Frank Swarbrick pisze:
I have read the manuals and understand there are many ways to set them. I'm
interested in more fully understand, however, the pros and cons of CEEDOPT
versus CEEPRMxx. Manuals too often tell you *how* to do things but not *why*.
I think, its quite obvious. There is ge
>Thanks for all of the thoughts.
>We are already using the PARMLIB member, and it looks like we'll continue to
>do so.
>Just wanted to make sure that was the right choice.
When I started in this business, almost everything was assembled tables and
required huge unnatural acts to get things chang
Thanks for all of the thoughts. We are already using the PARMLIB member, and
it looks like we'll continue to do so. Just wanted to make sure that was the
right choice.
Frank
--
Frank Swarbrick
Applications Architect - Mainframe Applications Development
FirstBank Data Corporation
Lakewood, C
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 19:25:28 -0400, Lizette Koehler
wrote:
>Don't forget that there is also a JCL over ride now at z/OS V1.9 (IIRC) that
>allows your programmers to put in the LE Parms there was well.
>
Actually 2 releases earlier, z/OS 1.7 - via CEEOPTS DD.
Not all options can be overridden at
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 5:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: LE options
There appears to be (at least) two ways to change LE runtime options
system wide.
There'
Actually I was talking about the //CEEOPT DD statement that can be added to
JCL rather than the PARM.
Lizette
>
> >Don't forget that there is also a JCL over ride now at z/OS V1.9 (IIRC)
that allows
> your programmers to put in the LE Parms there was well.
>
> That's been around a lot longer
>anuals too often tell you *how* to do things but not *why*.
I guess, in my case, it's because it's dynamic and more flexible. So, I prefer
PARMLIB.
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archi
>Don't forget that there is also a JCL over ride now at z/OS V1.9 (IIRC) that
>allows your programmers to put in the LE Parms there was well.
That's been around a lot longer than 1.9!
IIRC, it was around during OS/390.
The option(s) are specified by:
//STEP EXEC PGM=appl,PARM='appl/LE'
Or vic
Check the manuals
> for more details about the order of settings. Also understand the term
> LE enclave and how the LE options takes effect for some application
> especially
> under CICS.
>
> BTW: SHOWzOS shows the CEEDOPT and CEEPRMxx settings
>
> Roland
>
>
>>
; libraries and still have different LE options, if desired. Is this the
reason for is its
> existence? If we use the PARMLIB way is there anything that has to be
done with
> the macros and can't be done with the PARMLIB?
>
> Honestly, there are so many ways to change
Frank,
As others have pointed out, there are still other ways to do set LE
options.
One difference between the "old" ways (e.g. CEEDOPT) and the new ways
(PARMLIB) is that the "old" ways allowed for "fixed" options, i.e. system
"defaults" that could NOT b
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 4:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: LE options
There appears to be (at least) two ways to change LE runtime options
system wide.
There'
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 15:25:26 -0600, Frank Swarbrick
wrote:
There are more ways (CEEROPT, CEEUOPT and more). Check the manuals
for more details about the order of settings. Also understand the term
LE enclave and how the LE options takes effect for some application especially
under CICS
m thinking that the PARMLIB way allows for multiple systems to share the
same LE libraries and still have different LE options, if desired. Is this the
reason for is its existence? If we use the PARMLIB way is there anything that
has to be done with the macros and can't be done with the PAR
SHOWzOS and COBANAL display the CEExOPT settings but not for CEEROPT.
However the code should also work for CEEROPT unless you modify it and load
the CEEROPT entry. Starting with z/OS R9 (?) IBM deliver a macro (CEEOCB?)
to map the CEExOPT.
Regards
Roland
>Is there some utility out there whe
I don't know if this is what you are looking for, but at LE 1.9, you can
A) create a CEEROPT "stand-alone" module with
RPTOPTS(ON)
(You may or may not want to modify MSGFILE as well)
See:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ceea2180/1.9.2
B) place the resuliting loa
3 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN (IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU)
> Subject: Utility for LE Options?
