LU 6.2 flow diagrams

The following diagrams show the flows for transactions that are sent from an LU 6.2 device.

The following figures show:

Differences in buffering and encapsulation of control data with user data may cause variations in the flows. The control data are the 3 returned fields from the Receive APPC verb: Status_received, Data_received, and Request_to_send_received. Any variations based on these differences will not affect the function or use of the flows.

Figure 1. Flow of a local IMS synchronous transaction when Sync_level=None
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.

Figure 2 shows the flow of a local synchronous transaction when Sync_level is Confirm.

Figure 2. Flow of a local IMS synchronous transaction when Sync_level=Confirm
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.

Figure 3 shows the flow of a local asynchronous transaction when Sync_level is None.

Figure 3. Flow of a local IMS asynchronous transaction when Sync_level=None
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.

Figure 4 shows the flow of a local asynchronous transaction when Sync_level is Confirm.

Figure 4. Flow of a local IMS asynchronous transaction when Sync_level=Confirm
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.

The following figure shows the flow of a local conversational transaction When Sync_level is None.

Figure 5. Flow of a local IMS conversational transaction when Sync_level=None
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.

The following figure shows the flow of a local IMS command when Sync_level is None.

Figure 6. Flow of a local IMS command when Sync_level=None
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.

The following figure shows the flow of a local asynchronous command when Sync_level is Confirm.

Figure 7. Flow of a local IMS asynchronous command when Sync_level=Confirm
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.

The following figure shows the flow of a message switch When Sync_level is None.

Figure 8. Flow of a message switch when Sync_level=None
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.

Synchronous is used to verify that no error has occurred while processing DFSAPPC. If an error occurred, the error message returns before DEALLOCATE.

The following figure shows the flow of a CPI-C driven program when Sync_level is None.

Figure 9. Flow of a local CPI communications driven program when Sync_level=None
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.

The following figure shows the flow of a remote synchronous transaction when Sync_level is None.

Figure 10. Flow of a remote IMS synchronous transaction when Sync_level=None
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.

The following figure shows the flow of a remote asynchronous transaction when Sync_level is None.

Figure 11. Flow of a remote IMS asynchronous transaction when Sync_level=None
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.

The following figure shows the flow of a remote asynchronous transaction when Sync_level is Confirm.

Figure 12. Flow of a remote IMS asynchronous transaction when Sync_level=Confirm
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.

The following figure shows the flow of a remote synchronous transaction when Sync_level is Confirm.

Figure 13. Flow of a remote IMS synchronous transaction when Sync_level=Confirm
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.

The scenarios shown in the following figure provide examples of the two-phase process for the supported application program types. The LU 6.2 verbs are used to illustrate supported functions and interfaces between the components. Only parameters pertinent to the examples are included. This does not imply that other parameters are not supported.

The following figure shows a standard DL/I program commit scenario when Sync_Level=Syncpt.

Figure 14. Standard DL/I program commit scenario when Sync_Level=Syncpt
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.
Notes:

The following figure shows a CPI-C driven commit scenario when Sync_Level=Syncpt.

Figure 15. CPI-C driven commit scenario when Sync_Level=Syncpt
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.
Notes:

The following figure shows a standard DL/I program backout scenario when Sync_Level=Syncpt.

Figure 16. Standard DL/I program U119 backout scenario when Sync_Level=Syncpt
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.
Notes:
The following figure shows a standard DL/I program backout scenario when Sync_Level=Syncpt.
Figure 17. Standard DL/I program U0711 backout scenario when Sync_Level=Syncpt
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.
Notes:
The following figure shows a standard DL/I program ROLB scenario when Sync_Level=Syncpt.
Figure 18. Standard DL/I program ROLB scenario when Sync_Level=Syncpt
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.
Notes:

The following figure shows multiple transactions in the same commit when Sync_Level=Syncpt.

Figure 19. Multiple transactions in same commit when Sync_Level=Syncpt
begin figure description. This figure is described in the surrounding text. end figure description.
Notes:
Parent topic: LU 6.2 partner program design
Related concepts:
Application objectives