Re: z/VM 5.4 Guide For Automated Installation and Service

[Jack Woehr]

Jack Woehr wrote:

Michael Forte wrote:
I was able to pull a few strings and have the z/VM V5.4 Guide for 
Automated Installation and Service, as well as the two summaries, 
added directly to the z/VM library page.
Pull a few more please! Get 'em to post the z/VM 5.4 SMAPI Error Codes 
that are missing from the link

http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/lnxpcomp/v101v121/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.zvm.v54.dmse6/rrcods.htm
--
Jack J. Woehr# "Self-delusion is
http://www.well.com/~jax #  half the battle!"
http://www.softwoehr.com #  - Zippy the Pinhead
  
Nemmind, it's just a bad link on 
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zvm/v5r4/index.jsp ... the docs 
are there.


--
Jack J. Woehr# "Self-delusion is
http://www.well.com/~jax #  half the battle!"
http://www.softwoehr.com #  - Zippy the Pinhead

Re: z/VM 5.4 Guide For Automated Installation and Service

[Jack Woehr]

Michael Forte wrote:
I was able to pull a few strings and have the z/VM V5.4 Guide for 
Automated Installation and Service, as well as the two summaries, 
added directly to the z/VM library page.
Pull a few more please! Get 'em to post the z/VM 5.4 SMAPI Error Codes 
that are missing from the link

http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/lnxpcomp/v101v121/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.zvm.v54.dmse6/rrcods.htm

--
Jack J. Woehr# "Self-delusion is
http://www.well.com/~jax #  half the battle!"
http://www.softwoehr.com #  - Zippy the Pinhead

Re: WAIT STATE 9003

[David Boyes]

On 9/23/08 6:15 PM, "Mike Walter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Just on the off chance...
> are there any CPUs defined to that LPAR?  Check the HMC.

Also make sure they didn't accidentally give you a CF engine by mistake.
They used to look the same as an IFL on older HMCs, and some people haven't
gotten used to the new HMC software. 

Re: LOGONBY

[David Boyes]

On 9/23/08 6:14 PM, "Mike Walter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> No, you cannot logon to one userid when logged onto another.

Mike! What happened to your copy of SESSION?

Native CP can't do it, but you certainly can use SESSION or YVETTE or NV/AS
or PVM to get multiple login sessions from a single terminal. 

Re: LOGONBY

[David Boyes]

On 9/23/08 5:58 PM, "Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi
> 
> One last thing on this. Am I logged on with my user id and password then
> from there logonby to another machine such as MAINT? Or do I just logon
> to MAINT using LOGONBY with my personal user id's password?

The latter, although if you have RACF or a similar ESM, you can force the
other behavior by limiting the pattern of logical terminals that certain IDs
can be used from, and installing a copy of the super-fabulous SESSION tool
available from most collections of useful VM tools. No system should be
without it (or TNVT100). SESSION lets you create essentially a poor-mans
session manager from a CMS session. Good for environments that force you to
logon as you first. 

Re: LOGONBY

[David Boyes]

Geez. 28 years. Now I really feel officially ancient. Thanks a lot, dude.


On 9/23/08 5:44 PM, "Dave Wade" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> David Boyes wrote:
> A very long time...
> http://vm.marist.edu/~vmshare/browse?fn=DMKLOG&ft=MEMO
> http://vm.marist.edu/~vmshare/browse?fn=NOPSWD&ft=NOTE

Re: z/VM 5.4 Guide For Automated Installation and Service

[David Boyes]

On 9/23/08 4:58 PM, "Michael Forte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>> > I was able to pull a few strings and have the z/VM V5.4 Guide for Automated
>> Installation and Service, as well as the two summaries, added directly to the
>> z/VM library page.
> 

The Force is strong in this one

Re: WAIT STATE 9003

[Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)]

That was the problem. I found it logged on in a half way up state. I did
a SHUTDOWN REIPL and all is fine now.

 

Thanks for the help to ALL

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dean, David (I/S)
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:20 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

I get it all the time when the system is already running somewhere else.
Have you already got it running elsewhere? 

 

David Dean

Information Systems

*bcbstauthorized*

 

 

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Scott Rohling
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:18 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

Have you altered your SYSTEM CONFIG and perhaps taken the processor
offline by mistake?   If so - you can use SALIPL screen to point to a
previous version of the system config ...

Scott Rohling

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:11 PM, David Kreuter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

um how much memory is defined?

Is there a chance of IPLing in a 2nd level machine to see if instruction
simulation masks the problem?

David

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R.
(CMS/CTR) (CTR)

Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 6:09 PM


To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU

Subject: Re: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003

This is a separate VM LPAR there is no second level. I am running a
2094-711 (z9) and it is an IFL.

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Kreuter
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:05 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

what model cpu is it?

Does the same CPLOAD MODULE IPL in a 2nd level system?

David

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R.
(CMS/CTR) (CTR)
Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 5:45 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003

Hi 

 

Here we go again:

 

I am receiving a WAIT STATE 9003 while trying to IPL my test LPAR
(VM5.3). I have no idea what/why  he is trying to do at this point with
the PROCESSOR. Does anyone know a symptom that would cause this wait
state? 

 

HCP9003W  PROCESSOR QUIESCED -- VARY OFFLINE


 


 Explanation:  A VARY OFFLINE PROCESSOR command has been received for a


 processor.


 


 System Action:


 


   o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

 for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

 If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.


 


   o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.  

 

System Action:


 


  o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


  o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


User Response:  None.


 


Operator Response:  None.


 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

 

Please see the following link for the BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee
E-mail disclaimer:  http://www.bcbst.com/email_disclaimer.shtm

Re: z/VM 5.4 Guide For Automated Installation and Service

[Michael Forte]

Hello Mike,

I was able to pull a few strings and have the z/VM V5.4 Guide for 
Automated Installation and Service, as well as the two summaries, added 
directly to the z/VM library page.

The reason why you cannot find them as part of the PDF library is because 
that library contains the contents of the z/VM collection on CD-ROM. The 
installation publications are not part of the z/VM collection due to the 
nature of their schedules. 

Going forward, you will be able to find them on the z/VM library page, in 
the z/VM information center, or through the IBM Publications Center.

z/VM library: http://www.vm.ibm.com/library/
IBM Publications Center: 
http://www.elink.ibmlink.ibm.com/publications/servlet/pbi.wss?SSN=08IWU0035736528384&FNC=TXT

Thank you!
Michael J. Forte
z/VM ID and POK Softcopy Support
Software Engineer, System z Information Solutions 58HA
IBM Poughkeepsie, New York
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Office: 845-435-9062, T/L: 295-9062
Cell: 845-702-7962
Fax: 845-432-9405

P181, 2455 South Road, Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
Building 052, B09

"Often those who work the hardest are the luckiest..." 



