Greetings.
We're a single iron shop running Base Sysplex with three LPARs under Z/OS 1.4
I would like to have the ability to log onto each LPAR using the same User id.
If anyone has this configuration, could you give me a brief run down
of how to do it?
Thanks.
Rob R. Goings
Archer Da
Hi Rob,
You need to follow the following steps in allowing this to happen. First you
need to allow for ISPF temp files to be allocated under different names in each
lpar which would logically be the &sysname. You can accomplish this by
changing the ISPF global table and creating a local table
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Goings, Rob
>
> Greetings.
>
> We're a single iron shop running Base Sysplex with three
> LPARs under Z/OS 1.4
>
> I would like to have the ability to log onto each LPAR using
> the same User id.
>
> If anyone
IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Goings, Rob
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 1:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Multiple LPARs / one user id
Greetings.
We're a single iron shop running Base Sysplex with three LPARs under
Z/OS 1.4
I would like to
Search the archives.
Mark Zelden as a 3 page description of what you need to do which is
excellent.
I just used his guidlines to get it set up here.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send emai
You could change the ISPF temporary dataset qualifiers also in similar
fashion to prevent those error messages about log. Use the exec
ISPCCONF, this exec is present in ISPCLIB, to create ISPF Configuration
module. The ISPF Configuration module should be placed in ISPLLIB of TSO
LOGON.
Thanks
Nat
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 13:29:58 -0500, Goings, Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Greetings.
>
>We're a single iron shop running Base Sysplex with three LPARs under Z/OS 1.4
>
>I would like to have the ability to log onto each LPAR using the same User id.
>
>If anyone has this configuration, could you g
I pretty much followed Mark Zeldon's excellent advice at
http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html
(Under heading Quick Index, click on JOBs/Doc, and then look for
$SNGLTSO.TXT).
In particular, his document
http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsfiles/$sngltso.txt
does a great job hilighting the issu
>I would like to have the ability to log onto each LPAR using the same >User
id.
I had used Mark Zeldens instructions (as suggested by others). I ended up
having to create a new logon proc and having to copy the ISPF Profile to the
new naming conventions (which didn't go over well with the others)
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:10:19 +0200, Barbara Nitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I would like to have the ability to log onto each LPAR using the same
>User
>id.
>
>I had used Mark Zeldens instructions (as suggested by others). I ended up
>having to create a new logon proc and having to copy the ISPF
>Had the same problem. See my post on the subject for how
>I handled it. I can't even image having to edit over 1000
>profiles.
In my case it was about 450 profiles. (Just finished the last today). We
don't have the ISF exit, and new exits aer very much frowned upon as there
aren't enough people a
One appointment about this. Probably it's quite bad idea, but
We have implemented this in 1992 and since that, we have the SAME
PROFILE for the user (GRS solved). Modifications to the profile are saved at
session end in each image, so modifications in one image can be overlapp
On Tuesday 18 October 2005 03:37 am, Barbara Nitz wrote:
> >Had the same problem. See my post on the subject for how
> >I handled it. I can't even image having to edit over 1000
> >profiles.
>
> In my case it was about 450 profiles. (Just finished the last today). We
> don't have the ISF exit, and
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:37:29 +0200, Barbara Nitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Had the same problem. See my post on the subject for how
>>I handled it. I can't even image having to edit over 1000
>>profiles.
>
BTW, it wasn't the same subject, the post was to the "Dynamic change
LOGCLS from IEASYSX
DOMINGUEZ MARTIN, ANGEL LUIS wrote:
We have implemented this in 1992 and since that, we have the SAME
PROFILE for the user (GRS solved).
What do you mean "GRS solved"? Are you saying you're bypassing
multisystem integrity protection on the profile data set?
--
.
In a recent note, Edward E. Jaffe said:
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 07:54:53 -0700
>
> DOMINGUEZ MARTIN, ANGEL LUIS wrote:
> > We have implemented this in 1992 and since that, we have the SAME
> >PROFILE for the user (GRS solved).
>
> What do you mean "GRS solved"? Are you saying you'
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 10:18 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Multiple LPARs / one user id
>
>
> But, I thought ISPF wa
In a recent note, McKown, John said:
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 10:26:53 -0500
>
> do it." Of course, this was in the days when single system environments
> were the norm, so they did not anticipate a single userid logged on to
> multiple systems with shared profiles concurrently.
>
Heck;
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 10:35 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Multiple LPARs / one user id
>
>
> Heck; even on a sing
On Oct 18, 2005, at 6:10 AM, Mark Jacobs wrote:
On Tuesday 18 October 2005 03:37 am, Barbara Nitz wrote:
Had the same problem. See my post on the subject for how
I handled it. I can't even image having to edit over 1000
profiles.
In my case it was about 450 profiles. (Just finished the last t
On Tuesday 18 October 2005 02:52 pm, Ed Gould wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2005, at 6:10 AM, Mark Jacobs wrote:
> > On Tuesday 18 October 2005 03:37 am, Barbara Nitz wrote:
> >>> Had the same problem. See my post on the subject for how
> >>> I handled it. I can't even image having to edit over 1000
> >>> pr
On 18 Oct 2005 11:52:26 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Gould) wrote:
>Mark:
>
>I disagree. The problem is (the way I see it) is that assembler people
>are hard to come by and if a program burps there may not be anyone
>around to fix the program.
>
>The shop I am familiar with had a no assembler po
Well, I disagree with your disagreement :-) . IMHO any systems programmer
should at least have some sort of comfort level with assembler. I don't mean
wizard level, but at least to know the difference between a Load Address and
a Load instruction.
Amen! A long time ago I was hired by a la
>Well, I disagree with your disagreement :-) . IMHO any systems programmer
>should at least have some sort of comfort level with assembler. I don't
mean
>wizard level, but at least to know the difference between a Load Address
and
>a Load instruction.
L 1,SYSPROG
S 1,ASM
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 14:41:44 -0500, Martin Kline wrote:
>>Well, I disagree with your disagreement :-) . IMHO any systems programmer
>>should at least have some sort of comfort level with assembler. I don't
>>mean wizard level, but at least to know the difference between a Load
>>Address and a Loa
>Sad. I try to keep things as vanilla as possible and only resort to
>exits when I have to. In this case I felt justified and it was only
>two instructions. Even a system programmer trainee with no ASM
>experience can support something that simple.
Guess why just about every line of code in my Ass
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 10/18/2005
at 01:52 PM, Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>I disagree. The problem is (the way I see it) is that assembler
>people are hard to come by
I'm hardly the only assembler programmer to be unemployed. If the
companies can't find us, it's because they don't
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 10/19/2005
at 07:38 AM, Barbara Nitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Ouch. Theoretically I know the difference, but when it comes to
>coding, I confuse LA x,address and L x,address at least once per
>program, especially if the storage location contains the address of
>an a
On Oct 20, 2005, at 6:22 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 10/18/2005
at 01:52 PM, Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
I disagree. The problem is (the way I see it) is that assembler
people are hard to come by
I'm hardly the only assembler programmer to be une
On 21 Oct 2005 12:07:49 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Gould) wrote:
>On Oct 20, 2005, at 6:22 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
>
>> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 10/18/2005
>>at 01:52 PM, Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>>> I disagree. The problem is (the way I se
30 matches
Mail list logo
