Re: ShopZ order response

[Edward Gould]

> On Oct 14, 2017, at 2:45 PM, Tom Brennan  wrote:
> 
> David W Noon wrote:
> 
>> I find it a little surprising that reel-to-reel tape was still being
>> used in 2004 but, given that the HST alternative was really no better, I
>> guess we should not be really surprised.
> 
> Earlier this year I was at a large datacenter and happened to wander into a 
> room that time-warped me back to the mid 1990's.  It was a tape room with 
> 24-hour operators waiting for highlighted mount messages on maybe 10 separate 
> z/OS consoles.  An operator mentioned they had just gotten rid of their last 
> round tapes 5 years earlier, which would be around 2012.
> 
> ———
David:
Thanks for the kick start as now I remember something slightly different than 
yours.
year 2016: I was given a tour of a large DC in the Chicago area. Like you they 
had a room for round tapes and some 3480’s (I couldn’t get close enough to 
tell).
The person giving the tour told me that they got round reels and 3480 tapes in 
*ALL* the time. I asked what he meant all the time, he said every day the mail 
was delivered. I asked how they identified which tape belonged to who he said 
they had a barcode system. I was being a pester and asked for a WAG as to the 
number of reels they received every day and he said approximartely  250 he was 
not sure and he admitted it could be 300.

So, it seems that round tape is not even close to being dead. 

I checked with a friend of mine today and he said his DC got around 10 a day. 
Since he was a friend I thought I could push him a little and asked where the 
tapes came from, he told me small shops that weren’t all the large and all they 
could afford were round reels but some managed 3480’s he told me the 3480’s 
would be around for a long time as the small shops just can’t go to 3490’s 
because of costs.
I asked him what kind of shops are we talking about, he said AS400’s and the 
ILK, he said there was some SERIES 1 shops as well. The tape they produces was 
really small, maybe 8 inches. Series 1 is essentially dead he said and sooner 
or later they will have to do something. That is what he told me. 

I don’t have connections like I used to, so I cannot verify what he said. From 
20 years ago a *LOT* of small brokerage firms are determined to stay static and 
not change their hardware .

Ed


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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Phil Smith]

Ed Gould wrote:
>I was never in the loop about Sterling Forest, but didn't they have a fire 
>that ruined pretty much all of their tapes?
>This had to be in the 1980's (Think). I actually ordered the source from them 
>one time and I think it was a renumber subcommand of basic.

No idea, sorry!

And he also wrote:
>About 20 years or so maybe longer 30? anyway, A contractor working for one of 
>the large aero space companies, came to Guide with a large box of tapes. On 
>each tape was a copy of IBM's compiler that IBM used to create source (PLS if 
>I am not mistaken). I wasn't interested but when he opened the box after the 
>session I have never seen a black Friday sale but one of the women there said 
>it reminded her of one.
>My memory is stretching here but somehow the legal department got involved and 
>they tracked down 30 or the 32 tapes.
>No one that got one of the tapes was willing to talk about it at the next 
>Guide. There were whispers of the FBI but no one would confirm it.

In the early 90s, IBM PartnerWorld went pay-to-play briefly--$5K/year IIRC. As 
part of that new offering, we could get the PLX (PL/X?) compiler. So I said 
sure, send it to me.

A few months later, they revamped the program again and said they were 
refunding the $5K. Except...I got to go to my VP and say "I have good news and 
bad news, and they're the same news: we're getting MOST of that $5K back". We 
lost about a third of it because PWD had to pay Raleigh for the compiler. Of 
course we never actually used it.

Hmm, as I finish typing this, it feels like maybe I've already shared this 
anecdote. Apologies if so.

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Tom Brennan]

David W Noon wrote:


I find it a little surprising that reel-to-reel tape was still being
used in 2004 but, given that the HST alternative was really no better, I
guess we should not be really surprised.


Earlier this year I was at a large datacenter and happened to wander 
into a room that time-warped me back to the mid 1990's.  It was a tape 
room with 24-hour operators waiting for highlighted mount messages on 
maybe 10 separate z/OS consoles.  An operator mentioned they had just 
gotten rid of their last round tapes 5 years earlier, which would be 
around 2012.


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

Re: ShopZ order response

[David W Noon]

On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 20:46:36 -0400, Tony Harminc (t...@harminc.net)
wrote about "Re: ShopZ order response" (in
):

> On 13 October 2017 at 18:47, Phil Smith III  wrote:
> 
>> Anyone know if Sterling Forest still has 3420s? Last time I was there
>> (2004?) they did, and even a 7-track drive IIRC.
> 
> Also in 2004 I was surprised to see a short string of 3420 drives, all
> powered up and lights on, at one of our UK banking customers. I asked,
> and it seems they were used only for data exchange. A nightly courier
> would arrive from each of the other big banks with tapes, and be
> dispatched with the ones from this bank. I had a vision, perhaps not
> inaccurate, of each bank having such a dusty set of drives used only
> for the same purpose.
> 
> Maybe someone at a UK bank can tell us if that scheme survives today...

I can't vouch for today, but the use of 9-track, reel-to-reel tapes was
the standard back in the late 1990's.

>From 1996 to 1999 I was working at Lloyd's Bank in London. I was working
in a section called Autoclearings and our batch jobs wrote and read
these tapes.

The Bank of England ran a clearing house through which all financial
transfers were made between clearing banks. The concrete bunker was in
Uxbridge. All the clearing banks would write their pending transactions
to 9-track tape (with ANSI labels and RECFM=DB ASCII records). These
tapes would then be  put into an armoured car and sent off to Uxbridge.
Tapes containing completed transactions would be sent back to the banks
so they could reconcile their accounts.
In 1998 the Bank of England announced that they had a new system called
High Speed Transfer (HST). This consisted of custom terminals with
hardware cryptography connected to leased lines ... that went to
Uxbridge. The data transmissions were made up of ANSI format HDR1 and
HDR2 records, a stream of ASCII data records in RECFM=DB format,
followed by ANSI format TLR1 and TLR2 records. This was not warmly
received by the clearing banks as state-of-the-art technology.

I find it a little surprising that reel-to-reel tape was still being
used in 2004 but, given that the HST alternative was really no better, I
guess we should not be really surprised.
-- 
Regards,

Dave  [RLU #314465]
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
david.w.n...@googlemail.com (David W Noon)
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

 

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Phil Smith]

Tony Harminc wrote:
>Also in 2004 I was surprised to see a short string of 3420 drives, all
>powered up and lights on, at one of our UK banking customers. I asked,
>and it seems they were used only for data exchange. A nightly courier
>would arrive from each of the other big banks with tapes, and be
>dispatched with the ones from this bank. I had a vision, perhaps not
>inaccurate, of each bank having such a dusty set of drives used only
>for the same purpose.

>Maybe someone at a UK bank can tell us if that scheme survives today...

Heh, I believe that. My dad was doing camera-ready copy in the late 70s and 
early 80s--long before it was common--and had to deliver it on 8" floppies. 
Mutual Life of Canada ("MuCana") was still using 8" floppies on a daily basis, 
and he somehow made a connection there and would run a 3420 over and get back a 
floppy. This went on MUCH longer than sanity would suggest.

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it"; such things usually get fixed when it does 
break, and either parts are no longer available or the only guy who knew how to 
fix it is retired or DEAD. Like the dude in Pennsylvania who was still 
servicing keypunches in the early 2000s. That stopped when he passed away--at 
86.