From:
Michael Coffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Date:
09/16/2008 11:46 AM
Subject:
Re: z/VM 5.4 Guide For Automated Installation and Service



Hi Rich,

THANKS so much!  And yup, if you go to the Information Center and THEN
click Available PDF Docs from there, it's on the list.  If you just
select the PDF Library for z/VM 5.4 from www.vm.ibm.com/library it is
not.

Now I don't have to wait for Fedex to delivery my hardcopy!  :)

-Mike

-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rich Smrcina
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 10:50 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: z/VM 5.4 Guide For Automated Installation and Service


I found it in the z/VM 5.4 Information Center.

Michael Coffin wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> 
> Can anyone tell me if the z/VM 5.4 Guide For Automated Installation 
> and
> Service is on www.vm.ibm.com/library  
> somewhere and I'm just not seeing it? 
> 
> It's definitely not in the 5.4 PDF Library.  When I look in the
> Additional z/VM Publications area I can find a 5.3 version,  but no 
> 5.4... (has this Guide not changed for 5.4?).
> 
> -Thanks
> 
> -Mike

-- 
Rich Smrcina
VM Assist, Inc.
Phone: 414-491-6001
Ans Service:  360-715-2467
rich.smrcina at vmassist.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/richsmrcina

Catch the WAVV!  http://www.wavv.org
WAVV 2009 - Orlando, FL - May 15-19, 2009




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: WAIT STATE 9003

[Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)]

I do not think so!

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dean, David (I/S)
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:20 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

I get it all the time when the system is already running somewhere else.
Have you already got it running elsewhere? 

 

David Dean

Information Systems

*bcbstauthorized*

 

 

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Scott Rohling
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:18 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

Have you altered your SYSTEM CONFIG and perhaps taken the processor
offline by mistake?   If so - you can use SALIPL screen to point to a
previous version of the system config ...

Scott Rohling

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:11 PM, David Kreuter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

um how much memory is defined?

Is there a chance of IPLing in a 2nd level machine to see if instruction
simulation masks the problem?

David

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R.
(CMS/CTR) (CTR)

Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 6:09 PM


To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU

Subject: Re: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003

This is a separate VM LPAR there is no second level. I am running a
2094-711 (z9) and it is an IFL.

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Kreuter
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:05 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

what model cpu is it?

Does the same CPLOAD MODULE IPL in a 2nd level system?

David

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R.
(CMS/CTR) (CTR)
Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 5:45 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003

Hi 

 

Here we go again:

 

I am receiving a WAIT STATE 9003 while trying to IPL my test LPAR
(VM5.3). I have no idea what/why  he is trying to do at this point with
the PROCESSOR. Does anyone know a symptom that would cause this wait
state? 

 

HCP9003W  PROCESSOR QUIESCED -- VARY OFFLINE


 


 Explanation:  A VARY OFFLINE PROCESSOR command has been received for a


 processor.


 


 System Action:


 


   o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

 for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

 If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.


 


   o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.  

 

System Action:


 


  o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


  o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


User Response:  None.


 


Operator Response:  None.


 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

 

Please see the following link for the BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee
E-mail disclaimer:  http://www.bcbst.com/email_disclaimer.shtm

Re: WAIT STATE 9003

[Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)]

I will check on this and let you know what I find!

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Scott Rohling
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:18 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

Have you altered your SYSTEM CONFIG and perhaps taken the processor
offline by mistake?   If so - you can use SALIPL screen to point to a
previous version of the system config ...

Scott Rohling

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:11 PM, David Kreuter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

um how much memory is defined?

Is there a chance of IPLing in a 2nd level machine to see if instruction
simulation masks the problem?

David

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R.
(CMS/CTR) (CTR)

Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 6:09 PM


To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU

Subject: Re: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003

This is a separate VM LPAR there is no second level. I am running a
2094-711 (z9) and it is an IFL.

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Kreuter
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:05 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

what model cpu is it?

Does the same CPLOAD MODULE IPL in a 2nd level system?

David

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R.
(CMS/CTR) (CTR)
Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 5:45 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003

Hi 

 

Here we go again:

 

I am receiving a WAIT STATE 9003 while trying to IPL my test LPAR
(VM5.3). I have no idea what/why  he is trying to do at this point with
the PROCESSOR. Does anyone know a symptom that would cause this wait
state? 

 

HCP9003W  PROCESSOR QUIESCED -- VARY OFFLINE


 


 Explanation:  A VARY OFFLINE PROCESSOR command has been received for a


 processor.


 


 System Action:


 


   o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

 for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

 If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.


 


   o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.  

 

System Action:


 


  o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


  o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


User Response:  None.


 


Operator Response:  None.


 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

 

Re: WAIT STATE 9003

[Dean, David (I/S)]

I get it all the time when the system is already running somewhere else.
Have you already got it running elsewhere? 

 

David Dean

Information Systems

*bcbstauthorized*

 

 

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Scott Rohling
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:18 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

Have you altered your SYSTEM CONFIG and perhaps taken the processor
offline by mistake?   If so - you can use SALIPL screen to point to a
previous version of the system config ...

Scott Rohling

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:11 PM, David Kreuter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

um how much memory is defined?

Is there a chance of IPLing in a 2nd level machine to see if instruction
simulation masks the problem?

David

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R.
(CMS/CTR) (CTR)

Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 6:09 PM


To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU

Subject: Re: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003

This is a separate VM LPAR there is no second level. I am running a
2094-711 (z9) and it is an IFL.

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Kreuter
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:05 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

what model cpu is it?

Does the same CPLOAD MODULE IPL in a 2nd level system?

David

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R.
(CMS/CTR) (CTR)
Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 5:45 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003

Hi 

 

Here we go again:

 

I am receiving a WAIT STATE 9003 while trying to IPL my test LPAR
(VM5.3). I have no idea what/why  he is trying to do at this point with
the PROCESSOR. Does anyone know a symptom that would cause this wait
state? 

 

HCP9003W  PROCESSOR QUIESCED -- VARY OFFLINE


 


 Explanation:  A VARY OFFLINE PROCESSOR command has been received for a


 processor.


 


 System Action:


 


   o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

 for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

 If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.


 


   o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.  

 

System Action:


 


  o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


  o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


User Response:  None.


 


Operator Response:  None.


 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

 

Please see the following link for the BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee E-mail 
disclaimer:  http://www.bcbst.com/email_disclaimer.shtm

Re: LOGONBY

[Scott Rohling]

Just to clarify -- you can be logged on to your own userid if you like..
just bring up another session and logonby to maint with your userid/pw.
Just want to be sure you understand that being logged on to your own userid
has no bearing at all on being able to logonby to another userid...

