You are not understanding the integrity exposures and the requirements to use
system key storage. I would suggest dropping the idea of doing this as a CICS
transaction.
As to your business case, what part of CICS makes the coding easier? How will
you be using the data? Did your client (of Sunflowe
In what way was your subtask authorized? Supervisor state? System
key?
Did you avoid saving your registers in the save area provided in R13
when your attached program first got control, and restoring them from
there
and doing a BR 14 if you were terminating?
Did you avoid all use o
The SDSF SVC ran under SVC 109, one of those ESR (extended SVC routing)
routines.
I once wrote a bunch of programs/menus that did RACF processing under CICS,
essentially duplicating the RACF ISPF panels, but instead of using a magic SVC
to authorise CICS application code, I established an autho
On 10/18/2018 4:41 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
IBM went wonko porting SCP to z/OS and turned it into a text-only
transfer, despite its being binary-only on all other platforms including
IBM i.
Are any of those other platforms EBCDIC?
Doesn't matter. Unicode, ASCII, no difference in SCP. SCP i
> Poking the I HATE EBCDIC bear? :)
Moment of weakness. :)
First Tennessee Bank
Mainframe Technical Support
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Tom
Brennan
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 9:07 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SCP of file t
> beautiful EBCDIC encoding and the podunk, 7-bit, toy-computer ASCII
encoding
Poking the I HATE EBCDIC bear? :)
When I wrote up some doc showing application programmers how to setup
mainframe SSH keys, the example showed scp to transfer the text public
key to the non-mainframe box. It was
On Fri, 19 Oct 2018 00:27:17 +, Jackson, Rob wrote:
>The SFTP file-transfer add-on using the SSH protocol on z/OS, at least with
>the OpenSSH port, is the only one I know of that allows conversion between the
>beautiful EBCDIC encoding and the podunk, 7-bit, toy-computer ASCII encoding.
>
Hi Rob,
Thanks for your reply!
I'm not quite sure "some sort of PC routine service to invoke the IFI0306
request" means, can you help give some more explanation?
Is it possible to do like this:
1. write a Assembler subroutine to get ECSA storage and return the
address
The SFTP file-transfer add-on using the SSH protocol on z/OS, at least with the
OpenSSH port, is the only one I know of that allows conversion between the
beautiful EBCDIC encoding and the podunk, 7-bit, toy-computer ASCII encoding.
By default, on z/OS, SFTP is binary; you can elect to translat
On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:18:55 -0600, Jack J. Woehr wrote:
>On 10/18/2018 10:45 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>> I want to use scp to copy a pax to USS from my Mac by the file hash is wrong
>> and it’s not the same content.
>
>IBM went wonko porting SCP to z/OS and turned it into a text-only
>transfer,
Because we went to IAM to solve these problems months ago.
Sent from my iPhone — small keyboarf, fat fungrs, stupd spell manglr. Expct
mistaks
> On Oct 18, 2018, at 5:33 PM, David W Noon
> <013a910fd252-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:01:33 -0400, Steve
Because the I/Os and I/O delays are such that loading it into a large table
with key lookup in storage and the move to the buffer are done at the speed of
light while the actual I/Os are done at the speed of sound. So we can get a
12hr long job (elapsed time) done in about 12% of the time. (Ok,
The old xmem POST has LINKAGE=SVC and LINKAGE=SYSTEM
(which is a PC interface) which allows you to invoke in problem state
if you are APF authorized.
LINKAGE=BRANCH for POST requires supervisor state.
IEAMSXMP provides only a branch entry interface. So if you are
APF authorized and in proble
See UCBSID in SYS1.MODGEN(IOSDUCBP)
However, you should not need to be concerned with this
when you issue the STARTIO macro. You pass an IOSB to
STARTIO, in which you have set IOSUCB to the address
of the UCB of interest. IOS will use the current UCBSID when
starting the I/O operation.
On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:01:33 -0400, Steve Thompson (ste...@copper.net)
wrote about "Re: COBOL 64bit" (in
):
[snip]
> Assume that this data set is a VSAM KSDS. And assume that we do random
> access of the records, and that those records contain pricing and rules
> for same.
