Re: Hipersockets and z/VM access

2004-11-26 Thread David Boyes
It would be nice to have some DWIMity built into computers. DWIM = Do What I Mean (geekspeak) I still have my Xerox Dandetiger. It has DWIM functions...8-) --d b -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access

Re: Hipersockets and z/VM access

2004-11-26 Thread Alan Altmark
On Thursday, 11/25/2004 at 05:21ZE10, Vic Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The MTU size must be set appropriately with respect to the definition of the Hipersockets CHPID in HCD. This definition in effect determines the maximum 'block size' that can be sent on that CHPID, and there are

Re: Hipersockets and z/VM access

2004-11-25 Thread Vic Cross
Ranga Nathan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Changing the MTU to 8192 made TCP/IP force it to 16384 and everything started working! The MTU size must be set appropriately with respect to the definition of the Hipersockets CHPID in HCD. This definition in effect determines the maximum 'block size'

Re: Hipersockets and z/VM access

2004-11-25 Thread Post, Mark K
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Hipersockets and z/VM access -snip- It is like dealing with teenagers! I would describe everything about working with computers that way! ;) -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive

Re: Hipersockets and z/VM access

2004-11-25 Thread Ranga Nathan
K [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: Linux on 390 Port [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/25/2004 10:01 AM Please respond to Linux on 390 Port To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:Re: Hipersockets and z/VM access Well, no. A computer actually does exactly what I tell it to do

Hipersockets and z/VM access

2004-11-24 Thread Ranga Nathan
After some considerable difficulty tracing why I can not connect to z/VM from outside, I figured out that specification of correct (!) MTU on hipersockets caused the problem. I set the MTU to 16384 but TCP/IP did not like it. TCP/IP was partially paralysed. Hipersockets did not work. We could go