>
> OOPS, my idea won't work. It is the CEEROPT module itself
> that you are trying to find what options are set.
>
> I do not know of a "dis-assembler" for a CEEROPT load module.
January 19, 2009 6:44 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN (IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU)
> Subject: Fw: Utility for LE Options?
>
> I don't know if this is what you are looking for, but at LE
> 1.9, you can
>
> A) create a CEEROPT "stand-alone" module with
> RPTOPTS(ON)
> (You may
It's for an IMS MPR. We're at z/OS 1.9.
What I'd really like is for the utility to take the load module, and output
the
CEEXOPT macro, complete with options contained in the CEEROPT module.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signof
Is this for IMS, CICS, Batch or other environment? What level of z/OS would
you be running this on?
Cics has CLER for seeing the options, and I think IMS may also have one for the
online side.
If you are at z/OS V1.9 then the parms might be maintained in CEEPRMxx in
SYS1.PARMLIB or a CEEOPT D
Is there some utility out there where you supply as input the CEEROPT load
module, and the utility reports on what options it specifies?
I'd hate to write one only to find out that I re-invented the wheel...
Thanks.
Adam Johanson
IMS Systems Programming
USAA
On Jan 8, 2008, at 7:21 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:30:53 -0600, Ed Gould wrote:
//STEP1 EXEC PGM=BPXBATCH,PARM='PGM /bin/sleep '
//STEP2 EXEC PGM=IEFBR14,COND=(0,LE)
//SYSUT99 DD DISP=OLD,DSN=SYS1.PARMLIB
... but RACF won't help you there.
But
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:30:53 -0600, Ed Gould wrote:
>On Jan 7, 2008, at 12:32 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>> Take my remark as largely rhetorical. IIRC, I was rebutting a prior
>> post expressing a phobic delusion that if PARMLIB had UACC=READ, an
>> incompetently or maliciously crafted job might A
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:30:53 -0600, Ed Gould wrote:
>
>> //STEP1 EXEC PGM=BPXBATCH,PARM='PGM /bin/sleep '
>> //STEP2 EXEC PGM=IEFBR14,COND=(0,LE)
>> //SYSUT99 DD DISP=OLD,DSN=SYS1.PARMLIB
>>
>> ... but RACF won't help you there.
>
>But the initiator might stop you as RMF has
On Jan 7, 2008, at 12:32 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 12:46:34 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 06/27/2007
Time warp?
at 02:19 PM, Paul Gilmartin said:
But, as discussed here recently, prohibiting read access doesn't
prevent
the allocat
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 12:46:34 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 06/27/2007
>
Time warp?
> at 02:19 PM, Paul Gilmartin said:
>
>>But, as discussed here recently, prohibiting read access doesn't prevent
>>the allocation, and it might be more likely that a program th
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 06/27/2007
at 02:19 PM, Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>But, as discussed here recently, prohibiting read access doesn't prevent
>the allocation, and it might be more likely that a program that ABENDs on
>OPEN will exit abnormally without doing the FREE.
De
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:13:09 -0300, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
>
>>If your system security is setup properly, I can see no harm in
>>browsing anything on the system.
>
>One problem, which has been discussed here before, is users who
>allocate systems data sets and don't free them when they're
In
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
on 06/21/2007
at 02:58 PM, Tom Savor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Funny how it's ok for SYSPROGs to cruise Applications and "tell" us
>what needs to be changed or how to tune our application (when we
>didn't ask for their opinion), but it's not ok for us to cruise your
>PA
On Jun 25, 2007, at 7:50 AM, Chase, John wrote:
--SNIP-
The consultants were using our resources to compile programs
for the consultants essentially stealing resources from our
company. The two steps we made to stop the process was
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
>
> > The consultants were using our resources to compile programs for the
> > consultants essentially stealing resources from our company. ...
>
> You let them off easy!
