On Thursday, 07/21/2011 at 04:15 EDT, "O'Brien, Dennis L"
wrote:
> I know we could use VLAN?s. The network people would rather spend money
on
> additional OSA?s.
It is a common (possibly "best") practice to keep Internet and intranet
traffic segregated onto separate (not trunked) physical s
, Larry (National VM/VSE Capability)
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 3:26 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Separate virtual switch controllers
No One Controller can handle all the VSWITCHES you may want to create. I would
create at least to Controller and code all your VSwitch definition
We have the same situation here.
Larry Davis
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf
Of O'Brien, Dennis L
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 4:14 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Separate virtual switch controllers
I know we could use VLAN&#x
f
Of Davis, Larry (National VM/VSE Capability)
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 12:26
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: [IBMVM] Separate virtual switch controllers
No One Controller can handle all the VSWITCHES you may want to create. I would
create at least to Controller and code all your VSwitch d
On Thursday, 07/21/2011 at 03:16 EDT, "O'Brien, Dennis L"
wrote:
> I believe there was a statement from IBM that the two
> default controllers, DTCVSW1 and DTCVSW2, are sufficient for any number
of
> virtual switches. Is there any security risk if the same controllers
manage
> virtual switc
Larry Davis
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf
Of O'Brien, Dennis L
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 3:16 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Separate virtual switch controllers
We are working on a project to provide Internet access to select Linux gu
witch for the secure
zone. These are in addition to the existing virtual switch that we already
have on our internal network. The network people have also asked for separate
virtual switch controllers. Is there any reason to create separate controller
virtual machines (DTCVSWx) for these vi