Scott Rohling

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR) <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  Thanks Scott
>
>
>
> *Thank You,*
>
>
>
> *Terry Martin***
>
> *Lockheed Martin - Information Technology***
>
> *z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning***
>
> *Cell - 443 632-4191***
>
> *Work - 410 786-0386***
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   --
>
> *From:* The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On
> Behalf Of *Scott Rohling
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:12 PM
>
> *To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> *Subject:* Re: LOGONBY
>
>
>
> Just logon to MAINT using LOGONBY with your personal userid/pw
>
> Scott Rohling
>
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 3:58 PM, Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR) <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> One last thing on this. Am I logged on with my user id and password then
> from there logonby to another machine such as MAINT? Or do I just logon
> to MAINT using LOGONBY with my personal user id's password?
>
> Thank You,
>
> Terry Martin
> Lockheed Martin - Information Technology
> z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning
> Cell - 443 632-4191
> Work - 410 786-0386
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>
> Behalf Of Rob van der Heij
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 5:51 PM
> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> Subject: Re: LOGONBY
>
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:35 PM, O'Brien, Dennis L
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Be careful about what "*no* password" means.  Rob is talking about
> RACF.
> > The directory allows a password of NOPASS, which might seem to be the
> > obvious thing if you don't read the manual.  NOPASS actually allows
> > anyone to log on without specifying a password.  If using VM:Secure or
> > no ESM, specify a password of LBYONLY.
>
> Thank you :-)  I was indeed thinking RACF only.  A lot of this becomes
> a moot point when you have passwords in plain text...
>
> Rob
>
>
>

Re: WAIT STATE 9003

[Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)]

I am running with 25g. At this time an am not ready to IPL in 2nd level
mode. Why would it even be trying to OFFLINE a PROCSSOR at LOAD time? It
does not make a lot of sense. Could I have damaged up my CONFIG file or
DIRECTORY somehow while I was up? 

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Kreuter
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:12 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

um how much memory is defined?

Is there a chance of IPLing in a 2nd level machine to see if instruction
simulation masks the problem?

David

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R.
(CMS/CTR) (CTR)
Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 6:09 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003

This is a separate VM LPAR there is no second level. I am running a
2094-711 (z9) and it is an IFL.

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Kreuter
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:05 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

what model cpu is it?

Does the same CPLOAD MODULE IPL in a 2nd level system?

David

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R.
(CMS/CTR) (CTR)
Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 5:45 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003

Hi 

 

Here we go again:

 

I am receiving a WAIT STATE 9003 while trying to IPL my test LPAR
(VM5.3). I have no idea what/why  he is trying to do at this point with
the PROCESSOR. Does anyone know a symptom that would cause this wait
state? 

 

HCP9003W  PROCESSOR QUIESCED -- VARY OFFLINE


 


 Explanation:  A VARY OFFLINE PROCESSOR command has been received for a


 processor.


 


 System Action:


 


   o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

 for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

 If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.


 


   o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.  

 

System Action:


 


  o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


  o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


User Response:  None.


 


Operator Response:  None.


 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Re: LOGONBY

[Schuh, Richard]

Your id need not be logged on. You can logon to more than one id using
logonby. When I am testing tools for our TPF testers, I frequently have
up to 6 concurrent ids that I have logged on via logonby.

Regards, 
Richard Schuh 

 

> -Original Message-
> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin, Terry 
> R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 2:58 PM
> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> Subject: Re: LOGONBY
> 
> Hi
> 
> One last thing on this. Am I logged on with my user id and 
> password then from there logonby to another machine such as 
> MAINT? Or do I just logon to MAINT using LOGONBY with my 
> personal user id's password? 
> 
> Thank You,
>  
> Terry Martin
> Lockheed Martin - Information Technology z/OS & z/VM Systems 
> - Performance and Tuning Cell - 443 632-4191 Work - 410 
> 786-0386 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob van der Heij
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 5:51 PM
> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> Subject: Re: LOGONBY
> 
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:35 PM, O'Brien, Dennis L 
>  wrote:
> 
> > Be careful about what "*no* password" means.  Rob is talking about
> RACF.
> > The directory allows a password of NOPASS, which might seem 
> to be the 
> > obvious thing if you don't read the manual.  NOPASS actually allows 
> > anyone to log on without specifying a password.  If using 
> VM:Secure or 
> > no ESM, specify a password of LBYONLY.
> 
> Thank you :-)  I was indeed thinking RACF only.  A lot of 
> this becomes a moot point when you have passwords in plain text...
> 
> Rob
> 

Re: WAIT STATE 9003

[Scott Rohling]

Have you altered your SYSTEM CONFIG and perhaps taken the processor offline
by mistake?   If so - you can use SALIPL screen to point to a previous
version of the system config ...

Scott Rohling

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:11 PM, David Kreuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

>  um how much memory is defined?
> Is there a chance of IPLing in a 2nd level machine to see if instruction
> simulation masks the problem?
> David
>
> --
> *From:* The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R.
> (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
> *Sent:* Tue 9/23/2008 6:09 PM
> *To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> *Subject:* Re: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003
>
>  This is a separate VM LPAR there is no second level. I am running a
> 2094-711 (z9) and it is an IFL.
>
>
>
> *Thank You,*
>
>
>
> *Terry Martin***
>
> *Lockheed Martin - Information Technology***
>
> *z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning***
>
> *Cell - 443 632-4191***
>
> *Work - 410 786-0386***
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  --
>
> *From:* The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On
> Behalf Of *David Kreuter
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:05 PM
> *To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> *Subject:* Re: WAIT STATE 9003
>
>
>
> what model cpu is it?
>
> Does the same CPLOAD MODULE IPL in a 2nd level system?
>
> David
>
>
>  --
>
> *From:* The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R.
> (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
> *Sent:* Tue 9/23/2008 5:45 PM
> *To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> *Subject:* [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003
>
> Hi
>
>
>
> Here we go again:
>
>
>
> I am receiving a WAIT STATE 9003 while trying to IPL my test LPAR (VM5.3).
> I have no idea what/why  he is trying to do at this point with the
> PROCESSOR. Does anyone know a symptom that would cause this wait state?
>
>
>
> HCP9003W  PROCESSOR QUIESCED -- VARY
> OFFLINE
>
>
>
>
>  Explanation:  A VARY OFFLINE PROCESSOR command has been received for
> a
>
>  processor.
>
>
>
>
>
>  System
> Action:
>
>
>
>
>o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system action
> is
>
>  for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
> Reset.
>
>  If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
> a
>
>  disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on
> the
>
>  remaining
> processors.
>
>
>
>
>o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
> loads a
>
>  disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on
> the
>
>  remaining processors.
>
>
>
> System
> Action:
>
>
>
>
>   o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system action
> is
>
> for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
> Reset.
>
> If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
> a
>
> disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on
> the
>
> remaining
> processors.
>
>
>
>
>   o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor loads
> a
>
> disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on
> the
>
> remaining
> processors.
>
>
>
>
> User Response:
> None.
>
>
>
>
> Operator Response:
> None.
>
>
>
>
> *Thank You,*
>
>
>
> *Terry Martin*
>
> *Lockheed Martin - Information Technology*
>
> *z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning*
>
> *Cell - 443 632-4191*
>
> *Work - 410 786-0386*
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>

Re: LOGONBY

[Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)]

Thanks Scott

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Scott Rohling
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:12 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: LOGONBY

 

Just logon to MAINT using LOGONBY with your personal userid/pw

Scott Rohling

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 3:58 PM, Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi

One last thing on this. Am I logged on with my user id and password then
from there logonby to another machine such as MAINT? Or do I just logon
to MAINT using LOGONBY with my personal user id's password?