> I would have dismissed them, r
> The consultants were using our resources to compile programs
> for the consultants essentially stealing resources from our
> company. The two steps we made to stop the process was taking
> away access to sys1.maclib and also not allowing assembler to
> be invoked.
You let them off easy!
I wo
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Ed Gould
>
> On Jun 22, 2007, at 7:05 AM, Thomas Berg wrote:
>
> > == Ed Gould == wrote2007-06-21 21:58:
> >> On Jun 21, 2007, at 4:44 AM, Thomas Berg wrote:
> >> --SNIP--
> >>>
> >>
== Ed Gould == wrote2007-06-23 13:09:
On Jun 23, 2007, at 4:15 AM, Thomas Berg wrote:
-SNIP
That explains it. But what were they expected to do, btw ?
Thomas Berg
--
I am not sure I understand the question. They were expected to work
On Jun 23, 2007, at 12:57 PM, Gerhard Postpischil wrote:
Ed Gould wrote:
I am not sure I understand the question. They were expected to
work on any work that was assigned to them by our company. Not use
their time there for some other use. We had one consultant that
was an ISV and was using o
Ed Gould wrote:
I am not sure I understand the question. They were expected to work on
any work that was assigned to them by our company. Not use their time
there for some other use. We had one consultant that was an ISV and was
using our system to do development work on his product. THEN he tr
Chase, John wrote:
[...]
> ITYM "dumb" rather than "stupid" ("dumb" is curable via education;
> "stupid" is as "stupid" does).
That was actually a stated policy in a university (!!) where I worked
previously. In that boss's own words, "If we allow you more training,
your marketability will be e
On Jun 23, 2007, at 4:15 AM, Thomas Berg wrote:
-SNIP
That explains it. But what were they expected to do, btw ?
Thomas Berg
--
I am not sure I understand the question. They were expected to work
on any work that was assigned to them by our c
== Ed Gould == wrote2007-06-23 01:49:
On Jun 22, 2007, at 7:05 AM, Thomas Berg wrote:
Still don't understand why they wasn't allowed to assemble their
programs.
Were they doing "private" programming or what ?
Thomas Berg
---SNIP
The standard company wide
- Original Message -
From: "Rick Fochtman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To:
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: PARMLIB(s) (Was: how to list LE options)
-
Funny how it's ok f
On Jun 22, 2007, at 7:05 AM, Thomas Berg wrote:
== Ed Gould == wrote2007-06-21 21:58:
On Jun 21, 2007, at 4:44 AM, Thomas Berg wrote:
--SNIP--
The consultants
howled as
they could no longer assemble programs (no access to sys1.maclib)
???
Our official la
On Jun 22, 2007, at 6:48 AM, Chase, John wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Thomas Berg
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List För Ed Gould
The consultants howled as
they could no longer assemble programs (no acc
-
Funny how it's ok for SYSPROGs to cruise Applications and "tell" us what
needs to be changed or how to tune our application
---
In our shop, it was called "Quality Assurance Review" and we caught some
real how
Chase, John wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Barkow, Eileen
that in most medium to large organizations, lines do need
to be drawn
in order to keep people focused on the jobs they are hired to do
I take this to mean keep them stupid so that
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 16:27:40 +1000, Ken Brick wrote:
>This thread was originally entitled "How to list LE Options".
>
>One of the responses was to browse the LE options member of PARMLIB. I
>see this as a valid requirement for an application programmer. Hence
>they ne
O
SNIP
ITYM "dumb" rather than "stupid" ("dumb" is curable via education;
"stupid" is as "stupid" does).
That was actually a stated policy in a university (!!) where I worked
previously. In that boss's o
>All AUDITOR does is give me READ access to profiles and doesn't let me
>circumvent security in any way, but every year during audit my manager and the
>security manager have to sign off on the access and explain it.
Doesn't it also allow you to make changes using SETROPTS?