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Edward Gould]

> On Oct 13, 2017, at 5:47 PM, Phil Smith III  wrote:
> 
> ——SNIP
> 
> Anyone know if Sterling Forest still has 3420s? Last time I was there
> (2004?) they did, and even a 7-track drive IIRC.
> 
> 
Phil:
I was never in the loop about Sterling Forest, but didn’t they have a fire that 
ruined pretty much all of their tapes?
This had to be in the 1980’s (Think). I actually ordered the source from them 
one time and I think it was a renumber subcommand of basic.
I tried many hours to get it to work and I didn’t even come close. I was sort 
of supporting VSBASIC out of our NY office. They had all sorts of requests that 
cost me hundreds of hours tracking them down and seeing if we could incorporate 
it on our system. I put my foot down when they wanted to support a plotter. I 
said no can do.

Ed
> 
> .phsiii
> 
> 
> --
> 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: ShopZ order response

[Edward Gould]

> On Oct 13, 2017, at 6:03 PM, Paul Gilmartin 
> <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> 
>>> 
>>> "I got lots of great software that way!"
>> 
>> *facepalm*
>> 
>> Since it's Friday and we're swapping tape stories, back in the day, I had a
>> couple of red 3480 cartridges that I'd picked up somewhere. I'd take 'em to
>> customer sites, because it was usually easier to tell the operators "It's
>> the red one" when I needed it mounted or returned.
>> 
> Legend is that Ralph Griswold, the author, mischievously distributed
> SNOBOL4 on red flanged tapes (3420? 729?).  At some highly secured
> sites possessing a red tape was a security violation.

About 20 years or so maybe longer 30? anyway, A contractor working for one of 
the large aero space companies, came to Guide with a large box of tapes. On 
each tape was a copy of IBM’s compiler that IBM used to create source (PLS if I 
am not mistaken). I wasn’t interested but when he opened the box after the 
session I have never seen a black Friday sale but one of the women there said 
it reminded her of one.
My memory is stretching here but somehow the legal department got involved and 
they tracked down 30 or the 32 tapes.
No one that got one of the tapes was willing to talk about it at the next 
Guide. There were whispers of the FBI but no one would confirm it.

Ed

> 
> You were lucky.
> 
>> That is, until an operator put it into an STK silo. Seems the red cartridge
>> and the red laser didn't get along: the silo insisted the slot was empty,
>> and then of course wouldn't pull the cart to return it. They had to power
>> down the silo to extract it manually. After that, I took two: a red and a
>> black, and asked about silo use before providing either.


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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Chris Hoelscher]

SNOBOL ?? should have been distributed on a yellow tape .

Chris Hoelscher
Technology Architect, Database Infrastructure Services
Technology Solution Services

123 East Main Street
Louisville, KY 40202
Humana.com
(502) 476-2538 or 407-7266


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 7:04 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] ShopZ order response

On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 18:47:21 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote:
>
>>"I got lots of great software that way!"
>
>*facepalm*
>
>Since it's Friday and we're swapping tape stories, back in the day, I 
>had a couple of red 3480 cartridges that I'd picked up somewhere. I'd 
>take 'em to customer sites, because it was usually easier to tell the 
>operators "It's the red one" when I needed it mounted or returned.
>
Legend is that Ralph Griswold, the author, mischievously distributed
SNOBOL4 on red flanged tapes (3420? 729?).  At some highly secured sites 
possessing a red tape was a security violation.

You were lucky.

>That is, until an operator put it into an STK silo. Seems the red 
>cartridge and the red laser didn't get along: the silo insisted the 
>slot was empty, and then of course wouldn't pull the cart to return it. 
>They had to power down the silo to extract it manually. After that, I 
>took two: a red and a black, and asked about silo use before providing either.
>
>Anyone know if Sterling Forest still has 3420s? Last time I was there
>(2004?) they did, and even a 7-track drive IIRC.

They could contract to cut service tapes for Ed.

-- gil

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

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.

Humana Inc. and its subsidiaries comply with applicable Federal civil rights 
laws and
do not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, 
disability or
sex. Humana Inc. and its subsidiaries do not exclude people or treat them 
differently
because of race, color, national origin, age, disability or sex.

English: ATTENTION: If you do not speak English, language assistance services, 
free
of charge, are available to you. Call 1‐877‐320‐1235 (TTY: 711).

Español (Spanish): ATENCIÓN: Si habla español, tiene a su disposición servicios
gratuitos de asistencia lingüística. Llame al 1‐877‐320‐1235 (TTY: 711).

繁體中文(Chinese)：注意：如果您使用繁體中文，您可以免費獲得語言援助
服務。請致電 1‐877‐320‐1235 (TTY: 711)。

Kreyòl Ayisyen (Haitian Creole): ATANSION: Si w pale Kreyòl Ayisyen, gen sèvis 
èd
pou lang ki disponib gratis pou ou. Rele 1‐877‐320‐1235 (TTY: 711).

Polski (Polish): UWAGA: Jeżeli mówisz po polsku, możesz skorzystać z bezpłatnej
pomocy językowej. Zadzwoń pod numer 1‐877‐320‐1235 (TTY: 711).

한국어 (Korean): 주의: 한국어를 사용하시는 경우, 언어 지원 서비스를 무료로
이용하실 수 있습니다. 1‐877‐320‐1235 (TTY: 711)번으로 전화해 주십시오.


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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Tony Harminc]

On 13 October 2017 at 18:47, Phil Smith III  wrote:

> Anyone know if Sterling Forest still has 3420s? Last time I was there
> (2004?) they did, and even a 7-track drive IIRC.

Also in 2004 I was surprised to see a short string of 3420 drives, all
powered up and lights on, at one of our UK banking customers. I asked,
and it seems they were used only for data exchange. A nightly courier
would arrive from each of the other big banks with tapes, and be
dispatched with the ones from this bank. I had a vision, perhaps not
inaccurate, of each bank having such a dusty set of drives used only
for the same purpose.

Maybe someone at a UK bank can tell us if that scheme survives today...

Tony H.

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 18:47:21 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote:
>
>>"I got lots of great software that way!"
>
>*facepalm*
>
>Since it's Friday and we're swapping tape stories, back in the day, I had a
>couple of red 3480 cartridges that I'd picked up somewhere. I'd take 'em to
>customer sites, because it was usually easier to tell the operators "It's
>the red one" when I needed it mounted or returned.
>
Legend is that Ralph Griswold, the author, mischievously distributed
SNOBOL4 on red flanged tapes (3420? 729?).  At some highly secured
sites possessing a red tape was a security violation.

You were lucky.

>That is, until an operator put it into an STK silo. Seems the red cartridge
>and the red laser didn't get along: the silo insisted the slot was empty,
>and then of course wouldn't pull the cart to return it. They had to power
>down the silo to extract it manually. After that, I took two: a red and a
>black, and asked about silo use before providing either.
>
>Anyone know if Sterling Forest still has 3420s? Last time I was there
>(2004?) they did, and even a 7-track drive IIRC.

They could contract to cut service tapes for Ed.

-- gil

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Phil Smith III]

Paul Gilmartin wrote:

>Decades ago a rogue co-worker told me that in his previous position he

>sometimes distributed shareware.  He always asked recipients to supply

>a tape to which he could copy.

 

>But each such tape he first copied to one of his tapes.

 

>"I got lots of great software that way!"

