Peter, >Given the "problem cases", the simple fact of mismatched APF lists is >quite possibly a customer environmental problem.
Can you please elaborate why you consider different APF lists in a sysplex a customer environmental problem? Actually, how many installations really *need* identical setups on all systems in the plex because everything can run everywhere? I find the identical APF list more bothersome than having different ones: - In our installation the products are just not set up to run on every system in the sysplex, and there is no need to run them everywhere. So defining not-needed APF-Authorizations is not considered a good thing here. - In one sysplex they share the APF list, and we just migrated one of those systems to 1.8. I had a bloody row with my colleagues when the RACF sensitve resources health check hit exactly because APF-authorized datasets are still needed in the old release but not the new one, so they're not on the new sysres's, but the shared PROG-APF member still defines them. Talk about getting them to define a command member that removes those APF-Auths! Thanks and regards, Barbara -- Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
