HI
I use only one static Vipa / lpar
but we have some dynamic VIPAS for each application (FTP, CICS, DB2 and
so on..)
it works fine.
regards
Wolfgang
Am 12.08.2024 um 15:51 schrieb roscoe5:
Thanks again.
I understand it’s a routing issue and I added a matching OSPF_Interface where
the original one was defined, using the new IP and Destination Address.
But when I issue the OBEYFILE command I get “EZZ7871I NO MATCHING INTERFACE
STATEMENTS FOR 7.7.7.8 (VIPALINK2)”.
My gut instinct keeps coming back to the PROFILE member where the
original/working VIPA has the pair of physical IPAQENET interfaces with
SOURCEVIPAINTs pointing at the VIPA.
This new VIPA doesn’t have any matching physical interfaces pointing at it.
I’m thinking I need a similar association, but multiple sources say that I
don’t.
No doubt I’m missing something simple.
Just to be clear, the dynamic Obey of the PROFILE member does allow me to Ping
the new IP from TSO, just not from the outside, confirming the OMP/OSPF issue.
Sent from [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) for iOS
On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 8:19 AM, John S. Giltner, Jr.
<[000005a978a73af8-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu](mailto:On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 8:19
AM, John S. Giltner, Jr. <<a href=)> wrote:
O.K., that is a routing issue. You need to look at your OSPF parameters and
verify that you are setup to advertise 7.7.7.8 to your neighbors. If your not,
then you need to update you OSPF parameters to advertise it and go from there.
No matter what you may want to check with whomever handles your OSPF neighbors
and see if they are setup to accept that route.
On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 11:49:22 +0000, roscoe5<rosc...@protonmail.com> wrote:
John,
Thanks for your time and the thorough response. I’m not too concerned about the
applications, but your comments confirmed what I thought in that area.
One quick test failed to work in the OSPF space (did not recognize the new IP
address). However, I think I’ll have another test opportunity soon, so I’ll
continue down this path.
Thanks again!
Sent from [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) for iOS
On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 7:40 AM, John S. Giltner, Jr.
<[000005a978a73af8-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu](mailto:On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 7:40
AM, John S. Giltner, Jr. <<a href=)> wrote:
You should only ned to add a new VIPA:
For all traffic that is initiated to your system, they just specify the
destination IP address 7.7.7.8, or create a DNS entry that resolves to that
address and have them use that host name.
For most of traffic the that you initiate outbound I would look at using SRCIP
entries with job names something like
SRCIP
JOBNAME MYTSTJOB 7.7.7.8
ENDSRCIP
Then any job you submit with the name MYTSTJOB will use the address 7.7.7.8 as
its source IP address. You can add multiple job names as needed or even code a
pattern like MYTSTJ* and then any job that starts with MYTSTJ willuse 7.7.7.8
You can either update you existing TCPIP parameter and issue the OBEY command,
or if you use PDS for your TCPIP parameters just create a new member with all
of your SRCIP parameters and obey that member.
To keep the SRCIP parameters across IPL's in your normal TCPIP parameters just
INCLUDE the DSN of where you have coded the SRCIP statements.
Once a TCP connection is setup between two IP addresses, all traffic will flow
between those to addresses. So there is nothing that would cause a connection
that was established with 7.7.7.8 to start flowing with 7.7.7.7.
If you are still running standard FTP then you could have problems because it
uses 2 TCP connections and it could be tough to have both connections use the
new IP address.
On Sun, 11 Aug 2024 20:50:24 +000 , roscoe5<rosc...@protonmail.com> wrote:
I thought I had an answer, but no.
(Hard to test; can’t IPL)
Trying to make this clearer.
We currently have a single VIPA and two physical INTERFACE statements, let's
say ...
INTERFACE VIPALINK1 DEFINE VIRTUAL IPADDR 7.7.7.7
INTERFACE LINK0010
DEFINE IPAQENET
PORTNAME T0010
IPADDR 10.1.1.1/29
SOURCEVIPAINT VIPALINK1
...
add
NTTERFACE LINK0020
DEFINE IPAQENET
PORTNAME T0020
IPADR 10.1.1.2/29
SOURCEVIPAINT VIPALINK1
...
We woul like to add a second VIPA, VIPALINK2, very much like the first, except
with IPADDR 7.7.7.8.
Do I need to create more IPAQENET INTERFACES (with or without new ports) and
give them a SOURCEVIPAINT VIPALINK2?
Or is there any way to simply use the current existing IPAQENET INTERFACEs and
associate them with VIPALINK2?
The obvious challengewwould be, how would the app/system know which VIPA to
use? Fair question.
One of my peers suggested that as we expect the traffic would be inbound, it
would come in on 7.7.7.8.
Further, any session created from inbound 7.7.7.8 shulld go back out on 7.7.7.8.
Beyond the above technical question, some may want to ask why? What is tobe
gained.
The answeris,multiple applications are using 7.7.7.7 with most unsecured.
We intend to require ALL traffic on 7.7.7.8 be AT-TLS encrypted.
Then test and migrate apps, independently, on to 7.7.7.8.
Thanking in advance,
Bob
ennt from [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) for iOS
On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 5:22 PM, roscoe5 <[rosc...@prtoonmail.com](mailto:On Mon, Aug 5,
2024 at 5:22 PM, roscoe5 <<a href=)> wrote:
Never mind, I figured it out.
As is too often, I was making it more complicated than necessary.
Sent from [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) for iOS
On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 6:43 PM, roscoe5
<[0000056b62686b81-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu](mailto:On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 6:43
PM, roscoe5 <<a href=)> wrote:
Sent from [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) for iOS
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: roscoe5<rosc...@protonmail.com>
Date: On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 6:39 PM
Subject: Fw: Multiple VIPAs
To:ibm-m...@listserv.ua.edux <ibm-m...@listserv.ua.edux>
Cc:
Hello,
In our TCP/IP (z/OS 3.1) we define OSA interfaces with IP addresses, and use
the SourceVipaInt to refer to a Virtual IP address/interface. That much is
working fine.
I want to add another VIPA IP Address, where users can continue to use
applications on (for example) 7.7.7.7 or get to the same services on the new
7.7.7.8 address.
The plan is to use PAgent on the new address and enforce security/encryption.
My question is, in the TCPIP Profile configuration, can I assign a native (not
virtual) interface to two virtual interfaces (7.7.7.7 and 7.7.7.8)? Or do I
need to duplicate the native interfaces with IPAQENET, PORTNAME, IPADDR, etc.,
and refer these new interfaces to the 7.7.7.8 virtual address?
Thanks in advance,
Bob
Sent from [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) for iOS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email tolists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email tolists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email tolists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email tolists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email tolists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email tolists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