Thank You,

Terry Martin
Lockheed Martin - Information Technology
z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning
Cell - 443 632-4191
Work - 410 786-0386
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On

Behalf Of Rob van der Heij
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 5:51 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: LOGONBY

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:35 PM, O'Brien, Dennis L
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote:

> Be careful about what "*no* password" means.  Rob is talking about
RACF.
> The directory allows a password of NOPASS, which might seem to be the
> obvious thing if you don't read the manual.  NOPASS actually allows
> anyone to log on without specifying a password.  If using VM:Secure or
> no ESM, specify a password of LBYONLY.

Thank you :-)  I was indeed thinking RACF only.  A lot of this becomes
a moot point when you have passwords in plain text...

Rob

 

Re: WAIT STATE 9003

[Mike Walter]

Just on the off chance...
are there any CPUs defined to that LPAR?  Check the HMC.

Mike Walter 
Hewitt Associates 
Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily 
represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates.




"Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 

Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" 
09/23/2008 05:09 PM
Please respond to
"The IBM z/VM Operating System" 



To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: WAIT STATE 9003






This is a separate VM LPAR there is no second level. I am running a 
2094-711 (z9) and it is an IFL.
 
Thank You,
 
Terry Martin
Lockheed Martin - Information Technology
z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning
Cell - 443 632-4191
Work - 410 786-0386
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
Behalf Of David Kreuter
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:05 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003
 
what model cpu is it?
Does the same CPLOAD MODULE IPL in a 2nd level system?
David
 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R. 
(CMS/CTR) (CTR)
Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 5:45 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003
Hi 
 
Here we go again:
 
I am receiving a WAIT STATE 9003 while trying to IPL my test LPAR (VM5.3). 
I have no idea what/why  he is trying to do at this point with the 
PROCESSOR. Does anyone know a symptom that would cause this wait state? 
 
HCP9003W  PROCESSOR QUIESCED -- VARY OFFLINE  
  
 Explanation:  A VARY OFFLINE PROCESSOR command has been received for a   
 processor.  
  
 System Action:  
  
   o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system action 
is 
 for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU 
Reset. 
 If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load a 
 
 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues 
on the 
 remaining processors.  
  
   o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor 
loads a 
 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues 
on the 
 remaining processors. 
 
System Action:  
  
  o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system action 
is 
for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU 
Reset. 
If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load a  
 
disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on 
the 
remaining processors.  
  
  o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor 
loads a 
disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on 
the 
remaining processors.  
  
User Response:  None.  
  
Operator Response:  None.   
 
Thank You,
 
Terry Martin
Lockheed Martin - Information Technology
z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning
Cell - 443 632-4191
Work - 410 786-0386
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 





The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may 
contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from 
disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this 
message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender 
by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any 
dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by 
anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. All messages 
sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by 
applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies 
and to protect our business. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to 
be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or 
contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate 
with us by e-mail. 

Re: LOGONBY

[Mike Walter]

No, you cannot logon to one userid when logged onto another.

When already logged on, the process is CP LOGoff (or CP DISConnect).
Then you get a logo screen and can logon using LOGONBY.  Personally, I'd 
just clear the logon screen, and logon from a blank screen.

The command entry from a cleared logo screen would be:

LOGON MAINT
BY
youruserid
your password

Once you get past that, you can experiment with ways to reduce the number 
of individual commands.

Mike Walter 
Hewitt Associates 
Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily 
represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates.



"Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 

Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" 
09/23/2008 04:58 PM
Please respond to
"The IBM z/VM Operating System" 



To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: LOGONBY






Hi

One last thing on this. Am I logged on with my user id and password then
from there logonby to another machine such as MAINT? Or do I just logon
to MAINT using LOGONBY with my personal user id's password? 

Thank You,
 
Terry Martin
Lockheed Martin - Information Technology
z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning
Cell - 443 632-4191
Work - 410 786-0386
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rob van der Heij
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 5:51 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: LOGONBY

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:35 PM, O'Brien, Dennis L
 wrote:

> Be careful about what "*no* password" means.  Rob is talking about
RACF.
> The directory allows a password of NOPASS, which might seem to be the
> obvious thing if you don't read the manual.  NOPASS actually allows
> anyone to log on without specifying a password.  If using VM:Secure or
> no ESM, specify a password of LBYONLY.

Thank you :-)  I was indeed thinking RACF only.  A lot of this becomes
a moot point when you have passwords in plain text...

Rob







The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may 
contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from 
disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this 
message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender 
by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any 
dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by 
anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. All messages 
sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by 
applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies 
and to protect our business. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to 
be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or 
contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate 
with us by e-mail. 

Re: WAIT STATE 9003

[David Kreuter]

um how much memory is defined?
Is there a chance of IPLing in a 2nd level machine to see if instruction 
simulation masks the problem?
David



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) 
(CTR)
Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 6:09 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003



This is a separate VM LPAR there is no second level. I am running a 2094-711 
(z9) and it is an IFL.

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
David Kreuter
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:05 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

what model cpu is it?

Does the same CPLOAD MODULE IPL in a 2nd level system?

David

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) 
(CTR)
Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 5:45 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003

Hi 

 

Here we go again:

 

I am receiving a WAIT STATE 9003 while trying to IPL my test LPAR (VM5.3). I 
have no idea what/why  he is trying to do at this point with the PROCESSOR. 
Does anyone know a symptom that would cause this wait state? 

 

HCP9003W  PROCESSOR QUIESCED -- VARY OFFLINE   



 Explanation:  A VARY OFFLINE PROCESSOR command has been received for a 

 processor. 



 System Action: 



   o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system action is   

 for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU Reset.  

 If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on the 

 remaining processors.  



   o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor loads a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on the 

 remaining processors.  

 

System Action: 

   

  o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system action is   

for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU Reset.  

If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on the 

remaining processors.  

   

  o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor loads a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on the 

remaining processors.  

   

User Response:  None.  

   

Operator Response:  None.   
   

