Re: VM TN3270 Secure and non-Secure ports

On Monday, 04/04/2016 at 07:14 GMT, "Beard, Rick" wrote: > Does anyone know if you can have both a secure TN3270 port and a non-secure > TN3270 port on a z/VM system? I've setup a secure TN3270 port, but once I did > that it stops the listening of port 23. I would like

Re: VM TN3270 Secure and non-Secure ports

staff." - Unknown -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Beard, Rick Sent: Monday, April 04, 2016 8:05 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: VM TN3270 Secure and non-Secure ports Does anyone know if you can have both a secure TN3270 port

VM TN3270 Secure and non-Secure ports

Does anyone know if you can have both a secure TN3270 port and a non-secure TN3270 port on a z/VM system? I've setup a secure TN3270 port, but once I did that it stops the listening of port 23. I would like to have both for a while if that is possible. Thanks, Rick Beard Infrastructure

Re: persistent zfcp ports/luns

I am using the /etc/sysconfig/mkinitrd/modules file to specify the zfcp module... But i did not run zipl as i only replaced the initrd. I thought that zipl should only run if you change zipl.conf. I tried to run zipl and the old luns are gone... Please can you explain what zipl does with the

Re: persistent zfcp ports/luns

On 03/01/2012 09:50 AM, Offer Baruch wrote: I am using the /etc/sysconfig/mkinitrd/modules file to specify the zfcp module... But i did not run zipl as i only replaced the initrd. I thought that zipl should only run if you change zipl.conf. I tried to run zipl and the old luns are gone... You

Re: persistent zfcp ports/luns

Well, thank you very much for the detailed explanation. Every thing is clear now... On 1 במרס 2012 12:35, Steffen Maier ma...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote: On 03/01/2012 09:50 AM, Offer Baruch wrote: I am using the /etc/sysconfig/mkinitrd/**modules file to specify the zfcp module... But i did not

Re: persistent zfcp ports/luns

/drivers/zfcp/0.0.0011 i can still see the old ports and luns. for example: drwxr-xr-x 6 root root0 Feb 28 15:17 0x5001738000800140 - old drwxr-xr-x 6 root root0 Feb 28 15:17 0x5001738000800150 - old drwxr-xr-x 6 root root0 Feb 28 15:17 0x5001738000800160 - old drwxr-xr-x 5 root root0

Re: persistent zfcp ports/luns

0x5001738062670190 0x0 0x0001 I expected that after a reboot zfcp will forget about the old luns but he didn't. looking at: /sys/bus/ccw/drivers/zfcp/0.0.**0010 /sys/bus/ccw/drivers/zfcp/0.0.**0011 i can still see the old ports and luns. for example: drwxr-xr-x 6 root root0

Re: persistent zfcp ports/luns

0.0.0010 0x0 0x5001738062670190 0x0 0x0001 I expected that after a reboot zfcp will forget about the old luns but he didn't. looking at: /sys/bus/ccw/drivers/zfcp/0.0.**0010 /sys/bus/ccw/drivers/zfcp/0.0.**0011 i can still see the old ports and luns. for example: drwxr-xr-x

persistent zfcp ports/luns

a reboot zfcp will forget about the old luns but he didn't. looking at: /sys/bus/ccw/drivers/zfcp/0.0.0010 /sys/bus/ccw/drivers/zfcp/0.0.0011 i can still see the old ports and luns. for example: drwxr-xr-x 6 root root0 Feb 28 15:17 0x5001738000800140 - old drwxr-xr-x 6 root root0 Feb 28 15:17

OSA Two Ports per CHPID Exploitation Problem

Starter System for System z I installed that starter system with seemingly similar results: No interface found [1A..failedSetting up service network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...failed It is my understanding base z/VM 5.4 supports two ports per CHPID exploitation and per the z