 

*facepalm*

 

Since it's Friday and we're swapping tape stories, back in the day, I had a
couple of red 3480 cartridges that I'd picked up somewhere. I'd take 'em to
customer sites, because it was usually easier to tell the operators "It's
the red one" when I needed it mounted or returned.

 

That is, until an operator put it into an STK silo. Seems the red cartridge
and the red laser didn't get along: the silo insisted the slot was empty,
and then of course wouldn't pull the cart to return it. They had to power
down the silo to extract it manually. After that, I took two: a red and a
black, and asked about silo use before providing either.

 

Anyone know if Sterling Forest still has 3420s? Last time I was there
(2004?) they did, and even a 7-track drive IIRC.

 

.phsiii


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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 08:38:22 -0400, John Eells wrote:
>
>> ".. might it be permissible to return used tapes to IBM for re-use?"
>>
>> "No."
>
>And I stand by that answer for a number of reasons, practical,
>technical, and legal.
> 
Decades ago a rogue co-worker told me that in his previous position he
sometimes distributed shareware.  He always asked recipients to supply
a tape to which he could copy.

But each such tape he first copied to one of his tapes.

"I got lots of great software that way!"

-- gil

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 08:38:22 -0400, John Eells wrote:
>
>Nobody makes either of those any more. Further, 3420 is far past
>end-of-life because the oxides and binding agents deteriorate rapidly in
>comparison to 3480 and later tape.
> 
Alan Altmark had things to say about this on a day before Friday:
https://listserv.uark.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1710&L=ibmvm&O=D&P=9
(subscription required)

-- gil

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Edward Gould]

> On Oct 12, 2017, at 3:59 PM, Paul Gilmartin 
> <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu 
> > wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 23:52:12 -0500, Edward Gould wrote:
>>> 
 IOW we are going to be majorly hurt if IBM decided to drop tape.
 
>>> I'd be inclined to trust the SHA-1 checksum transmitted via an independent
>>> verifiable conduit more than a heat-sealed polyethylene sleeve on a 3480 
>>> cartridge.
>>> SMP/E will verify the checksum and Do No Evil.
>>> 
>> I have asked the auditor and he seems happy with a plastic sealed envelope 
>> that is handled by signatures. 
>> 
> "signatures"?  Do you mean you expect Ginni to pick up a Sharpie and
> sign the plastic sleeve?
> 
> I believe John Eels at SHARE Denver predicted the demise of tape as an
> interchange vehicle.  In part because the media are no longer being
> manufactured.
> 
> A customer asked, "Then might it be permissible to return used tapes to IBM
> for re-use?"
> 
> "No."
> 
>> Like I said I was always happy with a 3480/3420 tape. I suspect that if 
>> someone is going to intercept a tape they are reasonably advanced 
>> counterfiting team.
>> 
> Since in the near future no one will be able to create a tape, it follows 
> logically
> that no one will be able to counterfeit one.
> 
> You need to get a different auditor; one who is comfortable with the fact
> that in the 21st Century enterprises widely use the Internet to transfer
> busiess-critical data.
That is not going to happen anytime soon. BTW I like the auditor as he is 
reasonable when it come time for Z/os but NOT for the INTERNET.
He has defended me several times for various items. He is reasonably young in 
his 40’s. I keep telling him not to pay attention to the horror stories and he 
comes right back with another horror story.
Rightly or wrongly he has convinced upper management not to allow any INTERNET 
connection to the MF.
Today I had a chance to talk with him about this issue and he got really upset 
about it. I tried to calm him down but he is convinced he has to take this to 
upper management. I am trying to restrain him but once he gets a whiff of 
someone/something on the Internet is going to infect the MF, I can’t do 
anything with him except to calm him down.
I have repeatedly told him his stories are false and there has *NEVER* been a 
case of a virus hitting the MF. (I haven’t told him about the Christmas “virus” 
yet).
Ed
> 
> -- gil


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

Re: ShopZ order response

[John Eells]

John Eells wrote:


Tape
orders are dwindling fast.


To clarify what I meant, in case anyone didn't get it from context, 
orders *for software* on tape are dwindling fast.  I do not mean to 
imply that we're not selling tape drives!  Nothing could be further from 
the truth.


--
John Eells
IBM Poughkeepsie
ee...@us.ibm.com

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[John Eells]

Exactly!  There is more than one use case here.

Tape as a backup medium is certainly not dead.  It's the cheapest (or 
among the cheapest) of alternatives for long-term offline storage.  And 
for verifiable archives, WORM tape is a great solution.


As an *interchange* media, it's problematic unless all data exchange 
partners have compatible drives.


As a *software delivery* media, it appears to be dying from the numbers 
I see for our own software delivery.  It would be interesting to know 
what the other vendors are seeing, but I would expect them to be seeing 
a similar trend.


Clark Morris wrote:


Given that IBM has reported a way to create multi-terabyte tapes (and
presumably read them), I find it hard to believe tape is dead. Whether
there will be enough drives of a given type commonly available at the
dwindling number of mainframe sites to make it worth while for IBM to
have that tape drive to create the tapes is another question. 3420s
and then 3480s were at one time ubiquitous.  Now I suspect the variety
of incompatible drives is making make it increasing interesting for
any vendor to supply their software on tape.


--
John Eells
IBM Poughkeepsie
ee...@us.ibm.com

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[John Eells]

Paul Gilmartin wrote:

On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 23:52:12 -0500, Edward Gould wrote:





I have asked the auditor and he seems happy with a plastic sealed envelope that 
is handled by signatures.


"signatures"?  Do you mean you expect Ginni to pick up a Sharpie and
sign the plastic sleeve?

I believe John Eels at SHARE Denver predicted the demise of tape as an
interchange vehicle.  In part because the media are no longer being
manufactured.


*Older* media are no longer manufactured. Current media remains 
available, of course.  However, cross-vendor compatible media is no 
more.  If you don't buy our drives, you can't read our tapes.  Some 
customers run tapeless, and others buy from The Competition.  Tape 
orders are dwindling fast.  The confluence of these things is what leads 
me to the conclusion that software delivery on tape is dying.



A customer asked, "Then might it be permissible to return used tapes to IBM
for re-use?"

"No."


And I stand by that answer for a number of reasons, practical, 
technical, and legal.



Like I said I was always happy with a 3480/3420 tape. I suspect that if someone 
is going to intercept a tape they are reasonably advanced counterfiting team.


Nobody makes either of those any more. Further, 3420 is far past 
end-of-life because the oxides and binding agents deteriorate rapidly in 
comparison to 3480 and later tape.




--
John Eells
IBM Poughkeepsie
ee...@us.ibm.com

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Clark Morris]

[Default] On 12 Oct 2017 13:57:48 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu (Paul Gilmartin) wrote:

>On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 23:52:12 -0500, Edward Gould wrote:
>>> 
 IOW we are going to be majorly hurt if IBM decided to drop tape.
 