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Re: LOGONBY

[Scott Rohling]

Just logon to MAINT using LOGONBY with your personal userid/pw

Scott Rohling

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 3:58 PM, Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR) <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi
>
> One last thing on this. Am I logged on with my user id and password then
> from there logonby to another machine such as MAINT? Or do I just logon
> to MAINT using LOGONBY with my personal user id's password?
>
> Thank You,
>
> Terry Martin
> Lockheed Martin - Information Technology
> z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning
> Cell - 443 632-4191
> Work - 410 786-0386
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -Original Message-
> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Rob van der Heij
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 5:51 PM
> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> Subject: Re: LOGONBY
>
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:35 PM, O'Brien, Dennis L
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Be careful about what "*no* password" means.  Rob is talking about
> RACF.
> > The directory allows a password of NOPASS, which might seem to be the
> > obvious thing if you don't read the manual.  NOPASS actually allows
> > anyone to log on without specifying a password.  If using VM:Secure or
> > no ESM, specify a password of LBYONLY.
>
> Thank you :-)  I was indeed thinking RACF only.  A lot of this becomes
> a moot point when you have passwords in plain text...
>
> Rob
>

Re: WAIT STATE 9003

[Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)]

This is a separate VM LPAR there is no second level. I am running a
2094-711 (z9) and it is an IFL.

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Kreuter
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:05 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: WAIT STATE 9003

 

what model cpu is it?

Does the same CPLOAD MODULE IPL in a 2nd level system?

David

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R.
(CMS/CTR) (CTR)
Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 5:45 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003

Hi 

 

Here we go again:

 

I am receiving a WAIT STATE 9003 while trying to IPL my test LPAR
(VM5.3). I have no idea what/why  he is trying to do at this point with
the PROCESSOR. Does anyone know a symptom that would cause this wait
state? 

 

HCP9003W  PROCESSOR QUIESCED -- VARY OFFLINE


 


 Explanation:  A VARY OFFLINE PROCESSOR command has been received for a


 processor.


 


 System Action:


 


   o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

 for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

 If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.


 


   o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.  

 

System Action:


 


  o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


  o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


User Response:  None.


 


Operator Response:  None.


 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Re: LOGONBY

[Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)]

Hi

One last thing on this. Am I logged on with my user id and password then
from there logonby to another machine such as MAINT? Or do I just logon
to MAINT using LOGONBY with my personal user id's password? 

Thank You,
 
Terry Martin
Lockheed Martin - Information Technology
z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning
Cell - 443 632-4191
Work - 410 786-0386
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rob van der Heij
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 5:51 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: LOGONBY

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:35 PM, O'Brien, Dennis L
 wrote:

> Be careful about what "*no* password" means.  Rob is talking about
RACF.
> The directory allows a password of NOPASS, which might seem to be the
> obvious thing if you don't read the manual.  NOPASS actually allows
> anyone to log on without specifying a password.  If using VM:Secure or
> no ESM, specify a password of LBYONLY.

Thank you :-)  I was indeed thinking RACF only.  A lot of this becomes
a moot point when you have passwords in plain text...

Rob

Re: WAIT STATE 9003

[David Kreuter]

what model cpu is it?
Does the same CPLOAD MODULE IPL in a 2nd level system?
David



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) 
(CTR)
Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 5:45 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: [IBMVM] WAIT STATE 9003



Hi 

 

Here we go again:

 

I am receiving a WAIT STATE 9003 while trying to IPL my test LPAR (VM5.3). I 
have no idea what/why  he is trying to do at this point with the PROCESSOR. 
Does anyone know a symptom that would cause this wait state? 

 

HCP9003W  PROCESSOR QUIESCED -- VARY OFFLINE   



 Explanation:  A VARY OFFLINE PROCESSOR command has been received for a 

 processor. 



 System Action: 



   o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system action is   

 for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU Reset.  

 If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on the 

 remaining processors.  



   o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor loads a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on the 

 remaining processors.  

 

System Action: 

   

  o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system action is   

for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU Reset.  

If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on the 

remaining processors.  

   

  o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor loads a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues on the 

remaining processors.  

   

User Response:  None.  

   

Operator Response:  None.   
   

 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Re: Cloning SLES10 SP2

[Mark Post]

>>> On 9/23/2008 at  3:10 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Hilliard,
Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> Curious to know if anyone has experienced issues cloning sles10 SP2
> using the clone.sh script as described in "The Virtualization Cookbook
> for SLES 10 SP2".  The script works perfectly the first time I invoke
> it.  However, if I immediately invoke it again to clone another virtual
> server, the script fails when trying to bring device 2100 online.

What exactly is the failure?


Mark Post

Re: z/VM 5.4 Guide For Automated Installation and Service

[Michael Forte]

Hello Mike,

I was able to pull a few strings and have the z/VM V5.4 Guide for 
Automated Installation and Service, as well as the two summaries, added 
directly to the z/VM library page.

The reason why you cannot find them as part of the PDF library is because 
that library contains the contents of the z/VM collection on CD-ROM. The 
installation publications are not part of the z/VM collection due to the 
nature of their schedules. 

Going forward, you will be able to find them on the z/VM library page, in 
the z/VM information center, or through the IBM Publications Center.

z/VM library: http://www.vm.ibm.com/library/
IBM Publications Center: 
http://www.elink.ibmlink.ibm.com/publications/servlet/pbi.wss?SSN=08IWU0035736528384&FNC=TXT

Thank you!
Michael J. Forte
z/VM ID and POK Softcopy Support
Software Engineer, System z Information Solutions 58HA
IBM Poughkeepsie, New York
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Office: 845-435-9062, T/L: 295-9062
Cell: 845-702-7962
Fax: 845-432-9405

P181, 2455 South Road, Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
Building 052, B09

"Often those who work the hardest are the luckiest..." 

The IBM z/VM Operating System  wrote on 
09/16/2008 11:46:13 AM:

> [image removed] 
> 
> Re: z/VM 5.4 Guide For Automated Installation and Service
> 
> Michael Coffin 
> 
> to:
> 
> IBMVM
> 
> 09/16/2008 11:46 AM
> 
> Sent by:
> 
> The IBM z/VM Operating System 
> 
> Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System
> 
> Hi Rich,
> 
> THANKS so much!  And yup, if you go to the Information Center and THEN
> click Available PDF Docs from there, it's on the list.  If you just
> select the PDF Library for z/VM 5.4 from www.vm.ibm.com/library it is
> not.
> 
> Now I don't have to wait for Fedex to delivery my hardcopy!  :)
> 
> -Mike
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Rich Smrcina
> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 10:50 AM
> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> Subject: Re: z/VM 5.4 Guide For Automated Installation and Service
> 
> 
> I found it in the z/VM 5.4 Information Center.
> 
> Michael Coffin wrote:
> > Hi Folks,
> > 
> > Can anyone tell me if the z/VM 5.4 Guide For Automated Installation 
> > and
> > Service is on www.vm.ibm.com/library  
> > somewhere and I'm just not seeing it? 
> > 
> > It's definitely not in the 5.4 PDF Library.  When I look in the
> > Additional z/VM Publications area I can find a 5.3 version,  but no 
> > 5.4... (has this Guide not changed for 5.4?).
> > 
> > -Thanks
> > 
> > -Mike
> 
> -- 
> Rich Smrcina
> VM Assist, Inc.
> Phone: 414-491-6001
> Ans Service:  360-715-2467
> rich.smrcina at vmassist.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/richsmrcina
> 
> Catch the WAVV!  http://www.wavv.org
> WAVV 2009 - Orlando, FL - May 15-19, 2009

Re: LOGONBY

[Rob van der Heij]

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:35 PM, O'Brien, Dennis L
 wrote:

> Be careful about what "*no* password" means.  Rob is talking about RACF.
> The directory allows a password of NOPASS, which might seem to be the
> obvious thing if you don't read the manual.  NOPASS actually allows
> anyone to log on without specifying a password.  If using VM:Secure or
> no ESM, specify a password of LBYONLY.