Re: OSA Two Ports per CHPID Exploitation Problem

On 8/17/2009 at 4:06 PM, Neubert, Kevin kevin.neub...@courts.wa.gov wrote: -snip- Not sure how to debug linuxrc for better information on what is happening. Any clues would be appreciated. From the Linux guest, #cp q nic details would be a good start. Before IPLing from the reader,

Re: OSA Two Ports per CHPID Exploitation Problem

. The port number specified by a guest using a VSWITCH doesn't actually do anything. It's a knob that isn't attached to anything (validate and ignore). All virtual ports on a vNIC go to the same place: the VSWITCH. The VSWITCH decides which physical port to use based on the value on DEFINE VSWITCH. You

Re: OSA Two Ports per CHPID Exploitation Problem

Mark Post noted my gateway was suspicious. I was using a former gateway. Thank you Mark. Regards, Kevin -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the

Re: VSWITCH - OSA-Ports connected different physical switches

On Friday, 02/20/2009 at 01:30 EST, Marcy Cortes marcy.d.cor...@wellsfargo.com wrote: IBM does provide some LACP examples - so you don't have to say I don't know :), but you can say it's supposed to look something like this: http://www.vm.ibm.com/virtualnetwork/cis6509.html I can send you a

Re: VSWITCH - OSA-Ports connected different physical switches

'using NIC teaming for connectivity redundancy'. I must admit I am not up to date, but I think zVM doesn't support such type of teaming. As stated in the appends on the FORUM (and in your original one) zVM VSWITCH supports the IEEE 802.3ad Link aggregation protocol, so the OSA ports have

VSWITCH - OSA-Ports connected different physical switches

Hello, according to the documentation, a z/VM virtual switch controlled link aggregation (IEEE 802.3ad) allows you to combine multiple physical OSA-Express ports into a single logical link for increased throughput and for nondisruptive failover in the event that a port becomes unavailable

Re: VSWITCH - OSA-Ports connected different physical switches

On Thursday, 02/19/2009 at 08:33 EST, Hürlimann Heinz (KIUT 33) heinz.huerlim...@credit-suisse.com wrote: Hello, according to the documentation, a z/VM virtual switch controlled link aggregation (IEEE 802.3ad) allows you to combine multiple physical OSA-Express ports into a single logical

Re: VSWITCH - OSA-Ports connected different physical switches

The 6500s have a feature called Virtual Switching System (VSS) 1440 that allows multiple switches to appear as one. (Btw, IEEE 802.3ad requires awareness of what's going on on all the links. This isn't a limitation of the VSWITCH.) We operate in that way and found a major drawback: The physical

Re: VSWITCH - OSA-Ports connected different physical switches

: Thursday, February 19, 2009 7:00 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] VSWITCH - OSA-Ports connected different physical switches On Thursday, 02/19/2009 at 08:33 EST, Hürlimann Heinz (KIUT 33) heinz.huerlim...@credit-suisse.com wrote: Hello, according to the documentation, a z

Re: NFS, Firewalls and ports

V3. Problem is made difficult by the dynamic allocations of ports via the portmapper. You can display the ports on both the NFS Server and Client using: rpcinfo -p You need to fix the ports for rpc.mountd and the lockd, so that you have known ports to add to your firewall. for the mountd you need

NFS, Firewalls and ports

Good morning (or evening, depenging) everyone. I am hoping someone can shed some light on something for me... Trying to a read-only NFS export of a directory through the DMZ firewall to a local linux instance. From what I have read, NFSV4 uses port 2049 to make it's connections. Presumable this

Re: NFS, Firewalls and ports

Subject Re: NFS, Firewalls and ports Please respond

Re: NFS, Firewalls and ports

, September 18, 2007 8:42 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: NFS, Firewalls and ports Good morning (or evening, depenging) everyone. I am hoping someone can shed some light on something for me... Trying to a read-only NFS export of a directory through the DMZ firewall to a local linux instance

