Re: Setting up Sublime Text to edit PDS members

[David Crayford]

On 9/09/2015 10:11 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:


What's Qt?  Does it go over VPN?  Do I need a Qt as opposed to X11
desktop agent?  QuickTime?


Qt is a cross-platform GUI toolkit used to build desktop GUI 
applications. I run Slickedit on Windows, Mac and Ubuntu and access the 
file systems over SMB, NFS or FTP.
Slickedit used to run on z/OS using X11 and it sucked so much they 
pulled it pretty quickly. Mac users complained about the Mac SE that 
used X11 which is why SE now uses Qt. It's only because Macs are now
so popular as a development machine that they made such a big investment 
to switch GUI toolkits. With Solaris your probably SOL. What desktop 
operating system do you use?



Hipster kids all seem to be using Atom which I must admit is very slick.
It's amazing what you can do with HTML and Javascript these days.


I'll check it out.

Thanks,
gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS Upgrade 1.13 to 2.2

[Elardus Engelbrecht]

Lucas Rosalen wrote:

>We've done 1.13 -> 2.1 recently in a parallel sysplex shop and there was one 
>Tolerance/Coexistence PTF missing which prevented the system to join the plex, 
>so I suggest you to make sure you apply ALL these PTFs.

Many thanks for your kind suggestion. 

Please give that PTF number if you can. Just want to make sure we have 
everything.

Thanks in advance.

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Source for "98% of the checking transactions flow through a mainframe" type statements

[Vernooij, CP (ITOPT1) - KLM]

Well, a lot of money is quite virtual these days...

Kees.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Don Leahy
Sent: 08 September, 2015 22:18
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Source for "98% of the checking transactions flow through a 
mainframe" type statements

If you are handling Real money, you need to use a Real computer.

:-)

On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Jeff Gross  wrote:

> Charles,
>
> Here is a link to Mainframe resource info by CA technologies.
> http://www.ca.com/us/products/mainframe/product-resources.aspx
>
> There is one report in the Industry Analysts section called "The Mainframe
> Opportunity - IT Strategies for Achieving Breakthrough Value" and this link
> is
>
> http://www.ca.com/us/~/media/Files/IndustryAnalystReports/camainframe2revised11022009_213783.PDF
>
> I think you will find some information supporting your position.
>
> Jeff
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message. 

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its 
employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of 
this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. 
Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch 
Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 
33014286




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS Upgrade 1.13 to 2.2

[Lucas Rosalen]

IBM works with "supported migration paths". They are given by the N-2
formula, where N is the target version of z/OS you want.
So, it's supported to migrate to v2.2 from 2 previous versions (v2.1 and
v1.13).
Of course you can do it in the unsupported way (I've seen that some times),
but remember you probably will not have much help from IBM in case of
problems.
We've done 1.13 -> 2.1 recently in a parallel sysplex shop and there was
one Tolerance/Coexistence PTF missing which prevented the system to join
the plex, so I suggest you to make sure you apply ALL these PTFs.

Lucas
On Sep 9, 2015 07:41, "Timothy Sipples"  wrote:

> For the record, you can migrate from *any* operating system/operating
> system release you like to z/OS 2.2. IBM hopes you do as expeditiously as
> possible and reasonable.
>
> Migrations to z/OS 2.2 only from these releases:
>
> z/OS 1.13
> z/OS 2.1
>
> include IBM supported "coexistence" and "fallback." Many customers want and
> appreciate having coexistence and fallback capabilities, and so they make
> efforts to stay at least reasonably current on their operating system
> releases. Having those capabilities helps reduce risks and the work effort
> involved in migrations. But you are NOT required to exploit coexistence and
> fallback capabilities. Yes, you can migrate directly from, as one example,
> z/OS 1.11 to z/OS 2.2 -- without coexistence/fallback.(*)
>
> I should also point out that "coexistence" is not the same word as
> "co-located." Yes, it is possible to migrate from z/OS 1.11 to z/OS 2.2, as
> one example, and have both those operating system releases be co-located on
> the same physical machine. "LPARs work," to put it simply. The IBM
> definition of coexistence is a different concept, discussed in the z/OS
> migration guides.
>
> (*) For perspective, the rest of the IT world does not have coexistence and
> fallback, at least not to the level IBM offers.
>
>
> 
> Timothy Sipples
> IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM z Systems, AP/GCG/MEA
> 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
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Source for "98% of the checking transactions flow through a mainframe" ty...

[Ed Finnell]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2015-09-07/bitcoin-island-cryptocurrenc
y-on-the-isle-of-man
 
 
In a message dated 9/9/2015 1:24:34 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
kees.verno...@klm.com writes:

Well, a  lot of money is quite virtual these  days...


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS Upgrade 1.13 to 2.2

[Sankaranarayanan, Vignesh]

Get your SHARE fix here:
https://share.confex.com/share/125/webprogram/uploadlistall.html

-Vignesh
Mainframe Infrastructure

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Jerry
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 8:26 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS Upgrade 1.13 to 2.2

The z Channel, an online user group, is hosting a two-part presentation by 
Marna Walle (IBM) titled "Migrating to V2.2" on Monday, September 14, 2015 at 2 
pm EDT (Part 1) and on Tuesday, September 15, 2015 (Part 2). All are advised to 
register for both webcasts.

You can find more information and a link to register at 
http://www.newera-info.com/zExchange.html

You can also find a document titled "What's New in V2R1" at 
http://www.newera-info.com/Links.html

"What's New in V2R2" will be available soon at 
http://www.newera-info.com/Links.html

The same webpage includes links to Marna Walle's recorded z Channel two-part 
webcasts "Migrating to z/OS V2R1".

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of zos reader
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 1:51 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: z/OS Upgrade 1.13 to 2.2

Hi All,

We are planning to Upgrade z/OS from 1.13 to 2.2, we are in plan of checking 
compatability of ISV Products and Applying the required PTF's.

