> -----Original Message----- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of David Boyes > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 9:16 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Console Server equivalent for z/VM > > I guess I don't consider the HMC a component that common > citizens should > be permitted to manipulate. It certainly isn't something that the > unwashed masses should be permitted to touch, and it's not part of the > VM environment.
Agreed > > There are no tools within a VM system that can drive or > manipulate data > streams to the virtualized VT220 console. The HMC is not a VM > component > (in fact, it is deliberately OUTSIDE the scope of any operating system > by design), and the assumption that anyone needing that VT220 console > access should ALSO have either a) physical access to the HMC or b) > network access to the HMC is optimistic, IMHO. > Exactly my problem > It's not unusual these days for the machine to be several > hundred miles > away from the people, and/or physically inaccessible to even > the systems > people. ATTACHing a process that runs only on a closed box with no > external integration points isn't (at least IMHO) > exploitable. I'd also > really hesitate to allow your average Unix administrator access to > something like the HMC; the access controls exposed in the HMC UI are > just not manageable at any scale. If there's a way to integrate access > control via external sources into the HMC *that IBM is willing to > support*, I'd sure like to know where to read about it. > Right on the money > From a usability standpoint, it'd be my expectation to AT MINIMUM be > able to do SSL-protected telnet to a concentrator of some time and > select a connected system to interact with. Exactly what I was hoping someone could point me to. > > I don't disagree that the HMC has improved a LOT since the > MP2k days. I > do contest that it constitutes a good design management goal > to have it > in the loop for things that are in normal operations for virtual > machines. An HMC can do way too much harm to have that be attractive. Agreed. Thank you all for the differing suggestions, they all will be given some thought. Alan, if you need a request opened I'll be happy to work with you. "Email Firewall" made the following annotations. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Warning: All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the corporate e-mail system, and is subject to archival and review by someone other than the recipient. This e-mail may contain proprietary information and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient(s), you are notified that you have received this message in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately. ============================================================================== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
