IBM Sterling Ideas

Submit new product ideas for IBM Sterling solutions. Before you submit, please review existing ideas; if an idea close to yours already exists, it's better to add comments or vote on the existing idea. We will review your ideas and use them to help prioritize our product development. Best of all, the portal will automatically update you when the status of your idea has been changed.

IBM is transforming its request for enhancement (RFE) process. The purpose of the transformation is to provide a more consistent experience for you to submit requests and to enable IBM product owners to respond to your requests more quickly. For more information click here.

Connect with IBM experts and your peers on the Supply Chain Collaboration Community and the Order Management Interest Group

Improve diagnostic accuracy of Secure+ error messages

We often get Secure+ error messages (prefix CSPA) that don’t necessarily indicate a Secure+ issue.  This makes it difficult to monitor for errors.  The error messages that have caused us the most difficulty are:


  • CSPA202E SSL handshake failure, reason=Socket closed by remote partner
  • CSPA202E SSL handshake failure, reason=SNODE ERROR
  • CSPA003E Security Violation - SNODE authentication error
  • CSPA004E Security Violation - PNODE authentication error


We often see these error messages but they reflect a transient networking issue rather than an actual Secure+ error.  That makes it difficult to alert on Secure+ issues because of the large number of false positives we would generate with a simple message alert.  


If the SSL handshake fails because the remote side doesn’t respond or sends a TCP reset, we would like the error message to indicate that as opposed to the case where the SSL handshake fails because of a true SSL handshake failure. The former error is transient while the latter will require some change to the security configuration on either the remote or local node to correct the problem.


I’ve attached a document showing some examples of CSPA error messages followed by successful connections.

  • Avatar32.5fb70cce7410889e661286fd7f1897de Guest
  • Jun 1 2018
  • Delivered
How will this idea be used?

If implemented, we will use this idea to improve the monitoring of remote nodes.  Currently, we have a custom-built monitor running in CA's Netmaster product that checks connectivity to remote nodes by submitting a "heartbeat" process periodically and monitoring whether the connection succeeds.  with accurate diagnostic messages we will more easily be able to alert our Operations team if there are Secure+ issues.

What is your industry? Financial Markets
What is the idea priority? Medium
  • Attach files
  • Avatar40.8f183f721a2c86cd98fddbbe6dc46ec9
    Guest commented
    9 Jun 06:24pm

    My apologies. The post below should have read:

    This feature is now available in Connect Direct for z/OS 6.1.

    Updated messages SVTM600i and SVTM601i are issued for true SSL handshake errors.

  • Avatar40.8f183f721a2c86cd98fddbbe6dc46ec9
    Guest commented
    9 Jun 06:03pm

    This feature is now available in Connect Direct for z/OS 6.1.

    New messages SVTM600i and SVTM601i are issued for true SSL handshake errors.

  • Admin
    Chris Sanders commented
    14 Aug, 2018 01:20pm

    Thank you for opening this enhancement request with IBM.  I have reviewed it with my developers and we are all in agreement that this would be a worthwhile enhancement to C:D for z/OS.  We have accepted this as an Uncommitted Candidate and will look to make improvements to recoverable security related messages.  Some messages will not be changed as that could create security concerns however.  I'll look to add this to our offering roadmap moving forward.



    Chris Sanders

    Connect:Direct Offering Manager

  • Avatar40.8f183f721a2c86cd98fddbbe6dc46ec9
    Guest commented
    7 Jun, 2018 12:18pm

    I vote yes

  • Avatar40.8f183f721a2c86cd98fddbbe6dc46ec9
    Guest commented
    1 Jun, 2018 09:42pm

    I vote YES to this idea