IBM's Next Generation Mainframe Processor
Ref: Your note of Fri, 19 Oct 2007 07:29:11 -0400 (attached) Dale asked: Speaking of ads, does the Take Back Control commercial on www.vm.ibm.com really work, or is it a firewall issue here at work? It'd be interesting to see that. When I click on Watch Video, I get a screen to select Broadband or Quicktime Player, but I can't get either to work. The link to it still works, but I had the same problem you experienced. The video is on the main z site, so I sent a note to the owner of that site to see if it can be fixed. The other videos on that site seem to work, so hope it can be repaired. If not, I'll have to remove our link. :-( http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/z/literature/videos/# Regards, Pam C
RES: OS/390 2.7 and z900
I had a problem with TCP/IP for OS/390 2.4 that not supported OSA fast Ethernet. With the OS/390 2.9 is fine on 2064-116. Regards. Nelson Freitas -Mensagem original- De: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Em nome de Mark Post Enviada em: sexta-feira, 19 de outubro de 2007 16:27 Para: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Assunto: Re: OS/390 2.7 and z900 On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 1:47 PM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Antonio C Prado [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: People, Does anybody know if OS/390 2.4 or 2.7 runs on a z900 (2064-2XX)? You're likely to get a better answer on ibm-main, since most MVS people don't hang out in ibmvm. Mark Post
Re: FTP timeout on open request
Hmm. That is interesting. That would seem to preclude any firewall problems unless the FTP protocol is being filtered by source IP address. Steve Bireley BlueZone Software Integration-Emulation-Security Free Bluezone Secure FTP 1-404-364-1731 www.bluezonesoftware.com -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ewald Roller Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 10:54 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: FTP timeout on open request On my side nothing has changed. I have no access to the AIX side so I must ask the admin on monday. Another curiosity: my VSE system on the same subnet (different OSA) has no problems. Thanks Ewald
Re: Upgrade to z/VM 5.3 hangs
Quoting Bill Holder [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ok, thanks, Leland, it does sound like your symptoms match the problem, and I'm quite confident the fixtest will help substantially. Let us know how it goes. I'm the guy responsible for the VM64297 fix, so I'll get back to driving it through to closure - our current target date is the end of the month, 10/31, which I'm fairly confident we'll make. In that case, I'll just try to recreate it (to make sure I can) and then come back up with the maintenance. I'll skip the dump unless the problem recurs after coming up with the fix. Thanks much, Leland
Re: FTP timeout on open request
Hi Ewald, Are you getting and actual socket connection to the AIX box that is getting reset? In a packet trace you would see the SYN SYNACK ACK handshake to complete the socket connection. If not, it sounds like a firewall issue. Have there been any firewall changes that could block port 21 outbound from your side or inbound to the AIX box? Inbound to the AIX box is unlikely since ping worked. Port 21 is typically blocked by default and is a favorite of security people to disable. Steve Bireley Vice-President Product Development BlueZone Software 1-404-364-1731 www.bluezonesoftware.com BlueZone Secure FTP is Free -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ewald Roller Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 9:22 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: FTP timeout on open request Hello all... for about four weeks we have a strange FTP problem. A Servicemachine working for months and gathering data from a remote system suddenly makes problems. The FTP open to the remote system always gets a timout: ftp 128.1.2.120 ( timeout 450 trace VM TCP/IP FTP Level 440 Translate Table: STANDARD about to call BeginTcpIp Connecting to 128.1.2.120, port 21 SysAct 0 21 -2147417480 CC -1 == Active open to host 128.1.2.120 port 21 from host 0 port 65535 Foreign host did not respond within OPEN timeout Unable to connect to 128.1.2.120 Foreign host did not respond within OPEN timeout Command: quit SysHalt has been Called Ready; T=0.01/0.02 14:08:40 Ping and traceroute are working well. This is z/VM 4.4, the remote system is an AIX system. A tcpdump analysis by a network guru shows that the z/VM FTP is resetting the packets receiving from the open request to AIX system. But in the tcpdump-file we find no reason for this behavior. Any ideas ? Thanks Ewald Roller Rolf Benz AG Co. KG
