 tape dvol1 DMSP2C110S ERROR READING TAP1(181) READY(00100); T=0.01/0.01 16:25:28 If the drive is not assigned elsewhere, and there is a tape mounted on it, why can't 5.2 use it? And yes, it does still work in 4.4: REW 181 REWIND COMPLETE READY; T=0.01/0.01 20:27:00 TAPE DVOL1 VOL1V50250 READY; T=0.01/0.01 20:27:04 (I have not yet set timezones in 5.2, so the hour is wrong there). Thanks, Shimon -- ** ** Shimon Lebowitzmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] VM System Programmer . Israel Police National HQ. http://www.poboxes.com/shimonpgp Jerusalem, Israel phone: +972 2 530-9877 fax: 530-9308 ** **
Re: Sharing unassigned tape
Shimon, Does you z/VM 5.2 guest have "STDEVOPT LIBRARY CTL" in its directory entry? Even though DFSMS is not running yet, you may still need it to access and use the VTS devices on the guest? JR JR (Steven) Imler CA Senior Software Engineer Tel: +1 703 708 3479 Fax: +1 703 708 3267 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shimon Lebowitz Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 02:30 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Sharing unassigned tape Hi, I am starting to set up z/VM 5.2, and I got to the step that says to take a backup of NSS files. Since our tapes are VTS, and the 5.2 system does not yet have DFSMS set up, I figured I could mount a tape on a VTS drive in my 4.4 system, using the NOASSIGN option of DFSMSRM MOUNT, and then use it in 5.2 After mounting the tape in 4.4, I see this: TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO XMSL 0181 R/W NOASSIGN Then I go to the 5.2 system, and simply attach it: Q A10 TAPE 0A10 FREE ATT A10 * 181 NOASSIGN TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO MAINT 0181 Q A10 TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO MAINT0181 R/W NOASSIGN The problem is... it won't work. :-( rew 181 HCPDPB899I REWIND NOT PERFORMED READY(00899); T=0.01/0.01 16:25:20 tape dvol1 DMSP2C110S ERROR READING TAP1(181) READY(00100); T=0.01/0.01 16:25:28 If the drive is not assigned elsewhere, and there is a tape mounted on it, why can't 5.2 use it? And yes, it does still work in 4.4: REW 181 REWIND COMPLETE READY; T=0.01/0.01 20:27:00 TAPE DVOL1 VOL1V50250 READY; T=0.01/0.01 20:27:04 (I have not yet set timezones in 5.2, so the hour is wrong there). Thanks, Shimon -- ** ** Shimon Lebowitzmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] VM System Programmer . Israel Police National HQ. http://www.poboxes.com/shimonpgp Jerusalem, Israel phone: +972 2 530-9877 fax: 530-9308 ** **
Re: Sharing unassigned tape
Shimon, I'm guessing that the z/VM 520 "ATTACH" command is causing an unload. Perhaps try attaching the drive on both systems with NOASSIGN, then mount it on 4.4 and try using it on 5.2. That may prevent the unload from the ATTACH on 520, it having been done before the tape was mounted. Mike Walter Hewitt Associates Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates. "Shimon Lebowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" 10/17/2006 01:29 PM Please respond to "The IBM z/VM Operating System" To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Sharing unassigned tape Hi, I am starting to set up z/VM 5.2, and I got to the step that says to take a backup of NSS files. Since our tapes are VTS, and the 5.2 system does not yet have DFSMS set up, I figured I could mount a tape on a VTS drive in my 4.4 system, using the NOASSIGN option of DFSMSRM MOUNT, and then use it in 5.2 After mounting the tape in 4.4, I see this: TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO XMSL 0181 R/W NOASSIGN Then I go to the 5.2 system, and simply attach it: Q A10 TAPE 0A10 FREE ATT A10 * 181 NOASSIGN TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO MAINT 0181 Q A10 TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO MAINT0181 R/W NOASSIGN The problem is... it won't work. :-( rew 181 HCPDPB899I REWIND NOT PERFORMED READY(00899); T=0.01/0.01 16:25:20 tape dvol1 DMSP2C110S ERROR READING TAP1(181) READY(00100); T=0.01/0.01 16:25:28 If the drive is not assigned elsewhere, and there is a tape mounted on it, why can't 5.2 use it? And yes, it does still work in 4.4: REW 181 REWIND COMPLETE READY; T=0.01/0.01 20:27:00 TAPE DVOL1 VOL1V50250 READY; T=0.01/0.01 20:27:04 (I have not yet set timezones in 5.2, so the hour is wrong there). Thanks, Shimon -- ** ** Shimon Lebowitzmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] VM System Programmer . Israel Police National HQ. http://www.poboxes.com/shimonpgp Jerusalem, Israel phone: +972 2 530-9877 fax: 530-9308 ** ** The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.
