Re: Logon proc usage

2022-05-24 Thread Bob Bridges
No, he's right. You are, too (except about him being wrong). He said you can't tell what's allowed by looking at the TSO segment, which is true; you look for a profile in the TSOPROC resource class to see what's permitted, which is what I gather you're saying. --- Bob Bridges,

Re: How to keep the response from HSENDCMD batch

2022-05-24 Thread Nobuhiko Furuya
Hi Glenn, Thank you for your information. By the way, why does QUERYSET rexx require more than 20 seconds to complete ? Best regrads, Nobuhiko Furuya(古谷信彦) V-SOL Inc. e-mail:furu...@v-sol.co.jp On 2022/05/20 11:28, Glenn Wilcock wrote: FYI - Here's a link to 8+ hours of video recordings of

Re: OMVS trace buffer mapping

2022-05-24 Thread Michael Oujesky
Due to the complexity of the analysis, why would not IPCS formatting meet your needs? Michael At 08:38 AM 5/24/2022, Pierre Fichaud wrote: I've seen the first 2 already. I looked at the last link. I would like a macro or DSECT(s) that map the OMVS trace buffer. Regards, Pierre.

Re: Logon proc usage

2022-05-24 Thread Radoslaw Skorupka
1. You're wrong. "what is allowed" is described in TSOPROC class. 2. Pity. However feel free to suggest better solution. -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland W dniu 20.05.2022 o 13:12, Seymour J Metz pisze: 1. TSO segments will only tell you what is allowed; you still need SMF to tell how

Re: SDSF & TSS (RACF)

2022-05-24 Thread Larre Shiller
Mark - We use Top Secret as well and had the same issue that you are describing when we initially activated JESSPOOL control. We happen to be using (E)JES instead of SDSF, but essentially we did the same thing that Robert described here--we use an (E)JES exit to alter the RACF call for

Re: SDSF & TSS (RACF)

2022-05-24 Thread Jeremy Nicoll
On Mon, 23 May 2022, at 21:55, Steely.Mark wrote: > Then select the job and receives the following messages: > > TSS7257E Unauthorized Access Level for JESSPOOL > > TSS7257E Unauthorized Access Level for JESSPOOL > > TSS7257E Unauthorized Access Level for JESSPOOL > Leaving aside the

Re: SDSF & TSS (RACF)

2022-05-24 Thread Steely.Mark
Thanks for the link for the output violations - it doesn't appear to work for TSS (Top Secret). -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Robert S. Hansel (RSH) Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 8:16 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SDSF & TSS (RACF)

Re: SDSF & TSS (RACF)

2022-05-24 Thread Rob Scott
I think it is noteworthy to state that activating and implementing the JESSPOOL class (and maybe also OPERCMDS) has implications beyond just SDSF. The profiles for these classes will be checked for other software and user/public tools, for example output archiving and automated operations

Re: OMVS trace buffer mapping

2022-05-24 Thread Pierre Fichaud
I've seen the first 2 already. I looked at the last link. I would like a macro or DSECT(s) that map the OMVS trace buffer. Regards, Pierre. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to

Re: SDSF & TSS (RACF)

2022-05-24 Thread Robert S. Hansel (RSH)
Hi Mark, When a user attempts to select a job, SDSF does an authorization check for each individual SYSOUT DDNAME associated with the job and can generate multiple violations like this. To address this issue, see article " Avoiding Output Browse Violation Messages in SDSF" in the July 2008

Things have changed a bit...

2022-05-24 Thread Jay Maynard
I last wrangled z/OS in any seriousness in the early 2000s, with z/OS 1.6. Things have changed a bit. I got my zD LE system running last night (protip: they're serious when they say only to use Red Hat or Ubuntu; not even Pop!_OS, an Ubuntu derivative, will work), with z/OS 2.4. IBM seems to have