On Thu, 2 Feb 2006 16:33:03 -0600, Pommier, Rex R.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have 1 other step to chase down here and then I will be talking to IBM
about it. I wanted to try this group first because you are really fast
on helping out and I wanted to check to make sure I wasn't overlooking
On Thu, 2 Feb 2006 15:29:27 -0600, Doug Henry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 16:41:50 -0600, Pommier, Rex R.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only have 1 IKJTSOxx member, last modified July 2005. It does not have
PING defined to AUTHCMD.
From z/OS Comm Svr: IP Sys Admin Commands
In [EMAIL PROTECTED],
on 02/02/2006
at 01:30 PM, Pommier, Rex R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
You know, my first thought was to simply delete your ranting
Feel free.
because it seems there are a few people on this board
who seem to think their sole purpose is to blast others rather than
to try to
In [EMAIL PROTECTED],
on 02/01/2006
at 11:40 AM, Pommier, Rex R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I have a strange one. z/OS 1.4 on a Multiprise 3000 H50 box. Last
night I got a call from operations that a FTP job blew on the 390
trying to FTP to a wintel server with a connection refused error.
In
Peter,
Thanks for the suggestions. Ping behaves the same whether I telnet into
a line-mode TSO session, log on through normal tn3270, or run oping from
an OMVS shell.
BTW, I had the network guy remove the changes he made to the F% load
balancers and it made no difference.
Rex
Did anyone
Rex,
Found the following on the IBM support site. Maybe something in there
explains and/or helps.
Regards,
Peggy
Problem
Users in the Unix (OMVS) environment that are not superusers (UID is other
than 0) cannot perform ping (oping) or traceroute (otracert).
Cause
Ping receives the following
You know, my first thought was to simply delete your ranting but then I
decided to respond because it seems there are a few people on this board
who seem to think their sole purpose is to blast others rather than to
try to help. If I sound like I'm ticked, it is because I'm sick of
having my
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Pommier, Rex R.
For everybody else on the list, I apologize in advance for my
ranting back but I am looking for help, not ranting about
everything I apparently did wrong.
Be all that as it may, it remains that
I agree with you completely. Quite frankly it scares me that I can't
find anything as having changed to cause this problem - especially when
I got multiple good suggestions as to what I could check and everything
seems to be set up properly. That was why I came to the list - to see
if anybody
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Pommier, Rex R.
I agree with you completely. Quite frankly it scares me that
I can't find anything as having changed to cause this problem
- especially when I got multiple good suggestions as to what
I could
On Thu, 2 Feb 2006 14:49:17 -0600, Pommier, Rex R.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with you completely. Quite frankly it scares me that I can't
find anything as having changed to cause this problem - especially when
I got multiple good suggestions as to what I could check and everything
seems
On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 16:41:50 -0600, Pommier, Rex R.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only have 1 IKJTSOxx member, last modified July 2005. It does not have
PING defined to AUTHCMD.
From z/OS Comm Svr: IP Sys Admin Commands
For PING to be authorized to use RAW sockets, add the command name,
Sorry, no IPLs in there.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Chase, John
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 3:12 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Omvs/tcpip question
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe
out what happened.
Rex
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Zelden
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 3:26 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Omvs/tcpip question
On Thu, 2 Feb 2006 14:49:17 -0600, Pommier, Rex R.
[EMAIL
Hi.
I have a strange one. z/OS 1.4 on a Multiprise 3000 H50 box. Last
night I got a call from operations that a FTP job blew on the 390 trying
to FTP to a wintel server with a connection refused error. In trying
to diagnose the problem I had the operator try a ping to the same
machine and then
We had this happen when we MOVED to I think z/OS 1.3 from ( sorry, I forget
which release ). We're an ACF2 shop and the change I needed to make was to
set up a default uid and gid. Then, FTP was okay for the masses.
At 12:40 PM 2/1/2006, you wrote:
Hi.
I have a strange one. z/OS 1.4 on a
Rex,
you don't need UID 0 - OMVS segments for users who just need to FTP or PING or
REXEC something from z/OS to the outside world. You need specifics only for
users who do actual OMVS work and/or need to access HFS files, like sysprogs,
etc.
Check your security system's setup ... are the OMVS
I checked it all out:
I have BPX.DEFAULT.USER defined and FACILITY class is active.
BPX.DEFAULT.USER has as the application data OEDFLTU/OEDFLTG. The UID
associated with OEDFLTU is and the GID with OEDFLTG is 77.
On my playground system I just changed the UID of OEDFLTU to 0 and
Rex,
Yesterday it all broke and I didn't touch it!
If not you then who else did, or what else did change on your system? Changed
some RACF rules, perhaps?
Are you getting any RACF Violation messages?
Check SMF records written by RACF since the time from just before it broke ...
you might be
Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ulrich Krueger
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 2:50 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Omvs/tcpip question
Rex,
Yesterday it all broke and I didn't touch it!
If not you then who else did, or what else did change on your system
On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 15:25:48 -0600, Pommier, Rex R.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's the problem. It broke on all 3 LPARs and one of the three I'm
the only one who even logged onto it - and that only because I used the
LPAR to test and see how far the problem went. I get a daily report out
of
/tcpip question
On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 15:25:48 -0600, Pommier, Rex R.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's the problem. It broke on all 3 LPARs and one of the three I'm
the only one who even logged onto it - and that only because I used the
LPAR to test and see how far the problem went. I get a daily
-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pommier, Rex
R.
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 4:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Omvs/tcpip question
Only have 1 IKJTSOxx member, last modified July 2005.
It does not have PING defined to AUTHCMD
I have BPX.DEFAULT.USER defined and FACILITY class is active.
BPX.DEFAULT.USER has as the application data OEDFLTU/OEDFLTG.
The UID associated with OEDFLTU is and the GID with
OEDFLTG is 77.
Not related to the problem but nevertheless not a good idea, IMHO.
It's kind a like
Did anyone change IKJTSOxx or issue the PARMLIB command or
SET IKJTSO=xx command? Is PING defined to AUTHCMD?
Does ping behave the same from a shell session? Log-in
through telnet and try oping some.host.name
Peter Hunkeler
CREDIT SUISSE
25 matches
Mail list logo
