>Alternatively, I suppose you could run without APF-authorization if you have
>your initial program listed in the PPT as requiring a system key, as running
>in a system key will also allow you to switch to supervisor state. On the
>whole, though, running APF-authorized is probably simpler and
Exactly Walt.
As always,
Thank you,
Scott
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 8:51 AM Walt Farrell wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 22:35:23 +, scott Ford wrote:
> >We are using all functions, since we function as what is now being called
> a
> >central site
On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 22:35:23 +, scott Ford wrote:
>We are using all functions, since we function as what is now being called a
>central site administrator.
If you are indeed using _all_ the functions of r_admin (which I suppose is
possible, though it seems unlikely to
Walt,
We are using all functions, since we function as what is now being called a
central site administrator.
My confusion is not the working it is understanding it. I have ADHD so
sometimes I must ask multiple times to grasp a concept.
Peter a sorry but sometimes I must ask more than once..
On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 15:04:49 +, scott Ford wrote:
>Thank you for your reply, I just wanted to make sure I did the pgm call
>correctly before I stuck my neck out.
You haven't described the r_admin functions you're using. At least as of the
z/OS V1.13 documentation no
>There are z/OS Unix analogs of AC(1)..
Didn't you mean to say "there are z/OS Unix analogs of APF authorized
libraries"? AC(1) is the load module attribute part of the game. And this is no
different. It's the APF extended attribute of a load module file which is the
analog of the APF
On 16 September 2017 at 15:43, Blaicher, Christopher Y.
wrote:
> Remember, authorization occurs at the address space level. And once you do
> something to lose authorization, it is gone for good.
At the job-step task level, surely.
Tony H.
Peter,
Thank you for your reply, I just wanted to make sure I did the pgm call
correctly before
I stuck my neck out.
Respectfully,
Scott
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 9:17 AM Peter Relson wrote:
> The rule is simple. I do not understand why this topic continues to come
> up. It
The rule is simple. I do not understand why this topic continues to come
up. It has been discussed many times.
AC(1) is relevant for the EXEC PGM= Attach only. Otherwise it is ignored.
And it applies when the concatenation is APF-authorized only.
A concatenation is APF-authorized when all of
Trillium Software is now a part of Syncsort.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of scott Ford
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2017 2:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: STC - APF - confusion
All,
I have a COBOL written STC
All,
I have a COBOL written STC that is single thread socket server. It receives
messages that are
RACF commands and then calls a module which calls r_ admin. My question is
this,
when I initially started working with this code , it was AC (1) , I didn't
think anything about it.
But we are in the
11 matches
Mail list logo