Re: SMTP on VM
Hi Miguel. I have this from the powers that be: Certified systems, at a bare minimum, are required to fulfill the minimal functionality requirements described in Section 4.5 of RFC 2821, the address-handling requirements described in Section 5 of RFC 2821, and the problem detection and handling requirements described in Section 6 of RFC 2821. The links for those are: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2822.txt That's the short version of the description - I have a long version in word doc format that I could send to you off list. Marcy Cortes “This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation." From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Miguel DelapazSent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 11:29 AMTo: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUSubject: Re: [IBMVM] SMTP on VM The IBM z/VM Operating System wrote on 10/17/2006 11:13:33 AM:> Is SMTP that comes with our TCP/IP on 5.2.0 RFC2821 and RFC2822> compliant?> Inquiring minds wanna know... > > > Marcy CortesI don't belive any work was specifically done to update the server to be RFC 2821 and 2822 compliant; and I imagine that wouldn't happen unless we got a requirement to do that. In fact, I imagine a requirement that begins: "The SMTP server should support the following aspects of RFCS 2821 and 2822..." (with business impacts etc) would be more likely to be accepted than a requirement that simply says: "The SMTP server should be compliant with RFCs 2821 and 2822". That being said, are there aspects of those RFCs that you need supported that our current implementation does not support? Regards,Miguel Delapazz/VM TCP/IP Development
Sharing unassigned tape
Hi, I am starting to set up z/VM 5.2, and I got to the step that says to take a backup of NSS files. Since our tapes are VTS, and the 5.2 system does not yet have DFSMS set up, I figured I could mount a tape on a VTS drive in my 4.4 system, using the NOASSIGN option of DFSMSRM MOUNT, and then use it in 5.2 After mounting the tape in 4.4, I see this: TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO XMSL 0181 R/W NOASSIGN Then I go to the 5.2 system, and simply attach it: Q A10 TAPE 0A10 FREE ATT A10 * 181 NOASSIGN TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO MAINT 0181 Q A10 TAPE 0A10 ATTACHED TO MAINT0181 R/W NOASSIGN The problem is... it won't work. :-( rew 181 HCPDPB899I REWIND NOT PERFORMED READY(00899); T=0.01/0.01 16:25:20 tape dvol1 DMSP2C110S ERROR READING TAP1(181) READY(00100); T=0.01/0.01 16:25:28 If the drive is not assigned elsewhere, and there is a tape mounted on it, why can't 5.2 use it? And yes, it does still work in 4.4: REW 181 REWIND COMPLETE READY; T=0.01/0.01 20:27:00 TAPE DVOL1 VOL1V50250 READY; T=0.01/0.01 20:27:04 (I have not yet set timezones in 5.2, so the hour is wrong there). Thanks, Shimon -- ** ** Shimon Lebowitzmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] VM System Programmer . Israel Police National HQ. http://www.poboxes.com/shimonpgp Jerusalem, Israel phone: +972 2 530-9877 fax: 530-9308 ** **
Re: SMTP on VM
The IBM z/VM Operating System wrote on 10/17/2006 11:13:33 AM: > Is SMTP that comes with our TCP/IP on 5.2.0 RFC2821 and RFC2822 > compliant? > Inquiring minds wanna know... > > > Marcy Cortes I don't belive any work was specifically done to update the server to be RFC 2821 and 2822 compliant; and I imagine that wouldn't happen unless we got a requirement to do that. In fact, I imagine a requirement that begins: "The SMTP server should support the following aspects of RFCS 2821 and 2822..." (with business impacts etc) would be more likely to be accepted than a requirement that simply says: "The SMTP server should be compliant with RFCs 2821 and 2822". That being said, are there aspects of those RFCs that you need supported that our current implementation does not support? Regards, Miguel Delapaz z/VM TCP/IP Development
SMTP on VM
Is SMTP that comes with our TCP/IP on 5.2.0 RFC2821 and RFC2822 compliant? Inquiring minds wanna know... Marcy Cortes "This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation."
Re: MVS version of ickdsf
I have dumped a tape from mvs to vm and have been able to recover data. The thing I didn't do is try to put the original vol ser on the volume. Mace -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 6:05 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: MVS version of ickdsf It used to be that DSF was DSF was DSF... I found out that is no more trying to recover a volume from MVS and couldn't...Apparently now only the stand-alone and CMS (not VM!) versions support CPVOL anymore... Sigh... Lee Marcy Cortes wrote: > Can the MVS version of ickdsf write a VM cyl 0 with the CPVOL parm? > > > > Marcy Cortes > > > "This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. > If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the > addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on > this message or any information herein. If you have received this > message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail > and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation." > -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Enterprise Systems Group Phone: (303) 798-2954 Fax: (720) 228-2321 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.siriuscom.com
