I have CTCs from the z/OS LPARs to the other z/OS LPARs. I have reviewed
the z/OS routes but see no problems. The problem only exist between z/OS
and Linux. It seems that Linux wants to send it somewhere else? We run
OSPF on on z/OS with the CTC as static routes. He is an excerpt of the
z/OS routes in case I missed something.
;
DEVICE CTC2 CTC 1062 IOBUFFERSIZE 32K AUTORESTART
LINK CTCTC CTC 0 CTC2
;;
HOME
161.186.98.20 MAINPEPT
10.28.93.20 FE1 ; OSA Express Fast Ethernet card
10.28.91.20 FE2 ; OSA Express Fast Ethernet card
161.186.86.9 CTCTP ;Test to Prod
161.186.86.5 CTCTC ;Test to CEC
;
IPCONFIG VARSUBNETTING
IPCONFIG SOURCEVIPA
IPCONFIG IGNOREREDIRECT
IPCONFIG DEVRETRYDUR 0
IPCONFIG NODATAGRAMFWD
;
; ADD STATIC ROUTE FOR THE CTC
; HOST FIRST LINK PACKET
; HOP NAME SIZE
GATEWAY
;
; NETWORK FIRST LINK PACKET SUBNET SUBNET
; HOP NAME SIZE MASK VALUE
161.186 = CTCTP 65527 0.0.255.252 0.0.86.8
161.186 = CTCTC 32760 0.0.255.252 0.0.86.4
;
PRIMARYINTERFACE MAINPEPT
Adam Thornton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
03/26/2004 12:25 PM
Please respond to Linux on 390 Port
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: Re: CTC Route Problem
On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 10:40, Peter E. Abresch Jr. - at Pepco wrote:
> Like I said, I can ping 161.186.86.5 from 161.186.86.6 with no problems.
I
> CANNOT ping 161.186.86.6 from 161.186.86.5. An ifconfig ctc0 shows that
> the RX PACKETS increases by 1 each time I issue a ping from z/OS. This
led
> me to believe that the pings were getting to Linux from z/OS but not
> finding their way back. I use static routes for the CTCs on both Linux
and
> z/OS. To simplify, I deleted all routes except for the CTC route which
is
> as follows:
On z/OS, you must have an appropriate GATEWAY statement, saying that all
traffic for 161.186.86.5 should go via CTC-whatever, or you wouldn't be
able to ping Linux.
> 161.186.86.4/30 dev ctc0 proto kernel scope link 161.186.86.6
>
> I could not ping from z/OS. I added the following route and I can ping
> Linux from z/OS via CTC all day long.
>
> 161.186.0.0/16 via 161.186.86.6 dec ctc0 scope link
Try 161.186.86.6/32 via 161.186.86.5
and see what happens (that is, add a host route with no explicit
dependence on the interface name), and after that try
0/0 via 161.186.86.6
to add a default route via z/OS.
I'm always a little nervous about using device names rather than IP
addresses to control routing.
Adam
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or
visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