I have a query that do we need to move onto 2.1 then to 2.2 or straightly we 
can upgrade to 2.2? Please confirm.

Also guide us the if any key things that we need to follow.

Thanks,
Samat.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

MARKSANDSPENCER.COM

 Unless otherwise stated above:
Marks and Spencer plc
Registered Office:
Waterside House
35 North Wharf Road
London
W2 1NW

Registered No. 214436 in England and Wales.

Telephone (020) 7935 4422
Facsimile (020) 7487 2670

www.marksandspencer.com

Please note that electronic mail may be monitored.

This e-mail is confidential. If you received it by mistake, please let us know 
and then delete it from your system; you should not copy, disclose, or 
distribute its contents to anyone nor act in reliance on this e-mail, as this 
is prohibited and may be unlawful.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Setting up Sublime Text to edit PDS members

[David Crayford]

On 9/09/2015 1:55 PM, Shane Ginnane wrote:

On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 21:11:41 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote:


Hipster kids all seem to be using Atom which I must admit is very slick.
It's amazing what you can do with HTML and Javascript these days.


I'll check it out.

Unlike (apparently) gil, I'm not at all sure I fit the demographic, but I may 
see how it copes with navigating a kernel source tree with ctags.
Like I need (yet) another editor - about as much as I need (yet) another 
"language".


I'm with you mate! Changing your editor is like moving house.

It's an interesting test to see if Atom could handle the kernel. It uses 
the C/C++ front ends from LLVM for parsing code for context assist which is
an excellent design. I've been very impressed with it. It also has a 
very cool minimap plugin https://github.com/atom-minimap/minimap which I 
absolutely love. Writing plugins is easy because it's just Javascript or
Coffeescript which is much better than horrible lisp for emacs or 
whatever vim uses. Of course, using Javascript means that there is 
already a large community of coders knocking out useful plugins. It's 
not good for large
text files though! It's a coders editor. It's basically chromium and 
node.js at the core with plugins which appeals to the hipster hackers 
that have the time and energy to get amongst it.



Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS Upgrade 1.13 to 2.2

[Kurt Quackenbush]

As i researched i need to apply lot of Prerequiste PTF's to full fill
the compatability checks.

Can i apply the latest RSU, will that satisfy and apply all the
prerequiste PTF's?


You can apply the latest RSU, but that may NOT install all required 
coexistence PTFs.  It is quite possible that one or more required PTFs 
has not yet been marked RSU.  If you install the latest RSU, you still 
need to use the IBM.Coexistence.z/OS.V2R2 fix category to be sure you 
have all the required coexistence PTFs installed.


Kurt Quackenbush -- IBM, SMP/E Development

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Source for "98% of the checking transactions flow through a mainframe" type statements

[John McKown]

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 1:24 AM, Vernooij, CP (ITOPT1) - KLM <
kees.verno...@klm.com> wrote:

> Well, a lot of money is quite virtual these days...
>
> Kees.
>
>
​Which explains why it just seems to vanish at times without actually being
spent.

-- 

Schrodinger's backup: The condition of any backup is unknown until a
restore is attempted.

Yoda of Borg, we are. Futile, resistance is, yes. Assimilated, you will be.

He's about as useful as a wax frying pan.

10 to the 12th power microphones = 1 Megaphone

Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS Upgrade 1.13 to 2.2

[Lucas Rosalen]

I lost all my notes, emails, etc when I moved some months ago - thanks for
old external HDs - so I'm not 100% sure about this, but I think it was PTF
UA68522 (APAR OA37696).
For some reason it got commented out of the APPLY statement generated by
the FIXCAT job (SMPPUNCH DD, IIRC), and was overlooked by me and other
folks (yeah, not my very best move ever).

---
*Lucas Rosalen*
Emails: rosalen.lu...@gmail.com / *lrosa...@pl.ibm.com
*
LinkedIn: http://br.linkedin.com/in/lrosalen
Phone: +48 792 809 198


2015-09-09 10:37 GMT+02:00 Elardus Engelbrecht <
elardus.engelbre...@sita.co.za>:

> Lucas Rosalen wrote:
>
> >We've done 1.13 -> 2.1 recently in a parallel sysplex shop and there was
> one Tolerance/Coexistence PTF missing which prevented the system to join
> the plex, so I suggest you to make sure you apply ALL these PTFs.
>
> Many thanks for your kind suggestion.
>
> Please give that PTF number if you can. Just want to make sure we have
> everything.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Groete / Greetings
> Elardus Engelbrecht
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: AMASPZAP to C main marked as $private

[John Abell]

Here is what I use for a AMODE 64 program:

NAME load_module csect_to_be_zapped  C_CODE64

Where load_module is the module on the EXEC statement, csect_to_be_zapped  is 
the module being linked into the load_madule and that has a #pragma 
csect(CODE,"csect_name") coded in it.

The following also works for a DUMPT:

DUMPT load_module csect_to_be_dumped  C_CODE64

John T. Abell
Tel:800-295-7608Option 4
President
International:  1-416-593-5578  Option 4
E-mail:  john.ab...@intnlsoftwareproducts.com
Fax:800-295-7609

International:  1-416-593-5579


International Software Products
www.ispinfo.com

This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of 
the intended recipient(s). Any review, use, retention, distribution or 
disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient (or authorized to receive on behalf of the named recipient), please 
contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. 
Also,email is susceptible to data corruption, interception,
tampering, unauthorized amendment and viruses. We only send and receive emails 
on the basis that we are not liable for any such corruption, interception, 
tampering, amendment or viruses or any consequence thereof.


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Scott Ford
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:56 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: AMASPZAP to C main marked as $private

Janet,

Agree with Jim, that's what I just read also...

