Early in January Russ Witt sent the list a warning about the implications apar OA17011 could have on tape retention. We've had some discussions about this apar internally; not concerning the technical impact but the fact that there was no hold on it. I'm not suggesting that it should have a hold but that, perhaps because of our methodology, if it weren't for Russ' warning we wouldn't have known about it.
So I'm asking the group "when you're applying preventative maintenance do you read and analyze the cover information for every ptf being applied?" We've always looked at the hold info for all ptf's needing a bypass although I admit that DOC holds were not included until a year or so ago. Have we simply been lucky? Just curious. Alan Schwartz Assurant Shared Business Services ************************************************************************************** This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, distribution, copying, forwarding or other use of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message and all copies and backups thereof. Thank you. ************************************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
