Re: define a service class in wlm by batch
Unless the OP wants to define a serviceclass daily when Prodbatch starts and delete it when it is finished, to prevent illegal use. So again: what is the thought behind the question? Kees. > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Allan Staller > Sent: 28 September, 2018 15:43 > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: define a service class in wlm by batch > > Short answer ... No. > Long answer. Yes, if you want to spend a lot more time than it will take > to do it from within the WLM dialog. > > HTH > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of Jason Cai > Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2018 10:13 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: define a service class in wlm by batch > > Hi all > > Could we define a service class in WLM by batch job? Thanks a lot! > > > > Best Regards, > Jason Cai > > > > -- > 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 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: define a service class in wlm by batch
Short answer ... No. Long answer. Yes, if you want to spend a lot more time than it will take to do it from within the WLM dialog. HTH -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Jason Cai Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2018 10:13 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: define a service class in wlm by batch Hi all Could we define a service class in WLM by batch job? Thanks a lot! Best Regards, Jason Cai -- 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: define a service class in wlm by batch
On 9/27/2018 11:12 PM, Jason Cai wrote: > Could we define a service class in WLM by batch job? Thanks a lot! Sure: fetch current service definition, update, store it, re-activate the currently active policy name (now sporting your new srvclass). Have a look at the WLM Programming Services pub. IIRC the relevant subset were named IWMDx. SAF permissions definitely needed. At a higher level though, is that action common enough to be worth automating it, or is there a larger unstated context? It would be surprising if automating "add srvclass" alone was worth the time - there's usually a whole ecosystem dependent on the data, with humans consuming it in the end even if only for exceptions and capacity planning, so adding/removing srvclasses on a regular basis would generally be considered "unusual". The original intent of the APIs was to allow systems management products to update the entire svdef - and replace the UI, if they felt like it - programmatically, and activate policies (which *could* easily be much more common, e.g. you might have different 1st/2nd shift policies) the same way. -- John Arwe IBM Wave for z/VM Development product owner Former zWLM perpetrator -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
define a service class in wlm by batch
Hi all Could we define a service class in WLM by batch job? Thanks a lot! Best Regards, Jason Cai -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?)
Hi: I have said this before. At a IBM class (here in Chicago) The instructor told us (SERVPAC CLASS) that the goal of IBM was to eliminate the systems programmer. Now hows does that make everyone on the list feel? Ed On Nov 25, 2014, at 12:36 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: Disclaimer: I (or we) don't have z/OSMF and z/OS v2.1, maybe next year, when we are deemed not be naughty SysOps... ;-) Cheryl Walker wrote: But the reason to go to z/OSMF is not because people want cheap labor, but because it's simply better (at least in 2.1). John McKown is talking about his problem of his company wanting cheap and ultra cheap labor. Each to its own. If I were a sysprog again, I would definitely prefer z/OSMF to do my standard tasks. I could get my work done more quickly, and with a better audit trail of who did what. The history function of z/ OSMF is one of its strengths. Where is that audit trail (besides history function) being kept? Just curious. Just because the tool is easier doesn't mean that you don't need experts. You still need to understand service classes, performance indicators, and much more. Agreed. And experience too. I personally think that z/OSMF reduces the manual effort to let you concentrate on more important matters. If you say so. Thanks. 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: z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?)
I feel fine. I was told the same thing 35 years ago. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Ed Gould Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 12:52 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?) Hi: I have said this before. At a IBM class (here in Chicago) The instructor told us (SERVPAC CLASS) that the goal of IBM was to eliminate the systems programmer. Now hows does that make everyone on the list feel? Ed On Nov 25, 2014, at 12:36 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: Disclaimer: I (or we) don't have z/OSMF and z/OS v2.1, maybe next year, when we are deemed not be naughty SysOps... ;-) Cheryl Walker wrote: But the reason to go to z/OSMF is not because people want cheap labor, but because it's simply better (at least in 2.1). John McKown is talking about his problem of his company wanting cheap and ultra cheap labor. Each to its own. If I were a sysprog again, I would definitely prefer z/OSMF to do my standard tasks. I could get my work done more quickly, and with a better audit trail of who did what. The history function of z/ OSMF is one of its strengths. Where is that audit trail (besides history function) being kept? Just curious. Just because the tool is easier doesn't mean that you don't need experts. You still need to understand service classes, performance indicators, and much more. Agreed. And experience too. I personally think that z/OSMF reduces the manual effort to let you concentrate on more important matters. If you say so. Thanks. 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 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?)