Regards,
Scott

On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, Jim Mulder  wrote:

> > I'm trying to create a zap for a C main.  The binder has designated
> > the C main is in a $private code.  What's the AMASPZAP NAME card for
> > private code?  Alternatively can I force a name on the CSECT?
> >
> > Here's the link map output from the binder
> >
> >OFFSET   OFFSET  NAMETYPELENGTH  DDNAME SEQMEMBER
>
> >
> >  0  $PRIV10CSECT   410  XMLRPC
> 01TESTDCAL
> >88   88 main   LABEL
> >
> > The name card should be something like
> >
> > NAME TESTDCAL TESTDCAL C_CODE
> >
> > but that doesn't work.  A CSECT name of $PRIVATE, $PRIV10, or
> > anything else I can think of doesn't work either.
>
>  How about
>
> NAME TESTDCAL *
> or
> NAME TESTDCAL * C_CODE
>
>   I am not a C programmer, so that is just my best guess based on the
> AMASPZAP documentation for the NAME statement.
> For a program object, AMASPZAP invokes IGWSPZAP, which is owned by the
> Binder component.
>
> Jim Mulder   z/OS System Test   IBM Corp.  Poughkeepsie,  NY
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
> email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu  with the message:
> INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS V2.1 - When is ServerPac order cutoff date

[Marna WALLE]

As announced (IBM United States Withdrawal Announcement 915-107, dated June 2, 
2015), z/OS V2.1 will be withdrawn from marketing on January 25, 2016.  It's 
recommended you place your order at least two weeks before that date, to make 
sure that there are no problems with it, and it will be completed by January 
25, 2016.   Note that z/OSMF V2.1 will be withdrawn from marketing on July 25, 
2016.

While we're talking announced dates, notice that the End of Service date for 
z/OS V1R13 was announced to be September 30, 2016 (IBM United States Withdrawal 
Announcement, 915-163, dated August 4, 2015).

Thanks, 
Marna WALLE
z/OS System Installation, IBM Poughkeepsie

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Steve Harner]

I am interested in determining/clarifying what the current market share 
breakdown is for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top 
Secret. In his 5/24/12 interview with Jeffrey R. Yost, Ph.D. 
(conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/132470/oh404bs.pdf), Barry Schrager 
noted that:
(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM’s RACF and 
CA’s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has 75% market 
share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25 percent.

Thanks in advance for any further information which you can provide regarding 
what the current market share breakdown is for EACH of the three noted z/OS ESM 
products. 

Steve Harner
IT Audit Technical Consultant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: AMASPZAP to C main marked as $private

[Scott Ford]

Janet,

Agree with Jim, that's what I just read also...

Regards,
Scott

On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, Jim Mulder  wrote:

> > I'm trying to create a zap for a C main.  The binder has designated
> > the C main is in a $private code.  What's the AMASPZAP NAME card for
> > private code?  Alternatively can I force a name on the CSECT?
> >
> > Here's the link map output from the binder
> >
> >OFFSET   OFFSET  NAMETYPELENGTH  DDNAME SEQMEMBER
>
> >
> >  0  $PRIV10CSECT   410  XMLRPC
> 01TESTDCAL
> >88   88 main   LABEL
> >
> > The name card should be something like
> >
> > NAME TESTDCAL TESTDCAL C_CODE
> >
> > but that doesn't work.  A CSECT name of $PRIVATE, $PRIV10, or
> > anything else I can think of doesn't work either.
>
>  How about
>
> NAME TESTDCAL *
> or
> NAME TESTDCAL * C_CODE
>
>   I am not a C programmer, so that is just my best
> guess based on the AMASPZAP documentation for the NAME statement.
> For a program object, AMASPZAP invokes IGWSPZAP, which is owned
> by the Binder component.
>
> Jim Mulder   z/OS System Test   IBM Corp.  Poughkeepsie,  NY
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu  with the message:
> INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Thomas Conley]

On 9/9/2015 9:57 AM, Steve Harner wrote:

I am interested in determining/clarifying what the current market share 
breakdown is for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top 
Secret. In his 5/24/12 interview with Jeffrey R. Yost, Ph.D. 
(conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/132470/oh404bs.pdf), Barry Schrager 
noted that:
(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM’s RACF and 
CA’s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has 75% market 
share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25 percent.

Thanks in advance for any further information which you can provide regarding 
what the current market share breakdown is for EACH of the three noted z/OS ESM 
products.

Steve Harner
IT Audit Technical Consultant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



I would take Barry's word as gospel.  Just based on what I've seen at my 
clients, I would tend to agree with his numbers.


Regards,
Tom Conley

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS pricing question

[J O Skip Robinson]

The crux of this question involves a 'version change', i.e. from V1 to V2. In 
general, not just for z/OS, IBM allows two versions to coexist for a period of 
time without charging separately. This period is normally one year, but in the 
case of z/OS V1 --> V2, an extra year has been granted in general to all 
customers. Meanwhile, the price for V1 has been adjusted to match that of V2, 
so there is no longer a financial incentive to remain down level. Once V2 is 
installed, the two-year clock starts ticking.

Note that this rule is not about CECs or LPARs. It's about a customer account. 
If a customer is licensed for and installs V2, V1 needs to disappear altogether 
from the enterprise within two years. 

Note: this a customer's view of the world, not an official IBM pronouncement. 

.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
626-302-7535 Office
323-715-0595 Mobile
jo.skip.robin...@sce.com

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Charles Mills
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:45 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: z/OS pricing question

Maybe this is a question that is too complex for a listserve answer. Does IBM 
price each version of z/OS separately on a single box? In other words, does it 
generally cost more in IBM license charges to run V1R13 on one LPAR and V2R1 on 
the others (on the same footprint) than it would to run V2R1 on all?

