All, Thank you all. The IEANTRT is being issued via a STC. It has worked well. My concern the routine issuing the writes will go past the of storage, since we us KEY=0. I don't think it is, but I realize the danger of KEY=0.
Scott ford www.identityforge.com Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll understand. - Chinese Proverb On Oct 25, 2012, at 3:02 AM, Martin Truebner <[email protected]> wrote: > Scott, > > Jon said already a lot - here is my mustard (german saying) > >>> When this program issues a IEANTCR how do i know its within the STORAGE >>> OBTAIN address range or > is it? > > The thing is that the value you give it under the token-name (16 bytes) > can contain an address (or even more). This adress could be an anchor > or point directly to your data. > > If the token is system level (and you have the authority to > do so), token-service takes care to have the token/value pair in storage > that last as long enough. The piece that the address in the token > points to is subject to your actions. > >>> We later use a IEANTRT to locate and then write data to the STORAGE > OBTAIN area.. > > This sounds like it is done the way it should be done. > >>> And Please I didnt design this...I have to live with it , but I want >>> to understand what I am seeing. > > I would never criticise the use of tokens - it is a hidden treasure > (and it is object code compatible between zVSE and zOS). > >>> I have seen a TCB using IEANTCR and then a IEANTRT. > > I do not understand this sentence- could mean that you are using it > from a subtask - but not really sure. > > -- > Martin > > Pi_cap_CPU - all you ever need around MWLC/SCRT/CMT in z/VSE > more at http://www.picapcpu.de
