Re: Problems with rexec
Hello, I'm confused,too. I have checked my configurations on z/VM version 5.2 and 5.3 with or without changes in system dtcparms. IBM DTCPARMS according to redbook never changes. And i still receive two answers: monika:/# rexec -l RXAGENT1 -p RXAGENT1 126.177.54.30 q time TIME IS 14:16:17 EST WEDNESDAY 03/26/08 CONNECT= 00:00:00 VIRTCPU= 000:00.00 TOTCPU= 000:00.00 TIME IS 14:16:17 EST WEDNESDAY 03/26/08 CONNECT= 00:00:00 VIRTCPU= 000:00.00 TOTCPU= 000:00.00 I wrote the notice to our support to resolve this problem. Thanks for your time. Jakub Szefler Administrator MainFrame Pion Operacji IT Grupy TP/Departament Infrastruktury Wydział Infrastruktury Informatycznej Dział Mainframe ul. Goplańska 25, 91-463 Łódź tel.0 42 655 32 29 fax.0 42 655 42 22 www.tp.pl __ Treść tej wiadomości zawiera informacje przeznaczone tylko dla adresata. Jeżeli nie jesteście Państwo jej adresatem, bądź otrzymaliście ją przez pomyłkę, prosimy o powiadomienie o tym nadawcy oraz trwałe jej usunięcie -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jose Raul Baron Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 4:22 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: Problems with rexec Sorry, I don't know why the previous post showed me writing that I DID have a REXEC problem. Actually I didn't have it, which was what I wrote a few lines below, in a trial to answer the original question by Mr. Jakub. What I tried to say was: - I have an entry for RXAGENT1 in IBM DTCPARMS. - I also have another entry for RXAGENT1 in SYSTEM DTCPARMS. - I don't have a double result for a rexec execution using RXAGENT1. (which was the original problem of Mr. Jakub). - By default REXEC doesn't seem to allow anonymous connections unless you specify :Anonymous.YES in SYSTEM DTCPARMS. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Saludos / BRGDS, José R. Barón Dpto. Sistemas CALCULO S. A. Tel. 91 330 86 44 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] P No imprima este e-mail si no es realmente necesario -Mensaje original- De: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] En nombre de Alan Altmark Enviado el: jueves, 20 de marzo de 2008 0:37 Para: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Asunto: Re: Problems with rexec On Wednesday, 03/19/2008 at 05:49 EDT, Jose Raul Baron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have an entry for RXAGENT1 in IBM DTCPARMS: :nick.RXAGENT1 :type.server :class.rexec_agent :for.REXECD and I also have an entry for RXAGENT1 in SYSTEM DTCPARMS: :nick.RXAGENT1 :type.server :class.rexec_agent :for.REXECD and I don't have that problem: 1) I'm confused. Your previous post showed the problem, which I can reproduce here in the lab. 2) You shouldn't have the entry in SYSTEM DTCPARMS unless the one in IBM DTCPARMS doesn't meet your needs. (Don't duplicate data between IBM and SYSTEM DTCPARMS.) In fact I kind of log in as RXAGENT1 to be able to execute the q disk command. I can't do it as anonymous: lnxv00:~ # rexec -l anonymous -p anonymous 197.10.1.210 q disk No agent machines are available at this time. If you code :Anonymous.YES in a SYSTEM DTCPARMS entry for :Nick.REXECD, then anonymous access will be available to you. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: Having trouble adding a volume - seems to be resolved
I doubt that changing the size had anything to do with it. Try changing it back to 512M and see if 210 comes on line. Bauer, Bobby (NIH/CIT) [E] wrote: I realized that server#1 had 768M and server #2 only had 512M. I changed server#2, rebooted and 210 came online after the boot. That makes my head hurt! Bobby Bauer Center for Information Technology National Institutes of Health Bethesda, MD 20892-5628 301-594-7474 -- 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 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: Having trouble adding a volume - seems to be resolved
I did that and it came online so the memory isn't the issue. When I changed the memory I shutdown the VM guest. Before I had only been rebooting Linux. Bobby Bauer Center for Information Technology National Institutes of Health Bethesda, MD 20892-5628 301-594-7474 -Original Message- From: Stephen Frazier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 9:49 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: Having trouble adding a volume - seems to be resolved I doubt that changing the size had anything to do with it. Try changing it back to 512M and see if 210 comes on line. Bauer, Bobby (NIH/CIT) [E] wrote: I realized that server#1 had 768M and server #2 only had 512M. I changed server#2, rebooted and 210 came online after the boot. That makes my head hurt! Bobby Bauer Center for Information Technology National Institutes of Health Bethesda, MD 20892-5628 301-594-7474 -- 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 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
zLinux IBM Java Install
