Yes, that did the trick. Thanks for the solution with such details!
Frank M. Ramaekers Jr.
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Vic Cross
Sent: Monday, March 8, 2021 9:43 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Hipersockets
Frank wrote:
>Okay, following along in "IBM HiperSockets Implementation Guide"
>Chapter 3 "Software configurations for HiperSockets. The command
>"ifconfig enccw0.0.0800 192.168.250.88 netmask 255.255.255.0 up"
>seems to work, only temporarily.
>
># ping 192.168.250.101
>PING 192.168.250.101
...specifically Clef (CentOS) 7.8. Adding hipersockets to a zLinux instance.
Okay, following along in "IBM HiperSockets Implementation Guide" Chapter 3
"Software configurations for HiperSockets. The command "ifconfig enccw0.0.0800
192.168.250.88 netmask 255.255.255.0 up" seems to work, only
Since I don't have z/VM yet, I'm installing in an LPAR (as I've posted
before). I have the opportunity to choose hipersockets for my
communications link - but since hipersockets are self-contained within
the z/Series hardware, if I choose to use them would I then be effectively
passing through
Well, I'm using both but this is for a client with z/VM with multiple
LPARs running linux servers. Hipersockets are great and allow for
large high volume data transfers between LPARs. One of IBM's favorite
configurations is a z/VM IFL with Websphere connecting to a z/OS LPAR
with DB/2
On Mar 16, 2006, at 8:31 AM, Tim Hare wrote:
Since I don't have z/VM yet, I'm installing in an LPAR (as I've posted
before). I have the opportunity to choose hipersockets for my
communications link - but since hipersockets are self-contained
within
the z/Series hardware, if I choose to use
Assuming we eventually go with both hipersockets and OSA as suggested, I'm
assuming we will need to do some work in the IP stacks to encourage
routing internally over hipersockets? This is the part where I RTFM
about routing protocols and the like, and work with our z/OS Comm. Server
