Hi Ann, I need to (respectfully) disagree with you. RACF is simply horrible, terrible under VM. If their intent is to host Linux/390 server farms, I don't really know that VM security over and above all of the native CP security is even necessary since end users would never log on to VM (just Linux/390 servers).
DIRMAINT, a venerable old program, doesn't compare to VMSECURE. It's like comparing a Yugo (DIRMAINT, basic transportation, undependable and expensive in the long run) to a Volvo (VMSECURE, highly dependable, full featured, and lower TCO in the long run). VMSECURE also has excellent security components that plug in to the ESM exits in VM, so if a decision were made that you DO need a directory maintenance product AND an ESM VMSECURE has it all in one that works flawlessly and seamlessly. Of course, that's just my opinion - but I've worked with VMSecure, Dirmaint and RACF for about 20 years and my opinion hasn't changed about Dirmaint/RACF in all these years. Michael Coffin, VM Systems Programmer Internal Revenue Service - Room 6527 1111 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20224 Voice: (202) 927-4188 FAX: (202) 622-3123 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Ann Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 9:43 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: What's needed with z/VM? Another two cents. You definitely need RACF. A security package should be a requirement and RACF can be purchased with engine based charging. I am not sure of what CA is charging now for VMSECURE. DIRMAINT is highly recommended- very useful, makes the sysprog's life easier. Also available with engine based charging. RTM is good for snapshots and quite inexpensive (again engine priced). I also recommend Velocity Software's Linux Performance Suite. So basically I'd go with the IBM products for security and directory maintenance. The pricing is better and you know they'll be kept up to date. But I do recommend ESALPS from Velocity Software. It is reasonably priced and the best VM performance products. "Kittendorf, Craig" wrote: > We're currently have SuSE Linux/390 in an LPAR. Management is asking > about z/VM and I really know very little about it. > > If we get z/VM to run Linux/390 as guests, what else would be required > (not just desirable) beyond the base z/VM, e.g. RACF or Top Secret, > etc? > > Thanks, > Craig
