We did this for a short time.
MVS with RMM, had to write an RMM exit to prevent MVS/RMM from sucking in
all tapes entered into the ATL.
The name of the exit is documented in RMM, CBR...something. If you want it
just let me know.
Regards, Doug
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Kern" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 6:24 PM
Subject: Re: DFSMS/VM exit question - sharing 3494
This is what we do to share our ATL and VTS. VM owns (administrative
enforcement only) some drives, MVS owns the rest. Because only system
programmers really mount tapes on either system, we don't worry about any
exits
to enforce a separation. We even like the idea of being able to mount and
read
the other's tapes to handle some problem.
/Tom Kern
/301-903-2211
--- Bob Heerdink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No MIM. I was planning on segregating by dedicating one tape drive
(exposure or whatever it's called) to VM and keeping the MVS tape drives
varied offline.
This tiny VM does rarely needs more than one tape drive.
Thanks,
Bob
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
