11-02-2017 08:37 AM
We recently started deploying new GEN6 in our mainframe environment (DCX2 replacement).
So far we are not able to 'see' ISL port from a RMF standpoint, and thus we are not able to report on those ports.
Our field technicians told me that they implemented virtual switch on these new switches, and that ISL ports are not in the same domain of other Ficon ports.
Is there any workaround/hint to fix this issue, and let RMF to 'see' ISL ports too?
Thanks in advance.
11-02-2017 09:29 AM
is RFM Polling enable ?
are the Switches Ficon CUP Licensed ?
what is the FOS Release ?
when you say "...we are not able to 'see' ISL port from a RMF...."
how is this ISL is formed ? what Type of Switch ?
11-03-2017 02:18 AM
11-07-2017 02:33 AM
you will not be able to monitor the XISL (the physical ISLs in the base switch) with RMF -
When using XISLs, the effective routing policy for all logical switches configured to allow XISL use is that of the base switch
regardless of how the routing policy is defined. The best practice is to set the routing policy in all logical switches that allow XISL
use to have the same routing policy as the base switch to avoid confusion about the routing policy used. A base switch can only
be used for XISLs. Therefore, the switch cannot be managed through a CUP port and cannot report statistics for RMF
Physical ISL which are in the logical switch itself DISL (Direct ISL), should be visible for CUP and RMF
11-07-2017 10:14 AM
You said ISLs are in a different domain. Does that mean the ISLs are in a base switch? If not, I don't understand.
CUP only has visibility to addresible ports. 74-7 records, what RMF reads from the switch, therefore, are not available for ICL ports and any virtual port such as an ISL in a base switch or VE (FCIP) ports.