Ivica may "have it". 

We may have a similar situation.  One of our z/VM systems was designed to 
be IPLed at the same datacenter where the processor lives.  It's 
"consoles" are actually on a "mainframe LAN", and the "consoles" are 
actually PComm sessions connected to z/VM through a 2074 controller so 
that they appear to PComm as locally attached 3270's.  That way, when the 
system is IPLed, or (God forbid) fails, there is no TCPIP stack 
requirement for messages to appear on the console.

But one day Console Operations added a Console Operations Center in the 
other (3+ miles away) "remote data center.  There have been no terminals 
connected via a 2074 controller to that z/VM system.   So Console 
Operations, unaware that they are using the z/VM TCPIP stack to logon to 
OPERATOR from that data center.  When they enter: SHUTDOWN REIPL, they 
only see a few (if any) of the shutdown messages before the "TCPIP" 
userid/service machine shuts down.  They they have to wait a few minutes 
for the SHUTDOWN REIPL to complete.  To get OPERATOR started quickly on 
that system, the "PROFILE EXEC" for "OPERATOR" includes "CP TERMINAL MORE 
0 0 HOLD OFF", and the "PROFILE EXEC" for "AUTOLOG1" contains "CP XAUTOLOG 
TCPIP". 

Console Operations waits a couple minutes and then starts repetitively 
clicking on PComm's "Communications>Disconnect", and then 
"Communications>Connect".  After a few minutes, once the TCPIP stack has 
initialized, the session pops up and they can "LOGON OPERATOR HERE" and 
also logon sundry other userids from that data center.  When it won't 
reconnect after a few minutes, they call the original data center for 
someone to look at the OPERATOR console to see what went wrong, or someone 
has to drive to that data center to take a look.  Why not just IPL from 
that Data Center?  Let's not go there...

Is that "best practices"?  Absolutely not!  But then, no one consulted 
with us sysprogs before creating the Operations Center in that data center 
and splitting the Console Operations staff between the two data centers. 
It's been like that for a few years.  I've repeatedly begged and groveled 
for some 2074-connected terminal sessions between the "remote" data center 
and that z/VM system.  Just last week a renewed session of begging and 
groveling paid off... some should be defined this weekend.

Mike Walter 
Hewitt Associates 
Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily 
represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates.



"Ivica Brodaric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 

Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" <[email protected]>
07/27/2008 11:45 AM
Please respond to
"The IBM z/VM Operating System" <[email protected]>



To
[email protected]
cc

Subject
Re: z/VM IPL






What did you put in Operator_consoles in SYSTEM CONFIG? That defines where 
will you get the first messages after the IPL. You have to give us a bit 
more than "it doesn't come up". There are many things in VM that may or 
may not come up depending on how you configure it.

When you say "remotely" I assume you mean that you are accessing VM 
through TCPIP and you are not getting a signon screen.

Did you put 'XAUTOLOG TCPIP' in PROFILE EXEC of AUTOLOG1 user? If you 
didn't, TCPIP stack will not come up. That's just one thing that may not 
come up.

Which reader files were you going through? How can you possibly go through 
reader files if the system didn't come up?

Ivica





The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may 
contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from 
disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this 
message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender 
by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any 
dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by 
anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. All messages 
sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by 
applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies 
and to protect our business. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to 
be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or 
contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate 
with us by e-mail. 

Reply via email to