Why not use a big LSR p
Why do you want to load a KSDS in to storage instead of just doing random
access on the file? Or am I misunderstanding?
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Steve Thompson
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 1:01 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject
What are your thoughts on 31-bit COBOL calling 64-bit Swift, and vice versa?
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Tom
Ross
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 12:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: AMODE 64 COBOL
As has been discussed, we are w
Tom,
What about COBOL as JNI for 64-bit Java in a Liberty server? Isn't that a
"future proofing" area that IBM should be pre-emptively targeting? Or do you
intend that no customer can use their COBOL business logic programs for JNI
from 64-bit Java? Or be forced to "thunk" their 31-bit busin
I am doing Alternate Channel Set research and cannot find much that references
it, and nothing in the IBM docs about programming considerations.
Not much here on IBM-MAIN in the archives, either.
I can't seem to find a field in the UCB that alludes to being the current
(sub-)channel set for a de
Point taken, I assumed by the comments about how "easy" CICS programming the OP
was doing "traditional" CICS programming on the main TCB. The highly
specialized part of IFCID 196 processing goes way beyond just waits, with the
requirement for Key 7 ECSA and running in KEY 0, so is still not some
I agree with Radoslaw that an elaborate CTC naming convention might be overkill
for many shops. OTOH when we introduced sysplex in the mid-90s, we went from a
handful of single-purpose LPARs across four CECs to multisystem plexes. We
started with no CTCs to speak of, but XCF wants CTCs as backup
On 10/18/2018 10:45 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
I want to use scp to copy a pax to USS from my Mac by the file hash is wrong
and it’s not the same content.
IBM went wonko porting SCP to z/OS and turned it into a text-only
transfer, despite its being binary-only on all other platforms including
+1
--
Peter Hunkeler
Von: "Farley, Peter x23353" An:
IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Betreff: Re: COBOL 64bit Datum: 17.10.18, 23:29
The following is just my personal $0.02USD worth. I speak for myself only and
not for my employer.
Just like any other new version of the COBOL
On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:51:05 -0500, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>Thanks. I understand that but I’ve run into people that can scp binary data
>without being affected by code page translation but they don’t know why or how
>they are setup
>
o From a Mac or from other (specify)?
o To the same z/OS syste
We have run into a situation, quite recently, where we would love
to have COBOL 6.2 to be doing 64bit storage because we need to
load a large table (actually, we want to load a data set into
storage).
Assume that this data set is a VSAM KSDS. And assume that we do
random access of the records
I’ll give that a go. I wasn’t sure if some odd combo like _BPXK_AUTOCNVT or
other weird freaky setting to mask the EBCDIC problem was well understood
Matt Hogstrom
+1 (919) 656-0564
> On Oct 18, 2018, at 12:26, Paul Gilmartin
> <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
>> On T
As has been discussed, we are working on AMODE 64 COBOL in IBM COBOL
development and have been for some years now. Trying to get all the
players lined up has been a challenge. (IE: CICS, DB2, IMS, DFSORT, etc)
Our understanding from the beginning was that AMODE 64 COBOL would be for
specialized c
Thanks. I understand that but I’ve run into people that can scp binary data
without being affected by code page translation but they don’t know why or how
they are setup
Matt Hogstrom
+1 (919) 656-0564
> On Oct 18, 2018, at 12:17, Don Poitras wrote:
>
> Unix System Services uses whatever you
I believe that z/OS waits are still occurred in CICS when accessing certain
types of files, like extra-partition, which are QSAM datasets.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Ed Jaffe
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 1:57
Thanks for your comments and additions to the requirements for a good 64-bit
COBOL implementation. My opinions about multiple versions are based on
financial industry audit requirements - NOTHING gets into production without
testing. Period. Hence a dual-compile (and that would be two separat
On 10/18/2018 10:50 AM, Wayne Driscoll wrote:
the logic to retrieve log records via IFI is highly specialized and requires
z/OS waits, something not to be done in CICS programming.