I was told that System Programming would be reduced to PARMLIB updates. Circa 1981. And.. - -teD - Original Message From: Richards, Robert B. Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 13:01 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?) I feel fine. I was told the same thing 35 years ago. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Ed Gould Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 12:52 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?) Hi: I have said this before. At a IBM class (here in Chicago) The instructor told us (SERVPAC CLASS) that the goal of IBM was to eliminate the systems programmer. Now hows does that make everyone on the list feel? Ed On Nov 25, 2014, at 12:36 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: Disclaimer: I (or we) don't have z/OSMF and z/OS v2.1, maybe next year, when we are deemed not be naughty SysOps... ;-) Cheryl Walker wrote: But the reason to go to z/OSMF is not because people want cheap labor, but because it's simply better (at least in 2.1). John McKown is talking about his problem of his company wanting cheap and ultra cheap labor. Each to its own. If I were a sysprog again, I would definitely prefer z/OSMF to do my standard tasks. I could get my work done more quickly, and with a better audit trail of who did what. The history function of z/ OSMF is one of its strengths. Where is that audit trail (besides history function) being kept? Just curious. Just because the tool is easier doesn't mean that you don't need experts. You still need to understand service classes, performance indicators, and much more. Agreed. And experience too. I personally think that z/OSMF reduces the manual effort to let you concentrate on more important matters. If you say so. Thanks. 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 -- 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/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?)
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 12:25 PM I was told that System Programming would be reduced to PARMLIB updates. Circa 1981. And.. In a previous job as a CSR for an ISV, we got a new boss. In his first intro meeting, he explained that our job was, essentially, to try to work ourselves out of a job. But fear not: New releases always introduced new bugs^H^H^H^Hfeatures. :-) -jc- ** Information contained in this e-mail message and in any attachments thereto is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message, delete any copies held on your systems, notify the sender immediately, and refrain from using or disclosing all or any part of its content to any other person. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: WLM in batch?
John, This is part of the process we are looking for: unload - batch modify - reload of a policy. This tool does the reload (install) part. This is, together with unload, is the easiest part, it can be done online, because in the OP's and my situation, we have a running system. What is lacking is the batch mass modify part. Kees. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of John Eells Sent: 20 November, 2014 15:00 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: WLM in batch? (Reposting to the list server.) A while back, when it became obvious that we needed a way to prime a WLM policy for new systems, SYS1.SAMPLIB(IWMINSTL) was born. Maybe you'll find the IWMARIDU program useful in this context, and maybe not...if I recall correctly it uses an ISPF table. (I actually helped work on this a long time ago...I've just forgotten the details, I'm afraid.) johnc.e...@gmail.com (John Compton) wrote: Currently, the only way I know of handling WLM policy changes is though the ISPF dialogs, screens, etc., that sit behind IWMARIN0. That's all very well, but beyond the NOTES function (and/or in-house change control documentation), there is no real possibility of an audit trail. Is there any way of handling WLM policy processing in batch? snip -- John Eells z/OS Technical Marketing IBM Poughkeepsie ee...@us.ibm.com -- John Eells z/OS Technical Marketing 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 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: WLM in batch?
