On Wednesday, 07/09/2008 at 10:11 EDT, Shimon Lebowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Question 1: > I want to move to VSWITCH for the double-OSA failover > capability. But I have 2 VM LPARs, and 2, not 4, OSAs. > Assuming this picture: > (Richard: Please use monospace fon, or paste into Notepad) :-) > +---------------+---------------+ > | lpar a | lpar b | > | | | > | | | > | VMtcp a | VMtcp b | > +-----------+---+----+----------+ > | OSA1 | > +--------+ > | > | > ========LAN=10.0.0.0/16========== > Where tcp-a is 10.0.0.12, and tcp-b > is 10.0.0.7, and today they share the > same (single) OSA1. > If I put a VSWITCH in lpar-a, using both > OSA1 and OSA2, what do I do with lpar-b? > Can I really not put a VSWITCH in each LPAR > using the same pair of OSAs?
Out of habit, I use the standard terminology of internet standards. SHOULD NOT means that you may, but it is not recommended. You can do as you describe, but you inhibit your use of Link Aggregation should you need it. > Question 2: This question is independent of the first one > Is there any problem with VMtcp-a, with IP 10.0.0.12, > acting as a virtual router to a virtual machine in its > LPAR, connected to it by a CTC? > If my network routes traffic to > 10.1.2.2 via 10.0.0.12, will the VSWITCH OSA give that > traffic to VMtcp-a to deal with? At the time I had experimented > with this, but it had failed. I do not remember getting any > ideas why, and the archives don't show any answer. If you are using a layer 3 VSWITCH, then you must define it (the VSWITCH) with PRIROUTER. Remember that you can have only one PRIROUTER per OSA, so a port sharing arrangement can, again, cause problems. If you are using layer 2, then it works with no problems. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
