On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 12:17:29 -0400, Tony Harminc wrote: > >No - never. AMASPZAP (IMASPZAP before MVS, i.e. before 1972, and before the >notion of APF authorization) was always subject to dataset protection (via >passwords, long before RACF), ... > Is AMASPZAP linked AC=1? It would seem that there's no need for that nowadays: AC=0 with suitable data set and programmer profiles should suffice.
(To wit, IEBCOPY nowadays is AC=0(?), but it allows updating protected data sets subject to RACF profiles.) -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