Hi all, I think the simplest solution for an audit trail is z/OSMF 2.1. The WLM Policy Manager in z/OSMF keeps an audit trail of every change you make, AND keeps a history of previous definitions and policies. Whey create a new system when one already exists? You're going to need to go to z/OSMF at some point, so why not install it first for WLM? Users love WLM under z/OSMF. If you can wait for 2.1, it's best because there are more functions in 2.1, it uses far fewer resources, and is much easier to install. And now that there is no financial reason to delay moving to z/OS 2.1, I recommend that you go for it (see Cheryl's List #179). z/OS 2.1 has been in the field for a year and is a quite stable release. I partly disagree with John, who said I'm not holding my breath. z/OSMF is the way IBM is going because the money people in the most companies today don't seem to want experts, they want cheap labor. Like most of today's people who vote good enough instead of excellent with their wallets. Yes, z/OSMF is the way IBM is going, which means a requirement for a batch audit trail would likely be rejected (given that a function already exists). But the reason to go to z/OSMF is not because people want cheap labor, but because it's simply better (at least in 2.1). If I were a sysprog again, I would definitely prefer z/OSMF to do my standard tasks. I could get my work done more quickly, and with a better audit trail of who did what. The history function of z/OSMF is one of its strengths. Just because the tool is easier doesn't mean that you don't need experts. You still need to understand service classes, performance indicators, and much more. I personally think that z/OSMF reduces the manual effort to let you concentrate on more important matters. Best regards, Cheryl == Cheryl Watson Watson Walker, Inc. www.watsonwalker.com cell text: 941-266-6609 == On Nov 24, 2014, at 3:42 AM, Vernooij, CP (ITOPT1) - KLM kees.verno...@klm.com wrote: John, This is part of the process we are looking for: unload - batch modify - reload of a policy. This tool does the reload (install) part. This is, together with unload, is the easiest part, it can be done online, because in the OP's and my situation, we have a running system. What is lacking is the batch mass modify part. Kees. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of John Eells Sent: 20 November, 2014 15:00 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: WLM in batch? (Reposting to the list server.) A while back, when it became obvious that we needed a way to prime a WLM policy for new systems, SYS1.SAMPLIB(IWMINSTL) was born. Maybe you'll find the IWMARIDU program useful in this context, and maybe not...if I recall correctly it uses an ISPF table. (I actually helped work on this a long time ago...I've just forgotten the details, I'm afraid.) johnc.e...@gmail.com (John Compton) wrote: Currently, the only way I know of handling WLM policy changes is though the ISPF dialogs, screens, etc., that sit behind IWMARIN0. That's all very well, but beyond the NOTES function (and/or in-house change control documentation), there is no real possibility of an audit trail. Is there any way of handling WLM policy processing in batch? snip -- John Eells z/OS Technical Marketing IBM Poughkeepsie ee...@us.ibm.com -- John Eells z/OS Technical Marketing 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 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
Re: WLM in batch?
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: IBM wants z/OS to be friendly. They've turned down a lot of requirements that would have made it friendlier. And audit improvement requests too. :-( IBM wants things that will improve their cash flow, possibly at the expense of long term profit. Indeed. Think *backward compatibility*. That would keep cash flowing in. micro$h*t learned that lesson partially when introducing windoze causing backward compatibility with dos programs. Today you can get DOSBox to run your old DOS programs. I'm using it on WinXP and Win7 to play ancient computer games. ;-) 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
z/OSMF audit (was Re: WLM in batch?)
Disclaimer: I (or we) don't have z/OSMF and z/OS v2.1, maybe next year, when we are deemed not be naughty SysOps... ;-) Cheryl Walker wrote: But the reason to go to z/OSMF is not because people want cheap labor, but because it's simply better (at least in 2.1). John McKown is talking about his problem of his company wanting cheap and ultra cheap labor. Each to its own. If I were a sysprog again, I would definitely prefer z/OSMF to do my standard tasks. I could get my work done more quickly, and with a better audit trail of who did what. The history function of z/OSMF is one of its strengths. Where is that audit trail (besides history function) being kept? Just curious. Just because the tool is easier doesn't mean that you don't need experts. You still need to understand service classes, performance indicators, and much more. Agreed. And experience too. I personally think that z/OSMF reduces the manual effort to let you concentrate on more important matters. If you say so. Thanks. 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
WLM in batch?
Currently, the only way I know of handling WLM policy changes is though the ISPF dialogs, screens, etc., that sit behind IWMARIN0. That's all very well, but beyond the NOTES function (and/or in-house change control documentation), there is no real possibility of an audit trail. Is there any way of handling WLM policy processing in batch? I'd like to be able to 'unload' the current policy into a flat file of statements that are expressed in English or something reasonably understandable at least. From there I'd like to be able to modify (a) selected statement(s), then specify those statements as SYSIN to a batch program (or input to a REXX) to reload/modify the current policy. Yes, you can unload the policy into a bunch of members in a PDS, but the individual members are stored as hex code and are not 'readable' with IEH-EYEBALL, so that isn't a solution for my enquiry. I've scanned the cbttape site, and tried googling with various search arguments, but nothing makes itself immediately obvious. Any suggestions gratefully received... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: WLM in batch?
