Alan - you are missing the point and I believe that Dave already mentioned some of the reasons but I will add mine.
We are a OS/390 shop with ZERO VM skills. The distributed group does not want to learn z/VM for many reasons, among them are the lack of any usable intro/how-to documents to get started with - the existing pubs assume a firm foundation or knowledge gained from attending a class. The OS/390 sysprogs that are assigned to the z/VM + Linux world have this as just another assignment and thus do not have the time to become full fledged z/VM sysprogs and management does not want to hire a z/VM sysprog full time or contract for one. Management has been led to believe that z/VM+Linux is simple and it isn't. SAF was, supposedly like VIF, a simple to use tool but it was to limited to be helpful beyond some very basic functions. If you want z/VM+Linux to be successful you (IBM) need to publish a simple HowTo type document with step by step instructions, with explanation, for setting up and managing this new environment. Or you need to convince management that they need to train/hire/contract for z/VM skills and that they can't assume that the individual(s) will have time to do other z/OS activities if the z/VM+Linux environment is dynamic/active to any degree. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Lionel B. Dyck, Systems Software Lead Kaiser Permanente Information Technology 25 N. Via Monte Ave Walnut Creek, Ca 94598 Phone: (925) 926-5332 (tie line 8/473-5332) E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sametime: (use Lotus Notes address) AIM: lbdyck Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 05/14/2002 09:10:00 AM: > On Tuesday, 05/14/2002 at 08:09 MST, Lionel Dyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > As a migration tool it isn't even adequate as even a screwdriver can be > > used for multiple things whereas SAF is too limited and if it was > intended > > as a migration vehicle to eventually get the site to a native z/VM it > > falls miserably short as with SAF active you can't do anything but SAF > and > > Linux so you can't learn native z/VM. > > > > At a minimum the SAF doc should indicate to first install z/VM and then > > install a 2nd z/VM under the first and to activate SAF there so that you > > have a real z/VM to learn with as you can't guarantee that there is an > > available LPAR to install z/VM in for experimentation. > > Lionel, the design point of SAF was compatibility with VIF. It provides a > path so that that a VIF customer can migrate to z/VM *so they can stop > using the VIF command and use native VM functions instead. The whole idea > of a simplified VM command-line sysadmin interface has proved to be (IMO) > untenable. There are simply too many knobs, levers, bells, whistles, and > portals that have developed over the last 30 years to allow a meaningful > simplification of the magnitude imposed by SAF and VIF. How does one > create a 2nd level system without learning enough directory management to > make SAF unnecessary? Chicken and the egg. > > z/VM 4.3 introduced the IP Configuration Wizard and an ifconfig command to > handle TCP/IP stuff. DIRMAINT does the heavy lifting for directory > management. Those three things do most of what VIF/SAF did for you. > > Bottom line: The moment you decided that you needed to update the > directory for yourself, you outgrew SAF. We're pushing you out of the > nest. Fly and be free! :-) > > Alan Altmark > Sr. Software Engineer > IBM z/VM Development