Re: MIPS for SSLSERV
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:54:32 -0400, Alan Altmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday, 10/18/2007 at 04:07 EDT, Alan Ackerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We don't have PCOMM, but QWS3270 Secure, so I don't know what our situation will be. [re: Resumed SSL sessions] If you get a trace (e.g. Wireshark or something built into QWS3270) you can see if sessions are resuming by looking at the SSL/TLS handshake. I f you see CLIENT KEY EXCHANGE, you know a session was NOT resumed. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott = I used the QWS3270 Secure trace. I don't see that message, even the first time. What I see is: Error 0x800b0109 (CERT_E_UNTRUSTEDROOT) returned by CertVerifyCertificateChainPolicy! Connected to 171.177.29.52 port 6443 from 171.184.0.226 port 2027 (Actual session.) (LOGOFF with Automatically Re-Connect selected, which gives me a LOGO screen.) Connection to vmdev2 closed Error 0x800b0109 (CERT_E_UNTRUSTEDROOT) returned by CertVerifyCertificateChainPolicy! Connected to 171.177.29.52 port 6443 from 171.184.0.226 port 2028 The error is because we are using a self-signed certificate for testing. Even if I figure out whether it can resume or not, I don't know any way t o determine the number of new connections versus resumes. Is there anything in a console log that shows this? Or monitor record?
Re: FTP timeout on open request
On Friday, 10/19/2007 at 02:59 EDT, Ponte, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know the details of your trace, but this looks similar to an incident that occured here recently. This may be a shot in the dark, but it's worth a try. Make a small change to your PROFILE TCPIP to include a parmameter called 'OVERRIDEPRECEDENCE' under the ASSORTEDPARMS section like so: ASSORTEDPARMS PROXYARP RESTRICTLOWPORTS OVERRIDEPRECEDENCE ENDASSORTEDPARMS In our client's problem, FTP started giving OPEN TIMEOUTs to z/OS FTPD IP addresses *only*...other FTP sessions opened just fine it seemed. Nothing changed, yada yada...same thing customers always told me when I was at IBM :) Though, I still suspect that something in z/OS TCPIP was altered that indirectly affected the precidence values. E.g expecting an 'immediate', a '1' whatever they use. If you have DiffServ (Differentiated Services, RFC 2475)-enabled equipment (i.e. traffic shapers), they will use the precendence fields in a way contrary to the TCP standard (RFC 793). [Great - two RFCs that conflict!] Think of OverridePrecedence as implementing RFC 2873, which relaxes the rules in RFC 793. Chucky says OverridePrecedence should be the next unchangeable default. :-) Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Is HiperSwap Supported under z/VM?
Hyperswap is supported for z/VM and Linux, but it requires a z/OS image. If interested more details are available in the following redbook: SG24-6374-02 GDPS Family - An Introduction to Concepts and Capabilities Regards, Steve. Steve Wilkins IBM z/VM Development Mike Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED] tt.comTo Sent by: The IBM IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU z/VM Operating cc System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject ARK.EDU Re: Is HiperSwap Supported under z/VM? 10/18/2007 01:51 PM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System [EMAIL PROTECTED] ARK.EDU Supported in what way for what need? Maybe check: http://www.ibm.com/search/?en=utfv=14lang=encc=uslv=wq=hyperswap+vm+linux Mike Walter Hewitt Associates Stracka, James (GTI) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU [EMAIL PROTECTED] K.EDU cc 10/18/2007 10:12 AM Subject Is HiperSwap Please respond to Supported under The IBM z/VM Operating Systemz/VM? IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU If so, is it also supported under z/Linux? 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. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. Emails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by email.
Re: Is HiperSwap Supported under z/VM?
