On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 01:34:47 +0000, Ted MacNEIL <eamacn...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>>You can't use VTAM messages as a model. NetView and VTAM have a very special relationship. > >The suppression was more than VTAM messages. >The only reason I mentioned VTAM was because our VTAM/SNA team was responsible for NetView, as well. >... Let me put it another way, then. Prior to the recent implementation of NetView's Message Revision Table (for SSI-based message suppression among other things) NetView had absolutely no control over messages WTOed from other address spaces. None. It could suppress its own messages and VTAM messages . That's it. NetView could control what it did with a copy of the message: log/nolog to NetView's log, display/nodisplay on a NetView user's terminal, log/nolog a copy to SYSLOG (which would result in 2 SYSLOG copies of the message if MPF had SUP(N). NetView had no control over the original WTOed message because it operated on a copy of the message sent to it by the NetView SSI. It could write to SYSLOG a message that MPF had given SUP(Y) but had no way to suppress an external message with SUP(N). Pat O'Keefe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