-
Too busy driving
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 16:27:40 +1000, Ken Brick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>All valid many years ago but today with the ability to concatenate
>PARMLIB we, the system programmers, just need to put a little effort
>into segregating members into READ/NOREAD areas. This will still not
>satisfy every
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Barkow, Eileen
>
> that in most medium to large organizations, lines do need
> to be drawn
> > in order to keep people focused on the jobs they are hired to do
>
> I take this to mean keep them stupid so that they
== Ed Gould == wrote2007-06-21 21:58:
On Jun 21, 2007, at 4:44 AM, Thomas Berg wrote:
--SNIP--
The consultants
howled as
they could no longer assemble programs (no access to sys1.maclib)
???
Our official language was COBOL nothing else was permitted into
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Thomas Berg
>
> > -Ursprungligt meddelande-
> > Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List För Ed Gould
>
> > The consultants howled as
> > they could no longer assemble programs (no access to sys1.maclib)
>
> ???
eone with an approved need to see the LE
options (or something else) would automatically be able to see your
passwords.
A popular response to my "why do you need that" is people dreaming up
some possible emergency situation that never happened but might occur
some day ("when everyone else
This thread was originally entitled "How to list LE Options".
One of the responses was to browse the LE options member of PARMLIB. I
see this as a valid requirement for an application programmer. Hence
they need READ access to PARMLIB.
However I, from a system programmers perspective,
-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Security vs knowledge [was: RE: how to list LE options]
On Jun 21, 2007, at 2:40 PM, Wayne Driscoll wrote:
> In the JES2 Init deck, you can specify clear text passwords for RJE
> lines. That is a great reason for specifying UACC(NONE).
> Wayne Driscoll
> Produc
>>
>> I don't know about your shop, but at ours it gets to be a
>> pain when users call to complain because:
>>
>> "my job is 20th on the queue"
>
>"Hit ."
>
Tell them:
Stop hitting enter because all the computer has time to do is service your
request to see if it moved up in the queue. Put a NOT
On Jun 21, 2007, at 2:40 PM, Wayne Driscoll wrote:
In the JES2 Init deck, you can specify clear text passwords for RJE
lines. That is a great reason for specifying UACC(NONE).
Wayne Driscoll
Product Developer
JME Software LLC
NOTE: All opinions are strictly my own.
Wayne,
Not to disagree w
On Jun 21, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Barkow, Eileen wrote:
as for SMPE datasets, I was only referring to being able to look at
other compoenents SMPE datasets for which there is a real
need for in debugging a product using a different SMPE environment.
Which SMPE datasets a product uses is a function o
he systems guy cannot
understand the application guy's point, that is
a problem.
From: Ted MacNEIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: PARMLIB(s) (Was: how to list LE options)
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 18:29:05 +
>How m
st
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Security vs knowledge [was: RE: how to list LE options]
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:40:02 -0400
In the JES2 Init deck, you can specify clear text passwords for RJE
lines. That is a great reason for specifying UACC(NONE).
Wayne Driscoll
Product Developer
JME So
On 6/21/2007 3:40 PM, Wayne Driscoll wrote:
In the JES2 Init deck, you can specify clear text passwords for RJE
lines. That is a great reason for specifying UACC(NONE).
But why would you want to have clear-text RJE passwords in the JES2 init
deck when JES2 supports using RACF to perform the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Binyamin Dissen wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:54:09 + Ted MacNEIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
:>>ever have "users" cruise your parmlib and then tell you how to tune
the system? Solution: >UACC(NONE).
:>I have yet to see a single member of PARMLIB that is any busin
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:14:00 -0500, Robert Justice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Funny how it's ok for SYSPROGs to cruise Applications and "tell" us what
>needs to be changed or how to tune our application (when we didn't ask
>for their opinion), but it's not ok for us to cruise your PARMLIB
>setti
Wayne Driscoll wrote:
In the JES2 Init deck, you can specify clear text passwords for RJE
lines. That is a great reason for specifying UACC(NONE).
It is also good reason to get rid of such solution.
