>Don't know what an SME is.
Subject Matter Expert.
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search
In a message dated 11/22/2007 9:33:56 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Fritzy ol' auditors do NOT mandate anything!
>>
Don't know what an SME is. There are internal and external auditors as well
as Federal Inspection teams. They were between us and the CFO and they t
>Fritzy ol' auditors mandated
Fritzy ol' auditors do NOT mandate anything!
All they can do is report on compliance based on SME recommendations.
Are you following it or not?
Anything else is a conflict of duty.
SME's recommend.
Auditors report.
Compliance teams enforce.
-
Too busy driving to st
Fritzy ol' auditors mandated 'electronic separation' between test and
production LPARs so many habits were carryovers from that environment.
--
We all have our opinions about auditors. Good manners
cc
Discussion List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject
.EDU> Re: Question regarding RACF
In a message dated 11/22/2007 10:27:00 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I just ran the template update and shared the databases between old and
new level.
>>
Fritzy ol' auditors mandated 'electronic separation' between test and
production LPARs so many habits were
---
I had a PHB presentation, but can't find it. Long story short the big
conversion was RACF 1.8 to 1.9. After that there are incremental levels of the
DB added by using the extended fields in data base records. These fields are
examined by newer
In a message dated 11/22/2007 5:26:26 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks a lot for all your responses. It was really really useful.
>>
I had a PHB presentation, but can't find it. Long story short the big
conversion was RACF 1.8 to 1.9. After that there are in
Veena, Sridhar K.
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:08 PM
To: 'IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU'
Subject: Question regarding RACF migration.
G'day,
I want to know from a technical perspective if some one needs to migrate
an existing system from an older version of OS (say MVS/ESA, OS/390
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 06:37:32 -0500, Robert S. Hansel (RSH)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Theoretically, you could just apply the templates for the target z/OS
>release to the old database and reIPL with it. This assumes the database in
>the restructured format introduced with RACF 1.9 (MVS/ESA). How
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Question regarding RACF migration.
G'day,
I want to know from a technical perspective if some one needs to migrate
an existing system from an older version of OS (say MVS/ESA, OS/390 etc
to Z/Os) what is the impact on RACF?. Would migrating the RACF to a
newer
I want to know from a technical perspective if some one needs to migrate
an existing system from an older version of OS (say MVS/ESA, OS/390 etc
to Z/Os) what is the impact on RACF?. Would migrating the RACF to a
newer version be a big enough Proj
I dimly recall (hey, it's all pretty dim these days) a long ago chasm
crossing where we had to 'reformat' the RACF data base. I can't imagine
anyone still running such an ancient release. Unless you're resurrecting a
copy of a decades old data base, a 'template refresh' should be sufficient
to get
onths.
-Original Message-
From: Sridhar K Veena [mailto:snip]
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 10:38 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Question regarding RACF migration.
G'day,
I want to know from a technical perspective if some one needs to migrate
an existing system from an older
G'day,
I want to know from a technical perspective if some one needs to migrate
an existing system from an older version of OS (say MVS/ESA, OS/390 etc
to Z/Os) what is the impact on RACF?. Would migrating the RACF to a
newer version be a big enough Project(like a 6 months to 1 year kind of
pr
15 matches
Mail list logo