Thank you :-)  I was indeed thinking RACF only.  A lot of this becomes
a moot point when you have passwords in plain text...

Rob

WAIT STATE 9003

[Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)]

Hi 

 

Here we go again:

 

I am receiving a WAIT STATE 9003 while trying to IPL my test LPAR
(VM5.3). I have no idea what/why  he is trying to do at this point with
the PROCESSOR. Does anyone know a symptom that would cause this wait
state? 

 

HCP9003W  PROCESSOR QUIESCED -- VARY OFFLINE


 


 Explanation:  A VARY OFFLINE PROCESSOR command has been received for a


 processor.


 


 System Action:


 


   o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

 for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

 If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.


 


   o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

 disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

 remaining processors.  

 

System Action:


 


  o When the master processor is varied offline, the normal system
action is   

for the master processor to enter a stopped state using a SIGP CPU
Reset.  

If an attempt is made to restart the master processor, it will load
a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


  o A processor being varied offline that is not the master processor
loads a  

disabled wait-state PSW, wait-state code 9003. Processing continues
on the 

remaining processors.


 


User Response:  None.


 


Operator Response:  None.


 

Thank You,

 

Terry Martin

Lockheed Martin - Information Technology

z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning

Cell - 443 632-4191

Work - 410 786-0386

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Re: LOGONBY

[Dave Wade]

David Boyes wrote:

It was a user mod for a while (pre-XA). I think VM/XA or VM/ESA 1.x was
when it became "official". That was a long time ago, though. 


I know I had it on SP5 as a usermod and remember that I was really glad
to not have to maintain it any more. 



A very long time...

http://vm.marist.edu/~vmshare/browse?fn=DMKLOG&ft=MEMO

&

http://vm.marist.edu/~vmshare/browse?fn=NOPSWD&ft=NOTE

...

Re: Cloning SLES10 SP2

[Dean, David (I/S)]

Send the script

 

David Dean

Information Systems

*bcbstauthorized*

 

 

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Hilliard, Chris
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 3:10 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Cloning SLES10 SP2

 

Curious to know if anyone has experienced issues cloning sles10 SP2
using the clone.sh script as described in "The Virtualization Cookbook
for SLES 10 SP2".  The script works perfectly the first time I invoke
it.  However, if I immediately invoke it again to clone another virtual
server, the script fails when trying to bring device 2100 online.  The
only way I can get another successful clone is to completely log off the
controller (LINUX00) and log back on and reinvoke the clone.sh script.

 

I haven't risen to the level of VM or Linux Guru yet and while I can
read the script and pretty much understand what's going on, I'm not
seeing what is probably obvious.  It appears perhaps something does not
get cleaned up or reset after the first cloning.  

 

I'd be interested to know if anyone else has run into this issue or if
there is something unique to my environment.

 

Thanks...Chris

Please see the following link for the BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee E-mail 
disclaimer:  http://www.bcbst.com/email_disclaimer.shtm

Cloning SLES10 SP2

[Hilliard, Chris]

Curious to know if anyone has experienced issues cloning sles10 SP2
using the clone.sh script as described in "The Virtualization Cookbook
for SLES 10 SP2".  The script works perfectly the first time I invoke
it.  However, if I immediately invoke it again to clone another virtual
server, the script fails when trying to bring device 2100 online.  The
only way I can get another successful clone is to completely log off the
controller (LINUX00) and log back on and reinvoke the clone.sh script.

 

I haven't risen to the level of VM or Linux Guru yet and while I can
read the script and pretty much understand what's going on, I'm not
seeing what is probably obvious.  It appears perhaps something does not
get cleaned up or reset after the first cloning.  

 

I'd be interested to know if anyone else has run into this issue or if
there is something unique to my environment.

 

Thanks...Chris

Re: LOGONBY

[David Boyes]

It was a user mod for a while (pre-XA). I think VM/XA or VM/ESA 1.x was
when it became "official". That was a long time ago, though. 

I know I had it on SP5 as a usermod and remember that I was really glad
to not have to maintain it any more. 

Re: LOGONBY

[O'Brien, Dennis L]

Rob van der Heij wrote:
>Actually, the better solution is to have *no* password for TCPMAINT.
>You can with z/VM 5.3. Without a password, the TCPMAINT user can not
>be revoked by incorrect logon attempts. If it were revoked, the
>authorized people could not even logon to it with logonby. Also, you
>don't put individual users on the access list of the surrogate
>profile, but primarily groups of users. That way it is very easy to
>handle people joining or leaving the group or change their role. And
>if needed, you can use Q BYUSER in the PROFILE EXEC to see which
>person is using the shared userid.

Be careful about what "*no* password" means.  Rob is talking about RACF.
The directory allows a password of NOPASS, which might seem to be the
obvious thing if you don't read the manual.  NOPASS actually allows
anyone to log on without specifying a password.  If using VM:Secure or
no ESM, specify a password of LBYONLY.

   Dennis 

We are Borg of America.  You will be assimilated.  Resistance is futile.

Re: LOGONBY

[Kris Buelens]

Before VM got LOGONBY, IBM had internally a RACF modification that
allowed a Logon By, for ages.  Obviously, CP was not aware of the
LOGONBY, (so no Q BYUSER for example).  CP was even fooled: on the
password prompt one'd enter
  byuser/byuserpswd/byuserpswd
that is, for CP it looked like a password change.
I think that around VM/ESA 1.0 both CP and RACF 1.9 got official Logon
By support, that is thus at the same time as seen by external VM
users.