Just a clarification on my prior Hyperswap post is that the z/OS image is required for PPRC link management and failover detection/orchestration. Regards, Steve. Steve Wilkins IBM z/VM Development
Re: OS/390 2.7 and z900
Prado, I have a table compiled from various IBM sites and announcements, but it is in my desktop hd, just monday I can tell you. Give me a call monday morning. Regards Carlos Bodra De:The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Para:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Cópia: Data:Fri, 19 Oct 2007 12:47:54 -0500 Assunto:OS/390 2.7 and z900 People, Does anybody know if OS/390 2.4 or 2.7 runs on a z900 (2064-2XX)? Thanks, Prado
Re: VM Newbie Question
I agree. The poster didn't really say what their plans weremostly that he was a newbie. In my shop, we have Oracle 10g running in test. Applications wanted an Oracle machine bigger then we currently have in production (4 GB). I gave them a couple images of Oracle running in 400 MBs (about the smallest I could make it and still run OEM). They have been happy with the performance. Now, production may be a different matter. But we will go into production with a 400 MB machine and I'll give it more memory (and adjust the SGA) when I see the performance problems. We will be scaling up slowly. Perhaps a dozen users will be moved to the mainframe on the first go around. Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting Romanowski, John (OFT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/19/2007 12:46 PM On the other hand, if his site plans to eventually run multiple oracle guests with little/zero down time to add LPAR memory as more guests are added , then sizing the LPAR memory now to avoid LPAR outages later is prudent. 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 Tom Duerbusch Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 1:28 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: VM Newbie Question The first question that pops into my mind is, why do you think you need that much real memory (central and expanded)? Is it that you have 16 GB real and nothing else to do with it? Is it that you have a current Oracle box that needs more and more memory? The performance characteristics of mainframes are quite a bit different then the other platforms. Your box, should have Ficon/FCP channels. The promos on our IBM DS6800 dasd subsystem, states that if it is properly configured (ours is not), it can do 300,000 I/Os per second. What do your current platforms have? What I'm getting at is, take Intel for example. Very cheap memory. Very cheap MIPS. Poor context switching. Poor I/O rates (unless you spend mainframe type dollars to beef up the I/O subsystem). So you throw lots of cheap memory on the box to knock down the I/O rates. (cheaper than beefing up the I/O subsystem). On the mainframe, we have the I/O subsystem (basically comes standard...well for the price we pay for the box). In my book, you trade memory for a higher I/O rate and you still get great performance. True, you may still need the memory. But just because the Intel side needed the memory, doesn't mean the mainframe side needs it. True, I would keep memory at 16 GB for a POC. But if I had the time, I would scale the memory back, perhaps a GB at a time, until I see performance start to suffer. In other words, take advantage of the resources available on the new-to-you platform. All the rules of thumb that you have seen for Oracle, really need to be rethought in the shared environment of the mainframe. If you treat the mainframe like a PC, it will be a very expensive project. Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting FELINE PHYSICS: Law of Cat Motion A cat will move in a straight line, unless there is a really good reason to change direction. Mark Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/18/2007 7:21 AM What is a good ratio of Central to Expanded storage to support an zLinux Oracle workload under zVM 5.3? The LPAR has 16GB assigned and our initial storage split is 12 Central, 4 Expanded. The workloads haven't been moved to this environment yet so we have no tuning numbers available. -- Mark Jacobs Time Customer Service Tampa, FL -- A desire not to butt into other people's business is at least eighty percent of all human wisdom...and the other twenty percent isn't very important. Jubal Harshaw (Stranger in a Strange Land)
OS/390 2.7 and z900
People, Does anybody know if OS/390 2.4 or 2.7 runs on a z900 (2064-2XX)? Thanks, Prado
Re: VM Newbie Question
