Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*TCPIP\s+for\s+MVS\s+3\.2\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*TCPIP\s+for\s+MVS\s+3\.2\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. TCPIP for MVS 3.2 (score: 1): Author: Gavin Ring/AALC/AlcatelAustralia <gavin.ring AT ALCATEL.COM DOT AU>; Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 23:12:30 +0000; We currently have ADSM for MVS (2.1.0.12) utilising TCP/IP for MVS 3.1 Has anyone had any experience running ADSM using TCP/IP for MVS 3.2 I can recall a couple of messages on this list where TCP/IP; /lists/html/ADSM-L/1997-04/msg00663.html (8,936 bytes)
2. Re: TCPIP for MVS 3.2 (score: 1): Author: "Lambelet,Rene,VEVEY,FC-SIL/INF." <Rene.Lambelet AT NESTLE DOT COM>; Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 17:21:09 +0200; Yes, we had to go back to TCP/IP 3.1 because of a problem in the restore jobs (was not possible at all to restore).; /lists/html/ADSM-L/1997-04/msg00665.html (9,500 bytes)
3. Re: TCPIP for MVS 3.2 (score: 1): Author: Laurie De Mamiel <Laurie.L.R.DeMamiel AT WOODSIDE.COM DOT AU>; Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 10:32:51 +0800; Could you elaborate a bit futher on the problems encountered with TCP/IP 3.2? We are running ADSM for MVS (2.1.0.10) and TCP/IP 3.2. We have encountered some problems with restores on NT, AIX and OS2; /lists/html/ADSM-L/1997-04/msg00682.html (9,595 bytes)
4. Re: TCPIP for MVS 3.2 (score: 1): Author: ADSM-L; Rene.Lambelet; Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 07:21:00 -0500; Yes, we had to go back to TCP/IP 3.1 because of a problem in the restore jobs (was not possible at all to restore).; /lists/html/ADSM-L/1997-04/msg00683.html (9,402 bytes)
5. Re: TCPIP for MVS 3.2 (score: 1): Author: "Clendenny, Ronald D." <rdclendenny AT CAL.UE DOT COM>; Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 07:43:06 -0500; Laurie, Did you actually get an increase in performance with TCP/IP 3.2 or are you being facetious? Ron Clendenny <rdclendenny AT cal.ue DOT com> Callaway Nuclear Power Plant Fulton, Missouri; /lists/html/ADSM-L/1997-04/msg00693.html (11,602 bytes)
6. Re: TCPIP for MVS 3.2 (score: 1): Author: Laurie De Mamiel <Laurie.L.R.DeMamiel AT WOODSIDE.COM DOT AU>; Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 09:07:55 +0800; We actually got a substantial increase in performance. I would say at least 15%, possibly as much as 20% to 25%. If we hadn't upgraded we wouldn't be able to backup the amount of data we are currentl; /lists/html/ADSM-L/1997-04/msg00718.html (8,752 bytes)
7. Re: TCPIP for MVS 3.2 (score: 1): Author: ADSM-L; rdclendenny; Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 04:43:00 -0500; Laurie, Did you actually get an increase in performance with TCP/IP 3.2 or are you being facetious? Ron Clendenny <rdclendenny AT cal.ue DOT com> Callaway Nuclear Power Plant Fulton, Missouri; /lists/html/ADSM-L/1997-04/msg00719.html (11,555 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]