> Yes, that was what I thought. But I received an answer from someone at > IBM (regarding a DITTO problem between nodes) that indicated that a > virtual CTC would work. I believe that person must have been mistaken, > because I cannot see how! So, I approached the list for verification!
At one point in the past, Princeton University had a tool for extending CTC connections over IP, written specifically for extending NJE connections (ie, before RSCS had TCPNJE support). It worked very well for that purpose. I did a little bit of tinkering with it at a previous job and got it to support VTAM PU connections, but those mods are long lost in the holocaust at the end of that employer's VM system, and now that Princeton is mainframe-free, I suspect the source to that tool is also lost. BCTCs are highly lock-step devices (ESCON CTCs are too, just different); it's easy to stall one in a funny state you can't get out of without a reset, or have to deal with missing interrupts. If you try to extend them over a media that doesn't support guaranteed delivery in real time, it gets *very* interesting. What are you trying to do with the ISLINK connection? SFS? If so, find a copy of IPGATE, which will transport APPC over IP. We use it heavily for sharing SFS pools between VM systems. Remote PERFKIT sessions appear to work as well (if you actually understand enough about APPC to configure the COMDIR entries correctly).