>>> I'd be inclined to trust the SHA-1 checksum transmitted via an independent
>>> verifiable conduit more than a heat-sealed polyethylene sleeve on a 3480 
>>> cartridge.
>>> SMP/E will verify the checksum and Do No Evil.
>>>
>>I have asked the auditor and he seems happy with a plastic sealed envelope 
>>that is handled by signatures. 
>>
>"signatures"?  Do you mean you expect Ginni to pick up a Sharpie and
>sign the plastic sleeve?
>
>I believe John Eels at SHARE Denver predicted the demise of tape as an
>interchange vehicle.  In part because the media are no longer being
>manufactured.
>
>A customer asked, "Then might it be permissible to return used tapes to IBM
>for re-use?"
>
>"No."
>
>>Like I said I was always happy with a 3480/3420 tape. I suspect that if 
>>someone is going to intercept a tape they are reasonably advanced 
>>counterfiting team.
>> 
>Since in the near future no one will be able to create a tape, it follows 
>logically
>that no one will be able to counterfeit one.

Given that IBM has reported a way to create multi-terabyte tapes (and
presumably read them), I find it hard to believe tape is dead. Whether
there will be enough drives of a given type commonly available at the
dwindling number of mainframe sites to make it worth while for IBM to
have that tape drive to create the tapes is another question. 3420s
and then 3480s were at one time ubiquitous.  Now I suspect the variety
of incompatible drives is making make it increasing interesting for
any vendor to supply their software on tape.

Clark Morris
>
>You need to get a different auditor; one who is comfortable with the fact
>that in the 21st Century enterprises widely use the Internet to transfer
>busiess-critical data.
>
>-- 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: ShopZ order response

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 23:52:12 -0500, Edward Gould wrote:
>> 
>>> IOW we are going to be majorly hurt if IBM decided to drop tape.
>>> 
>> I'd be inclined to trust the SHA-1 checksum transmitted via an independent
>> verifiable conduit more than a heat-sealed polyethylene sleeve on a 3480 
>> cartridge.
>> SMP/E will verify the checksum and Do No Evil.
>>
>I have asked the auditor and he seems happy with a plastic sealed envelope 
>that is handled by signatures. 
>
"signatures"?  Do you mean you expect Ginni to pick up a Sharpie and
sign the plastic sleeve?

I believe John Eels at SHARE Denver predicted the demise of tape as an
interchange vehicle.  In part because the media are no longer being
manufactured.

A customer asked, "Then might it be permissible to return used tapes to IBM
for re-use?"

"No."

>Like I said I was always happy with a 3480/3420 tape. I suspect that if 
>someone is going to intercept a tape they are reasonably advanced 
>counterfiting team.
> 
Since in the near future no one will be able to create a tape, it follows 
logically
that no one will be able to counterfeit one.

You need to get a different auditor; one who is comfortable with the fact
that in the 21st Century enterprises widely use the Internet to transfer
busiess-critical data.

-- gil

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Edward Gould]

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 9:23 AM, Paul Gilmartin 
> <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 23:56:47 -0500, Edward Gould wrote:
>> 
>> Our auditors would hop all over me and my management if we ever did 
>> something like what you are talking about. One time I got a fix for one of 
>> our MF products and I had to get the Presidents personal OK for me to upload 
>> it to the MF. It was an *EXTREMELY* important fix. The auditor sat with me 
>> while I explained to the President how I got the fix and how I was going to 
>> upload it to the MF. The auditor grilled me like there was his job on the 
>> line (mine was more likely the case). The auditor asked every blankety blank 
>> detail on how I learned about the fix and the product that was involved the 
>> fix number and how I d/l’d it. How was I going to get it to the MF and on 
>> and on. I felt like I was guilty for even asking for it. I asked him in the 
>> future did he want to get involved and micromanage every fix and he said 
>> *YES*. The President said well we have a solution. I *Never* want to go 
>> through that again. He did not blink when I asked him if Tape was OK and he 
>> said sure as long as the package is sealed from the vendor to us.
>> 
> What if you need it within hours?  Well, the express services can be very 
> prompt,
> on a graduated price scale.  Or a courier pouch on a private jet, for even 
> higher
> cost.

Interesting question, will pose it at the next time the big boss is in a good 
mood.
I do not know if its still available from Bolder, but we use to get fixes that 
way.
Ed

> 
>> IOW we are going to be majorly hurt if IBM decided to drop tape.
>> 
> I'd be inclined to trust the SHA-1 checksum transmitted via an independent
> verifiable conduit more than a heat-sealed polyethylene sleeve on a 3480 
> cartridge.
> SMP/E will verify the checksum and Do No Evil.
I have asked the auditor and he seems happy with a plastic sealed envelope that 
is handled by signatures. 
Like I said I was always happy with a 3480/3420 tape. I suspect that if someone 
is going to intercept a tape they are reasonably advanced counterfiting team.

Ed 
> 
>  All the risk with email, www, USB, arises from clients that 
> automatically
> execute programs embedded in documents or support cross-site scripting.  The
> defense should be clients which unconditionally, not optionally, refuse to 
> open
> attachments.  Does CURL satisfy this? 
> 
> -- 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: ShopZ order response

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 23:56:47 -0500, Edward Gould wrote:
>
>Our auditors would hop all over me and my management if we ever did something 
>like what you are talking about. One time I got a fix for one of our MF 
>products and I had to get the Presidents personal OK for me to upload it to 
>the MF. It was an *EXTREMELY* important fix. The auditor sat with me while I 
>explained to the President how I got the fix and how I was going to upload it 
>to the MF. The auditor grilled me like there was his job on the line (mine was 
>more likely the case). The auditor asked every blankety blank detail on how I 
>learned about the fix and the product that was involved the fix number and how 
>I d/l’d it. How was I going to get it to the MF and on and on. I felt like I 
>was guilty for even asking for it. I asked him in the future did he want to 
>get involved and micromanage every fix and he said *YES*. The President said 
>well we have a solution. I *Never* want to go through that again. He did not 
>blink when I asked him if Tape was OK and he said sure as long as the package 
>is sealed from the vendor to us.
> 
What if you need it within hours?  Well, the express services can be very 
prompt,
on a graduated price scale.  Or a courier pouch on a private jet, for even 
higher
cost.

>IOW we are going to be majorly hurt if IBM decided to drop tape.
> 
I'd be inclined to trust the SHA-1 checksum transmitted via an independent
verifiable conduit more than a heat-sealed polyethylene sleeve on a 3480 
cartridge.
SMP/E will verify the checksum and Do No Evil.

 All the risk with email, www, USB, arises from clients that 
automatically
execute programs embedded in documents or support cross-site scripting.  The
defense should be clients which unconditionally, not optionally, refuse to open
attachments.  Does CURL satisfy this? 

-- gil

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Edward Gould]

> On Oct 9, 2017, at 6:36 AM, John Eells  wrote:
> 
> In addition to what I wrote above, we, like everyone else, are driven by 
> client behaviors and available technologies.  So let's talk about numbers for 
> a minute.
> 
> As of this March, 86% of our orders are being downloaded, and every time we 
> get new numbers that percentage goes up.  Of the remainder, the last year I 
> pulled numbers to break down DVD vs. tape, about 2/3 of orders delivered on 
> physical media were on DVD.  That was a couple of years ago.  If I 
> extrapolate the trend we saw then, that 1/3 of the remainder is probably more 
> like 1/6 today.
> 
> In other words, tape orders are dwindling, and not slowly.
> 
> At some point, we will almost certainly drop tape support for software 
> delivery.  It seems very likely to me that we simply will not be able to 
> justify replacing the tape drives in the distribution centers once our 
> current tape drives reach end of life.
> 
> I hope nobody finds this surprising.  We have, for example, discussed this 
> before in IBM-MAIN.
> 
> In a future without tape, if you do not have optical drives and cannot 
> connect to the Internet, you will need to take a laptop outside the firewall, 
> download your order, bring it back in, and upload it to your z/OS system.  
> This is already supported and documented, and has been for well over a decade 
> now.
> 
> — 
John:

Our auditors would hop all over me and my management if we ever did something 
like what you are talking about. One time I got a fix for one of our MF 
products and I had to get the Presidents personal OK for me to upload it to the 
MF. It was an *EXTREMELY* important fix. The auditor sat with me while I 
explained to the President how I got the fix and how I was going to upload it 
to the MF. The auditor grilled me like there was his job on the line (mine was 
more likely the case). The auditor asked every blankety blank detail on how I 
learned about the fix and the product that was involved the fix number and how 
I d/l’d it. How was I going to get it to the MF and on and on. I felt like I 
was guilty for even asking for it. I asked him in the future did he want to get 
involved and micromanage every fix and he said *YES*. The President said well 
we have a solution. I *Never* want to go through that again. He did not blink 
when I asked him if Tape was OK and he said sure as long as the package is 
sealed from the vendor to us.

