When we had multiple machines, we insisted that we had consistent device numbering for consoles, tapes, DASD and printers. We wanted the Operators
and hardware maintenance to always know exactly which device was acting u p, being worked on, being replaced, being returned to production. The only differences we accepted were Master console addresses (MVS had 4 16, VM had 420) and IPL address. We still maintain this within our LPARS and even run z/OS under z/VM at t he DR site so that the z/OS support staff doesn't have to worry about an I/O change. /Tom Kern /301-903-2211 On Fri, 30 May 2008 09:33:24 -0400, Alan Altmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: >Pop quiz: > >For those of you who have multiple boxes (CECs) sharing devices, do you >assign the same device number in the IOCDS to the device for each CEC? > >Example: Given a shared 3390 volume, if it is known as device number 80 0 >on CEC A, do you assign it device number 800 on CEC B? > >If you don't do that, what device numbering scheme do you use? > >Alan Altmark >z/VM Development >IBM Endicott >======================== ========================= ========================
