Skip to Main Content
IBM Power Ideas Portal

This portal is to open public enhancement requests against IBM Power Systems products, including IBM i. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (

Shape the future of IBM!

We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Search existing ideas

Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,

Post your ideas
  1. Post an idea.

  2. Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.

  3. Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.

Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use

Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.

IBM Unified Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM. - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.

Status Submitted
Created by Guest
Created on Jan 13, 2024

confusing behavior of LPM during inspections max_xfer_size

confusing behavior of LPM during inspections max_xfer_size :

I can create on system "A" lpar "X" (and run it) with max_xfer_size larger (on NPIV virtual FC adapter) then used by respective vios on physical FC adapter

I can move this lpar by LPM to another system "B" (with max_xfer_size on vios physical FC adapter equal or greater then on lpar "X")

I can't move lpar "X" back to system "A", because validation will fail due to size of max_xfer_size (and it calls it txu to make it even less understandable ;-((

the check is too strict and should be moved from the error category to the warning category (and unify terminology max_xfer_size  / txu )


Ales Horak


Idea priority Low