On the other hand, if his site plans to eventually run multiple oracle guests with little/zero down time to add LPAR memory as more guests are added , then sizing the LPAR memory now to avoid LPAR outages later is prudent. 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 Tom Duerbusch Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 1:28 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: VM Newbie Question The first question that pops into my mind is, why do you think you need that much real memory (central and expanded)? Is it that you have 16 GB real and nothing else to do with it? Is it that you have a current Oracle box that needs more and more memory? The performance characteristics of mainframes are quite a bit different then the other platforms. Your box, should have Ficon/FCP channels. The promos on our IBM DS6800 dasd subsystem, states that if it is properly configured (ours is not), it can do 300,000 I/Os per second. What do your current platforms have? What I'm getting at is, take Intel for example. Very cheap memory. Very cheap MIPS. Poor context switching. Poor I/O rates (unless you spend mainframe type dollars to beef up the I/O subsystem). So you throw lots of cheap memory on the box to knock down the I/O rates. (cheaper than beefing up the I/O subsystem). On the mainframe, we have the I/O subsystem (basically comes standard...well for the price we pay for the box). In my book, you trade memory for a higher I/O rate and you still get great performance. True, you may still need the memory. But just because the Intel side needed the memory, doesn't mean the mainframe side needs it. True, I would keep memory at 16 GB for a POC. But if I had the time, I would scale the memory back, perhaps a GB at a time, until I see performance start to suffer. In other words, take advantage of the resources available on the new-to-you platform. All the rules of thumb that you have seen for Oracle, really need to be rethought in the shared environment of the mainframe. If you treat the mainframe like a PC, it will be a very expensive project. Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting FELINE PHYSICS: Law of Cat Motion A cat will move in a straight line, unless there is a really good reason to change direction. Mark Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/18/2007 7:21 AM What is a good ratio of Central to Expanded storage to support an zLinux Oracle workload under zVM 5.3? The LPAR has 16GB assigned and our initial storage split is 12 Central, 4 Expanded. The workloads haven't been moved to this environment yet so we have no tuning numbers available. -- Mark Jacobs Time Customer Service Tampa, FL -- A desire not to butt into other people's business is at least eighty percent of all human wisdom...and the other twenty percent isn't very important. Jubal Harshaw (Stranger in a Strange Land)
Re: VM Newbie Question
The first question that pops into my mind is, why do you think you need that much real memory (central and expanded)? Is it that you have 16 GB real and nothing else to do with it? Is it that you have a current Oracle box that needs more and more memory? The performance characteristics of mainframes are quite a bit different then the other platforms. Your box, should have Ficon/FCP channels. The promos on our IBM DS6800 dasd subsystem, states that if it is properly configured (ours is not), it can do 300,000 I/Os per second. What do your current platforms have? What I'm getting at is, take Intel for example. Very cheap memory. Very cheap MIPS. Poor context switching. Poor I/O rates (unless you spend mainframe type dollars to beef up the I/O subsystem). So you throw lots of cheap memory on the box to knock down the I/O rates. (cheaper than beefing up the I/O subsystem). On the mainframe, we have the I/O subsystem (basically comes standard...well for the price we pay for the box). In my book, you trade memory for a higher I/O rate and you still get great performance. True, you may still need the memory. But just because the Intel side needed the memory, doesn't mean the mainframe side needs it. True, I would keep memory at 16 GB for a POC. But if I had the time, I would scale the memory back, perhaps a GB at a time, until I see performance start to suffer. In other words, take advantage of the resources available on the new-to-you platform. All the rules of thumb that you have seen for Oracle, really need to be rethought in the shared environment of the mainframe. If you treat the mainframe like a PC, it will be a very expensive project. Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting FELINE PHYSICS: Law of Cat Motion A cat will move in a straight line, unless there is a really good reason to change direction. Mark Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/18/2007 7:21 AM What is a good ratio of Central to Expanded storage to support an zLinux Oracle workload under zVM 5.3? The LPAR has 16GB assigned and our initial storage split is 12 Central, 4 Expanded. The workloads haven't been moved to this environment yet so we have no tuning numbers available. -- Mark Jacobs Time Customer Service Tampa, FL -- A desire not to butt into other people's business is at least eighty percent of all human wisdom...and the other twenty percent isn't very important. Jubal Harshaw (Stranger in a Strange Land)
FXREC in Erep
To All: I have search the archives and found old post about the FXREC's and found PTF VM63896 for z/VM 5.1 but I am on 5.2. We just upgraded to a z9 and HiperPAV is turned on. I am just trying to think what has changed to cause these messages. In 5.2 just treats them as regular PAV volume. I just wondering if anyone else encountered this issue. Frank --- ***National City made the following annotations --- This communication is a confidential and proprietary business communication. It is intended solely for the use of the designated recipient(s). If this communication is received in error, please contact the sender and delete this communication. ===
FTP timeout on open request
On my side nothing has changed. I have no access to the AIX side so I must ask the admin on monday. Another curiosity: my VSE system on the same subnet (different OSA) has n o problems. Thanks Ewald
Re: FTP timeout on open request
I've seen that a lot when the FTP server is being run from inetd or xinetd, and requires and IDENT transaction. Did someone change your configuration, either adding an IDENT rquirement on the FTP server or removing an IDENT process on the remote machine? ---BeginMessage--- Hello all... for about four weeks we have a strange FTP problem. A Servicemachine working for months and gathering data from a remote system suddenly makes problems. The FTP open to the remote system always gets a timout: ftp 128.1.2.120 ( timeout 450 trace VM TCP/IP FTP Level 440 Translate Table: STANDARD about to call BeginTcpIp Connecting to 128.1.2.120, port 21 SysAct 0 21 -2147417480 CC -1 == Active open to host 128.1.2.120 port 21 from host 0 port 65535 Foreign host did not respond within OPEN timeout Unable to connect to 128.1.2.120 Foreign host did not respond within OPEN timeout Command: quit SysHalt has been Called Ready; T=0.01/0.02 14:08:40 Ping and traceroute are working well. This is z/VM 4.4, the remote system is an AIX system. A tcpdump analysis by a network guru shows that the z/VM FTP is resetting the packets receiving from the open request to AIX system. But in the tcpdump-file we find no reason for this behavior. Any ideas ? Thanks Ewald Roller Rolf Benz AG Co. KG ---End Message---
Re: Command to list details about the exisitng partitions / guest on zVM
Hi, After logging through the 3270 terminal emulator, I am being asked to login to the linux guest. So there is no provison to enter CP commands. Find the attached file for more details. Please suggest. Thanks Regards, -GnanaShekar- On 10/18/07, RPN01 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another starting point, if the guests are connected via vSwitch, would be to query vswitch to get the name of the virtual switch. This will also tell you how many guests are attached to the virtual switch. Then query vswitch switchname active to list the individual guests attached to the virtual switch. Older methods might be reflected in the TCPIP definitions, which should be on TCPMAINT's minidisk 198. -- .~.Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation /V\RO-OE-5-55200 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. On 10/18/07 8:02 AM, Dave Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, GnanaShekar. Welcome to the wonderful world of z/VM and zLinux; I think you will find it a very friendly and easy to use environment. To see how many guests (virtual machines) are running running, try this command: CP Q Names This will show you a list of all of the virtual machines (guests) that are currently running and whither or not they are connected to a console (terminal) or not (DSC -- disconnected). Guests do not need to be connected to a console for them to continue to run. A good place for someone new to z/VM to start is to take a look at this IBM document: Introduction to the New Mainframe: z/VM Basics. You can download a free copy from here: http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redpieces/abstracts/sg247316.html?Open Good luck and do not be afraid to ask any more questions that you might have here on the list..we really do enjoy helping new comers get to know z/VM! Have a good one. GnanaShekar Subramani wrote: Hi, I am a newbie to IBM systemz / Mainframe / zVM / zLinux. However I am familiar to IBM system p, AIX and LPAR / virtualization in AIX. I have been given a username / password for zVM; and my client wants me to find out all the different partitions / guests that are existing. A long time ago somebody has setup linux guests on zVM and they have used zLinux in the project. We donot have a record of what was done earlier in relation to zVM / zLinux setup. I am clueless. So thought of taking help from this forum. This is what appears for my zVM login. z/VM ONLINE z/VM Version 5 Release 2.0, Service Level 0602 (64-bit), built on IBM Virtualization Technology There is no logmsg data FILES: NO RDR, NO PRT, NO PUN RECONNECTED AT 21:19:58 PDT WEDNESDAY 10/17/07 -- I do not know even a single zVM command, so please suggest or point me in the right direction. Thanks Regards, -GnanaShekar-
Re: IBM's Next Generation Mainframe Processor
Clicking on 'broadband' does nothing here, but when I select 'Quick-Time' I get a pop-up window in my browser (FireFox 2.0.0.7) telling me I need to install the QuickTime plugin. This makes sense as I don't have QuickTime available here, so I expect that if I did the plugin install, it would work [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Speaking of ads, does the Take Back Control commercial on www.vm.ibm.com really work, or is it a firewall issue here at work? It'd be interesting to see that. When I click on Watch Video, I get a screen to select Broadband or Quicktime Player, but I can't get either to work. Dale R. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 10/16/2007 04:35 PM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: IBM's Next Generation Mainframe Processor Aren't the commercials geared towards the PHBs of the world? Therefore they have to be dumb! :-) -- DJ V/Soft
Re: IBM's Next Generation Mainframe Processor
Speaking of ads, does the Take Back Control commercial on www.vm.ibm.com really work, or is it a firewall issue here at work? It'd be interesting to see that. When I click on Watch Video, I get a screen to select Broadband or Quicktime Player, but I can't get either to work. Dale R. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 10/16/2007 04:35 PM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: IBM's Next Generation Mainframe Processor Aren't the commercials geared towards the PHBs of the world? Therefore they have to be dumb! :-) -- Dale R. Smith The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. - Albert Einstein On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:29:14 -0400, David Boyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not so much obnoxious as just *dumb*. All three campaigns share the characteristic of being insulting by their sheer dumbness. Do the people at Ogilvy and Mather really think we're that dumb? Or do the people at IBM responsible for giving the go-ahead think we're that dumb? Last time I checked, most of us in IT-land had at least a few brain cells left. The mind boggles. Now, it'd be interesting to know if the same group at OM came up with the Heist ad, and the Flying Cars ad for the pSeries folks. I can't imagine it'd be true -- both are far too intelligent and funny -- but I suppose it's possible. The universe is full of strange and wonderful things. -- db
AW: FTP timeout on open request
On my side nothing has changed. I have no access to the AIX side so I must ask the admin on monday. Another curiosity: my VSE system on the same subnet (different OSA) has no problems. Thanks Ewald _ Von: Paul Raulerson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Freitag, 19. Oktober 2007 15:55 An: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Betreff: Re: FTP timeout on open request I've seen that a lot when the FTP server is being run from inetd or xinetd, and requires and IDENT transaction. Did someone change your configuration, either adding an IDENT rquirement on the FTP server or removing an IDENT process on the remote machine?
