Phil Smith III wrote: >Timothy Sipples disagrees, which is his right, >but the industry doesn't, so I'm not sure what >else to say here.
To recap, you claimed this: >Read about data-centric protection, note the analysts and >standards bodies saying that container-level protection is >just not very useful. z/OS Data Set Encryption is not container-level encryption, at least not if you respect reasonable precision in terminology. (Are you referring to Docker container-level encryption, for example?) It's file-level encryption. Data sets are files that contain one or more records (formal definition). You could start by citing specific analysts and standards bodies (your plurals and conjunction) that claim that file-level encryption "is just not very useful." That's your (corrected) claim, not mine. You've already agreed with the "pyramid," even pointing out that you've been using a similar diagram in your presentations for "years." Are you now pushing for a lesser pyramid? :-) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy Sipples IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM Z & LinuxONE -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