Re: NFS, Firewalls and ports

You also need to punch a hole in the firewall for port 111 (portmapper). Dell Harris On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 10:42 -0500, James Melin wrote: Good morning (or evening, depenging) everyone. I am hoping someone can shed some light on something for me... Trying to a read-only NFS export of a

Re: NFS, Firewalls and ports

Subject Re: NFS, Firewalls and ports Please respond

Re: NFS, Firewalls and ports

-Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Melin Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 10:42 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: NFS, Firewalls and ports Good morning (or evening, depenging) everyone. I am hoping someone can shed

Re: NFS, Firewalls and ports

Subject Re: NFS, Firewalls and ports Please respond to Linux on 390 Port LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: NFS, Firewalls and ports

Dell Harris wrote: You may need to add the ESTABLISHED,RELATED rule to your firewallI'm assuming you are using iptables ... If so the rule syntax is as follows: iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT If you're using netfilter, then shorewall is really worth a

Re: NFS, Firewalls and ports

Subject Re: NFS, Firewalls and ports Please respond

NFS question on statd and lockd ports ....

I have posted this question to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] with no response yet. Any assistance on this would be appreciated. I noticed that when I set the lockd (lockmngr) ports to a specific static port that the statd (status) port is set to the same port. Should I also set statd (status

Re: NFS question on statd and lockd ports ....

. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Terry Spaulding Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 9:56 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: NFS question on statd and lockd ports I have posted this question to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] with no response yet

Re: NFS question on statd and lockd ports ....

Thanks for the responses. I just received another response from Neil: I noticed that when I set the lockd ports to specific port that the statd port is set to the same port. This behavior is specific to SLES9 and SLES10. The kernels in those distributions contain statd

Re: Public Ports of Research compilers.

of libraries,, which are probably not significant. The ALGOL compiler would be nice addition to the set of public ports if only for historical reasons. The other aspect of the has to do with ( Flamers start your engines now ) the ECLIPZ project. Rumor and speculation has it that the Micro/Milli code

enable/disable tcp ports

We have an app that will hang up a tcp port. The only way we know to free it up is to down the server. yes we bring the app down but it doesn't help. Is there a way to kill a port then bring it back?? We are running sles 9 sp3. thanks Mace

Re: enable/disable tcp ports

Issue 'netstat -anp'. That will show any other processes (by process number) that may be using the port. LJ Mace wrote: We have an app that will hang up a tcp port. The only way we know to free it up is to down the server. yes we bring the app down but it doesn't help. Is there a way to

Re: enable/disable tcp ports

On Fri, Mar 2, 2007 at 10:02 AM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rich Smrcina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Issue 'netstat - anp'. That will show any other processes (by process number) that may be using the port. Note that this has to be done as root. Unprivileged user's can't use the p option.

Re: enable/disable tcp ports

Indeed, and I didn't mean to imply that the display would be ordered by process number, it will show the process number as opposed to the command. Mark Post wrote: On Fri, Mar 2, 2007 at 10:02 AM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rich Smrcina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Issue 'netstat - anp'. That

Re: Ports

@VM.MARIST.EDU 08/03/2006 10:22 PM Please respond to Linux on 390 Port LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU From John Summerfied [EMAIL PROTECTED] To LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU cc Subject Re: Ports Marcy Cortes wrote: Thanks all. Richards iptables suggestion did the trick (with the IP changed to the IP

Re: Ports

Richard Troth wrote: John ... Some recent releases of 'nmap' lack that option. (I say recent describing systems which may still be on the 2.4 kernel, so no telling how far back the utilities may be.) But thanks for the tip! -- R, I guess that's one program you could update to a newer

Re: Ports

, August 02, 2006 17:55 To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Ports Yes. Install tcpwrappers and configure them to allow only access from local addresses. You can also do this with iptables, but tcpwrappers is probably less invasive. You and Richard both assume TCP. I don't know

