ibm-main wrote:
From: "R.S."
For non-sysplex GRS, you native GRS CTC communication: BCTC devices.
Usually GRS uses XCF communication - that means Base Sysplex.
No - GRS will use XCF in preference *if* it's available.
That's certainly not *usually* - base sysplex is by no means required (or
expected).
I cannot provide any reference now, but my memory tells me that IBM
suggests to use XCF for GRS. Maybe that's why GRS is not updated to use
"more modern" SCTC. AFAIK BCTC means base CTC - compatible with S/360,
while SCTC is "modern" S/370 mode.
BTW: I don't know what Shane mean, but it is feasible to share data
without GRS and without integrity exposures.
Feasible, but not sensible if the volume that may be updated from more than
one system.
GRS provides protection with less effort, and less angst. No contest.
Where is security exposure here ?
For sure, sharing with GRS more efficient, since it locks dataset, not
volume, however it has nothing to do with integrity exposures.
BTW: such exposures can exist when GRS is used, but misconfigured.
Especially when two systems use CONVERSION on resource and there is
third system, which is not considered because ... (put any reason here).
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
