I would suggest getting the actual error from the joblog.
On Sat, 5 May 2012 11:28:09 -0500 Vince Getgood <[email protected]> wrote:
:>Hi all,
:>The site I'm on is replacing GRS with CA-MIM.
:>
:>This is mainly 'cos they don't have a 'PLEX, but do have two closely coupled
LPARS on different CECS.
:>Both of those CECS will be moving to different remote sites, and connectivity
will be over FCTC's.
:>From what I know, GRS will only "talk" over a FCTC using XRC, and they can't
use that. 'cos they don't have a 'PLEX.
:>
:>We've defined all new FCTC's (Exxx and Fxxx unit / CU addresses), and have
defined all LPARS to talk to each other both on the existing CECs and the new
CECs.
:>
:>CA-MIM provides a procedure for testing the CTC "paths" before going live,
PROCCTC (We have called ours MIICTC)
:>
:>To run this, you are supposed to start the proc, and pass it the CTC unit
address, i.e. S PROCCTC,/E700 (or in our case S MIICTC,/E700 - you need the /
for a 4 digit unit address)
:>
:>However, when we start our proc, it fails: -
:>
:>S MIICTC,/E700
:>/£HASP100 MIICTC ON STCINRDR
:> IEF695I START MIICTC WITH JOBNAME MIICTC IS ASSIGNED TO USER STC
:> , GROUP PROD
:>/£HASP373 MIICTC STARTED
:>/ACF9CCCD USERID STC IS ASSIGNED TO THIS JOB - MIICTC
:>/IEF403I MIICTC - STARTED - TIME=08.34.14
:> - --TIMINGS (MINS.)--
:> ----PAGING COUNTS---
:> -JOBNAME STEPNAME PROCSTEP RC EXCP CONN TCB SRB CLOCK
:> SERV PG PAGE SWAP VIO SWAPS
:> -MIICTC IEFPROC FLUSH 0 0 ****** .00 .0
:> 0 0 0 0 0 0
:>/IEF453I MIICTC - JOB FAILED - JCL ERROR - TIME=08.34.14
:> -MIICTC ENDED. NAME- TOTAL TCB CPU TIME= .00
:> TOTAL ELAPSED TIME= .0
:>/£HASP395 MIICTC ENDED
:>IEE132I START COMMAND DEVICE ALLOCATION ERROR
:>
:>The JCL is good, and the unit address correct.
:>
:>We know that SMS was getting in the mix previously, 'cos they EXCLUDE a bunch
of devices / unit addresses in their "valid dasd", but they changed the ACS
routines to exclude E* and F* devices: -
:>
:>FILTLIST &VALID_DASD EXCLUDE('3590-1',
:> 64%,92%,B4%,1F%,06%,4A%,E*,F*,
:>
:>And have put them live. (Don't ask why they do this, I don't know!)
:>
:>I ran a SMS test case against the ACTIVE SMS CDS on all three LPARs,
specifying an Exxx and a Fxxx unit address, and now they do NOT have a storage
class assigned, whereas they were getting one assigned previously.
:>
:>However, the proc still fails.
:>
:>CA-MIM is critical to the CEC move project (of course). I have CA looking at
it, but can anyone else shed some light on what might be happening here?
:>
:>TIA.
:>
:>----------------------------------------------------------------------
:>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
:>send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
--
Binyamin Dissen <[email protected]>
http://www.dissensoftware.com
Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel
Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.
I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
