Paul
Prejudice[1] is like a neglected slip, it sometimes shows to the acute
embarrassment of the wearer.
There was not an iota of "VTAM jargon" present in the quoted post - but
there were some very well-known CICS abbreviations. Were these the supposed
"VTAM jargon"?
I even went to the Google archive to check since it appeared I must have
missed a post.
As others indicate below - but without highlighting the actionable and
completely unfounded slur on VTAM - whatever the perceived problem here is,
VTAM is as innocent as a new-born babe. VTAM has no interest whatsoever in
userids and DD-names or whatever is standing in the way of the subject under
discussion. Thus "getting rid of VTAM" is utterly irrelevant.
"Feelings" and "suspicions" are bad mentors when tying to steer technical
discussions.
Chris Mason
[1] Since religion has been introduced, the word "bigotry" also comes to
mind. But there's always hope, look at Ulster - or - as some say - "the six
counties".
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Gilmartin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: <IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 9:03 PM
Subject: Re: Multiple TSO logons (was: Patents, ...)
On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 13:48:19 -0400, Kirk Talman wrote:
More accurately, single ID, single LPAR, single application, multiple
session facility.
I stand corrected. Thanks.
That is an application issue. E.g., we have two TORs using a single
AOR/FOR pair. For some transactions we disallowed using both AORs at the
same time in the transaction's security signon part because the
transaction was not sophisticated enough to build temp storage queue names
to distinguish simultaneous signins (and related issues). And it was
deemed not worth the effort to correct that.
Theology. Dogma. Simply to start doing it right, you must
stop doing it wrong. Somehow I feel a major culprit is VTAM
because whenever this issue arises an expert starts spouting
VTAM jargon. Get rid of VTAM; let TCP/IP connect directly to
the TMP input/output data streams.
For TSO and whatever TCAS is called now, the issue becomes having the
address space name created be different from the userid. What would that
break?
To have the session manager handle that wrinkle using e.g. morphing the
userid used at signon and then having the security system or application
handle the authorization via unmorphing the userid is messy. btdtgt-scars.
Somehow this all works for batch EXEC PGM=IKJEFT01, which I am told
is the same TMP. Seems like a solved problem. I suspect it only
works because there's no VTAM in the way.
-- gil
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
