On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:52:35 -0500, Paul Gilmartin <paulgboul...@aim.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 18:14:10 -0400, Joseph W Gentile wrote: > >>I think the description of RNAME= in the ISGENQ macro doc is more clear. I >>could potentially use the wording in the last sentence "The RNAME must be >>from 1 to 255 bytes long, and can contain any hexadecimal character from >>X'00' to X'FF'" to update the ENQ rname_addr doc. What do you think? Also, >>I encourage you to check out the newer ISGENQ macro, in case it has >>features you might find useful. >> >Much better. Thanks. In: >z/OS 2.1.0>z/OS MVS>z/OS MVS Planning: Global Resource Serialization>Global >Resource Serialization>Introduction>ISGENQ macro >I also see: > ... > ISGENQ includes parameter checking to ensure that authorized callers use > authorized qnames. > ... > >I'd prefer: > "ISGENQ includes parameter checking to ensure that *only* authorized > callers use authorized > qnames." As it stands, it seems to imply that authorized callers are > restricted to using authorized > qnames (I suppose that may be true) and non-authorized callers are not so > restricted. I believe it is true that ISGENQ restricts authorized callers to using only authorized QNAMEs, gil. Use of unauthorized QNAMES by authorized callers can easily end up being a system integrity issue, but changing ENQ to enforce that was probably viewed as too disruptive. Enforcing it in the newer, preferred interface was probably viewed as a better alternative. -- Walt ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