I'm posting this for a colleague here, so hopefully the stuff below makes sense (personally I'm a mainframe/CICS guy). The JRE installs without any problems; however, I'm having a bit of difficulty with the IBM Java 6.0-0.0 SDK installation for s390x on zLinux. The rpm states a dependency error with libstdc++.so.5 as well as libXp.so.5. I verified libstdc++.so.5 and libXp so.5 are both installed (through compat-libstdc++-295-2.9.5.3-81.s390x.rpm and I can't recall the libXp library). I then removed the JRE and attempted to install the SDK again. No luck. If I extract the rpm directly everything seems to run fine. I'm using ibm-java-s390x-sdk-6.0-0.0.s390x.rpm and ibm-java-s390x-jre-6.0-0.0.s390x.rpm Anyone successfully installed the sdk here? Kevin R Evans Software Engineer Staff IV Lockheed Martin Information Technology Federal Bureau of Investigation 1000 Custer Hollow Road Clarksburg WV, 26306 304-625-5870 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: zLinux IBM Java Install
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 2:41 PM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Evans, Kevin R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm posting this for a colleague here, so hopefully the stuff below makes sense (personally I'm a mainframe/CICS guy). The JRE installs without any problems; however, I'm having a bit of difficulty with the IBM Java 6.0-0.0 SDK installation for s390x on zLinux. The rpm states a dependency error with libstdc++.so.5 as well as libXp.so.5. I verified libstdc++.so.5 and libXp so.5 are both installed (through compat-libstdc++-295-2.9.5.3-81.s390x.rpm and I can't recall the libXp library). I then removed the JRE and attempted to install the SDK again. No luck. If I extract the rpm directly everything seems to run fine. I'm using ibm-java-s390x-sdk-6.0-0.0.s390x.rpm and ibm-java-s390x-jre-6.0-0.0.s390x.rpm Anyone successfully installed the sdk here? Where were those packages obtained from? Your Linux distribution provider? If so, which one? Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: Problems with rexec
On Wednesday, 03/26/2008 at 09:31 EDT, Szefler Jakub [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I'm confused,too. I have checked my configurations on z/VM version 5.2 and 5.3 with or without changes in system dtcparms. IBM DTCPARMS according to redbook never changes. Sorry, but Redbooks are not the authority on IBM DTCPARMS. I am. :-) IBM DTCPARMS *can* change due to service or SPEs (between-release enhancements). That's how I designed it, that's why SYSTEM DTCPARMS exists, and that's why IBM DTCPARMS lives on the 591 disk (with other things you don't change). And i still receive two answers: monika:/# rexec -l RXAGENT1 -p RXAGENT1 126.177.54.30 q time TIME IS 14:16:17 EST WEDNESDAY 03/26/08 CONNECT= 00:00:00 VIRTCPU= 000:00.00 TOTCPU= 000:00.00 TIME IS 14:16:17 EST WEDNESDAY 03/26/08 CONNECT= 00:00:00 VIRTCPU= 000:00.00 TOTCPU= 000:00.00 I wrote the notice to our support to resolve this problem. For the 3rd and final time: Do NOT use RXAGENT1 as the target of an REXEC command. It doesn't have a traditional PROFILE EXEC like other users do. My fix for this is to change the password of RXAGENT1 to AUTOONLY. In fact, I plan to make that change in our next release. (I've been asked by others to make ALL of the servers AUTOONLY so that sysprogs can avoid having to manage their passwords.) Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Betr.: Re: Problems with rexec
Alan Altmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/26/08 4:01 ( mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ) (I've been asked by others to make ALL of the servers AUTOONLY so that sysprogs can avoid having to manage their passwords.) GD. That's what I have been doing right after install from when AUTOONLY was invented eons ago. Another item finally off the install checklist. Best regards, Pieter Harder [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel +31-73-6837133 / +31-6-47272537 Brabant Water N.V. Postbus 1068 5200 BC 's-Hertogenbosch http://www.brabantwater.nl Handelsregister: 16005077 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: zLinux IBM Java Install
We got them from here: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/jdk/linux/download.html However, we used the tgz file instead of the rpm. Ron Foster Baldor Mark Post wrote: On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 2:41 PM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Evans, Kevin R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm posting this for a colleague here, so hopefully the stuff below makes sense (personally I'm a mainframe/CICS guy). The JRE installs without any problems; however, I'm having a bit of difficulty with the IBM Java 6.0-0.0 SDK installation for s390x on zLinux. The rpm states a dependency error with libstdc++.so.5 as well as libXp.so.5. I verified libstdc++.so.5 and libXp so.5 are both installed (through compat-libstdc++-295-2.9.5.3-81.s390x.rpm and I can't recall the libXp library). I then removed the JRE and attempted to install the SDK again. No luck. If I extract the rpm directly everything seems to run fine. I'm using ibm-java-s390x-sdk-6.0-0.0.s390x.rpm and ibm-java-s390x-jre-6.0-0.0.s390x.rpm Anyone successfully installed the sdk here? Where were those packages obtained from? Your Linux distribution provider? If so, which one? Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
telnet to z/vm with linux logon
