Shmuel Metz: >As a point of curiosity, what are his licensing options if he decides >to look at z/OS or z/VM?
I’ll answer in terms of standard commercial licensing (even though that’s not likely for hobbyist purposes). AFAIK there’s no special obstacle to *licensing* z/OS. z/OS Version 2 is IBM Program Number 5650-ZOS, and that program number applies to both z/OS 2.2 (the final release compatible with the IBM z114) and current z/OS 2.5. IBM’s licensing and billing systems don’t have a problem with that. The only unusual obstacle is delivery of z/OS 2.2 since that release is Withdrawn from Marketing. That’d be a special order, and as always it’s up to IBM to decide whether to fill it. z/VM is *slightly* different since the IBM Program Number has changed between z/VM Version 6 and z/VM Version 7. However, my recollection is that it’s permissible to license Version X then run Version X-n as long as the license quantity is correct. Obviously please check that detail “with your friendly IBM representative.” And here too the unusual obstacle is delivery of z/VM 6.4. z/OS is charged monthly, and z/VM is a “one-time charge” with optional annual Subscription & Support. Both z/OS and z/VM are eligible for sub-capacity licensing even with these older releases. For example, if you have an IBM z114 with 3 CPs and 2 IFLs you could license z/VM for 1 CP and 1 IFL (2 engines) if you wish, provided you follow a few basic rules. In principle zNALC z/OS is available on this model, and if the z114 happens to be a capacity model A01 then in principle ZELC is available. The z114 supports some popular nice features for licensing purposes such as LPAR group capacity limits (with softcapping) and zIIPs. It also supports z/VM type LPARs, meaning you can have a single LPAR running z/VM that spans CPs, IFLs, zIIPs, and zAAPs. (zAAPs were still available on this model.) In short, the commercial licensing isn’t any harder than usual as far as I can tell. Actually *shipping* older releases is more interesting. Probably moot points for hobbyist purposes, but I’m answering the question you asked. Enzo D'Amato wrote: >Based on what I read in the z114 technical guide, I thought that unless the >machine was running in an ensemble mode, the HMC just acted as a remote >management console for the SEs. Does the HMC have extra features that the >SEs don't? Others could probably give you better insight, but the short answer is yes. In particular I think you’d face difficulties getting the machine started up with its first operating system (of any type) without the HMC. Whether those difficulties could be overcome...I’m not sure. >I also have an IBM TS3200 tape library (one of the small 4U rack mount units) >that I got broken and repaired. I'll have to see what kind of controller I >would >need for it. I have seen some FICON switches that advertise having a tape >license, >I wonder if this means that the controller unit is built in to the switch. The IBM TS3200 tape library holds only LTO tape drives. They can be FC-attached to an IBM z114 (via a FC SAN switch), and then you can use the tape library/drives from Linux. The TS3200 and LTO drives aren’t FICON devices, and they weren’t/aren’t directly supported with other operating systems. However, you could still *indirectly* use these drives from other operating systems via Linux on IBM Z. For example, if you have FICON disk and another operating system (z/OS for example) you could dump/copy something to a 3390 volume, logically detach the volume, mount the volume on Linux with zdsfs, and then run your backup to tape. >I'd really like to get my hands on z/TPF. All of the other major IBM OSes have >either ADCD releases, or 24-bit predecessors that are open source, so you can >get some experience playing around with them. z/TPF has nothing, and I have >never even seen someone do a video, or write an article about it online. It >seems like the ulitmate challenge for the mainframe hobbyist. z/TPF would require ECKD (FICON) disk and some FICON-attached tape, too. That could be technically challenging, and it’s been a while since z/TPF officially (and probably technically) supported the IBM z114. So it’d be an older PUT level. Leaving aside availability questions, a possible technical alternative is IBM ALCS on z/OS. ALCS is highly functionally compatible with z/TPF but runs on z/OS. >I am sorry, but I have never head this term before, and I could not find >a definition online. Is there any way you could elaborate? What I meant by “commercial z/VSE or VSEn service bureau” is z/VSE or VSEn hosting. Suppose some municipal government somewhere wants another development environment for their z/VSE applications. A hosting company could provide that service using a “slice” of their own mainframe, and then the city government accesses the LPAR or VM remotely. Standard commercial licensing terms would presumably apply in such cases. If someone can enter their credit card details and self-provision a z/VSE or VSEn instance then you’d probably call that a VSE cloud service. — — — — — Timothy Sipples Senior Architect Digital Assets, Industry Solutions, and Cyber Security IBM zSystems and LinuxONE [email protected] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