Would XML suit you? It's what I do in Batch from the ISPF TLIB. I'm not sure whether to write up what is an undocumented and unsupported technique. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: John Compton johnc.e...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 10:49 Subject:WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Currently, the only way I know of handling WLM policy changes is though the ISPF dialogs, screens, etc., that sit behind IWMARIN0. That's all very well, but beyond the NOTES function (and/or in-house change control documentation), there is no real possibility of an audit trail. Is there any way of handling WLM policy processing in batch? I'd like to be able to 'unload' the current policy into a flat file of statements that are expressed in English or something reasonably understandable at least. From there I'd like to be able to modify (a) selected statement(s), then specify those statements as SYSIN to a batch program (or input to a REXX) to reload/modify the current policy. Yes, you can unload the policy into a bunch of members in a PDS, but the individual members are stored as hex code and are not 'readable' with IEH-EYEBALL, so that isn't a solution for my enquiry. I've scanned the cbttape site, and tried googling with various search arguments, but nothing makes itself immediately obvious. Any suggestions gratefully received... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: WLM in batch?
Actually I sort of already did: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/blogs/MartinPacker/entry/playing_spot_the_difference_with_wlm_service_definitions?lang=en Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: Martin Packer/UK/IBM@IBMGB To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 11:03 Subject:Re: WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Would XML suit you? It's what I do in Batch from the ISPF TLIB. I'm not sure whether to write up what is an undocumented and unsupported technique. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: John Compton johnc.e...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 10:49 Subject:WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Currently, the only way I know of handling WLM policy changes is though the ISPF dialogs, screens, etc., that sit behind IWMARIN0. That's all very well, but beyond the NOTES function (and/or in-house change control documentation), there is no real possibility of an audit trail. Is there any way of handling WLM policy processing in batch? I'd like to be able to 'unload' the current policy into a flat file of statements that are expressed in English or something reasonably understandable at least. From there I'd like to be able to modify (a) selected statement(s), then specify those statements as SYSIN to a batch program (or input to a REXX) to reload/modify the current policy. Yes, you can unload the policy into a bunch of members in a PDS, but the individual members are stored as hex code and are not 'readable' with IEH-EYEBALL, so that isn't a solution for my enquiry. I've scanned the cbttape site, and tried googling with various search arguments, but nothing makes itself immediately obvious. Any suggestions gratefully received... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: WLM in batch?
That looks like a good start, Martin. My need for an audit trail appears to covered. But is modifying the policy via batch something that is still to be developed/documented? Do you have any plans for such a thing? Regards John On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com wrote: Actually I sort of already did: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/blogs/MartinPacker/entry/playing_spot_the_difference_with_wlm_service_definitions?lang=en Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: Martin Packer/UK/IBM@IBMGB To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 11:03 Subject:Re: WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Would XML suit you? It's what I do in Batch from the ISPF TLIB. I'm not sure whether to write up what is an undocumented and unsupported technique. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: John Compton johnc.e...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 10:49 Subject:WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Currently, the only way I know of handling WLM policy changes is though the ISPF dialogs, screens, etc., that sit behind IWMARIN0. That's all very well, but beyond the NOTES function (and/or in-house change control documentation), there is no real possibility of an audit trail. Is there any way of handling WLM policy processing in batch? I'd like to be able to 'unload' the current policy into a flat file of statements that are expressed in English or something reasonably understandable at least. From there I'd like to be able to modify (a) selected statement(s), then specify those statements as SYSIN to a batch program (or input to a REXX) to reload/modify the current policy. Yes, you can unload the policy into a bunch of members in a PDS, but the individual members are stored as hex code and are not 'readable' with IEH-EYEBALL, so that isn't a solution for my enquiry. I've scanned the cbttape site, and tried googling with various search arguments, but nothing makes itself immediately obvious. Any suggestions gratefully received... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- 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: WLM in batch?
