>From this console info I'd say that the problem is on de system with
the receiver IPGATE.  I don't remember the details, but somehow that
IPGATE must present itself to LNXSFS as MARCY when the initial APPC
CONNECT is made.  I see that I gave IPGATE permission to the VMBATCH
RACF profiles of all users.  I guess that's required.  Do you have an
ESM?  Else, IPGATE only needs CLASS B.  Here's part
the CP directory entry, it lists OPTION COMSRV, a CP requirement to
allow IPGATE to setup APPC connections for other userIDs than its own.
USER IPGATE NONOLOG 32M 64M BG 64
* Route APPC over TCP/IP
   INCLUDE GENERCMS
   ACCOUNT IPGATE C/O-8541
   IUCV *IDENT GATEANY GATEWAY REVOKE
   IUCV ALLOW
   IUCV *IDENT RESANY GLOBAL
   OPTION COMSRV MAXCONN 400 QUICKDSP

2008/8/20 Marcy Cortes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The consoles look all happy - the sender (client) says:
> IPGATEY0000000013 started.
> IPGATEY0000000013 Request from MARCY for LNXSFS at 4567 10.103.28.161
> IPGATEY0000000013 Thread terminating ... Read rc = 0 (0 )
> IPGATEY0000000013 ended.
>
> The receiver (where LNXSFS lives) says:
> IPGATEI0000000004 started. (3 2 AF_INET 3279 10.93.27.253)
> IPGATEI0000000004 User MARCY from 10.93.27.253 has been accepted for LNXSFS
> IPGATEI0000000004 ended.
>
> I have admin auth on the filepool for myself, so that's not it.  And I can 
> get to the filepool from a system in the ISFC collection (over ctc), so I 
> don't think its missing anything either.
>
>
>
>
> Marcy
>
>
> "This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you 
> are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you 
> must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any 
> information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise 
> the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for 
> your cooperation."
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> Kris Buelens
> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:34 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [IBMVM] IPGATE question
>
> Did you have a look at the consoles of the two involved IPGATE users?
>
> As for Query RESOURCE: on the remote systems, IPGATE must be the owning 
> userid of the filepool.  That's the trick: IPGATE tells CP it is the owner of 
> the filepool resource.  Hence if a connect request comes in, CP sends it to 
> IPGATE, IPGATE reads the APPC message and sends that -using TCP/IP- to its 
> IPGATE partner at the central site, where that I¨PGATE users issues an APPC 
> connect request that CP then needs to resolve.
> I don't remember what IPGATE tells on its console, but a TCP/IP session 
> should be built between both IPGATE users.  I think the central IPGATE will 
> check the authorisation of the remote user before it tries to reach SFS, 
> which in turn can refuse the connection.
>
> 2008/8/20 Marcy Cortes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> Tried it both ways.
>>
>> The other system that works looks like this:
>> Resource: POOL1     Type: Local   Owning Userid: IPGATE
>>
>> acc pool1:marcy. c
>>
>> Ready; T=0.01/0.01 10:05:04
>>
>> q disk c
>>
>> LABEL  VDEV M  STAT   CYL TYPE BLKSZ   FILES  BLKS USED-(%) BLKS LEFT
>> BLK TOTAL
>> -      DIR  C   R/W     -    - 4096      142             -          -
>> -
>> Ready; T=0.01/0.01 10:06:44
>>
>> q search
>>
>> MDC191  191   A    R/W
>>
>> -       DIR   C    R/W   POOL1:MARCY.
>>
>> MNT325  325   H    R/O
>>
>> MNT319  319   P    R/O
>>
>> MNT190  190   S    R/O
>>
>> ISP192  301   V    R/O
>>
>> MNT19E  19E   Y/S  R/O
>>
>> MON198  120   Z    R/O
>>
>> Ready; T=0.01/0.01 10:06:47
>>
>>
>>
>> The only difference I can find in the 2 configuration is the difference
>> in TCPIPUSERID.   I may have to go create a stack with that name TCPIP
>> in order to prove that (fun fun).
>>
>> I can access LNXSFS from the other systems in the ISFC collection just
>> fine to so I'm pretty sure the SFS is set up correctly.
>>
>>
>>
>> Marcy
>>
>>
>> "This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the
>> addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based
>> on this message or any information herein. If you have received this
>> message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail
>> and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation."
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Behalf Of Imler, Steven J
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:04 AM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [IBMVM] IPGATE question
>>
>> I think you need to make the LNXSFS FilePool a *global* resource ...
>>
>>
>> JR (Steven) Imler
>> CA
>> Senior Sustaining Engineer
>> Tel: +1 703 708 3479
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On
>> > Behalf Of Marcy Cortes
>> > Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 01:02 PM
>> > To: [email protected]
>> > Subject: Re: IPGATE question
>> >
>> > Hmm.  Well, I see it is picking up the correct TCPIPUSERID by peering
>> > into IPGATE1 MTREXX.   It seems to accept the connection:
>> >
>> > flag"
>> >
>> > IPGATEI0000000006 started. (3 2 AF_INET 3276 10.93.27.253)
>> >
>> > IPGATEI0000000006 User MARCY from 10.93.27.253 has been accepted for
>> > LNXSFS
>> > IPGATEI0000000006 ended.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > And yet on the remote system I get:
>> > acc lnxsfs:sles9. c
>> > DMSACR1151E File pool LNXSFS is unavailable Ready(00055);
>> > T=0.01/0.01
>> > 10:00:32
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Q resource on the remote system indicates it is there too:
>> > Resource: LNXSFS    Type: Local   Owning Userid: IPGATE
>> >
>> > I can't see anything I might have misconfigured - it is simple
>> > really
>> -
>> > and I do have it running to another system.
>> >
>> > Anyone have a clue what I could check next?
>> >
>> > Marcy
>> >
>> > "This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
>> If
>> > you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the
>> > addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action
>> > based
>> on
>> > this message or any information herein. If you have received this
>> > message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply
>> > e-mail
>>
>> > and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation."
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On
>> > Behalf Of Thomas Kern
>> > Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 8:51 AM
>> > To: [email protected]
>> > Subject: Re: [IBMVM] IPGATE question
>> >
>> > I have a second stack to use the HyperSockets between a CP and an
>> > IFL systems. The IPGATE servers have a TCPIP DATA on their A-disk
>> > which defin= es the TCPIPUSERID.
>> >
>> > /Tom Kern
>> > /301-903-2211
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:39:53 -0500, Marcy Cortes
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > >Is anyone using IPGATE with a TCPIP stack who has a name other than
>> > >TCPIP?  I have one system working and another which doesn't and
>> that's
>> > >the only difference I can find.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >Marcy
>
>
>
> --
> Kris Buelens,
> IBM Belgium, VM customer support
>



-- 
Kris Buelens,
IBM Belgium, VM customer support

Reply via email to