Charles 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS pricing question

[Norbert Friemel]

On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 16:00:27 +, J O Skip Robinson wrote:

>The crux of this question involves a 'version change', i.e. from V1 to V2. In 
>general, not just for z/OS, IBM allows two versions to coexist for a period of 
>time without charging separately. This period is normally one year, but in the 
>case of z/OS V1 --> V2, an extra year has been granted in general to all 
>customers. Meanwhile, the price for V1 has been adjusted to match that of V2, 
>so there is no longer a financial incentive to remain down level. Once V2 is 
>installed, the two-year clock starts ticking.
>
>Note that this rule is not about CECs or LPARs. It's about a customer account. 
>If a customer is licensed for and installs V2, V1 needs to disappear 
>altogether from the enterprise within two years. 
>
>Note: this a customer's view of the world, not an official IBM pronouncement. 
>

"Single Version Charging (SVC)" 
http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/z/resources/swprice/subcap/corner2.html
"Migration Pricing Option (MPO)"  
http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/z/resources/swprice/reference/announce.html

Norbert Friemel

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

z/OS pricing question

[Charles Mills]

Maybe this is a question that is too complex for a listserve answer. Does
IBM price each version of z/OS separately on a single box? In other words,
does it generally cost more in IBM license charges to run V1R13 on one LPAR
and V2R1 on the others (on the same footprint) than it would to run V2R1 on
all?

Charles 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS pricing question

[Charles Mills]

VERY helpful. Thanks!

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of J O Skip Robinson
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:00 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS pricing question

The crux of this question involves a 'version change', i.e. from V1 to V2.
In general, not just for z/OS, IBM allows two versions to coexist for a
period of time without charging separately. This period is normally one
year, but in the case of z/OS V1 --> V2, an extra year has been granted in
general to all customers. Meanwhile, the price for V1 has been adjusted to
match that of V2, so there is no longer a financial incentive to remain down
level. Once V2 is installed, the two-year clock starts ticking.

Note that this rule is not about CECs or LPARs. It's about a customer
account. If a customer is licensed for and installs V2, V1 needs to
disappear altogether from the enterprise within two years. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Setting up Sublime Text to edit PDS members

[Tony Harminc]

On 9 September 2015 at 04:11, David Crayford  wrote:
> On 9/09/2015 10:11 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>>
>> What's Qt?  Does it go over VPN?  Do I need a Qt as opposed to X11
>> desktop agent?  QuickTime?
>
> Qt is a cross-platform GUI toolkit used to build desktop GUI applications. I
> run Slickedit on Windows, Mac and Ubuntu and access the file systems over
> SMB, NFS or FTP.

Qt's most prominent roots pass through the Symbian (Nokia) smartphone
era. It was open-sourced, and then closed again (but of course the
genie was out of the bottle) as Nokia went through its death throes.
Now Nokia's phones run Windows, and have approximately 0% market share
(down from around 80% just a few years ago). Qt is used to implement,
among others, the KDE desktop environment for Linux. There's a fairly
detailed Wikipedia article.

Tony H.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Shane Ginnane]

On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 08:47:27 -0500, Steve Harner  wrote:

>(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM’s RACF 
>and CA’s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has 75% 
>market share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25 percent.

Does anyone, other than reputedly CA itself, actually use T/S ?. Never seen it 
in a customer site.
When I first saw ACF2 (prior to the buyout), it was the ducks nuts - RACF was a 
slug in comparison. Seems IBM has won that battle though.

Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Steve Conway]

Hi, Shane.

I've seen and used Top Secret at government, military, and very large 
financial service organizations.

No idea of the numbers, of course.


Cheers,,,Steve

Steven F. Conway
AO-DTS- CTHO-HSD INFRASTRUCTURE (INFR)
z/OS Systems Support
Phone:  703-295-1926
Mobile: 304-995-7360
steve_con...@ao.uscourts.gov



From:   Shane Ginnane 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   09/09/2015 11:27 AM
Subject:Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three 
z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 



On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 08:47:27 -0500, Steve Harner  
wrote:

>(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM?s 
RACF and CA?s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has 
75% market share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25 
percent.

Does anyone, other than reputedly CA itself, actually use T/S ?. Never 
seen it in a customer site.
When I first saw ACF2 (prior to the buyout), it was the ducks nuts - RACF 
was a slug in comparison. Seems IBM has won that battle though.

Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Effort to upgrade V1R13 to V2R1?

[Charles Mills]

I'm not a sysprog and I'm trying to do a reality check on some numbers. What
would the members of this august list guess would be the approximate number
of work hours for an experienced z/OS sysprog to upgrade one LPAR from V1R13
to V2R1? No CICS, no DB2, just basic MVS, JES2 and RACF. Only a small
handful of RACF users. Nothing "special." No application or ISV issues.

Charles 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS V2.1 - When is ServerPac order cutoff date

[Robert Harrison]

SMFF?

From my "Installing Your Order" book:


With DCF's SCRIPT Mathematical Formula Formatter (SMFF) the user may describe
mathematical equations and scientific expressions to DCF, and format and print 
them
on any all points addressable printer supported by DCF.



Robert Harrison

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Charles Mills]

Yes, we have customers running TSS. I could (but won't LOL) name a very large 
bank.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Shane Ginnane
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM 
products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 08:47:27 -0500, Steve Harner  wrote:

>(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM’s RACF 
>and CA’s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has 75% 
>market share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25 percent.

Does anyone, other than reputedly CA itself, actually use T/S ?. Never seen it 
in a customer site.
When I first saw ACF2 (prior to the buyout), it was the ducks nuts - RACF was a 
slug in comparison. Seems IBM has won that battle though.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Effort to upgrade V1R13 to V2R1?

[Chris Hoelscher]

>> What would the members of this august list .

Wouldn't this now be a ... September ... list?

