On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:23:53 -0500, Mark Zelden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 12:50:29 -0700, Skip Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: > >>I put this question to IBM recently and learned a difference between >>parallel sysplex (with CF) and basic sysplex (without). With CF supporting >>XCF, other systems are notified when one member is truly down. Without a >>CF, other systems *believe* a member is down but need operator >>confirmation. >> >>That difference matches our experience across the enterprise. >> > >Is that true even with an SFM policy? > Bill already answered here: http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0804&L=ibm-main&D=1&T=0&O=D&F=&S=&P=247575 Also good posts and references from Scott and Barbara. I want to make sure I have these 2 points correct... For a planned removal (V XCF,sysname,offline) in a parallel sysplex OR basic sysplex, you will not see IXC102A if you have an active and properly configured SFM policy. For an unplanned removal, you will see IXC102A regardless of any SFM policy in a basic sysplex but may not see it in a parallel sysplex depending on your SFM policy. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
