On Thu, 2 Apr 2015 18:12:39 +0000, J O Skip Robinson wrote: > >The historical basis for this requirement is not hard to guess. Imagine a time >when tapes were handled by people scrambling around on roller skates. A TSO >user could finger-check a data set name and send a tape jockey hurtling across >a cavernous room to grab a volume not even wanted; meanwhile the user is stuck >on the clock wondering why the computer went dead, hollering at the help desk >about terrible response time. I would have disallowed tape mounts then. >They're still disallowed now by default. > >Just understand that if your personal userid acquires mount authority, you >might become the user described above. > What century is this?
The default should be more granular: o "Allowed" for virtual tapes. o "Disallowed" for roller skate tapes. o Somewhere in between for robotic mounted tapes. But perhaps the emulation is too faithful; the OS may be unable (by design) to distinguish a virtual tape from physical. But there are still esoteric device names. Anyway, the user shouldn't be left "stuck on the clock wondering why the computer went dead," the mount message should be echoed to the user's terminal (yes, even if the user is logged on to OMVS, and then to the right session if there are several) so the user would know. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
