Hal, I'm pretty sure you are using VIPA as I would expect but a couple of clarifications might help.
I think you may have missed a word out in your sentence "So, you assign as many VIPA addresses as you need to each application." Perhaps this should be "So, you assign as many VIPA addresses as you need, one to each application." I can't see you would need multiple VIPAs for one application. You describe associating the existence of a VIPA with the application such that, when the application begins, the VIPA exists and, when the application ends, the VIPA no longer exists. Just as a matter of curiosity really, do you do this by means of the PORT statement BIND parameter - as John Giltner appears to - or do you use a job step which calls the MODDVIPA program or, possibly, some other automation based on the moddvipa command in order to introduce and remove the VIPA to and from the appropriate LPAR. And now I've thought of another question: Do you use the Automatic Recovery Manager (ARM) function in order to restart an application in another LPAR following a failure? To my mind dynamic VIPA and ARM tend to go together. There was an issue with VIPAs and OMPROUTE OSPF dynamic routing. Ideally it should be possible to advertise a VIPA using a "host", single (the VIPA itself) address rather than a subnet range. When I examined setting this up in 2001, the last time I consulted on this topic, I seem to recall this ideal was not possible. Has anything changed or is it still necessary to assign, say, 4 addresses to each dynamic VIPA in order to advertise availability of individual dynamic VIPAs outside the LPAR? Of course, the waste may not really be a problem when assigning addresses from, say, network 10 in an intranet. Chris Mason ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hal Merritt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, 22 February, 2006 10:43 PM Subject: Re: TCP/IP over Cisco router CIP > Gee, I sure am glad no one told us it could not be done. I have two > OSA's servicing five LPARs with 15 'static' IP addresses each and > another dozen VIPA's that wander around. > > I want very much to use the third OSA and dynamic routing to eliminate a > single point of failure, but the network folks aren't on board yet. > > Is Cisco the root source of this misinformation? There seems to be a > number of very curious misperceptions that seem to be common to Cisco > trained folks. > > OBTW: one reason for lots of VIPA's is where you have lots of IP > applications and you want to be able to move them around to different > LPARs. So, you assign as many VIPA addresses as you need to each > application. You then include the VIPA adds to the application startup > process and VIPA deletes to the shutdown process. Works well for us. > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Kittendorf, Craig > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 11:41 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: TCP/IP over Cisco router CIP > > Our network people and their hired consultant insist that we can not > have multiple IP address on one OSA. The also refer to VIPA as "viper", > maybe because the consultant claimed we were creating "poisoned" routes. > Anyway we do have a VIPA and three OSA-E cards working perfectly. > > I don't understand why 'you "should" be using lots of VIPA' with our one > stack? > > Thanks, > Craig ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
