This is certainly an unfortunate situation, and yet since there must be more customers using CA11 and an alternate shadow system than Barbara, I don't think we can categorically say this is a "vendor who can't even manage to get their stuff working in the current environment(s)." I am not using this CA11, or I would be glad to try to help Barbara.
How about it guys and gals? Is there anyone else out there using this kind of CA11 configuration that could try to help? On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Shane Ginnane <ibm-m...@tpg.com.au> wrote: > THUMP - back to the real world folks. > > Here we all were wallowing around in the prospect of having a whole new > bunch > of kit to play with and here's a reminder that we still have to deal with > vendors who can't even manage to get their stuff working in the current > environment(s). > > Shane ... > > On Fri, Jul 23rd, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Barbara Nitz wrote: > > > Now, CA has STILL not gotten what they're doing wrong when they're not > > doing their sysplex cleanup properly. My colleague tells me that he feels > > that CA STILL don't understand what they're doing and are STILL looking > > in the wrong place. There is no solution in sight. How does one escalate > > CA problems? > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO > Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