Chris hoelscher
Technology Architect 
Database Infrastructure Services
Technology Solution Services

123 East Main Street
Louisville, KY 40202
choelsc...@humana.com
Humana.com
(502) 714-8615
(502) 476-2538

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which 
it is addressed
and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material.  If you receive this 
material/information in error,
please contact the sender and delete or destroy the material/information.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: AMASPZAP to C main marked as $private

[Janet Graff]

I found the solution.  The C Compile parameter NOCSECT was turned on.  Using 
CSECT named the CSECT which allows me to zap it.

Janet

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Scott Ford]

Yeah I think our numbers are larger on RACF and yes we have some large TSS
shops as well as RACF

On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, Rob Schramm  wrote:

> I think the numbers would need one more delineation.  My understanding is
> that TS is also in a lot of z/VSE.  Which changes the results for the
> question "how many mainframe installations of TS are there?" Of course if
> you add in z/VM, it might change things again.
>
> I was under the impression that the numbers for z/OS were
> 1) RACF
> 2) ACF/2
> 3) TSS
>
> But for the numbers of mainframes it was
> 1) RACF
> 2) TSS
> 3) ACF/2
> Of course the results of the numbers of mainframes are going to have some
> companies double or triple dipping even within a single mainframe
> footprint.
>
> Maybe a more interesting number would have rated MIPS, number of LPARs and
> number of users by operating system.  And it wouldn't be complete without
> the developers numbers as well.
>
> But as for real numbers.. can't really help.
>
> Rob Schramm
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:22 PM Tony Harminc  > wrote:
>
> > On 9 September 2015 at 09:47, Steve Harner  > wrote:
> > > I am interested in determining/clarifying what the current market share
> > breakdown is for EACH of the three
> > > z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret.
> >
> > Only IBM is in a position to truly know the market share, because only
> > they know exactly how many z/OS systems are out there. CA of course
> > knows how many ACF2 and TSS shops there are, but IBM also knows that
> > with almost perfect accuracy both because they know who is paying for
> > z/OS but not RACF, and because they see dumps and logs and such from
> > essentially every customer, which will also tell them. I doubt either
> > IBM or CA is talking on these numbers, though. In the absense of their
> > comments, I'd trust Barry's remarks.
> >
> > Based on the much smaller number of z/OS customers that I (as an ISV
> > employee) see problem tickets from, I would guess the ratio to be
> > roughly 80/10/10. Certainly neither ACF2 nor TSS is going away any
> > time soon; both are good products that are kept current, and all three
> > products offer unique features not available in the others. Because of
> > the nature of our software, we have to explicitly support all three in
> > code and doc, but I doubt that any would-be ISV or vendor of
> > consulting services in the z/OS market can afford to not support any
> > of them at least in install and use doc, even if the product uses only
> > standard SAF services.
> >
> > As for conversions, clearly the trend is to RACF, but we've seen
> > oddities like a large ACF2 customer that converted to RACF and was
> > then almost immediately acquired by another company using ACF2, and
> > converted back. I have yet to encounter a customer with all three
> > products in the same datacentre, though I don't doubt that they exist
> > as the result of M activity.
> >
> > Tony H.
> >
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu  with the message:
> INFO IBM-MAIN
> >
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu  with the message:
> INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: AMASPZAP to C main marked as $private

[Janet Graff]

NAME TESTDCAL * C_CODE 
  VER 01DE 5820,3208 
 AMA106I ATTEMPTING TO VER/REP OUTSIDE LIMITS OF SECTION 

You can't zap a module using a CSECT of *.  * is a generic CSECT indicator and 
there are multiple CSECTS in the load module.  I just want to get $PRIVATE or 
alternatively, name the main CSECT something other than $PRIVATE.

Janet

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS pricing question

[Jerry Whitteridge]

We start SVC (Single Version Charge) separately for each Datacenter, only when 
the new version first rolls to the Prod DC does SVC start for that site. We 
have different Customer Numbers for each site under the Enterprise Customer 
Number so that may be why we differ from Skip.


Jerry Whitteridge
Manager Mainframe Systems & Storage
Albertsons - Safeway Inc.
925 738 9443
Corporate Tieline - 89443

If you feel in control
you just aren't going fast enough.



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of J O Skip Robinson
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:00 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS pricing question

The crux of this question involves a 'version change', i.e. from V1 to V2. In 
general, not just for z/OS, IBM allows two versions to coexist for a period of 
time without charging separately. This period is normally one year, but in the 
case of z/OS V1 --> V2, an extra year has been granted in general to all 
customers. Meanwhile, the price for V1 has been adjusted to match that of V2, 
so there is no longer a financial incentive to remain down level. Once V2 is 
installed, the two-year clock starts ticking.

Note that this rule is not about CECs or LPARs. It's about a customer account. 
If a customer is licensed for and installs V2, V1 needs to disappear altogether 
from the enterprise within two years. 

Note: this a customer's view of the world, not an official IBM pronouncement. 

.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
626-302-7535 Office
323-715-0595 Mobile
jo.skip.robin...@sce.com

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Charles Mills
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:45 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: z/OS pricing question

Maybe this is a question that is too complex for a listserve answer. Does IBM 
price each version of z/OS separately on a single box? In other words, does it 
generally cost more in IBM license charges to run V1R13 on one LPAR and V2R1 on 
the others (on the same footprint) than it would to run V2R1 on all?

Charles 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

"Email Firewall" made the following annotations.
--

Warning: 
All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the corporate e-mail 
system, and is subject to archival and review by someone other than the 
recipient.  This e-mail may contain proprietary information and is intended 
only for the use of the intended recipient(s).  If the reader of this message 
is not the intended recipient(s), you are notified that you have received this 
message in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of 
this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this message in 
error, please notify the sender immediately.. 
 
==

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: AMASPZAP to C main marked as $private

[Scott Ford]

Excellent have to watch the compiler options, I have been bit also

On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, Janet Graff <
004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> I found the solution.  The C Compile parameter NOCSECT was turned on.
> Using CSECT named the CSECT which allows me to zap it.
>
> Janet
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu  with the message:
> INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Effort to upgrade V1R13 to V2R1?