I've found I can telnet (putty) to my z/vm system and then login to the z/vm guest running linux. At that point I can get the logon prompt for linux and login BUT from there I'm completely lost as I can not find the correct key sequence to perform an 'enter' or 'backspace'. Is there a how-to or other document on how to access and perform basic recovery actions (such as when the linux server itself has network issues) using the telnet to z/vm and logon to linux approach? Thanks Lionel B. Dyck, Consultant/Specialist Enterprise Platform Services, Mainframe Engineering KP-IT Enterprise Engineering 925-926-5332 (8-473-5332) | E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: lbdyck | Yahoo IM: lbdyck Kaiser Service Credo: Our cause is health. Our passion is service. We're here to make lives better. I never guess. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or otherwise using or disclosing its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments without reading, forwarding or saving them. Thank you. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
curiousity question: Linux usage: many or few
I'm wondering about this. I'm a z/OS person with some Linux knowledge. But we don't run Linux on z around here. In the Windows world, the mantra is generally One server, one function. On z/OS it is the opposite of one server, lots of functions. How does Linux, in general, stack up on this scale? It is better to have multiple guests, each doing a specific job. Or is it better to have multiple functions in a single guest? Yeah, I know, it depends!. I am fairly sure that if a Linux system is very busy, that it would be better for it to be stand alone. But is the same true of low activity functions? No, I don't have any examples of a low activity function, maybe simple email. Just curious. Also, what do ya'll think of VMWare's appliance philosophy? I.e. instead of having a generalized Linux (or other) system which can do many things, each appliance does one thing and is specialized to do that only. When you want to upgrade, you replace the entire appliance, OS and application, as a single black box. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing it. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: curiousity question: Linux usage: many or few
Most placed I know of put multiple applications on one Linux. This is true even on Intel. It usually happens because once you have a Linux system you can add applications to it without having to buy another server, as opposed the Windows world where adding a second application causes the first one to break. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of McKown, John Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 9:43 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: curiousity question: Linux usage: many or few I'm wondering about this. I'm a z/OS person with some Linux knowledge. But we don't run Linux on z around here. In the Windows world, the mantra is generally One server, one function. On z/OS it is the opposite of one server, lots of functions. How does Linux, in general, stack up on this scale? It is better to have multiple guests, each doing a specific job. Or is it better to have multiple functions in a single guest? Yeah, I know, it depends!. I am fairly sure that if a Linux system is very busy, that it would be better for it to be stand alone. But is the same true of low activity functions? No, I don't have any examples of a low activity function, maybe simple email. Just curious. Also, what do ya'll think of VMWare's appliance philosophy? I.e. instead of having a generalized Linux (or other) system which can do many things, each appliance does one thing and is specialized to do that only. When you want to upgrade, you replace the entire appliance, OS and application, as a single black box. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing it. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 __ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email from the State of California is for the sole use of the intended recipient and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review or use, including disclosure or distribution, is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of this email. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: curiousity question: Linux usage: many or few
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 11:06 PM, Fargusson.Alan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Most placed I know of put multiple applications on one Linux. This is true even on Intel. It usually happens because once you have a Linux system you can add applications to it without having to buy another server, as opposed the Windows world where adding a second application causes the first one to break. Interesting. I often see the opposite with Linux on z/VM: one application per server. That may have to do with many Linux on z/VM shops running commercial (i.e. paid and supported) application software that have their own specific incompatible software requirements and configuration settings. And if it would work they would not be supported in one virtual machine. Change management and testing is also easier. I could not imagine anyone running TSM, SAP, WebSphere etc all in a single virtual machine if they have the option to split it up. I think it is even rare to run multiple WebSphere application servers in a single virtual machine. From a tuning and charge-back perspective, it is often attractive to run in separate virtual machines. That way you can allocate resources as required. Even though there is a cost involved in extra virtual machines and communication overhead, the advantages normally make up for that. Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software GmbH http://velocitysoftware.com/ -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: curiousity question: Linux usage: many or few