That 'wait' restriction was lifted *years* ago with the advent of the
OPENAPI and L8 TCBs . Without that major a
Attempting to call IFI from a CICS program is a horrible idea, in the unlikely
event that it is supported. Additionally, the logic to retrieve log records via
IFI is highly specialized and requires z/OS waits, something not to be done in
CICS programming.
Wayne Driscoll
Rocket Software
Note - A
Folks,
I just converted some old xmem POST code to (wherever available) use IEAMSXMP
instead. My changes fell foul of the change in authorisation requirements
between the two - so long as you have APF auth the former can be invoked in
problem state while the latter can't (falls over with a S0C2
On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:17:07 -0400, Don Poitras wrote:
>Unix System Services uses whatever you tell it to use. I can edit
>ascii files or binary files. It's scp that's deficient in my opinion.
>There should be an option to do binary copies.
>
z/OS ssh converts unditionally. The fault is on the z
Related to this, we would require a 64-bit IMS DL/I interface and 64-bit CICS
LE application support before even considering a migration to 64-bit. Well, I
suppose we could leave the CICS programs 31-bit, but without IMS support for
64-bit modules it would be pretty much useless, as almost all
On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 11:45:59 -0500, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>I want to use scp to copy a pax to USS from my Mac by the file hash is wrong
>and it’s not the same content. Binary mode FTP works fine so I’m assuming
>it’s some kind of automatic character conversion perhaps related to the ssh
>confi
While I understand what you are saying, and mostly agree with it, I'm not sure
I agree that having 31-bit and 64-bit versions of callable subroutines is a
deal breaker. It seems to me that if the compiler could generate both 31-bit
and 64-bit objects from the same compile step, and the shop cou
Unix System Services uses whatever you tell it to use. I can edit
ascii files or binary files. It's scp that's deficient in my opinion.
There should be an option to do binary copies.
In article
you wrote:
> Unix System Services uses EBCDIC.
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 11:47 AM Matt Hogstrom wrot
On 2018-10-18 08:22, Peter Relson wrote:
FWIW, within IBM code, a BLDL could not get a 306-04. A module fetch after
a BLDL? Sure. But the directory entry is not relevant to that particular
"decision".
LLA does not care at all about the APF nature of a data set.
Abend 306-04 results specifically
Unix System Services uses EBCDIC.
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 11:47 AM Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
> I want to use scp to copy a pax to USS from my Mac by the file hash is wrong
> and it’s not the same content. Binary mode FTP works fine so I’m assuming
> it’s some kind of automatic character conversio
Of course, any "magic SVC" is ghastly and needs to be replaced by a more modern
design.
Authorised services should be provided by trusted service providers with any
appropriate SAF checks. Typically this is going to surface as a PC routine and
the software providing this service is going to nee
I want to use scp to copy a pax to USS from my Mac by the file hash is wrong
and it’s not the same content. Binary mode FTP works fine so I’m assuming
it’s some kind of automatic character conversion perhaps related to the ssh
config
Anyone else seen this issue and have a suggestion?
Matt Ho
When we adopted the 4*/5* naming convention in the mid-90s, I was a bit queasy
about reserving so many addresses (2*4096) for CTCs, but we could afford it at
the time. Since then, the number of DASD and tape devices has increased a lot.
-- At the time, we managed two data centers with two indep
IMHO as every convention, this one is limited. You cannot put any number
of CPCs or LPARs in it. And you don't need it.
From the other hand any fixed-lingth field means some lost, overhead,
i.e. One hex for CPC? That's to much for two CPCs in a shop and can be
completely omitted for single CPC.
An attacker who knew vendor product X included a magic SVC and who knew you had
vendor product X (neither one being rocket science) would be all set, wouldn't
he?
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Tom Marchant
IMHO the easiest and the only sure way to fix tersed file is to send it
again with proper parameters.
Unless the source is on Voyager II, other methods are not worth effort.
My €0.02
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
==
Je
The SDSF SVC had some 'integrity checks' that would complicate any spoofing
effort, but it was always a bad idea. Good riddance. Woe be to any similar
attempt at the quick-and-dirty solution to an APF problem.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:08:33 +, Barkow, Eileen
wrote:
>In order to call the SVC a programmer would have to know about it first as
>well as have a need for it;
>neither of which applied to any CICS application programmers.
