> On Sep 28, 2016, at 11:49 PM, Brian Westerman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Now that most mainframes (at least for the past several years) have > OSA-ICC's, there is no reason to worry about not having a console connection > remotely. We routinely define 16 consoles and 16 3270's (non-console) to > each LPAR (a few more for production LPARs sometimes). I can't think of the > last time that I couldn't get into any of the client mainframes that wasn't a > flat-out network issue, and that can't normally be handled from z/OS anyway. > That's why you have network appliances to control the network. > > You need to make sure that you ALWAYS have multiple points of entry to the > LPARs available to you, TCP to OSA, TCP to OSA-ICC, LPAR to LPAR, etc. If a > site is still using and/or paying for a local control unit and 3270's when > their system supports OSA-ICC they really need to think about spending their > money more wisely. I would trust an OSA-ICC a lot more than some old 3274. > The ICC's are cheap enough that really worried sites can purchase a backup. > > If you need to enter the computer room to get or keep your site working, then > you are doing something wrong. I'm not saying that you might not need to get > to the HMC, but if you physically have to go to it to use it, then you have > set things up badly. > > We do have a couple very old sites (who don't have OSA-ICC's) where the > backup way in is the HMC, and then a dial-up to the HMC in case the network > to the HMC fails. One of the banks we support still has local 3274 control > units on a z800, and they have a phone line attached to a PC in the computer > room that is wired directly to the 3274 via CUT. We have never needed to use > it, but we still test it out once a month. > > In my opinion, in the end, it's up to you as the consultant to make sure that > you can get in if there is a problem. If you don't set it up right or can't, > then you're in the wrong business. This is not meant as a comment on > anyone's abilities, not everyone is going to know how to set things up for > 100% remote support without doing some research. In my case, I helped to > design some of it, so I'm able to work comfortably with it. > > Brian
Brian: One of there specific episodes we had was that the master console was the only one that was “talking”. As to other options you listed the auditors cut them off years ago and no use arguing with them (BTDT). As for HMC remote access again the auditors wouldn’t allow it no matter how much we argued (besides I sort of agree with them on the HMC issue). I won’t go into the old xmas party story I use regularly on here and what could happen. Ed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