Re: Ports

-p 80 ns Starting nmap 3.70 ( http://www.insecure.org/nmap/ ) at 2006-08-04 10:21 WST Warning: OS detection will be MUCH less reliable because we did not find at least 1 open and 1 closed TCP port Interesting ports on ns.demo.lan (192.168.9.4): PORT STATE SERVICE 80/tcp open http Device type

Re: Ports

David Boyes wrote: Yes. Install tcpwrappers and configure them to allow only access from local addresses. You can also do this with iptables, but tcpwrappers is probably less invasive. You and Richard both assume TCP. I don't know what Marcy's talking about, but it could be UDP. You further

Re: Ports

Yes. Install tcpwrappers and configure them to allow only access from local addresses. You can also do this with iptables, but tcpwrappers is probably less invasive. You and Richard both assume TCP. I don't know what Marcy's talking about, but it could be UDP. Possible, but unlikely. Most

Ports

I was asked this question. I'm sure it is, but what do you gurus use to do this. This would be Sles 8 server. Is it possible for you to disallow access on port 9045 for processes that are not running on localhost Marcy Cortes This message may contain confidential and/or privileged

Re: Ports

Hi, Marcy I think you could add this iptables command: iptables -A INPUT -p tcp ! -s 127.0.0.1 --dport 9045 -j DROP to accomplish what you want. Richard Marcy Cortes wrote: I was asked this question. I'm sure it is, but what do you gurus use to do this. This would be Sles 8 server. Is

Re: Ports

Hello Marcy, You should install and run SuSEfirewall. It is a quick way to do this. If possible, it would be even easier to configure the service to only listen to localhost. Unfortunately, not all services will easily allow this. You can configure SuSEfirewall from YaST or from the

Re: Ports

Yes. Install tcpwrappers and configure them to allow only access from local addresses. You can also do this with iptables, but tcpwrappers is probably less invasive. I was asked this question. I'm sure it is, but what do you gurus use to do this. This would be Sles 8 server. Is it

Re: 32768-32772 Ports: Security Issue

Massimiliano Belardi wrote: Guys, I'm checking the TCPIP ports on my zLinux System (SLES8 SP2) and i can notice that there are some ports between 32768 and 32772 opened. This ports seems that are opened by services asking and RPC. In my scenario, I have 2 Services working with RPC: NFS

Re: 32768-32772 Ports: Security Issue

* Why NFS and NFSLOCK use this ports instead of 111 (Portmapper)??? RPC services use portmapper to request a port to run on. The idea is to have the service come up, ask where it should run, and then run using the answer it is given. To do that, the service needs to have a fixed place to ask

Re: Sharing OSA GbE Ports

On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 08:06:43AM -0700, Mark T. Regan, K8MTR wrote: We are looking at setting up a Linux complex on z900 that will have both Internet connections and internal only connections. Can a OSA port be shared between Linux hosts that are in unsecured and secured environments

Sharing OSA GbE Ports

We are looking at setting up a Linux complex on z900 that will have both Internet connections and internal only connections. Can a OSA port be shared between Linux hosts that are in unsecured and secured environments without compromising security integrity? I.e. would someone be able to come in

MQ on Linux - multiple ports for multiple receive channels?

Anyone running MQ server on Linux LPAR / VM? From all I see, multiple MQ receive channels in our Linux LPAR requires different (listening) ports but our mainframe experts say that on the mainframe all receive channels are multiplexed through one port. MQ's default port is 1414. Oh, also can you

Re: MQ on Linux - multiple ports for multiple receive channels?

I see, multiple MQ receive channels in our Linux LPAR requires different (listening) ports but our mainframe experts say that on the mainframe all receive channels are multiplexed through one port. MQ's default port is 1414. Oh, also can you recommend any open source or otherwise

Re: MQ on Linux - multiple ports for multiple receive channels?

. Otherwise, it is also common in MQSeries to have different ports (1414, 1415, 1416, etc.) when multiple queue managers are running on the same machine with the same IP Address. Just make sure that your connection definitions (i.e. Channels) on the distributed machines use the correct port number