I have a similar situation, except that VSE is in the other LPAR. For
Linux machines that need to communicate with VSE I assign them a
hipersocket interface. If it's a situation where performance isn't a
big concern (an occasional communication requirement), I just let the
Vswitch handle it.
Brian Nielsen wrote:
If I understand correctly, by definition I can't use a VSWITCH to share
a hipersocket connection the way an OSA is shared. This leaves the choice
of using a TCPIP stack as a router or connecting each guest directly to
the hipersocket.
I've read the performance report that compares direct OSA connections
with routing through a TCPIP stack and with sharing the OSA with a
VSWITCH, and I'm not sure how/if those results can be extrapolated to the
hipersocket connection choices above. While I know the direct hipersocket
connection will/should be faster than routing through a TCPIP stack I was
wondering if anyone can point me to some more relevent performance
references.
We have about a dozen LINUX guests that connect to a guest LAN and
route traffic through a TCPIP stack to a z/OS LPAR. From a configuration
management standpoint, is there any reason I should consider keeping the
route through the TCPIP stack rather than giving each guest a direct
connection to the hipersocket?
From DR standpoint it seems to be a wash since we'll recovering under a
vendors running VM system.
Brian Nielsen
--
Rich Smrcina
VM Assist, Inc.
Main: (262)392-2026
Cell: (414)491-6001
Ans Service: (360)715-2467
rich.smrcina at vmassist.com
Catch the WAVV! http://www.wavv.org
WAVV 2006 - Chattanooga, TN - April 7-11, 2006