I'm not a WLM developer. I'm hoping someone who is will answer that point. If not we'll have to raise a requirement. Sorry, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: John Compton johnc.e...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 11:27 Subject:Re: WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU That looks like a good start, Martin. My need for an audit trail appears to covered. But is modifying the policy via batch something that is still to be developed/documented? Do you have any plans for such a thing? Regards John On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com wrote: Actually I sort of already did: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/blogs/MartinPacker/entry/playing_spot_the_difference_with_wlm_service_definitions?lang=en Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: Martin Packer/UK/IBM@IBMGB To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 11:03 Subject:Re: WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Would XML suit you? It's what I do in Batch from the ISPF TLIB. I'm not sure whether to write up what is an undocumented and unsupported technique. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: John Compton johnc.e...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 10:49 Subject:WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Currently, the only way I know of handling WLM policy changes is though the ISPF dialogs, screens, etc., that sit behind IWMARIN0. That's all very well, but beyond the NOTES function (and/or in-house change control documentation), there is no real possibility of an audit trail. Is there any way of handling WLM policy processing in batch? I'd like to be able to 'unload' the current policy into a flat file of statements that are expressed in English or something reasonably understandable at least. From there I'd like to be able to modify (a) selected statement(s), then specify those statements as SYSIN to a batch program (or input to a REXX) to reload/modify the current policy. Yes, you can unload the policy into a bunch of members in a PDS, but the individual members are stored as hex code and are not 'readable' with IEH-EYEBALL, so that isn't a solution for my enquiry. I've scanned the cbttape site, and tried googling with various search arguments, but nothing makes itself immediately obvious. Any suggestions gratefully received... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- 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 Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: WLM in batch?
This was also an interesting (related) thread: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bit.listserv.ibm-main/1bnhG_--Zzc Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: John Compton johnc.e...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 11:42 Subject:Re: WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Sounds good, Martin - Thanks On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com wrote: I'm not a WLM developer. I'm hoping someone who is will answer that point. If not we'll have to raise a requirement. Sorry, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: John Compton johnc.e...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 11:27 Subject:Re: WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU That looks like a good start, Martin. My need for an audit trail appears to covered. But is modifying the policy via batch something that is still to be developed/documented? Do you have any plans for such a thing? Regards John On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com wrote: Actually I sort of already did: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/blogs/MartinPacker/entry/playing_spot_the_difference_with_wlm_service_definitions?lang=en Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: Martin Packer/UK/IBM@IBMGB To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 11:03 Subject:Re: WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Would XML suit you? It's what I do in Batch from the ISPF TLIB. I'm not sure whether to write up what is an undocumented and unsupported technique. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: John Compton johnc.e...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 10:49 Subject:WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Currently, the only way I know of handling WLM policy changes is though the ISPF dialogs, screens, etc., that sit behind IWMARIN0. That's all very well, but beyond the NOTES function (and/or in-house change control documentation), there is no real possibility of an audit trail. Is there any way of handling WLM policy processing in batch? I'd like to be able to 'unload' the current policy into a flat file of statements that are expressed in English or something reasonably understandable at least. From there I'd like to be able to modify (a) selected statement(s), then specify those statements as SYSIN to a batch program (or input to a REXX) to reload/modify the current policy. Yes, you can unload the policy into a bunch of members in a PDS, but the individual members are stored as hex code and are not 'readable' with IEH-EYEBALL, so that isn't a solution for my enquiry. I've scanned the cbttape site, and tried googling with various search arguments, but nothing makes itself immediately obvious. Any suggestions gratefully received... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth
Re: WLM in batch?
That was me. The result was practically zero. There is no really useable batch interface to do, in my case, mass WLM updates. I ended up with a terminal emulator macro doing the work for me. Kees. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Martin Packer Sent: 20 November, 2014 12:50 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: WLM in batch? This was also an interesting (related) thread: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bit.listserv.ibm-main/1bnhG_--Zzc Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: John Compton johnc.e...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 11:42 Subject:Re: WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Sounds good, Martin - Thanks On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com wrote: I'm not a WLM developer. I'm hoping someone who is will answer that point. If not we'll have to raise a requirement. Sorry, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: John Compton johnc.e...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 11:27 Subject:Re: WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU That looks like a good start, Martin. My need for an audit trail appears to covered. But is modifying the policy via batch something that is still to be developed/documented? Do you have any plans for such a thing? Regards John On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com wrote: Actually I sort of already did: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/blogs/MartinPacker/entry/playing_spot_the_difference_with_wlm_service_definitions?lang=en Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPack er From: Martin Packer/UK/IBM@IBMGB To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 11:03 Subject:Re: WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Would XML suit you? It's what I do in Batch from the ISPF TLIB. I'm not sure whether to write up what is an undocumented and unsupported technique. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPack er From: John Compton johnc.e...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 20/11/2014 10:49 Subject:WLM in batch? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Currently, the only way I know of handling WLM policy changes is though the ISPF dialogs, screens, etc., that sit behind IWMARIN0. That's all very well, but beyond the NOTES function (and/or in-house change control documentation), there is no real possibility of an audit trail. Is there any way of handling WLM policy processing in batch? I'd like to be able to 'unload' the current policy into a flat file of statements that are expressed in English or something reasonably understandable at least. From there I'd like to be able to modify (a) selected statement(s), then specify those statements as SYSIN to a batch program (or input to a REXX) to reload/modify the current policy. Yes, you can unload the policy into a bunch of members in a PDS, but the individual members are stored as hex code and are not 'readable' with IEH-EYEBALL, so that isn't a solution for my enquiry. I've scanned the cbttape site, and tried googling with various search arguments, but nothing makes itself immediately obvious. Any suggestions gratefully received... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour
Re: WLM in batch?
