Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE)

2007-08-25 Thread Phil Smith III
Nick Laflamme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fortunately, IBM makes it easy for us to define new command classes so we can do it our way. If I were feeling demanding, I might whine about IBM (and other vendors) listing command classes they want instead of commands (and DIAGs) they want, but I'm not,

Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE)

2007-08-24 Thread pfa
: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 3:07 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE) On Thursday, 08/23/2007 at 01:06 EDT, Schuh, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You do if you are adding

Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE)

2007-08-24 Thread Schuh, Richard
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 5:19 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE) TCPIP does FORCE and AUTOLOG/XAUTOLOG users Schuh, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE)

2007-08-24 Thread Schuh, Richard
We have a class V that allows class B queries. Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Laflamme Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 10:25 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Ops privs (was Re

Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE)

2007-08-24 Thread Kris Buelens
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 10:25 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE) Fortunately, IBM makes it easy for us to define new command classes so we can do it our way. If I were feeling demanding, I might whine about IBM (and other vendors) listing command

Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE)

2007-08-23 Thread David Boyes
Actually we never gave our ops class-C ... only sysprogs got that. The only reason for C would be to enable SET PRIV, which would let us take away all the other privs in the default setup.

Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE)

2007-08-23 Thread Alan Altmark
On Thursday, 08/23/2007 at 12:31 EDT, David Boyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually we never gave our ops class-C ... only sysprogs got that. The only reason for C would be to enable SET PRIV, which would let us take away all the other privs in the default setup. You don't need class C

Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE)

2007-08-23 Thread Alan Altmark
On Thursday, 08/23/2007 at 01:06 EDT, Schuh, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You do if you are adding a priv that is not in your directory entry. Most of us live in fear of the class A privileges, so we do not include it in our entries. Without either C or A, you cannot add A (or C, for that

Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE)

2007-08-23 Thread Schuh, Richard
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 3:07 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE) On Thursday, 08/23/2007 at 01:06 EDT, Schuh, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You do if you are adding a priv that is not in your

Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE)

2007-08-23 Thread George Haddad
A? Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 3:07 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Ops privs (was Re: MAINTENANCE) If you have class C, then you have all