Cost savings. On discrete boxes (Intel or LPAR) run multiple applications on one Linux. Adding another box costs money. Adding an application to an existing box costs zero. On virtual systems (z/VM or VMware) run one application per Linux. It doesn't cost anything to define another guest. Rob van der Heij wrote: On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 11:06 PM, Fargusson.Alan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Most placed I know of put multiple applications on one Linux. This is true even on Intel. It usually happens because once you have a Linux system you can add applications to it without having to buy another server, as opposed the Windows world where adding a second application causes the first one to break. Interesting. I often see the opposite with Linux on z/VM: one application per server. That may have to do with many Linux on z/VM shops running commercial (i.e. paid and supported) application software that have their own specific incompatible software requirements and configuration settings. And if it would work they would not be supported in one virtual machine. Change management and testing is also easier. I could not imagine anyone running TSM, SAP, WebSphere etc all in a single virtual machine if they have the option to split it up. I think it is even rare to run multiple WebSphere application servers in a single virtual machine. From a tuning and charge-back perspective, it is often attractive to run in separate virtual machines. That way you can allocate resources as required. Even though there is a cost involved in extra virtual machines and communication overhead, the advantages normally make up for that. Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software GmbH http://velocitysoftware.com/ -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- 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 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: curiousity question: Linux usage: many or few
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:06:38 -0700 Fargusson.Alan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Most placed I know of put multiple applications on one Linux. This is true even on Intel. It usually happens because once you have a Linux system you can add applications to it without having to buy another server, as opposed the Windows world where adding a second application causes the first one to break. Ditto in my experience with some exceptions like big database servers that seem to be loaded with one large db product and sundries. Virtual machines (or for more efficiency containers like OpenVZ) can be extremely useful however for containing groups of users or applications. It's a trade off - less systems are usually easier to manage. Alan -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: curiousity question: Linux usage: many or few
Cost savings. On discrete boxes (Intel or LPAR) run multiple applications on one Linux. Adding another box costs money. Adding an application to an existing box costs zero. On virtual systems (z/VM or VMware) run one application per Linux. It doesn't cost anything to define 2GB PC systems cost what $500 ? thats no cost in most books. I really don't think cost is the big factor - managability is a big big concern and the cost trade offs of managing virtual systems versus a new PC or two apps per PC (remembering PC tools and admins are not used to virtualisation) almost instantly override it. Also most PC systems are running environments where the failure case is nuisance, oh bother, can someone reboot it not million dollars an hour. That dramatically changes the view and management of risk neccessary for those systems. Alan -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: curiousity question: Linux usage: many or few