IOW we are going to be majorly hurt if IBM decided to drop tape.

Ed


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

Re: ShopZ order response

[John Eells]

I can see this is turning into one of "those" discussions; ask a simple 
question, go off on seventeen different tangents.


Anyway, some comments interspersed below.

Paul Gilmartin wrote:


In a future without tape, if you do not have optical drives and cannot
connect to the Internet, you will need to take a laptop outside the
firewall, download your order, bring it back in, and upload it to your
z/OS system.  This is already supported and documented, and has been for
well over a decade now.


I hope it's not a Windows laptop.

How woud you connect it to the M/F for upload?


Anything you can use to get it from the IBM download server into the 
z/OS UNIX file system will work. You don't need to set up an FTP server 
or anything fancy, just get it there--transferred in binary!  I'd choose 
FTP from my (Windows, these days) laptop to z/OS, personally, because 
it's not that hard to use, and I know how.



Do you expect the firewall to scan the laptop for malware?  The more data
you carry in through the firewall, the more likely that some of it is bad.

Many years ago, briefly, IBM delivered PTFs in 3480 cartridges in
polyethylene sleeves proclaiming that malware was thereby excluded.
My peers snickered, "And how hard is it to counterfeit a heat-sealed
plastic envelope?"

If you suspect that a product or service package received from the Internet
contains malware, how does filtering it through the laptop cleanse it?


It does not, of course, but one can scan the file content of a laptop 
before bringing it back inside the perimeter, just as one can scan 
physical media for the same reason.



SMP/E packages are validated by SHA-1 checksums.  Does SHA-1 meet
security criteria nowadays.  It's pointless to trust a checksum transmitted
by the same channel as the payload.  What are the alternatives?


SMP/E packages sent over the network are so validated, but not those 
sent on tape, where we can rely on the hardware for data integrity 
checking.  I'd have to check on DVD to be sure, but I believe we hash 
those, too, for the same reason.


The SHA-1 hash is intended to provide some reasonable assurance that 
what we send is what you get, and no more.  The FTP(S) and HTTPS 
transport layers do not assure data integrity.  The notion of tolerating 
randomly corrupted z/OS operating system software was, to put it mildly, 
"not deemed acceptable."  As far as I know, nobody even bothered to ask 
Level 2 (smile).


The SHA-1 hash never intended to be interpreted as being a secure hash 
for IBM software delivery.  Nonetheless, some clients tell us they want 
a stronger hash to be used.  This is usually not because they don't 
understand what we're doing (they generally do), but more often because 
their management and auditors do not necessarily want exceptions to a 
simple rule.


BTW, if memory serves, NIST deprecated SHA-1 for secure hashes several 
years ago.  (GIYF if you want to know when.)


There are plenty of alternatives, none of which are implemented today. 
The most likely among them seem to be certificate-based, in part because 
sending the public key in-band, along with the data to be verified, does 
not pose the risk of private key exposure or tampering (which is sort of 
the whole point to me, but a crypto guy I am not).




I don't understand certificates.  I think they're an institutionalization of
the fad of a couple decades ago, "Please sign my PGP public key."
I need to read up.


There's a bit more to it than that.  (Again, a crypto guy I am not.  But 
you can most likely find intro-level SHARE presentations from people 
like Greg Boyd, Eysha Sherrine, and others if you look for them.)


--
John Eells
IBM Poughkeepsie
ee...@us.ibm.com

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 07:36:53 -0400, John Eells wrote:
>>
>> How are you going to handle the orders for Tapes? Our installation does not 
>> have *ANY* internet connection from the M/F. AFAIK that will never change. 
>> The place is hyper about security. I think its overblown, but the current 
>> upper management says NFW. When they say no they mean no. Myself I am happy 
>> with tape, I don’t have to worry about the SMPE creating datasets all over 
>> the place and having 5 volumes(or more) for simple maintenance.
> 
I have to wonder, nowadays, what Ed's system does and what it's connected to.
Keypunches?  ATMs and POS stations on a very private network? ...

>In a future without tape, if you do not have optical drives and cannot
>connect to the Internet, you will need to take a laptop outside the
>firewall, download your order, bring it back in, and upload it to your
>z/OS system.  This is already supported and documented, and has been for
>well over a decade now.
> 
I hope it's not a Windows laptop.

How woud you connect it to the M/F for upload?

Do you expect the firewall to scan the laptop for malware?  The more data
you carry in through the firewall, the more likely that some of it is bad.

Many years ago, briefly, IBM delivered PTFs in 3480 cartridges in
polyethylene sleeves proclaiming that malware was thereby excluded.
My peers snickered, "And how hard is it to counterfeit a heat-sealed
plastic envelope?"

If you suspect that a product or service package received from the Internet
contains malware, how does filtering it through the laptop cleanse it?

SMP/E packages are validated by SHA-1 checksums.  Does SHA-1 meet
security criteria nowadays.  It's pointless to trust a checksum transmitted
by the same channel as the payload.  What are the alternatives?

I don't understand certificates.  I think they're an institutionalization of
the fad of a couple decades ago, "Please sign my PGP public key."
I need to read up.

-- gil

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

ShopZ order response

[Nightwatch RenBand]

I was expecting some licensing questions, which is why I wanted a response
from them.  Fortunately it seems that there were none, and notice of the
ready order appeared in my mailbox.

Still, it seems odd to get zero response from calls to ShopZ.

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[John Eells]

Edward Gould wrote:

On Oct 6, 2017, at 8:57 AM, John Eells  wrote:

Bob,

I am asking specifically about order turnaround time for ServerPac orders that 
contain z/OS.

It's interesting to understand the RFN and RECEIVE ORDER expectations and needs 
as well, but I am feeling lazy on this particular Friday, so I want to try to 
boil only one part of the ocean at a time.  ;-)

The problem everyone has with physical media is being able to ship something 
compatible with what people have today, and will continue to have tomorrow.  
Our tape drives cartridge formats are not, as far as I know, readable by other 
manufacturer's tape drives these days.  (3480 was the last interoperable 
format.)

On the workstation front, optical drives are falling out of favor on new 
machines.  I personally want to stay away from USB memory sticks, and a number 
of very security-conscious clients do not allow their use at all.  They disable 
USB ports entirely, which precludes all things that are USB-attached and not 
just memory sticks.  We're starting to run shy of things we can send everyone 
that will remain usable for the foreseeable future.

It's this, really, that might drive us toward Internet-only delivery at some 
future point.

John Eells
z/OS Platform Installation Strategy



John,

How are you going to handle the orders for Tapes? Our installation does not 
have *ANY* internet connection from the M/F. AFAIK that will never change. The 
place is hyper about security. I think its overblown, but the current upper 
management says NFW. When they say no they mean no. Myself I am happy with 
tape, I don’t have to worry about the SMPE creating datasets all over the place 
and having 5 volumes(or more) for simple maintenance.


In addition to what I wrote above, we, like everyone else, are driven by 
client behaviors and available technologies.  So let's talk about 
numbers for a minute.


As of this March, 86% of our orders are being downloaded, and every time 
we get new numbers that percentage goes up.  Of the remainder, the last 
year I pulled numbers to break down DVD vs. tape, about 2/3 of orders 
delivered on physical media were on DVD.  That was a couple of years 
ago.  If I extrapolate the trend we saw then, that 1/3 of the remainder 
is probably more like 1/6 today.


In other words, tape orders are dwindling, and not slowly.

At some point, we will almost certainly drop tape support for software 
delivery.  It seems very likely to me that we simply will not be able to 
justify replacing the tape drives in the distribution centers once our 
current tape drives reach end of life.


I hope nobody finds this surprising.  We have, for example, discussed 
this before in IBM-MAIN.


In a future without tape, if you do not have optical drives and cannot 
connect to the Internet, you will need to take a laptop outside the 
firewall, download your order, bring it back in, and upload it to your 
z/OS system.  This is already supported and documented, and has been for 
well over a decade now.


--
John Eells
IBM Poughkeepsie
ee...@us.ibm.com

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Edward Gould]

> On Oct 6, 2017, at 6:21 AM, John Eells  wrote:
> 
> More for ServerPac than for CBPDO, but ServerPac is how most people get z/OS, 
> at least.
> 
> What kind of ServerPac turnaround time do people:
> 
> - Expect?
> - Really need?
> 
> ...for z/OS orders?
> 

John,

Hands down CBPDO. Its straightforward none of the damn menus of Servpac and I 
can at any point in time see what is going on, which for us is important as we 
switch duties at a minutes notice. With a CBPDO there is a nice checklist and a 
spool to look at with SDSF. The people switching duties is typical in our shop. 
One day you are working on a PDO and in the afternoon you are dump looking 
while someone else is doing the CBPDO. No muss no fuss. I get pulled into so 
many meetings that essentially 2 people can work on it and no worry about 
servpac datasets.

Ed


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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Edward Gould]

> On Oct 6, 2017, at 8:57 AM, John Eells  wrote:
> 
> Bob,
> 
> I am asking specifically about order turnaround time for ServerPac orders 
> that contain z/OS.
> 
> It's interesting to understand the RFN and RECEIVE ORDER expectations and 
> needs as well, but I am feeling lazy on this particular Friday, so I want to 
> try to boil only one part of the ocean at a time.  ;-)
> 
> The problem everyone has with physical media is being able to ship something 
> compatible with what people have today, and will continue to have tomorrow.  
> Our tape drives cartridge formats are not, as far as I know, readable by 
> other manufacturer's tape drives these days.  (3480 was the last 
> interoperable format.)
> 
> On the workstation front, optical drives are falling out of favor on new 
> machines.  I personally want to stay away from USB memory sticks, and a 
> number of very security-conscious clients do not allow their use at all.  
> They disable USB ports entirely, which precludes all things that are 
> USB-attached and not just memory sticks.  We're starting to run shy of things 
> we can send everyone that will remain usable for the foreseeable future.
> 
> It's this, really, that might drive us toward Internet-only delivery at some 
> future point.
> 
> John Eells
> z/OS Platform Installation Strategy
> 

John,

How are you going to handle the orders for Tapes? Our installation does not 
have *ANY* internet connection from the M/F. AFAIK that will never change. The 
place is hyper about security. I think its overblown, but the current upper 
management says NFW. When they say no they mean no. Myself I am happy with 
tape, I don’t have to worry about the SMPE creating datasets all over the place 
and having 5 volumes(or more) for simple maintenance.

Ed


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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Mark Zelden]

On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 07:21:59 -0400, John Eells  wrote:

>More for ServerPac than for CBPDO, but ServerPac is how most people get
>z/OS, at least.
>
>What kind of ServerPac turnaround time do people:
>
>- Expect?
>- Really need?
>
>...for z/OS orders?
>

My expectations are based on past results.  2-3 weeks?  I don't know about 
"need",
but I think 2 weeks seems reasonable for a z/OS ServerPac.  

One size does not fit all. Not too long ago I ordered a ServerPac to refresh 
all the
Omegamon products for my client and it took 5 days from order to ready to 
download.

Best Regards,

Mark
--
Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS
ITIL v3 Foundation Certified
mailto:m...@mzelden.com
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/mvsutil.html
Systems Programming expert at http://search390.techtarget.com/ateExperts/
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: ShopZ order response

[Jousma, David]

John,

I'm glad you brought up optical media.   Here at the bank, we have no CD 
drives, and USB is disabled.  So today with internet serverpac delivery, the 
optional materials also come as CD/DVD images.I find that extremely 
cumbersome.   I have neither the NAS space or the time to download each and 
every image, since I might not know before the order expires which ones I will 
actually need.

What I end up doing is re-ordering my serverpack on physical media, soley for 
the purpose of getting all the CD/DVD media.  If I had my way, I'd get internet 
delivery of serverpack, and physical delivery of the optional media.

_
Dave Jousma
Manager Mainframe Engineering, Assistant Vice President
david.jou...@53.com
1830 East Paris, Grand Rapids, MI  49546 MD RSCB2H
p 616.653.8429
f 616.653.2717


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of John Eells
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2017 9:57 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ShopZ order response

**CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL**

**DO NOT open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected 
emails**

Bob,

I am asking specifically about order turnaround time for ServerPac orders that 
contain z/OS.

It's interesting to understand the RFN and RECEIVE ORDER expectations and needs 
as well, but I am feeling lazy on this particular Friday, so I want to try to 
boil only one part of the ocean at a time.  ;-)

The problem everyone has with physical media is being able to ship something 
compatible with what people have today, and will continue to have tomorrow.  
Our tape drives cartridge formats are not, as far as I know, readable by other 
manufacturer's tape drives these days.  (3480 was the last interoperable 
format.)

On the workstation front, optical drives are falling out of favor on new 
machines.  I personally want to stay away from USB memory sticks, and a number 
of very security-conscious clients do not allow their use at all. 
  They disable USB ports entirely, which precludes all things that are 
USB-attached and not just memory sticks.  We're starting to run shy of things 
we can send everyone that will remain usable for the foreseeable future.

It's this, really, that might drive us toward Internet-only delivery at some 
future point.

