Barbara Nitz wrote on 09/27/2005 01:05:50 AM: > Several comments on this: > First to Bob - thanks for the explanation. That explains why I get three > responses when I ask ip w for the cvtexit address. (Or why IPCS tells me > that an ASCB address is an ASCB.) > > Shane, I don't think that IBM is implementing this yet, it was just a > request and Bob alluded to what it would mean. Or am I mistaken? > You're welcome, Barbara. I hope that the explanation helped others as well. Please take the feedback that an ASCB is an ASCB as a good thing; it's when the storage serves as part of several structures that you've found a symptom of what's been going wrong.
You are correct that I was floating an idea that's been forming recently - one where I hoped to get feedback before the proposed implementation or an alternative was chosen. If the specific one sounds useful, it should be quite a small change but one that we'd need to also surface to the owners of formal publications, our testing groups, and others. It takes away the fun that goes with doing something one day and sharing it with folks up and down the hallway the next, but a lot more can benefit this way. Bob Wright - z/OS MVS Service Aids ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
