On Thu, 2 May 2013 10:14:04 -0500, Ed Gould wrote: >R.S. > >That would mean that the scheduler had its own security and letting >applications near production.
No, not "its own" security. RACF. >Then the finger pointing would start and never end. No Thanks. > Look. If you let people submit jobs outside the scheduler, then there's enough security and the scheduler needs no more. You don't let people submit jobs outside the scheduler, then everyone submits jobs through the scheduler, and the needed mechanisms must exist. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
