Alan, Would you mind telling a little more about the problems with OSPF and netmask? Also, do I understand correctly that z/VM will act as a router in a dynamic routing environment?
Thanks for your help, Regards, Michael At 12:30 PM 1/17/2002 -0500, you wrote: >On Thursday, 01/17/2002 at 10:03 EST, "Post, Mark K" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: > > Since you're going to be using point-to-point connections between z/VM >and > > your Linux/390 guests, the netmask on _those_ connections will (have to) >be > > 255.255.255.255. The netmask of the connection between z/VM and your >WAN is > > a totally separate issue, so if they want you to use 255.255.255.252, >then > > go ahead. (It's a pretty _small_ subnet, but since you've only got one > > system in it (z/VM itself), that should be OK.) > >Mark, if you use static routing, then 255.255.255.255 (HOST) routes are >ok. If you use dynamic routing (esp. OSPF), then I suggest .252. (I've >seen enough OSPF routing/config problems to convince me, even if it annoys >me philosophically.) > >Regards, >Alan > >IBM Senior Software Engineer >z/VM Development, Endicott, NY >Phone 607.752.6027 fax 607.752.1497 t/l 852