[Brian Westerman]

I tend to agree that system replacement can be quite a bit faster than upgrade, 
but having done this several times in the past two years I think 1 month is 
reasonable which includes planning to cut-over implementation for a 
replacement.  Upgrading can be a whole different animal because there can (and 
will) be a number of exits and other site specific items which have to be 
altered.  Most exits will have no problem at all, but you still have to check 
them all.  I have also come to believe that there is no such thing as a 
"vanilla" z/OS shop.

Just being a systems programmer, even a very good one, doesn't mean that you 
have installed z/OS, or that you can handle the conversion.  That's one of the 
reasons that consultants are still in such demand.  When it comes to upgrading, 
nothing beats experience.

Brian

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Shane Ginnane]

On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 20:40:49 +0300, Itschak Mugzach  wrote:

>The market is is split between TSS & RACF. I know of only one ACF2 site,
>but they droped the mainframe...

Interesting - as I said I have never seen TSS in any shop in Aus. Just never 
got a foothold here. That includes major banks and government departments.
When CA acquired ACF2 there was a concerted push for ACF2 over TSS - almost to 
the point of discouraging (maybe not encouraging) adoption of TSS.

Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Timothy Sipples]

Tony Harminc wrote:
>Only IBM is in a position to truly know the market share, because only
>they know exactly how many z/OS systems are out there.

Not truly, not exactly. IBM's omnipotence is routinely overestimated. ;)

IBM presumably knows how many z/OS licensees(*) are licensing the z/OS
Security Server elements. Presumably most(**) z/OS customers that do not
license z/OS Security Server are licensing some other security provider
product(s), though IBM would not know those details. Also, IBM would not
know which z/OS Security Server licensees also license other security
provider products.(***)

Anyway, I assume IBM could make some "reasonable" estimates, as other
parties could, but I'd say IBM doesn't truly know these market shares.

For what it's worth, Barry Schrager's estimates seem plausible to me, too,
but I have no special insight.

Writing my own views for myself, as always, even if I do not always insert
a disclaimer.

(*) z/OS licensees is not quite the same thing as z/OS systems (or
enterprises with z/OS). Every discrepancy I can think of is illegal,
though.

(**) I suppose it's also possible (though I'm sure rare) to run z/OS
without one of the three most popular security provider products. That's an
interesting side question. I have not yet encountered even one z/OS LPAR
(or z/VM guest) running without one of the three most popular security
provider products. Has anyone else? If so, how was that z/OS instance
configured?

(***) As one simple example, customers that license the IBM Rational
Development and Test Environment for z (RDTz) have z/OS Security Server
licenses (within those particular license terms and conditions) at no
additional charge. Do those RDTz licensees actually use the z/OS Security
Server, or do they use another security provider product? IBM would have no
reliable way of knowing.


Timothy Sipples
IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM z Systems, AP/GCG/MEA
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

Re: z/OS pricing question

[J O Skip Robinson]

OP did suggest that this may be too complex a question for IBM Main. Could it 
be harder than tracing back through an SRB chain running in secondary mode? (I 
made that up.) We also have data centers in two counties (LA and Orange), which 
means two different IBM branches, which means (somehow) a fistful of customer 
numbers. In our case, both sites are consolidated into a single SCRT report. 
Hence the rules I cited. For us. 

Your mileage is guaranteed to vary. Check your contract. With one site, 
multiple CECs may be treated like ours or like Jerry's. The version change 
issues are common but may apply differently. 

.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
626-302-7535 Office
323-715-0595 Mobile
jo.skip.robin...@sce.com

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Jerry Whitteridge
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 5:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS pricing question

We start SVC (Single Version Charge) separately for each Datacenter, only when 
the new version first rolls to the Prod DC does SVC start for that site. We 
have different Customer Numbers for each site under the Enterprise Customer 
Number so that may be why we differ from Skip.


Jerry Whitteridge
Manager Mainframe Systems & Storage
Albertsons - Safeway Inc.
925 738 9443
Corporate Tieline - 89443

If you feel in control
you just aren't going fast enough.



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of J O Skip Robinson
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:00 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS pricing question

The crux of this question involves a 'version change', i.e. from V1 to V2. In 
general, not just for z/OS, IBM allows two versions to coexist for a period of 
time without charging separately. This period is normally one year, but in the 
case of z/OS V1 --> V2, an extra year has been granted in general to all 
customers. Meanwhile, the price for V1 has been adjusted to match that of V2, 
so there is no longer a financial incentive to remain down level. Once V2 is 
installed, the two-year clock starts ticking.

Note that this rule is not about CECs or LPARs. It's about a customer account. 
If a customer is licensed for and installs V2, V1 needs to disappear altogether 
from the enterprise within two years. 

Note: this a customer's view of the world, not an official IBM pronouncement. 

.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
626-302-7535 Office
323-715-0595 Mobile
jo.skip.robin...@sce.com

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Charles Mills
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:45 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: z/OS pricing question

Maybe this is a question that is too complex for a listserve answer. Does IBM 
price each version of z/OS separately on a single box? In other words, does it 
generally cost more in IBM license charges to run V1R13 on one LPAR and V2R1 on 
the others (on the same footprint) than it would to run V2R1 on all?

Charles 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IPCS Magicians (was: Smaller Private Area in DR)

[Scott Fagen]

On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 09:41:13 +, Cannaerts, Jan  
wrote:

>If someone showed interest in becoming such a fabled magician, what direction 
>would you point said someone to?

This Redbook has a nice starter set on IPCS:

http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg247110.pdf

Scott Fagen
Chief Architect z Systems
CA Technologies

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Setting up Sublime Text to edit PDS members

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <55ef86ed.6020...@gmail.com>, on 09/09/2015
   at 09:10 AM, David Crayford  said:

>X11!! Crikey, what system are you running on? Slickedit uses Qt on 
>Windows, Linux and Mac.

