On Wednesday, 01/17/2007 at 02:10 CST, Tom Duerbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Since VM/ESA 370 mode, I don't think I ever had HOME statements for > anything other than my VM system. That includes last week when we were > on z/VM 5.1. Now, I think I'm being told that I need a HOME statement > for each link statement. And now told that these few dozen HOME > statements, all need IP addresses that don't duplication any of my > HOSTs. So I'm really being dense here.... How, or what matches up the > IP address in the HOME entry to the IP address used by the HOST? And if > there is nothing that matches the two together, why have the entry in > the HOST section to begin with?
Just so you don't think you're going crazy, z/VM 5.2 tightened up the rules for the PROFILE. The rules have always been there, but the stack was forgiving and "it worked in spite of itself." - HOME identifies all of *your* IP addresses. - GATEWAY HOST entries identify all of your p2p *peers* You know the old saying, "One man's HOME is another man's HOST." Kinda like cross-coupling CTC pairs. OK, not really like it at all, but there is a ... symmetry ... in the configuration of p2p links. Your HOME address on the CTC or IUCV link will be configured as the "peer" IP address on the other host. Likewise, your HOST entry will be in the local interface configuration of the peer. As you've discovered in spades, getting those guests to a level that can use Guest LAN or VSWITCH is, like, a bazillion times better than hacking up (as you would a furball) a bunch of p2p configs. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