Re: FTP timeout on open request
Ewald, I don't know the details of your trace, but this looks similar to an incident that occured here recently. This may be a shot in the dark, but it's worth a try. Make a small change to your PROFILE TCPIP to include a parmameter called 'OVERRIDEPRECEDENCE' under the ASSORTEDPARMS section like so: ASSORTEDPARMS PROXYARP RESTRICTLOWPORTS OVERRIDEPRECEDENCE ENDASSORTEDPARMS In our client's problem, FTP started giving OPEN TIMEOUTs to z/OS FTPD IP addresses *only*...other FTP sessions opened just fine it seemed. Nothing changed, yada yada...same thing customers always told me when I was at IBM :) Though, I still suspect that something in z/OS TCPIP was altered that indirectly affected the precidence values. E.g expecting an 'immediate', a '1' whatever they use. I'd be curious if this is the same issue. Let me know. Doug The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Ewald Roller Sent: Fri 19-Oct-07 10:53 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: FTP timeout on open request On my side nothing has changed. I have no access to the AIX side so I must ask the admin on monday. Another curiosity: my VSE system on the same subnet (different OSA) has no problems. Thanks Ewald
Re: VM Newbie Question
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 8:21 AM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is a good ratio of Central to Expanded storage to support an zLinux Oracle workload under zVM 5.3? The LPAR has 16GB assigned and our initial storage split is 12 Central, 4 Expanded. The workloads haven't been moved to this environment yet so we have no tuning numbers available. All the recommendations I've seen have topped out at 4GB for XSTOR. So, as a first SWAG, I think you're in decent shape. What are you running for a performance monitor? That will probably be a critical factor once you start moving the work. Mark Post
Re: MIPS for SSLSERV
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:31:16 -0400, Steve Bireley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Alan, For telnet, the SSL session resume is insignificant since the sessions last so long. Further, interactive sessions typically result in very little traffic because users type slowly and the 3270 datastream is prett y efficient. We have a SSL proxy product that handles 1000's of users and uses very little CPU (Windows OS). We do get spikes in CPU usage when something happens on the network that disconnects 100's of users, who the n reconnect simultaneously. That is rare though. Steve Bireley BlueZone Software www.bluezonesoftware.com I think you are probably right. According to the z/VM performance report, a new session connect takes about 3x as many CPU cycles as a reconnect. That was why I was concerned. On the other hand, it is beginning to look like these numbers are trivial . The highest cost given, for new session connects and 1024-bit keys, is 84 ms total CPU on a 2064-109. My peak rate (on one of our 5 VM systems) appears to be 50 connects per HOUR: 50 * 84.0 / (60*60) / 1000 = 0.00117 = 0.117% of one engine of a 2064 -109 0.00117 * 174 MIPS = 0.20 MIPS (Does that look right?) Assuming ModelMIPS MIPS/processor 2064-109 1563 174 MIPS Source: Technology News http://www.tech-news.com/publib/pl2064.html I haven't included the costs of the actual data transfer, because I don't know how to get the number of bytes, but it may also be trivial.
Re: OS/390 2.7 and z900
On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 1:47 PM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Antonio C Prado [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: People, Does anybody know if OS/390 2.4 or 2.7 runs on a z900 (2064-2XX)? You're likely to get a better answer on ibm-main, since most MVS people don't hang out in ibmvm. Mark Post
Re: Upgrade to z/VM 5.3 hangs
Ok, thanks, Leland, it does sound like your symptoms match the problem, a nd I'm quite confident the fixtest will help substantially. Let us know how it goes. I'm the guy responsible for the VM64297 fix, so I'll get back to driving it through to closure - our current target date is the end of the month, 10/31, which I'm fairly confident we'll make. - Bill Holder, IBM Endicott, z/VM Development and Service
FTP timeout on open request
Hello all... for about four weeks we have a strange FTP problem. A Servicemachine working for months and gathering data from a remote system suddenly makes problems. The FTP open to the remote system always gets a timout: ftp 128.1.2.120 ( timeout 450 trace VM TCP/IP FTP Level 440 Translate Table: STANDARD about to call BeginTcpIp Connecting to 128.1.2.120, port 21 SysAct 0 21 -2147417480 CC -1 == Active open to host 128.1.2.120 port 21 from host 0 port 65535 Foreign host did not respond within OPEN timeout Unable to connect to 128.1.2.120 Foreign host did not respond within OPEN timeout Command: quit SysHalt has been Called Ready; T=0.01/0.02 14:08:40 Ping and traceroute are working well. This is z/VM 4.4, the remote system is an AIX system. A tcpdump analysis by a network guru shows that the z/VM FTP is resetting the packets receiving from the open request to AIX system. But in the tcpdump-file we find no reason for this behavior. Any ideas ? Thanks Ewald Roller Rolf Benz AG Co. KG