However, if - for any reason - it cannot be done, this is really good
reason for UACC(N). Si
"Funny how it's ok for SYSPROGs to cruise Applications and "tell" us what
needs to be changed or how to tune our application (when we didn't ask
for their opinion), but it's not ok for us to cruise your PARMLIB
settings Never heard of a PARMLIB setting getting screwed-up by
looking at it. Un
On Jun 21, 2007, at 4:44 AM, Thomas Berg wrote:
--SNIP--
The consultants
howled as
they could no longer assemble programs (no access to sys1.maclib)
???
Our official language was COBOL nothing else was permitted into
production. The consultants had a habit of doing the
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 14:58:28 -0400, Tom Savor wrote:
>Another pet-peave, why do companies buy tools, then SYSPROG decides that
>"only they" get to use it. Example: My customer has purchased
>CICS/Abend-Aid, but has only configured it for CICS dumps.
>None of the applicatioin dumps can access it
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 12:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Security vs knowledge [was: RE: how to list LE options]
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Ma
>Funny how it's ok for SYSPROGs to cruise Applications and "tell" us what needs
>to be changed or how to tune our application
Funny how I haven't worked at a shop (for over 20 years) that allowed me to
"cruise" applications.
Record layouts also need to be protected.
-
Too busy driving to stop f
>Binyamin Dissen wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:54:09 + Ted MacNEIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>
>> :>>ever have "users" cruise your parmlib and then tell you how to tune
the system? Solution: >UACC(NONE).
>>
>> :>I have yet to see a single member of PARMLIB that is any business of
anybody o
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 12:55:58 -0400, Barkow, Eileen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>And just why is it a security breach to allow someone to look at a
>dataset they cannot update?
Please give me read access to the data set that has your SS# and
credit card information. I promise not to update it.
t: Re: Security vs knowledge [was: RE: how to list LE options]
Ted MacNEIL wrote:
>> Because some fool of an auditor doesn't understand mainframes?
>> That's just BS IMHO. Fire the auditor for incompetence
>
> An auditor doesn't set the rules.
> They just report
@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Security vs knowledge [was: RE: how to list LE options]
>Assuiming there is a reason, including curiosity and willingness to
learn.
That assumes they have the time; who does these days?
>What would you do if non-SYSPROG would ask you about some member in the
PARMLIB ?
I
>Assuiming there is a reason, including curiosity and willingness to learn.
That assumes they have the time; who does these days?
>What would you do if non-SYSPROG would ask you about some member in the
>PARMLIB ?
I would follow company security policy.
>Deny the knowledge, just beacuse you a
Ted MacNEIL wrote:
Because some fool of an auditor doesn't understand mainframes? That's just BS
IMHO. Fire the auditor for incompetence
An auditor doesn't set the rules.
They just report on compliance.
I still see no reason for a non-SYSPROG to have access to PARMLIB!
Assuiming there is
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 18:29:05 + Ted MacNEIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>>How much of PARMLIB cannot be detected by examining storage in a live system
- not using APF or anything special?
:>>Security by obscurity is useless.
:>I (honestly) do not understand your point.
That by "securing" pa
Binyamin Dissen wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:54:09 + Ted MacNEIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>>ever have "users" cruise your parmlib and then tell you how to tune the
system? Solution: UACC(NONE).
:>I have yet to see a single member of PARMLIB that is any business of anybody
outside SYSP
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 09:44:21 -0500, Mark Zelden wrote:
> ... Do you really think the
>APF list should be published?!
Yes. Why not? It is readily available. Using the APF list as the excuse for
preventing read access to PARMLIB is a red herring.
The APF command in ISRDDN is one of the eas
>How much of PARMLIB cannot be detected by examining storage in a live system -
>not using APF or anything special?
>Security by obscurity is useless.
I (honestly) do not understand your point.
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
>Because some fool of an auditor doesn't understand mainframes? That's just BS
>IMHO. Fire the auditor for incompetence
An auditor doesn't set the rules.
They just report on compliance.
I still see no reason for a non-SYSPROG to have access to PARMLIB!