>
Someone breaking into your systems would always have a need for so
On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:08:33 +, Barkow, Eileen wrote:
>In order to call the SVC a programmer would have to know about it first as
>well as have a need for it;
>neither of which applied to any CICS application programmers.
It isn't particularly difficult to take a dump, and search the SVC Tab
No argument. The subject line was COBOL 64bit -- by implication AMODE 64 COBOL
-- and so that's where my reply was coming from.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Tom Marchant
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 7:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 15:20:44 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
>And FWIW there is another overlapping complexity here besides AMODE 64
>-- speaking in theory only, because there is no reality of 64-bit COBOL.
It isn't really "theory only" because it is true of assembler too.
>There are really *three*
That is just THE classic "magic SVC" and is one of the #1 things that the
security types warn about at SHARE.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Rob Scott
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 6:56 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LI
LRS used to provide source code for various VPS modules and I found it in one
of their libs.
It was not meant to be distributed.
In order to call the SVC a programmer would have to know about it first as well
as have a need for it;
neither of which applied to any CICS application programmers.
--
I'm glad to hear you don't run it. It's not the few nano seconds, it's the
idea that anyone could call it, passing any address to any routine, and be in
supervisor state. Are you sure LRS would have distributed this? It would
seem hard to believe, honestly.
I'd implore you to NOT give this
So how did it work out?
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Gadi Ben-Avi
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 9:32 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: fixing a tersed file.
By binary stream mode do you mean u
> So fix the callee.
The usual reasons for not doing so should not apply. Any code that uses
grande instructions was by definition not written in 1972, so there should
be no "we can't find the source code, the guy who wrote it retired, we're
afraid to touch the code, ..."
Charles
-Original
That SVC is a *huge* system integrity risk .
I would advise that you re-think that design ASAP.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Barkow, Eileen
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 2:46 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: get ECSA key 7 storage u
The SVC code just sets the JSCBAUTH bit on for a few nanoseconds while the
user code runs and then sets if off in response to another SVC call to do so.
I do not run it any more but it really came in handy and did not cause any
problems.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussi
On 2018-10-18 09:30, Ira Nelson wrote:
Is the library defined to the PDSMAN Dynamic BlDL facility?
I don't know, but can ask (not my system); however, it seems likely that
it is since the BLDL is never passed on to IBM's BLDL SVC routine.
--
Regards, Gord Tomlin
Action Software Internationa
Eileen, that code sounds suspiciously like a huge security vulnerability? Am
I missing something?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Barkow, Eileen
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 9:46 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: get ECSA key 7 storag
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 20:04:00 +, Edward Finnell wrote:
>Isn't it just a profile setting in ISPF?
>
Nope, not when using the z/OSMF Workflow to Update zOSMF (IZUPRMxx) Parmlib
Member. To perform this task, zOSMF submits a job IZUWFJB batch job and the
actual update is done by a script runn
I actually have run a few CICS programs in supervisor state using an old SVC
routine that LRS used to provide -
You just pass it the address of the code to run and it sets the JSCBAUTH bit on
so that the code runs in supervisor state/key 0.
I needed this in order to issue MVS commands directly fr
Gord,
Is the library defined to the PDSMAN Dynamic BlDL facility?
Sent from my iPad
> On Oct 17, 2018, at 1:34 PM, Gord Tomlin
> wrote:
>
>> On 2018-10-17 13:19, Clark Morris wrote:
>> Is the data set in the concatenation twice because a symbolic is used
>> to change the name of none, one or
Well sure. The exit code invokes a macro from the product maclib. The macro has
a DS in it that got bigger, or a linkage that got more complicated, so now the
assembled exit is bigger.
So long as the exit works (and I am assuming it got only somewhat bigger, not
ten times as big or anything) I
Beesley, Paul wrote:
First thing first - I see you got good replies. I hope they were really useful
for you and your client.
>SAS still provide annual license keys despite 609 being not really supported..
