Thanks
I've been talking with him about these problems.
Where yesterday, I was looking for a bypass to get some networking
capabilities,
today, I started thinking about conversion time.
Tom Duerbusch
THD Consulting
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/6/2006 12:27 PM >>>
On Wednesday, 12/06/2006 at 11:05
That is the same problem here.
I hope that there will be a fix(s) before I get to the point of
dissolving my supernet.
Thanks
Tom Duerbusch
THD Consulting
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/6/2006 12:38 PM >>>
When I was installing and testing on z/VM 5.2 in a guest I used
supernetting of class C addres
When I was installing and testing on z/VM 5.2 in a guest I used
supernetting of class C addresses in the z/VM 5.2 guest's TCPIP stack.
There was a problem getting TCPIP to accept the supernetting syntax and I
openned a PMR. APAR PK18025 (PTF UK11188) was created to resolve the
problem. Wit
On Wednesday, 12/06/2006 at 11:05 CST, Tom Duerbusch
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> z/VM 5.2 seems to have some problems in the supernet arena.
I think Miguel mentioned something about supernetting problems recently.
Call it in. (Just make sure your GATEWAY syntax is correct.)
Alan Altmark
z/VM
We have a supernet defined on z/VM 5.1.
I have been installing z/VM 5.2 on second level and had a lot of
problems getting the TCP/IP portion to work. Eventually, we downgraded
the second level system to a single class C network. Great, that gets
me going again.
Then, last night, it dawned on m
