Topic
  • 2 replies
  • Latest Post - ‏2011-06-28T10:27:38Z by Edurne
Edurne
Edurne
13 Posts

Pinned topic CTG Connection Refused

‏2011-06-27T09:22:05Z |
Hello there!

We are trying to install CTG in a server different from where RDzUT is installed but in the same network. We have RDzUT installed in a RedHat Linux server with aliasing. That is, the scenario 5 in Redbook. ETH0 : x.x.x.49 and ETH0:0 (alias for RDzUT): x.x.x.33. CICS4.1 is listening in port 3000.

So CTG is configured for CICS 4.1 in IP x.x.x.33 via port 3000.

This does NOT work.

But instead if we installed CTG in the RedHat Server where the RDzUT is installed and use the 10.1.1.2 (IP for tunneling) via port 3000. Then it works.

Someone knows why is that? Why it only works when installed in the same server and not when installed the CTG in other server?

Thank you!
Updated on 2011-06-28T10:27:38Z at 2011-06-28T10:27:38Z by Edurne
  • RDzJohn
    RDzJohn
    271 Posts

    Re: CTG Connection Refused

    ‏2011-06-27T11:52:54Z  
    Sounds like you have either a routing table issue or an error in the linux firewall configuration. I suggest you not use scenario 5 and instead use scenario 4. Scenario 4 is a much simpler configuration and has the major advantage of not requiring any special linux rules/ configuration changes each time you start UT. Scenario 4 establishes separate IP networks with separate IP addresses for Linux and z/OS. It allows (but does not require) the two networks to communicate on the same machine via a tunnel interface. Through the magic of the UT OSA emulator, the physical ethernet adapter on the box is shared by the two networks. Take another look at scenario 4.

    RDz_John
  • Edurne
    Edurne
    13 Posts

    Re: CTG Connection Refused

    ‏2011-06-28T10:27:38Z  
    • RDzJohn
    • ‏2011-06-27T11:52:54Z
    Sounds like you have either a routing table issue or an error in the linux firewall configuration. I suggest you not use scenario 5 and instead use scenario 4. Scenario 4 is a much simpler configuration and has the major advantage of not requiring any special linux rules/ configuration changes each time you start UT. Scenario 4 establishes separate IP networks with separate IP addresses for Linux and z/OS. It allows (but does not require) the two networks to communicate on the same machine via a tunnel interface. Through the magic of the UT OSA emulator, the physical ethernet adapter on the box is shared by the two networks. Take another look at scenario 4.

    RDz_John
    Thank you for the answer.

    The difference between scenario 4 and 5 concerning the configuration is that in the scenario 4, both interfaces eth1 and eth2 on RDzUT are up and setup while in the scenario 5 only eth1 with 10.1.1.2 is setup and on, isnt it?

    Maybe as you recommend, we should change from scenario 5 to scenario 4.