2008/9/23 Stephen Frazier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> LOGONBY has been a part of CP since before VM/ESA 2.3 (1998). It is not
> mentioned in the Quick Reference for VM/SP 6 (1988) so it was added between
> 1988 and 1998. It has been around a long time. Maybe even longer that RACF.
> (I don't know when it was introduced on VM.)
>
> David Boyes wrote:
>>
>> It's controllable by RACF, but is part of CP (finally).
>>
>> Is LOGONBY a RACF thing or z/VM???
>>
>>
>
> --
> Stephen Frazier
> Information Technology Unit
> Oklahoma Department of Corrections
> 3400 Martin Luther King
> Oklahoma City, Ok, 73111-4298
> Tel.: (405) 425-2549
> Fax: (405) 425-2554
> Pager: (405) 690-1828
> email:  stevef%doc.state.ok.us
>



-- 
Kris Buelens,
IBM Belgium, VM customer support

Re: LOGONBY

[Stephen Frazier]

LOGONBY has been a part of CP since before VM/ESA 2.3 (1998). It is not mentioned in the Quick 
Reference for VM/SP 6 (1988) so it was added between 1988 and 1998. It has been around a long time. 
Maybe even longer that RACF. (I don't know when it was introduced on VM.)


David Boyes wrote:

It’s controllable by RACF, but is part of CP (finally).

Is LOGONBY a RACF thing or z/VM???

 



--
Stephen Frazier
Information Technology Unit
Oklahoma Department of Corrections
3400 Martin Luther King
Oklahoma City, Ok, 73111-4298
Tel.: (405) 425-2549
Fax: (405) 425-2554
Pager: (405) 690-1828
email:  stevef%doc.state.ok.us

Re: LOGONBY

[David Boyes]

It's controllable by RACF, but is part of CP (finally). 

Is LOGONBY a RACF thing or z/VM???

 

Re: LOGONBY

[Ron Schmiedge]

Terry,

LOGONBY has been around for many VM releases. We set all our service
machine accounts and important maintenance ids (MAINT, TCPMAINT, etc)
up with a LOGONBY list. Then we change those ids' passwords to
LBYONLY, which says the userid can only be logged on using LOGONBY. So
if you try and log on to MAINT directly you get told

L MAINT
HCPLGA053E MAINT not in CP directory

A scary message for the faint of heart!

Besides limiting the number of people who can access MAINT to the ones
in the LOGONBY list, MAINT never needs its password changed again, and
the auditors are appeased (a considerable benefit for those who have
to answer the questions at annual audits!).

Ron

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Rob van der Heij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 6:05 AM, Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> So the only thing you are buying here is that you keep TCPMAINT password
>> secret is that the whole idea behind LOGOnBY? So then you only add
>> certain user ids to do LOGONBY for this user id correct?
>
> Actually, the better solution is to have *no* password for TCPMAINT.
> You can with z/VM 5.3. Without a password, the TCPMAINT user can not
> be revoked by incorrect logon attempts. If it were revoked, the
> authorized people could not even logon to it with logonby. Also, you
> don't put individual users on the access list of the surrogate
> profile, but primarily groups of users. That way it is very easy to
> handle people joining or leaving the group or change their role. And
> if needed, you can use Q BYUSER in the PROFILE EXEC to see which
> person is using the shared userid.
>
> This scheme is also useful for service machine that you may
> occasionally logon to. Knowing all those passwords is either risky or
> inconvenient. And you certainly do not want service machines to be
> revoked (it will bite you at next IPL).
>
> The only users with a password should be the "warm body" users,
> belonging to a single known individual who can maintain his own
> password. All other userids should not have a password because they
> are either autologged or accessed via LOGONBY.
>
> -Rob
> --
> Rob van der Heij
> Velocity Software
> http://velocitysoftware.com/
>

Re: LOGONBY

[Schuh, Richard]

One thing not mentioned by others (unless I missed it) - if you have
VM:Secure for your ESM, if you use logonby to log on to a userid, say
ALAN for purposes of discussion,  and try to use VM:Secure to change any
of the security settings, you must give the logged on machine's password
in response to any prompts. You cannot change ALAN's passwords or rules
without knowing ALAN's password. I would hope that other ESMs, including
RACF, had similar requirements.
 

Regards, 
Richard Schuh 

 

 




From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ivica Brodaric
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 9:08 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: LOGONBY



So if I understand LOGONBY it simply allows a user to
logon to lets say TCPMAINT using the user's own PASSWORD. Does this mean
you still use TCPMAINT as the userid?

That's correct. LOGONBY will let a user logon to TCPMAINT using
his own userid and password of his own userid (the command will be
"LOGON TCPMAINT BY userid"). That will leave an audit trail of *who*
logged on to TCPMAINT and when. But the main advantage of LOGONBY is
that user does not need to know TCPMAINT's password. That also means
that you can change it without having to tell anyone about it. 

If you set *yourself* with LOGONBY to all "system-type" userids,
you will not have to remember multiple passwords, just your own. Then,
you can even let your ESM generate random passwords for userids like
TCPMAINT, because you don't really have to know it either. NB, don't do
this (random passwords) until you are comfortable with LOGONBY. Just
don't tell anyone about the passwords.

Ivica Brodaric

Re: LOGONBY

[Rob van der Heij]

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Kris Buelens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I never set tis up for a user like VMUTIL, but only to be able to
> logon to my colleague's userid with my password when he was on
> vacation (and a alike for my user when I was on vacation).

And that's exactly why you should keep that separate. You mess up
auditing by letting someone else use your personal userid. Even when
you're on vacation, your colleague is not you (unless he's posting in
your name on the list, paying bills out of your bank account, etc).
Most corporate security regulations forbid such schemes for a good
reason.
I know it's easy for folks at the helpdesk to take control of an
end-user account like this, but it is probably a good warning for the
user to find that he's not able to use it himself during such period.

If you keep roles in functional userid (even if under normal
circumstances there is only one individual using it) then delegating
tasks temporarily is easy.

Rob

Re: LOGONBY

[Wakser, David]

z/VM



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Howard Rifkind
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 9:33 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: LOGONBY


Is LOGONBY a RACF thing or z/VM???
 
T.y.

>>> Graves Nora E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 9/23/2008 8:59 AM >>>
And it makes it easy to revoke privileges from a user: just remove the
LOGONBY authority.  This is handy in an environment where roles change
frequently.  And if the person leaves or retires, deleting the User ID
takes care of all access, without scrambling to remember which
seldom-used accounts that the person may have used occasionally.


Nora Graves

-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Boyes
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 8:35 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: LOGONBY

> So the only thing you are buying here is that you keep TCPMAINT
password
> secret is that the whole idea behind LOGOnBY? So then you only add 
> certain user ids to do LOGONBY for this user id correct?

Think of it more as a role: you are assuming the role of TCPMAINT, using
your own login credentials to validate your claim to the role. 

The idea is minimum privilege; shared ids should not be directly logged
into, because you lose the audit trail of who did what. You give
individual ids minimum privilege (essentially with the combination of
LOGINBY and PROP, there's rarely a real reason for any individual id to
have more than class G), and they authenticate to the shared ID when
they need to do something more powerful, or an extended string of things
that require privileges or access to files w/o having to jump through a
lot of maintenance-intensive hoops. 