On Thu, 20 Nov 2014 11:41:00 +, Martin Packer wrote: I'm not a WLM developer. I'm hoping someone who is will answer that point. If not we'll have to raise a requirement. If you're raising a requirement, ask them why the hell it was architected like that in the first place. No doubt the answer will be Broken-As-Designed. There has to be so much scope for improvement - straight xml would be fine; at least we could write stuff to massage it ourselves easily. Shane ... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: WLM in batch?
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Shane Ginnane ibm-m...@tpg.com.au wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2014 11:41:00 +, Martin Packer wrote: I'm not a WLM developer. I'm hoping someone who is will answer that point. If not we'll have to raise a requirement. If you're raising a requirement, ask them why the hell it was architected like that in the first place. No doubt the answer will be Broken-As-Designed. There has to be so much scope for improvement - straight xml would be fine; at least we could write stuff to massage it ourselves easily. Why? Because somebody thought that using ISPF would make it better. Likely because, at the time, all Windows admins knew was point'n'click (curious that current Windows servers have a CLI for configuration and it is recommended instead of the GUI). IBM wants z/OS to be friendly. I love the IODF versus old-style SYSGEN. But I don't really much care for the HCD application (don't have HCM). I would prefer a complete source code based system where I have a configuration deck which I could compile in batch to create a complete IODF / IOCDS. I'm not holding my breath. z/OSMF is the way IBM is going because the money people in the most companies today don't seem to want experts, they want cheap labor. Like most of today's people who vote good enough instead of excellent with their wallets. Shane ... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- The temperature of the aqueous content of an unremittingly ogled culinary vessel will not achieve 100 degrees on the Celsius scale. 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: WLM in batch?
(Reposting to the list server.) A while back, when it became obvious that we needed a way to prime a WLM policy for new systems, SYS1.SAMPLIB(IWMINSTL) was born. Maybe you'll find the IWMARIDU program useful in this context, and maybe not...if I recall correctly it uses an ISPF table. (I actually helped work on this a long time ago...I've just forgotten the details, I'm afraid.) johnc.e...@gmail.com (John Compton) wrote: Currently, the only way I know of handling WLM policy changes is though the ISPF dialogs, screens, etc., that sit behind IWMARIN0. That's all very well, but beyond the NOTES function (and/or in-house change control documentation), there is no real possibility of an audit trail. Is there any way of handling WLM policy processing in batch? snip -- John Eells z/OS Technical Marketing IBM Poughkeepsie ee...@us.ibm.com -- John Eells z/OS Technical Marketing 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: WLM in batch?
In cacppn5zv0oxhtyzduualorbk_qupb4iytg8jgkkdhpohbkm...@mail.gmail.com, on 11/20/2014 at 10:49 AM, John Compton johnc.e...@gmail.com said: Any suggestions gratefully received... Write a WLM formatter, assuming that the format is documented. Submit a requirement to IBM, with business case. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html 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: WLM in batch?
In caajsdjh3gvsdewm25tn8qiwudxk+dxjbfbu3jxatpchskzn...@mail.gmail.com, on 11/20/2014 at 07:23 AM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com said: Why? Because somebody thought that using ISPF would make it better. An *option* to use ISPF *does* make it better. However valuable the ISPF panels may be, they don't eliminate the occasional need to automate things. IBM wants z/OS to be friendly. They've turned down a lot of requirements that would have made it friendlier. IBM wants things that will improve their cash flow, possibly at the expense of long term profit. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html 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