And what does Qt use?
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Itschak Mugzach]

No surprise. I've done such RACF to TSS conversion myself due to a bank
merge with our own tools. TSS is much more detailed in control and more
protective, but RACF is much more simpler to use and configure and use SAF
in a more standard way.
The market is is split between TSS & RACF. I know of only one ACF2 site,
but they droped the mainframe...


ITschak

ITschak Mugzach
Z/OS, ISV Products and Application Security & Risk Assessments Professional

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Gross, Randall [PRI-1PP] <
randy.gr...@primerica.com> wrote:

> I know of two extremely large US banks that use it.
>
> Both have RACF & T/S; at least one is (or was) in the throes of converting
> RACF to T/S.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Charles Mills
> Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 11:37 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM
> products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret
>
> Yes, we have customers running TSS. I could (but won't LOL) name a very
> large bank.
>
> Charles
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Shane Ginnane
> Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:27 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM
> products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret
>
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 08:47:27 -0500, Steve Harner 
> wrote:
>
> >(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM’s
> RACF and CA’s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has
> 75% market share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25
> percent.
>
> Does anyone, other than reputedly CA itself, actually use T/S ?. Never
> seen it in a customer site.
> When I first saw ACF2 (prior to the buyout), it was the ducks nuts - RACF
> was a slug in comparison. Seems IBM has won that battle though.
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
> to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS V2.1 - When is ServerPac order cutoff date

[Ed Finnell]

For many moons Service PAC and others used DCF formatted DOC. If it  was 
not licensed in PROGxx it would enable it, print and disable. Who uses SMFF?  
May be some of new tuning or very complex
thruput algorithms.   
 
 
In a message dated 9/9/2015 9:56:49 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
robert.harri...@omes.ok.gov writes:

SMFF?

>From my "Installing Your Order"  book:


With DCF's SCRIPT Mathematical Formula Formatter  (SMFF) the user may 
describe
mathematical equations and scientific  expressions to DCF, and format and 
print them
on any all points addressable  printer supported by DCF.



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Rob Schramm]

I think the numbers would need one more delineation.  My understanding is
that TS is also in a lot of z/VSE.  Which changes the results for the
question "how many mainframe installations of TS are there?" Of course if
you add in z/VM, it might change things again.

I was under the impression that the numbers for z/OS were
1) RACF
2) ACF/2
3) TSS

But for the numbers of mainframes it was
1) RACF
2) TSS
3) ACF/2
Of course the results of the numbers of mainframes are going to have some
companies double or triple dipping even within a single mainframe footprint.

Maybe a more interesting number would have rated MIPS, number of LPARs and
number of users by operating system.  And it wouldn't be complete without
the developers numbers as well.

But as for real numbers.. can't really help.

Rob Schramm

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:22 PM Tony Harminc  wrote:

> On 9 September 2015 at 09:47, Steve Harner  wrote:
> > I am interested in determining/clarifying what the current market share
> breakdown is for EACH of the three
> > z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret.
>
> Only IBM is in a position to truly know the market share, because only
> they know exactly how many z/OS systems are out there. CA of course
> knows how many ACF2 and TSS shops there are, but IBM also knows that
> with almost perfect accuracy both because they know who is paying for
> z/OS but not RACF, and because they see dumps and logs and such from
> essentially every customer, which will also tell them. I doubt either
> IBM or CA is talking on these numbers, though. In the absense of their
> comments, I'd trust Barry's remarks.
>
> Based on the much smaller number of z/OS customers that I (as an ISV
> employee) see problem tickets from, I would guess the ratio to be
> roughly 80/10/10. Certainly neither ACF2 nor TSS is going away any
> time soon; both are good products that are kept current, and all three
> products offer unique features not available in the others. Because of
> the nature of our software, we have to explicitly support all three in
> code and doc, but I doubt that any would-be ISV or vendor of
> consulting services in the z/OS market can afford to not support any
> of them at least in install and use doc, even if the product uses only
> standard SAF services.
>
> As for conversions, clearly the trend is to RACF, but we've seen
> oddities like a large ACF2 customer that converted to RACF and was
> then almost immediately acquired by another company using ACF2, and
> converted back. I have yet to encounter a customer with all three
> products in the same datacentre, though I don't doubt that they exist
> as the result of M activity.
>
> Tony H.
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

AW: Re: AMASPZAP to C main marked as $private

[bernd.oppolzer]

don't know if it helps with your problem, but I recall that it is possible 
to name the CSECTs in C using #pragma csect. Kind regards Bernd







--- Original-Nachricht ---
Von: Janet Graff
Betreff: Re: AMASPZAP to C main marked as $private
Datum: 09.09.2015, 1:43 Uhr
An: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU





A DUMPT of the module of all the C_CODE CSECTSs shows the CSECT I want as

**RECORD LENGTH: 04C0 CLASS: C_CODE MEMBER NAME: TESTDCAL
CSECT NAME: $PRIVATE CODE
 F2F0 F1F5 F0F9 F0F8 F1F4 F0F4 F3F5 F0F1 F1F2 F0F0 0070 0802

But I don't know how to specify $PRIVATE CODE on the NAME card. Nothing 
I've tried works.

Janet

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu  with the 
message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: AMASPZAP to C main marked as $private

[John Abell]

I agree as I out that in my earlier message.  If your code runs on platforms 
other than z, make sure the #pragma is only for the z environment.

John T. Abell
Tel:800-295-7608Option 4
President
International:  1-416-593-5578  Option 4
E-mail:  john.ab...@intnlsoftwareproducts.com
Fax:800-295-7609

International:  1-416-593-5579


International Software Products
www.ispinfo.com

This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of 
the intended recipient(s). Any review, use, retention, distribution or 
disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient (or authorized to receive on behalf of the named recipient), please 
contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. 
Also,email is susceptible to data corruption, interception,
tampering, unauthorized amendment and viruses. We only send and receive emails 
on the basis that we are not liable for any such corruption, interception, 
tampering, amendment or viruses or any consequence thereof.


