Hi,
It seems like marketing or SHARE requirements to IBM for DFSMSdfp to
support member level protection in just PDSE data sets might be in
order. PDSE code is newer and probably less costly and lower risk for
IBM to insert new function into. PDSE internal structure is not known
or used by customers and vendors so lower level access should be less of
an issue. PDSE access is only through known interfaces. PDSE is
actively being enhanced. If we want to get this funded as a line item
for a z/OS release then we need to start asking. If IBM satisfied
existing requirements only for DSORG PDSE it seems like that would be a
reasonable response.
My .02
Best Regards,
Sam Knutson, GEICO
Performance and Availability Management
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(office) 301.986.3574
"Think big, act bold, start simple, grow fast..."
-----Original Message-----
Subject: Re: RACF and Member Level Protection
Rob Scott of the IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]>
wrote on 04/05/2007 08:26:52 AM:
>>I went to an ACF2 presentation in the late 1990's about member level
>>protection, and IIRC, ACF2 checks the CCHHR address somewhere in the
>>EXCP process.
> I imagine those developers had some "fun" when PDS-Es were
> introduced....
<snip from ACF2 doc>
O PDS/E data sets are not under member-level controls.
</snip
Regards,
John K
====================
This email/fax message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this
email/fax is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
destroy all paper and electronic copies of the original message.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
