Paul,

yesterday we did a SSL test. We have two overlapping cluster - one using
SSL, the other one without SSL. We use to systems - one z/OS host and one
AIX server - for the tests. Both systems are members of both clusters.

First we put the queues into the non-SSL cLuster. The messages were sent
from a z/OS host to an AIX system and back via cluster queues. On AIX an
application reads the messages, creates an answer and puts them to a respond
queue. I could see (using your famous MO71 support pac ;-) ), that the
message were transmitted via the non-SSL channel in both directions.

Then we altered the queues and put them to the SSL cluster. From z/OS to AIX
the messages were now sent via the SSL channel - fine. But on the way back,
the messages were sent via the non-SSL channel :-(.

Would you expect such a behaviour? We did no cluster refresh, but with MQMON
I could verify, that the queues we use did really move from the non-SSL to
the SSL cluster.

Regards
Hubert


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von:  MQSeries List [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] im Auftrag
> von Kleinmanns, Hubert (ext.)
> Gesendet am:  Montag, 25. Juli 2005 17:15
> An:   [email protected]
> Betreff:      AW: AW: MQ Clustering question
> 
> Paul,
> 
> let me describe a possible scenario:
> 
> 1. QMgr QM1 hosts two queues: Q.SECURE and Q.FAST.
> 
> 2. Messages to Q.SECURE have to be send via a SSL channel.
> 
> 3. Messages to Q.FAST have to be send via a non-SSL channel.
> 
> 4. QM1 is a member of two clusters CL_SECURE and CL_FAST.
> 
> 5. Cluster receiver on QM1 are named TO.QM1.SEC (defined for cluster
> CL_SECURE) and TO.QM1.FAST (defined for cluster CL_FAST). 
> 
> 6. An application connected to another QMgr QM2 - which is member of both
> clusters too - puts message, with high security impact to queue Q.SECURE
> and
> other messages, with high speed requirements to queues Q.FAST.
> 
> In this scenario QM2 knows two different ways to QM1. Would messages to
> queue Q.SECURE be sent over channel TO.QMGR1.SEC only or over both
> channel?
> How can I assure, that message to queue Q.SECURE are NOT send over the
> insecure channel TO.QM1.FAST?
> 
> Regards
> Hubert
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von:        MQSeries List [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] im
> Auftrag
> > von Paul Clarke
> > Gesendet am:        Donnerstag, 21. Juli 2005 17:35
> > An: [email protected]
> > Betreff:    Re: AW: MQ Clustering question
> > 
> > Hubert,
> > 
> > Sorry for the delay - I've been on leave.
> > 
> > I'm not sure what you want me to explain or in fact what your concern
> is.
> > Bear in mind that MQ does its routing in two stages. If the QM is not
> > local
> > all it cares about is how to get to the QM. If the QM is local then it
> > routes to the individual queue. So, if you're targetting a remote QM
> (via
> > a
> > remote queue if necessary) all MQ will concern itself with is "do I know
> > how to get to this remote QM". We don't care what the target queue name
> is
> > and therefore don't need a cluster definition of it. This is the same
> > principle temporary reply queues work and why you don't need a remote
> > queue
> > definition for each remote queue your sending messages to. Anyway,
> > presumably you have a cluster queue manager telling MQ how to get to
> your
> > remote QM so off it goes.
> > 
> > Clustering is still very useful to send messages to non-cluster queues
> and
> > just using it as a way to manage the channel definitions etc.
> > 
> > Does this clarify at all ?
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > P.
> > 
> > Paul G Clarke
> > WebSphere Messaging Clients
> > IBM Hursley
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > MQSeries List <[email protected]> wrote on 14/07/2005
> > 13:46:30:
> > 
> > > T.Rob, David,
> > >
> > > I do not know, who is right. I would expect a behaviour as David
> > describes,
> > > but I would be not very surprised, whe T.Rob is right. I am in doubt,
> > > because MQ tries to find a way to the target QMgr. E. g. when you
> define
> > a
> > > remote queue without having a local tranmission queue and "normal"
> > sender
> > /
> > > receiver channel, but MQ "knows" a cluster channel to the target QMgr,
> > the
> > > message will be send using the cluster channel, although the remote
> > queue
> > as
> > > well as the target queue are NOT in any cluster.
> > >
> > > Maybe we need a "real" expert (like Paul Clarke ;-) ) to clarify the
> > > situation.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Hubert
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > > Von:   MQSeries List [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] im
> > Auftrag
> > > > von David C. Partridge
> > > > Gesendet am:   Donnerstag, 14. Juli 2005 14:32
> > > > An:   [email protected]
> > > > Betreff:   Re: MQ Clustering question
> > > >
> > > > T. Rob said:
> > > >
> > > > >When you have overlapping clusters and two channels leading to the
> > same
> > > > instance of
> > > > >a cluster queue, both channels are eligible to send the message.
> > > > >This is true even if the channels are in different clusters and the
> > > > cluster
> > > > queue
> > > > >exists in only one of them.
> > > >
> > > > No that shouldn't happen IMO - if a cluster queue is defined in only
> > one
> > > > cluster, then only the cluster channels for THAT cluster should be
> > > > eligible
> > > > to send messages to that queue.   The APAR I was referring to in my
> > > > earlier
> > > > post related to the problem that it WAS behaving as you describe.
> > > >
> > > > I'm still trying to find out the relevant APAR number and platforms.
> > > >
> > > > David
