Clark - an active project to get off JES3 - that is easier said than done. There is no cost justification for doing so, there is no ROI, there is no significant benefit to such a project. All a site will encounter is significant costs to (a) retrain sysprogs, operators, all JECL users, (b) convert from using JES3 DJC to the not quite the same JES2 DJC networks, (c) loss of data set awareness allowing jobs to enter execution only to wait for data sets held exclusive (disp new/old) or trying to access data sets exclusive, (d) loss of functionality from locally developed DSPs, (e) conversion of all JES3 user exits with probable loss of functionality, (f) updating all automation tools to use JES2 commands (assuming there are equivalent commands), (g) the lost opportunity to use the resources spent on the migration for other projects that help the company be more competitive, more productive, save money, be more agile, improve operations, support their users/customers, etc.
Just my $0.01 This e-mail reflects only my opinion and not those of my employer or those I'm contracting with. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lionel B. Dyck Mainframe Systems Programmer - TRA -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Clark Morris Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 8:56 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: IBM to stabilize JES3 (was: IBM to finally drop JES3) [Default] On 30 Aug 2017 04:43:59 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main [email protected] (Peter Relson) wrote: >It is very disturbing to see someone use an inflammatory representation >such as the initial subject of this thread when that is very much *not* >what the SOD said. The handwriting was on the wall decades ago on JES3. SMS was made available to JES2 shops on XA but not JES3. JES3 required the licensing of BDT to get SNA NJE while JES2 had it native. SNA NJE between JES3 and VSE did not work requiring resolution by what I recall was the Network Protocol Board (I was the systems and JES3 programmer at the shop that was first to try it). Over the years the more expensive job entry sub-system was the last to get some new functions if it ever got them. I would highly recommend that JES3 shops have an active project to get off JES3 and save money. Clark Morris > >Maybe in practice stabilization will result in some JES3 users choosing >to move (perhaps because they need new function that would become >available only in JES2), but IBM is not dropping JES3, nor did the >statement of direction say or imply anything about doing so. That's >like saying just because we might have stabilized some system service >that you must stop using it. That too would be a faulty conclusion. > >Regardless, input such as what Cheryl W refers to is important. > >(John Eells would probably have stated the above in a cleaner way; >apologies to him.) > >Peter Relson >z/OS Core Technology Design > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