John Eells
z/OS Platform Installation Strategy

Richards, Robert B. wrote:
> John,
>
> I am spoiled. I expect it to be ready for download within minutes or a 
> few hours.  Yesterday, a ten gigabyte RSU1709 took ten minutes to send 
> me the package details. I submitted the RFN and it took almost seven 
> hours to download. That is my expectation. :-)
>
> Reality need?  Order one day, submit on light weekday or on weekend. Restart 
> at last known good point, if needed.
>
> Anything across the network beats the heck out of snail mail and I know you 
> guys are trying to do away with the physical media!
>
> Bob
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of John Eells
> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2017 7:22 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: ShopZ order response
>
> More for ServerPac than for CBPDO, but ServerPac is how most people get z/OS, 
> at least.
>
> What kind of ServerPac turnaround time do people:
>
> - Expect?
> - Really need?
>
> ...for z/OS orders?
>
> Allan Staller wrote:
>> Might also be a flood of orders. CBPDO/SERVERPAC do require a lot of 
>> processing.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
>> Behalf Of Richards, Robert B.
>> Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2017 11:34 AM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: ShopZ order response
>>
>> Good question. However, I did not hear last Friday (original delivery date) 
>> about anyone talking about z/OS 2.3. Perhaps shipment has been delayed. If 
>> it has been, that might explain why the status has remained "Manufacturing". 
>> Otherwise, you may want to try emailing this link:   SWG ESW ShopCat L2 
>> Supportshopc...@dk.ibm.com
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
>> On Behalf Of Nightwatch RenBand
>> Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 12:18 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: ShopZ order response
>>
>> On 2017-09-28 I placed my order for a new version of zOS online.  I received 
>> an eMail back from ShopZ the next day and online shows "Manufacturing"
>> .
>> Unfortunately the person who sent the o

Re: ShopZ order response

[John Eells]

Bob,

I am asking specifically about order turnaround time for ServerPac 
orders that contain z/OS.


It's interesting to understand the RFN and RECEIVE ORDER expectations 
and needs as well, but I am feeling lazy on this particular Friday, so I 
want to try to boil only one part of the ocean at a time.  ;-)


The problem everyone has with physical media is being able to ship 
something compatible with what people have today, and will continue to 
have tomorrow.  Our tape drives cartridge formats are not, as far as I 
know, readable by other manufacturer's tape drives these days.  (3480 
was the last interoperable format.)


On the workstation front, optical drives are falling out of favor on new 
machines.  I personally want to stay away from USB memory sticks, and a 
number of very security-conscious clients do not allow their use at all. 
 They disable USB ports entirely, which precludes all things that are 
USB-attached and not just memory sticks.  We're starting to run shy of 
things we can send everyone that will remain usable for the foreseeable 
future.


It's this, really, that might drive us toward Internet-only delivery at 
some future point.


John Eells
z/OS Platform Installation Strategy

Richards, Robert B. wrote:

John,

I am spoiled. I expect it to be ready for download within minutes or a few 
hours.  Yesterday, a ten gigabyte RSU1709 took ten minutes to send me the 
package details. I submitted the RFN and it took almost seven hours to 
download. That is my expectation. :-)

Reality need?  Order one day, submit on light weekday or on weekend. Restart at 
last known good point, if needed.

Anything across the network beats the heck out of snail mail and I know you 
guys are trying to do away with the physical media!

Bob


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of John Eells
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2017 7:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ShopZ order response

More for ServerPac than for CBPDO, but ServerPac is how most people get z/OS, 
at least.

What kind of ServerPac turnaround time do people:

- Expect?
- Really need?

...for z/OS orders?

Allan Staller wrote:

Might also be a flood of orders. CBPDO/SERVERPAC do require a lot of processing.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Richards, Robert B.
Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2017 11:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ShopZ order response

Good question. However, I did not hear last Friday (original delivery date) about anyone 
talking about z/OS 2.3. Perhaps shipment has been delayed. If it has been, that might 
explain why the status has remained "Manufacturing". Otherwise, you may want to 
try emailing this link:SWG ESW ShopCat L2 Supportshopc...@dk.ibm.com

Bob

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Nightwatch RenBand
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 12:18 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: ShopZ order response

On 2017-09-28 I placed my order for a new version of zOS online.  I received an eMail 
back from ShopZ the next day and online shows "Manufacturing"
.
Unfortunately the person who sent the original eMail has not returned eMail or 
phone calls, Attempts to call ShopZ have resulted in my leaving messages, but 
again, no returned calls.
Is this normal?
Should it take this long to process an order?
Is there some better way to contact ShopZ?



--
John Eells
IBM Poughkeepsie
ee...@us.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




--
John Eells
IBM Poughkeepsie
ee...@us.ibm.com

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Veryl Ellis]

My RSU1709 RFN job took about 5.5 hours.
Submitted the job to run overnight.
I'm not in a production environment, so I may not have the same requirements.

S. Veryl Ellis ▪ Senior Systems Engineer | zSystems – Technical Services Group 
▪ Sungard Availability Services
 

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Richards, Robert B.
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2017 9:33 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ShopZ order response

John,

I am spoiled. I expect it to be ready for download within minutes or a few 
hours.  Yesterday, a ten gigabyte RSU1709 took ten minutes to send me the 
package details. I submitted the RFN and it took almost seven hours to 
download. That is my expectation. :-)

Reality need?  Order one day, submit on light weekday or on weekend. Restart at 
last known good point, if needed.

Anything across the network beats the heck out of snail mail and I know you 
guys are trying to do away with the physical media! 

Bob  


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of John Eells
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2017 7:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ShopZ order response

More for ServerPac than for CBPDO, but ServerPac is how most people get z/OS, 
at least.

What kind of ServerPac turnaround time do people:

- Expect?
- Really need?

...for z/OS orders?

Allan Staller wrote:
> Might also be a flood of orders. CBPDO/SERVERPAC do require a lot of 
> processing.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> Behalf Of Richards, Robert B.
> Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2017 11:34 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: ShopZ order response
>
> Good question. However, I did not hear last Friday (original delivery date) 
> about anyone talking about z/OS 2.3. Perhaps shipment has been delayed. If it 
> has been, that might explain why the status has remained "Manufacturing". 
> Otherwise, you may want to try emailing this link:SWG ESW ShopCat L2 
> Supportshopc...@dk.ibm.com
>
> Bob
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Nightwatch RenBand
> Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 12:18 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: ShopZ order response
>
> On 2017-09-28 I placed my order for a new version of zOS online.  I received 
> an eMail back from ShopZ the next day and online shows "Manufacturing"
> .
> Unfortunately the person who sent the original eMail has not returned eMail 
> or phone calls, Attempts to call ShopZ have resulted in my leaving messages, 
> but again, no returned calls.
> Is this normal?
> Should it take this long to process an order?
> Is there some better way to contact ShopZ?


--
John Eells
IBM Poughkeepsie
ee...@us.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

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Richards, Robert B.]

John,

I am spoiled. I expect it to be ready for download within minutes or a few 
hours.  Yesterday, a ten gigabyte RSU1709 took ten minutes to send me the 
package details. I submitted the RFN and it took almost seven hours to 
download. That is my expectation. :-)

Reality need?  Order one day, submit on light weekday or on weekend. Restart at 
last known good point, if needed.

Anything across the network beats the heck out of snail mail and I know you 
guys are trying to do away with the physical media! 

Bob  


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of John Eells
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2017 7:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ShopZ order response

More for ServerPac than for CBPDO, but ServerPac is how most people get z/OS, 
at least.

What kind of ServerPac turnaround time do people:

- Expect?
- Really need?

...for z/OS orders?

