Not get, but got. One of my reported APARs.

APAR Identifier ...... OA25089      Last Changed ........ 08/10/02
  IOS627E PRIMARY INTERFACE WITH ENCRYPTION KEY MANAGER CANNOT BE
  CONNECTED DUE TO SOCKET FAILURE ERNO=0000

PROBLEM SUMMARY:
  ****************************************************************
  * USERS AFFECTED: Users at HBB7720 and above                   *
  ****************************************************************
  * PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: IOSVEKMT fails with MSGIOS627E          *
  *                      ERNO=0000 and ABEND0C4 PIC4 when        *
  *                      REFRPROT is enabled in PROGxx member.   *

Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&[email protected]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On Thursday, September 2nd, 2021 at 4:02 PM, Jim Mulder <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> I found IBM RENT modules that modified themselves
>
> 15 years ago when I was experimenting to see what would
>
> happen if we tried to page-protect RENT modules. I have a list:
>
> ANTMAIN
>
> ANTSDMLK
>
> IEAVNIPX
>
> EZATNF
>
> IOEFSKN
>
> FNMVZJV
>
> FNMVZCVA
>
> EZAXVMCF
>
> DSNHDECP
>
> DSN9PARM
>
> DSN3INI
>
> CNMINIT
>
> CNMCSSIM
>
> CNMCSSIC
>
> We subsequently removed the unintended RENT from IEAVNIPX.
>
> So we don't page-protect RENT modules (except for experimental
>
> purposes under control of another undocumented DIAGxx TRAP name),
>
> and we implemented REFRPROT instead. I haven't heard about
>
> any IBM modules that get broken by REFRPROT.
>
> Jim Mulder z/OS Diagnosis, Design, Development, Test IBM Corp.
>
> Poughkeepsie NY
>
> "IBM Mainframe Discussion List" [email protected] wrote on
>
> 09/02/2021 08:54:25 AM:
>
> > From: "Seymour J Metz" [email protected]
> >
> > To: [email protected]
> >
> > Date: 09/02/2021 03:46 PM
> >
> > Subject: Re: RENT binder option
> >
> > Sent by: "IBM Mainframe Discussion List" [email protected]
> >
> > Given that IBM has fetched RENT load modules and program objects
> >
> > from authorized concatenations into SP252 for close to half a
> >
> > century, there is a case for requiring new reentrant code to also be
> >
> > read only. I agree about REFR. In both cases, IBM has to take
> >
> > compatibility into account.
> >
> > There is customer code that is REFR or RENT but not read only. Is
> >
> > there still any IBM code like that?
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> >
> > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
> --
>
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>
> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to