Pat Edward's response was a bit ambiguous in his emphasis on the PLU. If you ignore the first paragraph he is simply confirming your "everything (probably) works". The PLU is irrelevant.
You may be sure that VTAM - let alone the TN3270E server - will not be interested in managing "Read Partition Query" exchanges on the SSCP-LU session - either the real one or the emulated one. I detect a tendency in your and Edward's responses to regard the possibility to use the enhancements to the 3270 data stream which came in with the 3279 - back in 1979 wasn't it? - as just a set of enhancements. It's rather more complicated than that. The purpose of the "Read Partition Query" request and response is to establish just which of the enhancements are actually present and in what shape - literally. If we assume that the possibilities are either basic or enhanced, then, if two sets of messages can be specified, one of each, it would make some sort of sense for VTAM or the TN3270E server to ask which applied and use the appropriate set. However, since the enhanced set can logically be constructed only on the basis of what is contained in the reply, even all this rigmarole doesn't make sense. But, but, but I hear you say, you're making too much of a fuss. What if the enhancement is understood to be limited to just colours and maybe extended highlighting such as underscores and reverse video. Unfortunately, this wouldn't work in the case of the 3290 which would happily claim to be "queryable" but would return only the possibility to present orange characters. Well, today's emulators don't restrict themselves just to emulating the 3290 ... As I indicated in the earlier response, it is only "good practice" to check before you "chance your arm". It's not really to be dignified as a *standard* in that, not having followed a standard, you are possibly going to hit a problem when there are some future enhancements which assume a standard has been followed - as if there were going to be any enhancements in this area in the future! Except perhaps one - one which perhaps from today might be described as a "Hilary Clinton"! There is a glaring deficiency in the TN3270E RFC - USS messages ***are*** involved in the case of the traditional SSCP-LU session in the exchanges over the SSCP-LU session. It is the availability of such USS messages - and the substitution of variables such as, and most importantly, the LU name - that allows the help desk scenario where a complaining end user can easily identify his/herself and his/her LU name so that the immediate problem can be solved and the trouble ticket created. Very stupidly RFC 1647 imagines that the only use for the SYSREQ function while a session is in place is to invoke the SSCP-assisted logoff. The fact that identifying information can be passed over, most conveniently USS message 5, has entirely escaped the authors of this otherwise excellent RFC. When you're in the game of emulating you should emulate everything. When you take short cuts, you're liable to discard unappreciated function. Chris Mason ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
