Yes sir exactly ... Scott ford www.identityforge.com from my IPAD
'Infinite wisdom through infinite means' > On Nov 25, 2013, at 5:37 PM, Sam Siegel <[email protected]> wrote: > > Then it will probably also need to be passed a flag which can be tested to > see if it is time to shutdown or continue processing. > > The main task can post the shutdown flag at the appropriate time. Once > shutdown its posted, the subtask winds up its processing, posts the > completion ECB and exits. > > Sam >> On Nov 25, 2013 2:26 PM, "Scott Ford" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Sam, >> >> More or less ...it will be passed a socket-description..it will do the >> rest, so essentially we will listen on two ports ..one will direct inbound >> requests to RACF via RACF API. Second port will do the other functions ... >> >> Scott ford >> www.identityforge.com >> from my IPAD >> >> 'Infinite wisdom through infinite means' >> >> >>> On Nov 25, 2013, at 5:13 PM, Sam Siegel <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Scott. That sample code might be overly complex for what you need. >>> >>> Is the new sub-task attached from your true mainline? Or from another >>> sub-task? >>> >>> Does the sub-task need to handle some type of shutdown signal from the >>> attachor? Or can it be forcibly detached without consequences? >>> >>> Sam >>>> On Nov 25, 2013 2:06 PM, "Scott Ford" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Sam, >>>> >>>> We are thinking about modifying our original design...we need one >>>> additional subtask to handle racf commands and password requests so, I >> am >>>> trying to figure out how to retrofit our cobol code with assembler >> changes >>>> so I can multitask ...I am looking over your example you sent me >> sometime >>>> ago ...between crazy customer requests ..... >>>> >>>> Scott ford >>>> www.identityforge.com >>>> from my IPAD >>>> >>>> 'Infinite wisdom through infinite means' >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Nov 25, 2013, at 4:35 PM, Sam Siegel <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Scott - Yes ... at the high-level this seems correct. >>>>> >>>>> I'm assuming that the mainline will be doing other work while the >>>> sub-task >>>>> is running. >>>>> >>>>> If the task which attaches the sub-task abends, the sub-task will also >> be >>>>> abended by z/OS. So you will probably need to consider how the >> sub-task >>>>> handles unexpected abend conditions in addition to handling >>>>> abends/return-codes related to the tcp processing. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Scott Ford <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Guys and gals, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have a mainline that attaches a subtask via an ATTACH macro, the >>>> subtask >>>>>> will do Some TCPIP work, all self contained, my question is the >>>> structure, >>>>>> i.e.; >>>>>> >>>>>> Mainline --> attach .......do work and post >>>>>> Check post ..detach? >>>>>> >>>>>> Is my thinking correct ? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Scott ford >>>>>> www.identityforge.com >>>>>> from my IPAD >>>>>> >>>>>> 'Infinite wisdom through infinite means' >>>>>> >>>> >>