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 6:52 PM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cost savings. On discrete boxes (Intel or LPAR) run multiple applications on one Linux. Adding another box costs money. Adding an application to an existing box costs zero. On virtual systems (z/VM or VMware) run one application per Linux. It doesn't cost anything to define 2GB PC systems cost what $500 ? thats no cost in most books. I really We're not talking about PC class equipment, but server class. Much more than $500. Even so, that's not the main cost factor, it's software licenses. Oracle, WebSphere, DB2, etc., are all big ticket items that are licensed by processor. Installing multiple ones on a virtual machine on the mainframe provides isolation as well as license savings. don't think cost is the big factor - managability is a big big concern and the cost trade offs of managing virtual systems versus a new PC or two apps per PC (remembering PC tools and admins are not used to virtualisation) almost instantly override it. That's why we use automation and commercial management tools as much as possible, when they're available. We tend to get anywhere up to 100 servers per admin ratios in that environment. If you divide up the tasks relating to virtualization and assign them to the z/VM folks, then the Linux admins don't have to worry about it so much. Also most PC systems are running environments where the failure case is nuisance, oh bother, can someone reboot it not million dollars an hour. That dramatically changes the view and management of risk neccessary for those systems. I have yet to run into a case where Linux on z/VM was being used for such applications. It seems that most CEOs/CIOs are taking the position that if they're going to deploy on that platform, they expect enormous returns on investment. So, the applications that are being deployed are very important, and downtime for them is very expensive. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: telnet to z/vm with linux logon
Why would you use putty? To logon to a VM guest, you should be using TN3270. You would use PUTTY to connect to the Linux machine and do a Linux signon. Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting Law of Cat Obstruction A cat must lay on the floor in such a position to obstruct the maximum amount of human foot traffic. Lionel B Dyck [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3/26/2008 1:00 PM I've found I can telnet (putty) to my z/vm system and then login to the z/vm guest running linux. At that point I can get the logon prompt for linux and login BUT from there I'm completely lost as I can not find the correct key sequence to perform an 'enter' or 'backspace'. Is there a how-to or other document on how to access and perform basic recovery actions (such as when the linux server itself has network issues) using the telnet to z/vm and logon to linux approach? Thanks Lionel B. Dyck, Consultant/Specialist Enterprise Platform Services, Mainframe Engineering KP-IT Enterprise Engineering 925-926-5332 (8-473-5332) | E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: lbdyck | Yahoo IM: lbdyck Kaiser Service Credo: Our cause is health. Our passion is service. We're here to make lives better. I never guess. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or otherwise using or disclosing its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments without reading, forwarding or saving them. Thank you. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: curiousity question: Linux usage: many or few
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:47 AM, Mark Post [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's why we use automation and commercial management tools as much as possible, when they're available. We tend to get anywhere up to 100 servers per admin ratios in that environment. If you divide up the tasks relating to virtualization and assign them to the z/VM folks, then the Linux admins don't have to worry about it so much. An installation I talked to in the past was pushing that ratio with additional power. They were driving it that a system admin had no business to login to a server unless there was a change or problem ticket for it. The idea of just looking at something did not justify a login. Instead, if there's a need to just look at that server, there may be a justified need to look at all those servers and they would add the item to the automation to have that data available from all applicable servers for everyone who needed it. I found it a very interesting approach to push that ratio. Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software GmbH http://velocitysoftware.com/ -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: telnet to z/vm with linux logon
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 2:00 PM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lionel B Dyck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've found I can telnet (putty) to my z/vm system and then login to the z/vm guest running linux. At that point I can get the logon prompt for linux and login BUT from there I'm completely lost as I can not find the correct key sequence to perform an 'enter' or 'backspace'. I've run into the same problem. I don't think it's going to buy you anything in the way of being able to use curses-based tools though. Is there a how-to or other document on how to access and perform basic recovery actions (such as when the linux server itself has network issues) using the telnet to z/vm and logon to linux approach? Not that I'm aware of. I seem to recall a certain z/VM developer being interested in the fact that it didnt' work, though. Perhaps he'll speak up again. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: Problems with rexec
