I guess my main drive to use a common guest LAN was to avoid having to assign a unique device set for each zLinux guest by specifying a SPECIAL definition in each. The main use for the Hipersocket connections would be to run zLinux backup/restore processing based on the MVS platform, and I theorized that the MVS Hipersocket device would be a bottleneck anyway so why not use TCPIP as a centralized source. It sounds like using Guest LANs is the wrong answer, even though it would work.
I really need to have this process available no matter which physical CEC MVS happens to be on, so I would need an alternative route for the Hipersocket devices. It sounds like Alan's "HiperSocket VSWITCH Bridge" could be an option, but multiple people (including Alan) have recommended using direct Hipersocket device definitions for each zLinux user. If I make it simple and define unique devices to each user, how do I fail over to a different device if MVS moves to another machine? I'm also going to be limited as to the number of zLinux users on any given CHPID, or is that number high enough that its not an issue? Chet Norris ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
