I like the idea of associating the NETID and Node with the logical system 
rather than the cpu hardware. I have been in the position of having to move 
systems around due to hardware considerations, so the designation by cupid was 
a real pain. At one shop where we had two  systems, each with its own unique 
workload, we even disabled the use of SYSTEM NETID altogether because of the 
volatile nature of things - either system could be brought up on any of 4 cpus 
and could be switched from one to another at any time. The SYSTEM CONFIG file, 
perhaps a System_Name, is the proper place in my opinion. And I think that 
anyone who uses a node name that differs from the System_Name must have 
converted to VM from an MVS background. Having an identifier based on LPAR name 
is repugnant to me. 

Regards,
Richard Schuh

 -----Original Message-----
From:   VM/ESA and z/VM Discussions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]  On Behalf Of 
Alan Altmark
Sent:   Thursday, February 23, 2006 7:05 AM
To:     [email protected]
Subject:        Re: SYSTEM NETID and CPUIDs

On Thursday, 02/23/2006 at 03:36 CET, Dieltiens Geert 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wouldn't it be great if System_identifier didn't have to be based on the
> CPU-id and LPAR-number. Why not provide a way to specify a
> System_identifier_default in the LPAR-definitions on the HMC, or via
> SAPL?  Then, if you don't override it in the SYSTEM CONFIG, that will be
> the System_Identifier that VM will use.
> 
> That way you could set the System_identifier value even before VM starts
> up.  And then, if RSCS, TCP, etc, would all use the System_identifier
> instead of SYSTEM NETID, then you wouldn't need to worry about CPU-ids
> anymore when you move to another CPU for whatever reason (DRP, new
> hardware, another LPAR,...).

Override via SAPL.  Verrrrrry interesting.....

I had thought about using the HMC-defined LPAR name as the index into the 
SYSTEM_IDENTIFER table, along with a default SYSTEM_IDENTIFER that was the 
same as the LPAR name.  (Y'all know you can QUERY LPAR now, right?)

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott

Reply via email to