_
LEGAL NOTICE
Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential
and may be privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only.
Access to this E-mail by anyone else is unauthorized.
If you are not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the
contents of this E-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in
reliance on it is unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you are not an
addressee, please inform the sender immediately, then delete this
message and empty from your trash.

Re: LOGONBY

[Dave Jones]

Howard Rifkind wrote:

Is LOGONBY a RACF thing or z/VM???
 
T.y.




No, it is not a RACF thing...it's part of the native CP user facilities. It can be used 
with RACF, or your ESM of choice.




Graves Nora E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 9/23/2008 8:59 AM >>>

And it makes it easy to revoke privileges from a user: just remove the
LOGONBY authority.  This is handy in an environment where roles change
frequently.  And if the person leaves or retires, deleting the User ID
takes care of all access, without scrambling to remember which
seldom-used accounts that the person may have used occasionally.


Nora Graves


--
DJ

V/Soft
  z/VM and mainframe Linux expertise, training,
  consulting, and software development
www.vsoft-software.com

Re: LOGONBY

[Rob van der Heij]

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 3:33 PM, Howard Rifkind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is LOGONBY a RACF thing or z/VM???

It is easier with RACF, but CP also has directory statements that support it.

Rob

Re: LOGONBY

[Howard Rifkind]

Is LOGONBY a RACF thing or z/VM???
 
T.y.

>>> Graves Nora E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 9/23/2008 8:59 AM >>>
And it makes it easy to revoke privileges from a user: just remove the
LOGONBY authority.  This is handy in an environment where roles change
frequently.  And if the person leaves or retires, deleting the User ID
takes care of all access, without scrambling to remember which
seldom-used accounts that the person may have used occasionally.


Nora Graves

-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Boyes
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 8:35 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 
Subject: Re: LOGONBY

> So the only thing you are buying here is that you keep TCPMAINT
password
> secret is that the whole idea behind LOGOnBY? So then you only add 
> certain user ids to do LOGONBY for this user id correct?

Think of it more as a role: you are assuming the role of TCPMAINT, using
your own login credentials to validate your claim to the role. 

The idea is minimum privilege; shared ids should not be directly logged
into, because you lose the audit trail of who did what. You give
individual ids minimum privilege (essentially with the combination of
LOGINBY and PROP, there's rarely a real reason for any individual id to
have more than class G), and they authenticate to the shared ID when
they need to do something more powerful, or an extended string of things
that require privileges or access to files w/o having to jump through a
lot of maintenance-intensive hoops. 

_
LEGAL NOTICE
Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential
and may be privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only.
Access to this E-mail by anyone else is unauthorized.
If you are not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the
contents of this E-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in
reliance on it is unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you are not an
addressee, please inform the sender immediately, then delete this
message and empty from your trash.

Re: LOGONBY

[Kris Buelens]

Not mentioned yet.  If using RACF, when you define the user as
LOGONBY, it can by default no longer be logged on to with its own
password (what is normally what you'd want).  But, with an extra
command you can restore that possibility:
1. Define VMUTIL as LOGONBY
   RAC RDEFINE SURROGAT LOGONBY.VMUTIL UACC(NONE)
2. Reset the PERMIT RACF created for the command issuer
   RAC PERMIT LOGONBY.VMUTIL CLASS(SURROGAT) RESET
3. Allow users/groups to use this LOGONBY to VMUTIL
   RAC PERMIT LOGONBY.VMUTIL CLASS(SURROGAT) ID(user/group) ACCESS(READ)
4. (optional) Make it possible to logon to VMUTIL with its own password
   RAC PERMIT LOGONBY.VMUTIL CLASS(SURROGAT) ID(VMUTIL) ACCESS(ALTER)

I never set tis up for a user like VMUTIL, but only to be able to
logon to my colleague's userid with my password when he was on
vacation (and a alike for my user when I was on vacation).


2008/9/23 Graves Nora E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> And it makes it easy to revoke privileges from a user: just remove the
> LOGONBY authority.  This is handy in an environment where roles change
> frequently.  And if the person leaves or retires, deleting the User ID
> takes care of all access, without scrambling to remember which
> seldom-used accounts that the person may have used occasionally.
>
>
> Nora Graves
>
> -Original Message-
> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of David Boyes
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 8:35 AM
> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> Subject: Re: LOGONBY
>
> > So the only thing you are buying here is that you keep TCPMAINT
> password
> > secret is that the whole idea behind LOGOnBY? So then you only add
> > certain user ids to do LOGONBY for this user id correct?
>
> Think of it more as a role: you are assuming the role of TCPMAINT, using
> your own login credentials to validate your claim to the role.
>
> The idea is minimum privilege; shared ids should not be directly logged
> into, because you lose the audit trail of who did what. You give
> individual ids minimum privilege (essentially with the combination of
> LOGINBY and PROP, there's rarely a real reason for any individual id to
> have more than class G), and they authenticate to the shared ID when
> they need to do something more powerful, or an extended string of things
> that require privileges or access to files w/o having to jump through a
> lot of maintenance-intensive hoops.



--
Kris Buelens,
IBM Belgium, VM customer support

Re: LOGONBY

[Graves Nora E]

And it makes it easy to revoke privileges from a user: just remove the
LOGONBY authority.  This is handy in an environment where roles change
frequently.  And if the person leaves or retires, deleting the User ID
takes care of all access, without scrambling to remember which
seldom-used accounts that the person may have used occasionally.


Nora Graves

-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Boyes
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 8:35 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: LOGONBY

> So the only thing you are buying here is that you keep TCPMAINT
password
> secret is that the whole idea behind LOGOnBY? So then you only add 
> certain user ids to do LOGONBY for this user id correct?

Think of it more as a role: you are assuming the role of TCPMAINT, using
your own login credentials to validate your claim to the role. 

The idea is minimum privilege; shared ids should not be directly logged
into, because you lose the audit trail of who did what. You give
individual ids minimum privilege (essentially with the combination of
LOGINBY and PROP, there's rarely a real reason for any individual id to
have more than class G), and they authenticate to the shared ID when
they need to do something more powerful, or an extended string of things
that require privileges or access to files w/o having to jump through a
lot of maintenance-intensive hoops. 

Re: LOGONBY

[David Boyes]

> So the only thing you are buying here is that you keep TCPMAINT
password
> secret is that the whole idea behind LOGOnBY? So then you only add
> certain user ids to do LOGONBY for this user id correct?

Think of it more as a role: you are assuming the role of TCPMAINT, using
your own login credentials to validate your claim to the role. 

The idea is minimum privilege; shared ids should not be directly logged
into, because you lose the audit trail of who did what. You give
individual ids minimum privilege (essentially with the combination of
LOGINBY and PROP, there's rarely a real reason for any individual id to
have more than class G), and they authenticate to the shared ID when
they need to do something more powerful, or an extended string of things
that require privileges or access to files w/o having to jump through a
lot of maintenance-intensive hoops.