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
---
, June 21, 2007 1:43 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: how to list LE options
> that in most medium to large organizations, lines do need to be drawn
>
>
>>in order to keep people focused on the jobs they
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:54:09 + Ted MacNEIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>>ever have "users" cruise your parmlib and then tell you how to tune the
system? Solution: UACC(NONE).
:>I have yet to see a single member of PARMLIB that is any business of anybody
outside SYSPROGs.
How much of PARMLI
tions programmers can also utilize things like linklists
and apf datasets as well as LE options so they should have
the right to at least look at how they are defined to the system.
-
Each shop has its own needs and viewpoint. In our shop, all applications
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Mark Zelden
> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 10:44 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: how to list LE options
> There are pros and cons like everything else.
should be).
- Original Message - From: "Rick Fochtman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To:
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 11:46 AM
Subject: Re: how to list LE options
-
Dittoever have "users" c
ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Zelden
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 9:44 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: how to list LE options
There are pros and cons like everything else. If you want or need tight
security controls, then "on a need to know basis" is a good approach.
set they cannot update?
Certain applications programmers can also utilize things like linklists
and apf datasets as well as LE options so they should have
the right to at least look at how they are defined to the system.
a long time ago the MVS group here would not even allow the CICS and
ot
>Good relations between sysprogs and application programmers are crucial to
>business success. Locking yourself and your data in a closet does not
help.
I'm with Peter on this one. His comment above, says it all.
Mike Hill
Saffron Services
tel: +44(0)1-322-337338
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
In this case politics led to security. Management decision (as it should
be).
- Original Message -
From: "Rick Fochtman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To:
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 11:46 AM
Subject: Re: how to
>ever have "users" cruise your parmlib and then tell you how to tune the
>system? Solution: UACC(NONE).
I have yet to see a single member of PARMLIB that is any business of anybody
outside SYSPROGs.
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
---
-
Dittoever have "users" cruise your parmlib and then tell you how to
tune the system? Solution: UACC(NONE).
--
I always figured it was b ecause that user had too much spare time.
Solution: notify his manage
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To:
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: how to list LE options
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Phil Knight
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 9:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 10:10:31 -0400, Farley, Peter x23353
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Dittoever have "users" cruise your parmlib and then tell you how to
>> tune the system? Solution: UACC(NONE).
>
>Oh really? And did you then publish elsewhere the contents of LNKLST, the
>APF list, and ot
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Phil Knight
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 9:24 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: how to list LE options
>
> Dittoever have "users" cru
> -Ursprungligt meddelande-
> Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Ed Gould
> Skickat: den 21 juni 2007 04:49
> Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Ämne: Re: how to list LE options
> The consultants
> howled as
> they could no l
On Jun 20, 2007, at 8:24 PM, Phil Knight wrote:
Dittoever have "users" cruise your parmlib and then tell you
how to tune the system? Solution: UACC(NONE).
Phil,
Exactly. One place where I worked there were quite a few
"consultants" They were always complaining about X (take you pick
Dittoever have "users" cruise your parmlib and then tell you how to tune
the system? Solution: UACC(NONE).
- Original Message -
From: "Tim Hare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To:
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 3:34 PM
Subject:
PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: how to list LE options
I keep looking thru the manuals, but all I see is the use of RPTOPTS(ON)
on some current LE using program.
I am sure (ok.. hoping) that there is a way list out all LE run-time
options?
-Rob Schramm
This e-mail transmission contains
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Tim Hare
>
>> "I never understood the auditor/sysprog paranoia about
>> letting "normal"
>> users have access to the operator "Display" commands"
>
> I don't know about your shop, but at ours it gets to be a
> pain
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Hare
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 2:35 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: how to list LE options
>
>
>
> "my job is 20th on the qu
"I never understood the auditor/sysprog paranoia about letting "normal"
users have access to the operator "Display" commands"
I don't know about your shop, but at ours it gets to be a pain when users
call to complain because:
"my job is 20th on the queue"
"it looks like there are an awful lot o
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