Just in case, try to check disks TCPMAINT 198, 591 and 592 in search of possible duplicates for IBM DTCPARMS and/or SYSTEM DTCPARMS at least to discard this possibility. Saludos, José R. Barón Dpto. Sistemas CALCULO S. A. Tel. 91 330 86 44 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] P No imprima este e-mail si no es realmente necesario -Mensaje original- De: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] En nombre de Szefler Jakub Enviado el: miércoles, 26 de marzo de 2008 14:27 Para: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Asunto: Re: Problems with rexec Hello, I'm confused,too. I have checked my configurations on z/VM version 5.2 and 5.3 with or without changes in system dtcparms. IBM DTCPARMS according to redbook never changes. And i still receive two answers: monika:/# rexec -l RXAGENT1 -p RXAGENT1 126.177.54.30 q time TIME IS 14:16:17 EST WEDNESDAY 03/26/08 CONNECT= 00:00:00 VIRTCPU= 000:00.00 TOTCPU= 000:00.00 TIME IS 14:16:17 EST WEDNESDAY 03/26/08 CONNECT= 00:00:00 VIRTCPU= 000:00.00 TOTCPU= 000:00.00 I wrote the notice to our support to resolve this problem. Thanks for your time. Jakub Szefler Administrator MainFrame Pion Operacji IT Grupy TP/Departament Infrastruktury Wydział Infrastruktury Informatycznej Dział Mainframe ul. Goplańska 25, 91-463 Łódź tel.0 42 655 32 29 fax.0 42 655 42 22 www.tp.pl __ Treść tej wiadomości zawiera informacje przeznaczone tylko dla adresata. Jeżeli nie jesteście Państwo jej adresatem, bądź otrzymaliście ją przez pomyłkę, prosimy o powiadomienie o tym nadawcy oraz trwałe jej usunięcie -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jose Raul Baron Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 4:22 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: Problems with rexec Sorry, I don't know why the previous post showed me writing that I DID have a REXEC problem. Actually I didn't have it, which was what I wrote a few lines below, in a trial to answer the original question by Mr. Jakub. What I tried to say was: - I have an entry for RXAGENT1 in IBM DTCPARMS. - I also have another entry for RXAGENT1 in SYSTEM DTCPARMS. - I don't have a double result for a rexec execution using RXAGENT1. (which was the original problem of Mr. Jakub). - By default REXEC doesn't seem to allow anonymous connections unless you specify :Anonymous.YES in SYSTEM DTCPARMS. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Saludos / BRGDS, José R. Barón Dpto. Sistemas CALCULO S. A. Tel. 91 330 86 44 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] P No imprima este e-mail si no es realmente necesario -Mensaje original- De: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] En nombre de Alan Altmark Enviado el: jueves, 20 de marzo de 2008 0:37 Para: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Asunto: Re: Problems with rexec On Wednesday, 03/19/2008 at 05:49 EDT, Jose Raul Baron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have an entry for RXAGENT1 in IBM DTCPARMS: :nick.RXAGENT1 :type.server :class.rexec_agent :for.REXECD and I also have an entry for RXAGENT1 in SYSTEM DTCPARMS: :nick.RXAGENT1 :type.server :class.rexec_agent :for.REXECD and I don't have that problem: 1) I'm confused. Your previous post showed the problem, which I can reproduce here in the lab. 2) You shouldn't have the entry in SYSTEM DTCPARMS unless the one in IBM DTCPARMS doesn't meet your needs. (Don't duplicate data between IBM and SYSTEM DTCPARMS.) In fact I kind of log in as RXAGENT1 to be able to execute the q disk command. I can't do it as anonymous: lnxv00:~ # rexec -l anonymous -p anonymous 197.10.1.210 q disk No agent machines are available at this time. If you code :Anonymous.YES in a SYSTEM DTCPARMS entry for :Nick.REXECD, then anonymous access will be available to you. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: telnet to z/vm with linux logon
On Wednesday, 03/26/2008 at 05:30 EDT, Lionel B Dyck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've found I can telnet (putty) to my z/vm system and then login to the z/vm guest running linux. At that point I can get the logon prompt for linux and login BUT from there I'm completely lost as I can not find the correct key sequence to perform an 'enter' or 'backspace'. Is there a how-to or other document on how to access and perform basic recovery actions (such as when the linux server itself has network issues) using the telnet to z/vm and logon to linux approach? It doesn't work that way. :-) A linemode telnet session, such as putty or the CMS TELNET (LINEMODE command gives you, is a virtual 3215, not a tty. 1. You press a key, the key goes to the VM telnet server 2. If it wasn't the ENTER key (CRLF), the telnet server accumulates the keystroke. 3. If it was ENTER, an ATTN interrupt on the virtual 3215 console is given to the guest. 4. Guest reads the entire line all at once. (This is why you have that funny ^c thing.) What you are asking for is a way to telnet into VM and request a do-nothing pipe between the telnet server and a Linux guest's console input/output stream. Three inventions required: 1. The do-nothing pipe. 2. A virtual ASCII system console that can operate without benefit of the real integrated ASCII (ATTACH SYSASCII). 3. A telnet server solicitor screen that allows you to select (or exits to pre-select) whether you want 3215 or TTY access to the guest. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