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: MQSeries List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf
> > > > Of
> > > > Wyatt, T Rob
> > > > Sent: 14 July 2005 13:22
> > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > Subject: Re: MQ Clustering question
> > > >
> > > > Rao,
> > > >
> > > > Remember that clusters are really just namespaces.  When you have
> > > > overlapping clusters and two channels leading to the same instance
> of
> > a
> > > > cluster queue, both channels are eligible to send the message.  This
> > is
> > > > true
> > > > even if the channels are in different clusters and the cluster queue
> > > > exists
> > > > in only one of them.  You can set NETPRTY on the channels so one is
> > > > favored
> > > > over the other but that does not provide the QOS you want.
> > > >
> > > > I believe, and someone please correct me if I am wrong, that your
> only
> > > > option here is to create a workload exit or fall back to classic
> > channels.
> > > > If you use classic channels, they can coexist with the cluster, you
> > just
> > > > need to point the channels at QMgr aliases that are not known to the
> > > > cluster.  So if you want to send to cluster QMgr QM1 then you would
> > define
> > > > a
> > > > QMgr alias on it like...
> > > >
> > > > DEF QR(QM1.QOS) RQMNAME('QM')  RNAME(' ') CLUSTER(' ') CLUSNL(' ')
> > > >
> > > > On the sending side you need an XMitQ and channel to QM1.QOS.  As
> long
> > as
> > > > QM1.QOS is not known to the cluster, you can direct messages down
> this
> > > > channel.  You can have as many of these as you need such that normal
> > > > messages use the cluster channels and batch or large messages use
> one
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > QOS channels.
> > > >
> > > > Hope that helps so you don't have to tear down you cluster!
> > > >
> > > > -- T.Rob
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: MQSeries List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Behalf
> > > > Of
> > > > Rao Adiraju
> > > > Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 4:31 AM
> > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > Subject: MQ Clustering question
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Fellas
> > > >
> > > > We have connected two queue managers - say QM1 and QM2 by putting
> them
> > in
> > > > a
> > > > cluster. We have a requirement to support Quality of Service (Qos) -
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > sense we need three separate channels between them to support
> online,
> > > > batch,
> > > > bulk data transfer.
> > > >
> > > > So the next suggestion came is - to define three clusters between
> > these
> > > > same
> > > > two queue managers with each cluster having its own Cluster sender /
> > > > Receiver channels to support this QOS.
> > > >
> > > > Here comes my question - in Cluster SENDER channel definitions I
> > didn't
> > > > see
> > > > any option of specifying transmission queue name and what I have
> seen
> > is
> > > > all
> > > > three sender channels are polling on SYSEM.CLUSTER.TRANSMIT.QUEUE.
> So
> > even
> > > > going to this length, am I stuck up with Single Transmission queue
> ???
> > > >
> > > > 1) Is there a way to tie up each Cluster Sender channel to a
> specified
> > > > transmission queue or not.
> > > >
> > > > 2) Is there any other way of implementing clusters so that the three
> > QoS
> > > > can
> > > > be supported.
> > > >
> > > > My personal preference is to get rid of this clustering and use DQM
> -
> > with
> > > > three different transmission queues, three Sender channels.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks in advance
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > >
> > > > Rao
> > > >
> > > > *****************************************************
> > > > *               Rao ADIRAJU                         *
> > > > *  Distributed Systems Consultants Pty. Ltd.        *
> > > > *   GPO Box 1177, Canberra - ACT - 2601             *
> > > > *                  AUSTRALIA                        *
> > > > *      Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]                 *
> > > > *            [EMAIL PROTECTED]                *
> > > > *
> > > > * Tel:+61-419-022-126         Fax:+61-262-900-200   *
> > > > *****************************************************
> > > >
> > > > Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are
> provided
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com
> > > > Archive: http://listserv.meduniwien.ac.at/archives/mqser-l.html
> > > >
> > > > Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are
> provided
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com
> > > > Archive: http://listserv.meduniwien.ac.at/archives/mqser-l.html
> > > >
> > > > Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are
> provided
> > in
> > > > the Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com
> > > > Archive: http://listserv.meduniwien.ac.at/archives/mqser-l.html
> > >
> > > Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are provided
> in
> > > the Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com
> > > Archive: http://listserv.meduniwien.ac.at/archives/mqser-l.html
> > Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are provided in
> > the Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com
> > Archive: http://listserv.meduniwien.ac.at/archives/mqser-l.html
> 
> Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are provided in
> the Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com
> Archive: http://listserv.meduniwien.ac.at/archives/mqser-l.html

Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are provided in
the Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com
Archive: http://listserv.meduniwien.ac.at/archives/mqser-l.html

Reply via email to