--- On Sat, 1/31/09, Ted MacNEIL <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Ted MacNEIL <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: SYS1.UADS Format
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Saturday, January 31, 2009, 9:41 AM
> >>> I think you missed the
> forest for the trees.
> >>
> >> Do you have to editorialise, when somebody asks a
> question?
> >> I did say I didn't know.
>
> >I apologize. My original text had a smiley graphic, but
> that seems to have disappeared.
>
> No problem.
> My understanding of UADS is over 20 years out of date.
> And, I admit I didn't understand all the nuances, back
> then.
Ted:
LONG TIME AGO and far far away I had to dissect UADS. It was reasonably well
thought out (for the time).
My memory is vague but IIRC a single user could have multiple members ie
IBMUSER0 (must) IBMUSER1 (maybe) etc etc..
The "reason" it was possible to have one user having multiple passwords and
account numbers (and a few other items but I do not remember for sure)
That way if the blocksize of uads was "small" and you needed addition passwords
(with an different proc) the "overflow when it exceeded what ever number it was
the system would automatically look for the next pds member with a 1 or 2 or
whatever.
Ed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
