On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 20:00:33 +0100, R.S. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >There is no disagreement here. Wrong sysplex parameters can lead to >database corruption, but won't preserve system from IPL. In other words >IPL will be succesful, but the RACF db will be under high risk.
True, the IPL will technically work. Of course, you may end up with the wrong RACF DB (if you say "sysplex communication" in ICHRDSNT when you shouldn't have), and so none of the applications may work. Some might consider that a failed IPL since you'd end up with an unusable system at the conclusion of it. Or with the wrong dsnames in ICHRDSNT, or the wrong sysplex communication flag, you can also end up with an unusable system (wrong DB) or an unusable system because you broke the DB. Or even an unusable sysplex because you broke the DB. But yes, the IPL would have "been successful". And by the way, we've made that processing more robust in z/OS R10 to try to avoid some of the problems we've seen from such incorrect parameters. But that won't help much until all the systems sharing a RACF database are at z/OS R10. -- Walt Farrell, CISSP IBM STSM, z/OS Security Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
