| Author |
Message
|
| popebb |
 Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 5:47 am Post subject: amq9213: a communications error for tcp/ip occured |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Posts: 34
|
i am getting a message that ....
amq9213: a communications error for tcp/ip occured
action: the return code from the tcp/ip(recv) [timeout]360 seconds call was 0(x'0').
Then i get an error on my sdr chl.
amq9999: chl program ended abnormally.
Then the chl retries and gets error message
amq9558: remote chl is not currently available.
the host side, where this is pointing to states that he is in running state and i am in a retry on my server side...
after a few minutes it just comes back.
i am on a win2k server running mq 6.0.1.0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 5:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
Sounds like network / firewall issues, where the channel connections being terminated due to inactivity. Or something.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| popebb |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 5:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Posts: 34
|
even while i am in a retry i can telnet to the conname and get connected.
I am thankful for any assistance
brian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| popebb |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 5:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Posts: 34
|
| i have been told there is now fw between us, i am having vtam and network guys check routing. we did have the chls triggered with a disconnect in set.....i have changed this to 0 so it will not disconnect just test and i am still having the chl dropping |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| dhanaraj |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 5:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 92
|
Please check the firewall open on Queue Manager port.
Thanks
Dhanaraj |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| popebb |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 5:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Posts: 34
|
| even when i go to a retry i can telnet to the other side on the listening port so i am assuming i am not having fw issues |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 5:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| popebb wrote: |
| i have been told there is now fw between us, i am having vtam and network guys check routing. we did have the chls triggered with a disconnect in set.....i have changed this to 0 so it will not disconnect just test and i am still having the chl dropping |
If I'm correct (and if a firewall has been added it does sound likely) changing the disconnect will not help. The channel's not disconnecting, it's being disconnected by the firewall.
You're probably better off with a triggered channel, and a disconnect interval less than the firewall's inactive termination limit so it closes cleanly before it gets chopped.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 5:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| popebb wrote: |
| even when i go to a retry i can telnet to the other side on the listening port so i am assuming i am not having fw issues |
Then it's an inactive timeout, if a new telnet session is getting through but an old channel session is getting chopped.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| popebb |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Posts: 34
|
| we had the disc int set to 6000 before and where still having the issues |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| popebb |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Posts: 34
|
| i will try setting the dis in to 3000 to see |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| popebb |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 6:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Posts: 34
|
i just verified with our network person, there is now fw between us
ie not a inactivity time out |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 6:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| popebb wrote: |
i just verified with our network person, there is now fw between us
ie not a inactivity time out |
I did mean the firewall timing the connection out rather than the channel.
Sorry if I failed to make that entirely clear. 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| popebb |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Posts: 34
|
i understood, i just wanted my chl to time out before the fw did. i did verify that there is no firewall between us so that is not the issue. i am currently running mq traces on the server as well as the host, i am trying
to get the network team to get a sniffer going. as of now the chl has not
gone down and i have passed about 9000 messages |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| popebb |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 10:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Posts: 34
|
well still working, guess the network guys fix whatever they broke?????  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 11:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| popebb wrote: |
| well still working, guess the network guys fix whatever they broke????? |
It's amazing. Sometimes the network stops working, then suddenly starts again, and all without any changes to the network whatsoever. Honest.
But not one of the network admins will meet your eye. 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
