On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:24:43 -0500, Mark Zelden
wrote:
>>Are there any other issues or impacts to changing this?
>>
>
>One word. SAF.
>
>If you have SAF rules set up for SDSF, then changing is probably easy and
>provides functionality. If you don't (you use ISFPARMS / ISFPRMxx) then
>this coul
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:59:55 -0400, Lizette Koehler
wrote:
>I have a user requesting we change our JESINTERFACELEVEL from 1 to 2.
>
>Since I am not familiar with this function, I am z/OS V1.9 - is this a good
setting? Or should it be left at 1?
>
>I have read the fine manual and it seems to indi
Okay,
Here is the request
a vb.net application that I use to run ftp and submit jobs to the mainframe
with.
So I presume (no asuming) that FTP runs on a server to the mainframe and then
wants to review the output from the FTP process. Since we do have SDSF secured
through Top Secret, I th
JESINTERFACELEVEL=2 allows users to retrieve and list jobs based on SAF
calls to the same resource/class names used by SDSF. So, if you use
SAF/RACF to control SDSF and you allow these users to use SDSF, then you
should be OK with letting them use FTP with JESINTERFACELEVEL=2.
JESINTERFACELEVEL=1
If you use RACF to control SDSF access then "2" should work fine. If you use
ISFPARMS and don't have RACF set up to control spool access then "1" is
probably what you want. We use "2", but since we're a development shop we don't
care who accesses what.
Bob Shannon
Rocket Software
-
I have a user requesting we change our JESINTERFACELEVEL from 1 to 2.
Since I am not familiar with this function, I am z/OS V1.9 - is this a good
setting? Or should it be left at 1?
I have read the fine manual and it seems to indicate this will allow a user to
retieve and job based on security
6 matches
Mail list logo
