Jr,

Unfortunately, I have no weight to make the hardware change his position on
this. I suppose I could use 'RMS supports PtP as a single node VTS' as a new
argument to reopen an issue. But I think I found people more stubborn than
me.

Alain

  

Le 25/03/08 23:08, « Imler, Steven J » <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :

> Hi Alain,
> 
> I thought your finally got this ironed out and the problem was resolved?
> 
> As Les states, that restriction was removed and this should not be a
> problem.  We have several customers who run P2P configurations and do
> not have this problem.  VM:Tape was changed (back) to use the TARGETCAT
> VOLSPECIFIC option on MOUNT SCRATCH requests at least 2 GenLevels ago
> (probably 5 or 6 years ago).
> 
> JR (Steven) Imler
> CA
> Senior Software Engineer
> Tel:  +1 703 708 3479
> Fax:  +1 703 708 3267
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Les Geer (607-429-3580)
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 03:03 PM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: Question about virtual tape in a zVM environment
>> 
>>> I suppose you would be aware of our peer-to-peer problem.
>>> 
>>> When we got a 2nd 3494 in 2004, we decided to make them talk
>> each other
>>> as P2P mode.  This situation revealed a major problem
>> related to the target
>>> category. In basic mode, asking to mount a scratch through
>> vmtape, rmsmastr
>>> changed the category from scratch to volspecific. No more
>> true in P2P (for us).
>>> We have upgraded our 3494, we have opened PMR, we have asked the IBM
>>> hardware their advice with no result. We even asked the
>> dfsms doc to be
>>> changed related the p2p part to make it clearer.
>>> 
>>> We had to developp something to change the categories
>> according to what
>>> has been mounted during the day. I would really like to know
>> if someone is
>>> in the same situation
>>> 
>> 
>> I was under the impression with more recent PtP microcode levels the
>> restriction on a mount that a target category could not be specified
>> was removed.
>> 
>> 
>> Best Regards,
>> Les Geer
>> IBM z/VM and Linux Development
>> 
>> 
> 

Reply via email to