So if it can't be controlled at the LParr, then priv class C(B too?)
needs to be locked down to the few MVS security folk trust.

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Brian Nielsen <[email protected]> wrote:
> Devices you want to see intermittently are not in the "never" category
> and, as you noted, require different treatment than "never".
>
> Brian Nielsen
>
> On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:41:22 -0700, Schuh, Richard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Sorry, but there are the intermittent times when we need to see some of
> them. When needed, that can be accomplished via command, without requiring
> an update to the IOCP or LPAR Profile. The MVS security people want us to
> not even be able to vary them online except in special circumstances;
> thus, the Not_Accepted status. More proof that, "All generalities are
> wrong, including this one."
>>
>>Regards,
>>Richard Schuh
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brian Nielsen
>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 9:16 AM
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Subject: Re: Devices OFFLINE at IPL
>>>
>>> If you never want to see certain devices in the VM LPAR then
>>> the IOCP should be coded to not allow that LPAR to access the devices.
>>>
>>> Brian Nielsen
>>>
>>> On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:03:33 -0700, Schuh, Richard
>>> <[email protected]> wrot=
>>> e:
>>>
>>> >We have thousands of devices in the IOCP that we never want
>>> to see on
>>> >ou=
>>> r
>>> VM system; however, there are some we do need to access from
>>> VM intermixe= d with them. In this case, we find it better to
>>> add yet another category, =
>>>
>>> Not_Accepted, which prevents the devices from being sensed
>>> and the building of control blocks for them. This prevents
>>> bloat in the use of =
>>>
>>> storage and in any monitor displays or reports. If you went
>>> ahead and sensed the devices and took them offline after the
>>> IPL, the device blocks=
>>>
>>> would be built for them and they could affect the way space
>>> is allocated =
>>>
>>> and used in your monitor segment.
>>> >
>>> >As with all things that affect the configuration, you must take care
>>> >whe=
>>> n
>>> specifying that devices are to be kept offline or not even
>>> sensed. It is =
>>>
>>> certainly best to insure that you do not include devices
>>> which you need i= n the offline or Not_Accepted lists. As we
>>> like to say, "Your gun, your bullet, your foot."
>>> >
>>> >Regards,
>>> >Richard Schuh
>>> ========================================================================
>



-- 
Gregg Reed
"No Plan, survives execution"

Reply via email to