I do the same. Since I have so many VSE & z/OS guests I find it easier to keep all my JCL and editing in CMS and submit to the appropriate guest. Better than having 5 or 6 Telnet sessions open to various guests.
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:57 AM, McKown, John < john.mck...@healthmarkets.com> wrote: > I loved CMS many years ago. I no longer work for a company with z/VM. > Haven't for years. Using CMS and RSCS to submit jobs to MVS (yes, that long > ago - MVS 3.8!) was so much better than TSO it wasn't even funny. Now I'm > using a Linux desktop and writing code which allows me to use it for some > things instead of TSO. OpenSSH is really helping on that. But I'm getting > off-topic. > > -- > John McKown > Systems Engineer IV > IT > > Administrative Services Group > > HealthMarkets(r) > > 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 > (817) 255-3225 phone * > john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com > > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or > proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please > contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original > message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and > issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake > Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of > TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > > [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of George Henke/NYLIC > > Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 10:53 AM > > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > > Subject: Re: Vswitch Grant as a CMD in User's Directory? > > > > Some companies in the past preferred to confine application > > programmers to CMS due to the large overhead of TSO address > > spaces thereby realizing savings in CPU and storage. > > > > CMS is not as well liked as TSO/ISPF by application > > programmers, but given CPU price sensitivity these days, it > > may not be such a bad idea and, who knows, it might even > > convert them z/VM. > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill Munson <william.mun...@bbh.com> > > Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> > > > > 12/10/2010 10:57 AM > > Please respond to > > The IBM z/VM Operating System <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> > > > > To > > IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > > cc > > Subject > > Re: Vswitch Grant as a CMD in User's Directory? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tom, > > > > as Mike said there are a lot of companies I know of that are > > using "CMS" applications for day to day work and the DATA > > resides on "VM" > > > > they are using "FOCUS" for report generation , as well as > > "MAILBOOK" for e-mail and interoffice file transfers , and > > some are using VM:Backup and VM:Archive and the Shared File > > System for numerous versions of Source Code like GDG's on TSO > > and submitting their compiles and assembles to VM:Batch for > > processing. There is still a lot of WORK being done on "VM" > > and these companies are not running any other "OS" as a guest > > of these "VM" systems. They might and do have other "VM"'s > > for running LINUX or "VSE" . > > > > Granted it is a vast minority of what it was 10, 15, and 20 > > years ago. > > > > munson > > > > > > > > > > From: Tom Huegel <tehue...@gmail.com> > > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > > Date: 12/10/2010 09:16 AM > > Subject: Re: Vswitch Grant as a CMD in User's Directory? > > Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System > > <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone run applications in z/VM? Isn't the 'protected > > data' owned by some other OS (z/OS, z/VSE, zLINUX). It seems > > that the high level security effort belongs in those OS's. > > z/VM just needs to keep those systems isolated and NOT be > > able to circumvent their security procedures. > > > > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 2:46 AM, Les Koehler > > <vmr...@tampabay.rr.com <mailto:vmr...@tampabay.rr.com> > wrote: > > Back in the old days, I recall a finance type person saying > > something like: The Gold Standard is that it should take > > collusion between two or more people to defraud the company. > > > > If we apply that to IT, then shouldn't pswds for privileged > > userids that can access/change financial data be long enough > > that TWO sysprogs can each be given half a pswd so they both > > have to be present to make a change? > > > > Les > > > > > > Alan Altmark wrote: > > On Thursday, 12/09/2010 at 12:01 EST, Tom Huegel > > <tehue...@gmail.com <mailto:tehue...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Does it really matter? SOX is just another way congress has > > come up with > > to > > destroy the American economy, and in fact the American way of life. > > > > When you read the law, you find that SOX is "simply" a way to > > hold executives responsible for the financial statements > > issued by their companies. Assuming no ill intent (no > > comments, please!), that means trustworthy data. That flows > > downhill, as all such things must, until we start talking > > about access controls and audit mechanisms for financial > > data. That is, knowing who has the means and the opportunity > > to access the data, and knowing who has actually done so. (I > > leave it to others to talk about motive.) Who, what, where, when. > > > > Unfortunately, IT security industry consultants have mangled > > this laudable concept into a paranoia-inducing behemoth that > > has people screaming in terror as it rampages across the > > country, flogging every sysadmin in its path. Why? Because > > financial status is inferred from many other data sources and > > no one wants to spend the time it takes to follow all the > > data flows. Result: Secure Everything. > > > > With HIPAA and PCI running alongside, the "Secure Everything" > > policy looks even more reasonable to CEOs, CIOs, CFOs, and > > their lawyers. > > > > Alan Altmark > > > > z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant > > IBM System Lab Services and Training > > ibm.com/systems/services/labservices > > <http://ibm.com/systems/services/labservices> office: 607.429.3323 > > alan_altm...@us.ibm.com <mailto:alan_altm...@us.ibm.com> > > IBM Endicott > > > > > > *************************** IMPORTANT > > NOTE*****************************-- The opinions expressed in > > this message and/or any attachments are those of the author > > and not necessarily those of Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., > > its subsidiaries and affiliates ("BBH"). There is no > > guarantee that this message is either private or > > confidential, and it may have been altered by unauthorized > > sources without your or our knowledge. Nothing in the message > > is capable or intended to create any legally binding > > obligations on either party and it is not intended to provide > > legal advice. BBH accepts no responsibility for loss or > > damage from its use, including damage from virus. > > ************************************************************** > > ****************** > > > > > -- Mark D Pace Senior Systems Engineer Mainline Information Systems