Allan Staller wrote:
> Might also be a flood of orders. CBPDO/SERVERPAC do require a lot of 
> processing.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> Behalf Of Richards, Robert B.
> Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2017 11:34 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: ShopZ order response
>
> Good question. However, I did not hear last Friday (original delivery date) 
> about anyone talking about z/OS 2.3. Perhaps shipment has been delayed. If it 
> has been, that might explain why the status has remained "Manufacturing". 
> Otherwise, you may want to try emailing this link:SWG ESW ShopCat L2 
> Supportshopc...@dk.ibm.com
>
> Bob
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Nightwatch RenBand
> Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 12:18 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: ShopZ order response
>
> On 2017-09-28 I placed my order for a new version of zOS online.  I received 
> an eMail back from ShopZ the next day and online shows "Manufacturing"
> .
> Unfortunately the person who sent the original eMail has not returned eMail 
> or phone calls, Attempts to call ShopZ have resulted in my leaving messages, 
> but again, no returned calls.
> Is this normal?
> Should it take this long to process an order?
> Is there some better way to contact ShopZ?


--
John Eells
IBM Poughkeepsie
ee...@us.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: ShopZ order response

[Jousma, David]

Weeks is fine by me.  I always order earlier than needed anyway.  What's the 
rush, anyway?  CBPDO's on the other hand already come out pretty quick, unless 
you are waiting on a licensing issue.   

_
Dave Jousma
Manager Mainframe Engineering, Assistant Vice President
david.jou...@53.com
1830 East Paris, Grand Rapids, MI  49546 MD RSCB2H
p 616.653.8429
f 616.653.2717

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of John Eells
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2017 7:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ShopZ order response

**CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL**

**DO NOT open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected 
emails**

More for ServerPac than for CBPDO, but ServerPac is how most people get z/OS, 
at least.

What kind of ServerPac turnaround time do people:

- Expect?
- Really need?

...for z/OS orders?

Allan Staller wrote:
> Might also be a flood of orders. CBPDO/SERVERPAC do require a lot of 
> processing.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> Behalf Of Richards, Robert B.
> Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2017 11:34 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: ShopZ order response
>
> Good question. However, I did not hear last Friday (original delivery date) 
> about anyone talking about z/OS 2.3. Perhaps shipment has been delayed. If it 
> has been, that might explain why the status has remained "Manufacturing". 
> Otherwise, you may want to try emailing this link:SWG ESW ShopCat L2 
> Supportshopc...@dk.ibm.com
>
> Bob
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Nightwatch RenBand
> Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 12:18 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: ShopZ order response
>
> On 2017-09-28 I placed my order for a new version of zOS online.  I received 
> an eMail back from ShopZ the next day and online shows "Manufacturing"
> .
> Unfortunately the person who sent the original eMail has not returned eMail 
> or phone calls, Attempts to call ShopZ have resulted in my leaving messages, 
> but again, no returned calls.
> Is this normal?
> Should it take this long to process an order?
> Is there some better way to contact ShopZ?


--
John Eells
IBM Poughkeepsie
ee...@us.ibm.com

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

**DO NOT open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected 
emails**

This e-mail transmission contains information that is confidential and may be 
privileged.   It is intended only for the addressee(s) named above. If you 
receive this e-mail in error, please do not read, copy or disseminate it in any 
manner. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, 
distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. Please 
reply to the message immediately by informing the sender that the message was 
misdirected. After replying, please erase it from your computer system. Your 
assistance in correcting this error is appreciated.


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

Re: ShopZ order response

[John Eells]

More for ServerPac than for CBPDO, but ServerPac is how most people get 
z/OS, at least.


What kind of ServerPac turnaround time do people:

- Expect?
- Really need?

...for z/OS orders?

Allan Staller wrote:

Might also be a flood of orders. CBPDO/SERVERPAC do require a lot of processing.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Richards, Robert B.
Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2017 11:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ShopZ order response

Good question. However, I did not hear last Friday (original delivery date) about anyone 
talking about z/OS 2.3. Perhaps shipment has been delayed. If it has been, that might 
explain why the status has remained "Manufacturing". Otherwise, you may want to 
try emailing this link:SWG ESW ShopCat L2 Supportshopc...@dk.ibm.com

Bob

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Nightwatch RenBand
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 12:18 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: ShopZ order response

On 2017-09-28 I placed my order for a new version of zOS online.  I received an eMail 
back from ShopZ the next day and online shows "Manufacturing"
.
Unfortunately the person who sent the original eMail has not returned eMail or 
phone calls, Attempts to call ShopZ have resulted in my leaving messages, but 
again, no returned calls.
Is this normal?
Should it take this long to process an order?
Is there some better way to contact ShopZ?



--
John Eells
IBM Poughkeepsie
ee...@us.ibm.com

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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Allan Staller]

Might also be a flood of orders. CBPDO/SERVERPAC do require a lot of processing.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Richards, Robert B.
Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2017 11:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ShopZ order response

Good question. However, I did not hear last Friday (original delivery date) 
about anyone talking about z/OS 2.3. Perhaps shipment has been delayed. If it 
has been, that might explain why the status has remained "Manufacturing". 
Otherwise, you may want to try emailing this link:  SWG ESW ShopCat L2 Support  
  shopc...@dk.ibm.com

Bob

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Nightwatch RenBand
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 12:18 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: ShopZ order response

On 2017-09-28 I placed my order for a new version of zOS online.  I received an 
eMail back from ShopZ the next day and online shows "Manufacturing"
.
Unfortunately the person who sent the original eMail has not returned eMail or 
phone calls, Attempts to call ShopZ have resulted in my leaving messages, but 
again, no returned calls.
Is this normal?
Should it take this long to process an order?
Is there some better way to contact ShopZ?

--
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


::DISCLAIMER::


The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended 
for the named recipient(s) only.
E-mail transmission is not guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information 
could be intercepted, corrupted,
lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or may contain viruses in 
transmission. The e mail and its contents
(with or without referred errors) shall therefore not attach any liability on 
the originator or HCL or its affiliates.
Views or opinions, if any, presented in this email are solely those of the 
author and may not necessarily reflect the
views or opinions of HCL or its affiliates. Any form of reproduction, 
dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification,
distribution and / or publication of this message without the prior written 
consent of authorized representative of
HCL is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please 
delete it and notify the sender immediately.
Before opening any email and/or attachments, please check them for viruses and 
other defects.




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

Re: ShopZ order response

[Richards, Robert B.]

Good question. However, I did not hear last Friday (original delivery date) 
about anyone talking about z/OS 2.3. Perhaps shipment has been delayed. If it 
has been, that might explain why the status has remained "Manufacturing". 
Otherwise, you may want to try emailing this link:  SWG ESW ShopCat L2 Support  
  shopc...@dk.ibm.com

Bob

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Nightwatch RenBand
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 12:18 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: ShopZ order response

On 2017-09-28 I placed my order for a new version of zOS online.  I received an 
eMail back from ShopZ the next day and online shows "Manufacturing"
.
Unfortunately the person who sent the original eMail has not returned eMail or 
phone calls, Attempts to call ShopZ have resulted in my leaving messages, but 
again, no returned calls.
Is this normal?
Should it take this long to process an order?
Is there some better way to contact ShopZ?

--
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

ShopZ order response

[Nightwatch RenBand]

On 2017-09-28 I placed my order for a new version of zOS online.  I
received an eMail back from ShopZ the next day and online shows "Manufacturing"
.
Unfortunately the person who sent the original eMail has not returned eMail
or phone calls, Attempts to call ShopZ have resulted in my leaving
messages, but again, no returned calls.
Is this normal?
Should it take this long to process an order?
Is there some better way to contact ShopZ?

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