>though they do still question it every time we ask for a new key 😊
Ok, thanks for this u
FWIW, within IBM code, a BLDL could not get a 306-04. A module fetch after
a BLDL? Sure. But the directory entry is not relevant to that particular
"decision".
LLA does not care at all about the APF nature of a data set.
Abend 306-04 results specifically from checking DEBAPFIN and finding it
Don't expect anyone else to save it, so if you really need it after you
get started then save again in your own storage before you call someone
else who may or may not preserve it.
I disagree. That's what linkage conventions are for. Sure, if a callee
fails to follow them (and fails to docum
SAS still provide annual license keys despite 609 being not really supported..
though they do still question it every time we ask for a new key 😊
Paul (UK, not Canada!)
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Elardus Engelbrecht
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2
z/OS 2.3. SAS 609 ran fine on 2.1
Regards and thanks
Paul
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 12:41 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SAS 6.09
In what z/OS is 6.09 running now? I
Thanks Don. I will contact Tech support on their behalf.
Regards and thanks
Paul
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Don
Poitras
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 12:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SAS 6.09
Sas doesn't sell non-supported s
In what z/OS is 6.09 running now? I remember having had several issues after
upgrading z/OS releases with SAS releases current at that moment.
I guess, you need to address all of them when upgrading from an old z/OS to
V2.3.
Kees
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion Lis
Beesley, Paul wrote:
>I'm not really expecting any answer other than 'You must be joking', but is
>anyone using SAS 6.09 on z/OS 2.3?
Certainly not me. If you're living in Canada, I would rather ask 'what weed did
you smoked today?' ;-D
>Yes, I know SAS 6./09 has been out of support for 17 ye
Sas doesn't sell non-supported software. The support for 6.09 is pretty limited
though. Have the customer contact Tech support and we'll see if this is a known
problem and send a fix if we have one.
In article
you wrote:
> Hi
> I'm not really expecting any answer other than 'You must be joking'
You need to be supervisor state to do this. Using CICS just because it is
easier is a wrong decision.
But if you are sold on using CICS, you would need to write a SVC routine to
actually do the work and have your transaction supply a CICS area as a buffer
and the SVC routine will do the IFI work a
The book goes on to say that the application requesting IFI0306 must be
executing in key0.
CICS is NOT the correct environment for this work.
You either need a separate authorized jobstep program, or some sort of PC
routine service to invoke the IFI0306 request.
The minute you go into key0, al
Static linkage?
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 1:19 PM Jake Anderson
wrote:
> Hi
>
> We upgraded a product to a higher version.
>
> One of user exit we have reassembled again with the new maclibs.
> The size of module increases once we reassemble with tht new Mac ? Since I
> didn't add any modification
Hi
We upgraded a product to a higher version.
One of user exit we have reassembled again with the new maclibs.
The size of module increases once we reassemble with tht new Mac ? Since I
didn't add any modifications to the load modules source code .
Any thoughts ?
Jake
-
Hi Binyamin,
Many thanks to your quick replay.
I'm trying to capture/send DB2 log record using IFI call. The storage
requirement is ECSA key 7 storage: "The return area for monitor programs that
issue IFCID 0306 requests must reside either in ECSA key 7 storage or in the
64-bit commo
On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 04:24:35 -0500 Wang Rong wrote:
:>Hi all,
:>
:> Hello everyone, I'm a new commer.
:> I try to get ECSA key 7 storage under CICS, I can to that in batch
program by using STORAGE OBTAIN/FREE macro; but I read some articles say the
GETMAIN/FREEMAIN macro should not b
Hi
I'm not really expecting any answer other than 'You must be joking', but is
anyone using SAS 6.09 on z/OS 2.3?
Yes, I know SAS 6./09 has been out of support for 17 years ... our customer
never got round to upgrading and is now getting occasional 0C4 abends since the
upgrade to z/OS 2.3.
Pa
Hi all,
Hello everyone, I'm a new commer.
I try to get ECSA key 7 storage under CICS, I can to that in batch
program by using STORAGE OBTAIN/FREE macro; but I read some articles say the
GETMAIN/FREEMAIN macro should not be used under CICS, I guess this rule applys
to storage ob
81 matches
Mail list logo