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of bernd.oppolzer
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 1:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: AW: Re: AMASPZAP to C main marked as $private

don't know if it helps with your problem, but I recall that it is possible to 
name the CSECTs in C using #pragma csect. Kind regards Bernd







--- Original-Nachricht ---
Von: Janet Graff
Betreff: Re: AMASPZAP to C main marked as $private
Datum: 09.09.2015, 1:43 Uhr
An: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU





A DUMPT of the module of all the C_CODE CSECTSs shows the CSECT I want as

**RECORD LENGTH: 04C0 CLASS: C_CODE MEMBER NAME: TESTDCAL
CSECT NAME: $PRIVATE CODE
 F2F0 F1F5 F0F9 F0F8 F1F4 F0F4 F3F5 F0F1 F1F2 F0F0 0070 0802

But I don't know how to specify $PRIVATE CODE on the NAME card. Nothing
I've tried works.

Janet

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu  with the
message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Gross, Randall [PRI-1PP]]

I know of two extremely large US banks that use it.

Both have RACF & T/S; at least one is (or was) in the throes of converting RACF 
to T/S.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Charles Mills
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 11:37 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM 
products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

Yes, we have customers running TSS. I could (but won't LOL) name a very large 
bank.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Shane Ginnane
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM 
products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 08:47:27 -0500, Steve Harner  wrote:

>(a) When SKK was sold in 1986, ACF2 had a 60% market share while IBM’s RACF 
>and CA’s Top Secret split the other 40%; and (b) Currently , RACF has 75% 
>market share while ACF2 and Top Secret from CA share the other 25 percent.

Does anyone, other than reputedly CA itself, actually use T/S ?. Never seen it 
in a customer site.
When I first saw ACF2 (prior to the buyout), it was the ducks nuts - RACF was a 
slug in comparison. Seems IBM has won that battle though.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Effort to upgrade V1R13 to V2R1?

[Staller, Allan]

UPGRADE OR SYSTEM REPLACEMENT? 

I can only speak to the SYSTEM REPLACEMENT PATH, and it is about 60-80 hours 
(36 for install/test of CB/PDO (once received)) and 24 to modify the current 
environment  to use the newly created system. That is just for the install and 
migration. Does not include installing coexistence/fallback maint on current 
prod and also does not include exploitation of new features.

HTH,


I'm not a sysprog and I'm trying to do a reality check on some numbers. What 
would the members of this august list guess would be the approximate number of 
work hours for an experienced z/OS sysprog to upgrade one LPAR from V1R13 to 
V2R1? No CICS, no DB2, just basic MVS, JES2 and RACF. Only a small handful of 
RACF users. Nothing "special." No application or ISV issues.

Charles 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Current market share breakdown for EACH of the three z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret

[Tony Harminc]

On 9 September 2015 at 09:47, Steve Harner  wrote:
> I am interested in determining/clarifying what the current market share 
> breakdown is for EACH of the three
> z/OS ESM products: RACF, CA-ACF2 and CA-Top Secret.

Only IBM is in a position to truly know the market share, because only
they know exactly how many z/OS systems are out there. CA of course
knows how many ACF2 and TSS shops there are, but IBM also knows that
with almost perfect accuracy both because they know who is paying for
z/OS but not RACF, and because they see dumps and logs and such from
essentially every customer, which will also tell them. I doubt either
IBM or CA is talking on these numbers, though. In the absense of their
comments, I'd trust Barry's remarks.

Based on the much smaller number of z/OS customers that I (as an ISV
employee) see problem tickets from, I would guess the ratio to be
roughly 80/10/10. Certainly neither ACF2 nor TSS is going away any
time soon; both are good products that are kept current, and all three
products offer unique features not available in the others. Because of
the nature of our software, we have to explicitly support all three in
code and doc, but I doubt that any would-be ISV or vendor of
consulting services in the z/OS market can afford to not support any
of them at least in install and use doc, even if the product uses only
standard SAF services.

As for conversions, clearly the trend is to RACF, but we've seen
oddities like a large ACF2 customer that converted to RACF and was
then almost immediately acquired by another company using ACF2, and
converted back. I have yet to encounter a customer with all three
products in the same datacentre, though I don't doubt that they exist
as the result of M activity.

Tony H.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Is REPRO ENCIPHER supported again?

[R.S.]

I just found it in quite new Redbook draft.

Security on the
IBM Mainframe, Vol. 3
A Holistic Approach by Reducing Risk and Improving Security

Chapter 2.3

--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland






--
Treść tej wiadomości może zawierać informacje prawnie chronione Banku 
przeznaczone wyłącznie do użytku służbowego adresata. Odbiorcą może być jedynie 
jej adresat z wyłączeniem dostępu osób trzecich. Jeżeli nie jesteś adresatem 
niniejszej wiadomości lub pracownikiem upoważnionym do jej przekazania 
adresatowi, informujemy, że jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie 
lub inne działanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i może być 
karalne. Jeżeli otrzymałeś tę wiadomość omyłkowo, prosimy niezwłocznie 
zawiadomić nadawcę wysyłając odpowiedź oraz trwale usunąć tę wiadomość 
włączając w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku.

This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is 
intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be 
received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you 
are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorized to 
forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, 
distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be 
punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender 
immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete 
permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to 
hard drive.

mBank S.A. z siedzibą w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 Warszawa, 
www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.pl
Sąd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru 
Sądowego, nr rejestru przedsiębiorców KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. 
Według stanu na dzień 01.01.2015 r. kapitał zakładowy mBanku S.A. (w całości 
wpłacony) wynosi 168.840.228 złotych.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN