Re: SMP/E Feature?

[Edward Gould]

> On May 10, 2016, at 10:15 AM, Mark Zelden  wrote:
> 
> I never responded / commented on Andrew's post, but since you brought the 
> subject up
> again I will.
> 
> I always use DDDEFs unless some products install / maintenance procedures 
> don't include
> adding DDDEFs and the vendor supplies an SMP/E PROC or JCL with all the DDs 
> in them
> instead.  Even then I may add the DDDEFs depending on how many target and 
> dlibs there
> are.   
> 
> In my original post the example was from a product that contains JES2 exits 
> and is
> of course very sensitive to the the JES2 level and /or IBM maintenance to 
> JES2.  The 
> exits are installed in the product as a usermod and you re-apply the usermod 
> to
> force reassembly after JES2 maintenance is applied.  Since multiple levels of 
> the
> OS are being maintained I "APPLY REDO" pointing to a copy of the SMP/E
> controlled loadlib using the proper level of the JES2 macro library.   It 
> makes little
> sense (at least to me) to run one apply, change the dddef, then run another 
> apply for
> each JES2 level.   It's much easier to keep two copies of the JCL with the 
> SYSLIB
> override in JCL pointing to the correct macro library where I can see it.  
> There is
> no "correct" DDDEF when I'm maintaining two different OS / JES2 levels.
> 
> I actually have several products that I have to deal with this way while 
> maintaining
> multiple OS / JES2 levels.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Mark
> —

Mark:

One comment here. When I do JCL I have 1 PROC (total) for Receive, Apply and 
Accept.
The symbolics in JCL allow for overrides for APPLY & Accept volumes.

There is no second guessing on what you are applying and accepting.

I find with DDEF’s there can be too many incidents of OOPS I didn’t mean to do 
that.

Also with DDEFS there can be too many fingers in the pie and that leads to oops.

Ed

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

Re: ACF2 SMF Record Question

[Brian France]

ACFRPTPW - A report that can be run against the SMF data. This will show 
many different reasons as to why a logon wasn't any good. ie - password 
not matched, invalid syntax, password expired. There is a pre-processor 
utility as generally ACF2 logs to a SMF record ( we're 230 ) and the 
pre-processor breaks them out for the various reports. This can be done 
via the ISPF panels as well as batch jobs. That I know of, and we have 
users timing out here all the time, ACF2 does not cut an entry for that.


On 5/12/2016 2:48 PM, Donald Likens wrote:

I am sure this is not the correct place to ask this question but I hope someone 
can help me (or at least direct me to the correct place to ask this question). 
Note: We are supporting a client with ACF2... We do not have an ACF2 license at 
our shop.

We are assisting a customer in trying to determine why they are getting so many ‘Invalid 
Password\Authority’ ("P") ACF2 SMF records.  It seems like most of these records are 
being written when there is no invalid passwords by the user. It appears after a successful login 
after idle timeout, ACF2 is cutting an ‘Invalid Password\Authority’ ("P") SMF record.  
Can anyone help us to identify a field and values in the SMF record that would allow us to 
distinguish between a true “invalid password” and a false-positive after a user is timed out?

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


--
Brian W. France
Systems Administrator (Mainframe)
Pennsylvania State University
Administrative Information Services - Infrastructure/SYSARC
Rm 25 Shields Bldg., University Park, Pa. 16802
814-863-4739
b...@psu.edu

"To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe."

Carl Sagan

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

ACF2 SMF Record Question

[Donald Likens]

I am sure this is not the correct place to ask this question but I hope someone 
can help me (or at least direct me to the correct place to ask this question). 
Note: We are supporting a client with ACF2... We do not have an ACF2 license at 
our shop.

We are assisting a customer in trying to determine why they are getting so many 
‘Invalid Password\Authority’ ("P") ACF2 SMF records.  It seems like most of 
these records are being written when there is no invalid passwords by the user. 
It appears after a successful login after idle timeout, ACF2 is cutting an 
‘Invalid Password\Authority’ ("P") SMF record.  Can anyone help us to identify 
a field and values in the SMF record that would allow us to distinguish between 
a true “invalid password” and a false-positive after a user is timed out?

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

Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

[Greg Dyck]

On 5/12/2016 10:17 AM, Mark Zelden wrote:

On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:30:03 -0400, Richards, Robert B. 
 wrote:


I do have a follow-up question Is anyone aware of a downside to over 
specifying reserved CPs?


LCCA/PCCA storage.   But the default CBLOC has been VIRTUAL31 since z/OS 1.12.  
Even
if you are still overriding it to below the line it shouldn't be a problem 
unless you are reserving
a large number (FSVO large) and have 24-bit issues already in your common / pvt 
storage.


Not true.  LCCA/PCCA storage is only allocated for a CP when a CP is 
logically online.


The maximum number of CPs is dependent on the value of CVTMAXMP that is 
set when z/OS IPL's.  This value effects the size of many other control 
blocks, including, but not limited to, the LCCAVT and the PCCAVT.  Which 
is why CVTMAXMP can not be increased dynamically.  While over specifying 
reserved CPs does have an impact on storage usage, it is a *minor* 
impact until the CPs are actually brought online to z/OS.  So don't 
worry about over specifying the value.

Greg

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

Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

[Ed Jaffe]

On 5/12/2016 10:17 AM, Mark Zelden wrote:

LCCA/PCCA storage.   But the default CBLOC has been VIRTUAL31 since z/OS 1.12.  
Even
if you are still overriding it to below the line it shouldn't be a problem 
unless you are reserving
a large number (FSVO large) and have 24-bit issues already in your common / pvt 
storage.


Not just virtual; there is also a good deal of real storage wasted if 
too many CPUs are reserved. That's one reason why MVS lowered the 
default DYNCPADD count to 16 starting in z/OS 2.1. Before that, the 
value was _all_ CPUs that could be configured to the LPAR i.e., the max 
supported by z/OS or the number actually on the box, whichever was lower...


--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

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

Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

[Mark Zelden]

On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:30:03 -0400, Richards, Robert B. 
 wrote:

>I do have a follow-up question Is anyone aware of a downside to over 
>specifying reserved CPs? 

LCCA/PCCA storage.   But the default CBLOC has been VIRTUAL31 since z/OS 1.12.  
Even
if you are still overriding it to below the line it shouldn't be a problem 
unless you are reserving
a large number (FSVO large) and have 24-bit issues already in your common / pvt 
storage. 

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: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

[Martin Packer]

This and the post it replies to suggests we might be getting muddied in 
our terminology.

I think the original post was about DEFINING engines, rather than parking 
them or varying them on and offline.

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer,
zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator,
Worldwide Cloud & Systems Performance, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker

Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker

Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): 
https://developer.ibm.com/tv/category/mpt/



From:   "Warren, Cliff" 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   12/05/2016 16:41
Subject:Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 



Although this is not an HMC task I find I can either add or take away a CP 
on an individual LPAR with the following MVS command. 


CF CPU(1),OFFLINE< Puts one CP offline in this case CP #1


CF CPU(2),ONLINE< Puts one CP online in this case CP #2

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
Behalf Of Jon Butler
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 10:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

You can add CPs or memory to an active LPAR, but you can't take either 
away without stopping the LPAR.   You don't want more CPs assigned than 
you (or PR/SM) can use...it's just overhead.  In fact, unused CPs will be 
"parked" on newer CECs when underutilized. 

--
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: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

I’m not sure what the problem is with removing active CPs. At the start of a 
CBU window, extra CPs are made available in the hardware. If a system is newly 
IPLed at that point, it will see all available CPs defined in the Image 
profile. If a system is already running when CBU is activated, additional CPs 
must be configured online by MVS command. 

At the end of a CBU window, an LPAR may be deactivated if desired, or the extra 
CPs may simply be configured offline by MVS command, at which point the OS will 
no longer 'see' the removal of CBU CPs. This is fully dynamic.

There is (only?) one clue in the OS that CBU has been started or stopped. WLM 
issues a message about a capacity change upon either adding or removing CP(s). 
That message should be highlighted in everyone's automation and broadcast in 
some way because it can also occur in the case of a hardware problem. We once 
had an internal cooling problem that caused CPU degradation in the box. We got 
the same WLM message. 

Likewise storage may be configured on or offline dynamically if and only if it 
has been defined at IPL as RECONFIGURABLE.

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

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Jon Butler
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 7:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

You can add CPs or memory to an active LPAR, but you can't take either away 
without stopping the LPAR.   You don't want more CPs assigned than you (or 
PR/SM) can use...it's just overhead.  In fact, unused CPs will be "parked" on 
newer CECs when underutilized


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

Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

[Warren, Cliff]

Although this is not an HMC task I find I can either add or take away a CP on 
an individual LPAR with the following MVS command. 


CF CPU(1),OFFLINE< Puts one CP offline in this case CP #1


CF CPU(2),ONLINE< Puts one CP online in this case CP #2

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Jon Butler
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 10:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

You can add CPs or memory to an active LPAR, but you can't take either away 
without stopping the LPAR.   You don't want more CPs assigned than you (or 
PR/SM) can use...it's just overhead.  In fact, unused CPs will be "parked" on 
newer CECs when underutilized.  

--
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: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

[Jon Butler]

You can add CPs or memory to an active LPAR, but you can't take either away 
without stopping the LPAR.   You don't want more CPs assigned than you (or 
PR/SM) can use...it's just overhead.  In fact, unused CPs will be "parked" on 
newer CECs when underutilized.

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

Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

[Martin Packer]

Decrement would be more complicated, especially if there were work running 
on the supernumary ones.

I learnt "decrement is harder than increment" with PAGEDEL being later 
than PAGEADD. Also with DB2 Buffer Pool Dynamic sizing.

I believe the slightly less than polite term is "evacuation". :-)

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer,
zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator,
Worldwide Cloud & Systems Performance, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker

Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker

Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): 
https://developer.ibm.com/tv/category/mpt/



From:   "Richards, Robert B." 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   12/05/2016 12:21
Subject:Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 



Yes, I meet the requirements. :-)

I found the logical processor add and proved it works as advertised. The 
only surprise was the lack of ability to decrement processors without a 
deactivate. 

Thanks for responding. 

Bob

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
Behalf Of Mark Zelden
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 1:09 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

On Tue, 10 May 2016 16:56:32 -0400, Richards, Robert B. 
 wrote:

>I am in the middle of a CBU test and was wondering if it is possible on 
z/OS yet to dynamically add (config or otherwise) a CP or two to an lpar 
*without* that partition already having any specified as reserved in their 
activation profile. A friend said yes, but I was unable locate how using 
the HMC.
>
>Bob

I didn't see a response to this.   It would be "Logical Processor Add " 
under Operational
Customization for the LPAR, but you need (digging back in memory now) z10 
and
z/OS 1.10.I assume you meet the requirements by now.  :-)

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

--
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: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

[Martin Packer]

Bob, the last refuge of a scoundrel / ignoramous is "control blocks". :-) 
I'd be concerned only if they were below the line. "PCCA" comes to mind 
but I might've just made that up. :-)

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer,
zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator,
Worldwide Cloud & Systems Performance, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker

Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker

Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): 
https://developer.ibm.com/tv/category/mpt/



From:   "Richards, Robert B." 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   12/05/2016 12:30
Subject:Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 



I can assure all that it works to ADD with reserved = 0 and without 
Activate/Deactivate. Once you add with "change running system", you issue 
a CONFIG CPU command and "Voila!", instant  capacity increase. Don't 
forget that I am currently running a CBU test and had the extra physical 
processors available but unassigned to any of the normal activation 
profiles.

I do have a follow-up question Is anyone aware of a downside to over 
specifying reserved CPs?

Bob

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
Behalf Of Christian Borntraeger
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 7:10 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

On 05/12/2016 08:33 AM, Vernooij, CP (ITOPT1) - KLM wrote:
> I am quite sure, at least for the z196, that you can online config CPs 
online, if they have been defined as Reserved. To do so, you must change 
the LPAR profile and de/reactivate the LPAR. So dynamically, in a running 
z/OS: no.
> 
> Kees.

With all newer machines there is a "logical CPU add" that can add CPUs 
even if reserved == 0.
You will be asked if that should happen for the running system, the 
profile or both.

These CPUs appear then as reserved and can be configured on from the 
operating system. At least that works with Linux and a z196 and IFLs, so I 
assume z/OS should be able to do then same.

Christian

--
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: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

[Richards, Robert B.]

I can assure all that it works to ADD with reserved = 0 and without 
Activate/Deactivate. Once you add with "change running system", you issue a 
CONFIG CPU command and "Voila!", instant  capacity increase. Don't forget that 
I am currently running a CBU test and had the extra physical processors 
available but unassigned to any of the normal activation profiles.

I do have a follow-up question Is anyone aware of a downside to over 
specifying reserved CPs?

Bob

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Christian Borntraeger
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 7:10 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

On 05/12/2016 08:33 AM, Vernooij, CP (ITOPT1) - KLM wrote:
> I am quite sure, at least for the z196, that you can online config CPs 
> online, if they have been defined as Reserved. To do so, you must change the 
> LPAR profile and de/reactivate the LPAR. So dynamically, in a running z/OS: 
> no.
> 
> Kees.

With all newer machines there is a "logical CPU add" that can add CPUs even if 
reserved == 0.
You will be asked if that should happen for the running system, the profile or 
both.

These CPUs appear then as reserved and can be configured on from the operating 
system. At least that works with Linux and a z196 and IFLs, so I assume z/OS 
should be able to do then same.

Christian

--
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: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

[Richards, Robert B.]

Yes, I meet the requirements. :-)

I found the logical processor add and proved it works as advertised. The only 
surprise was the lack of ability to decrement processors without a deactivate. 

Thanks for responding. 

Bob

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Mark Zelden
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 1:09 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

On Tue, 10 May 2016 16:56:32 -0400, Richards, Robert B. 
 wrote:

>I am in the middle of a CBU test and was wondering if it is possible on z/OS 
>yet to dynamically add (config or otherwise) a CP or two to an lpar *without* 
>that partition already having any specified as reserved in their activation 
>profile. A friend said yes, but I was unable locate how using the HMC.
>
>Bob

I didn't see a response to this.   It would be "Logical Processor Add " under 
Operational
Customization for the LPAR, but you need (digging back in memory now) z10 and
z/OS 1.10.I assume you meet the requirements by now.  :-)

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

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

Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

[Christian Borntraeger]

On 05/12/2016 08:33 AM, Vernooij, CP (ITOPT1) - KLM wrote:
> I am quite sure, at least for the z196, that you can online config CPs 
> online, if they have been defined as Reserved. To do so, you must change the 
> LPAR profile and de/reactivate the LPAR. So dynamically, in a running z/OS: 
> no.
> 
> Kees.

With all newer machines there is a "logical CPU add" that can add CPUs even if 
reserved == 0.
You will be asked if that should happen for the running system, the profile or 
both.

These CPUs appear then as reserved and can be configured on from the operating 
system. At least
that works with Linux and a z196 and IFLs, so I assume z/OS should be able to 
do then same.

Christian

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

Re: RFE for new SMPP support in zOS

[Timothy Sipples]

Yes, e-mail-to-SMS/MMS is fairly common in the United States among other
places, but it's not common everywhere. For example, it's not available
with Singapore's mobile carriers as far as I know. It's not terribly common
in Europe either. The RESTful interfaces to SMS/MMS message centers are a
better option at this point in time, at least if you're implementing
something new, more global, and/or more reliable (fewer
hops/intermediaries/gateways). But you might also want to send an e-mail in
addition to a carrier text message and/or mobile push message. Or even
trigger an automatic voice call.

As another example, Japan really never hopped on the SMS/MMS bandwagon,
instead jumping straight to mobile handset-based "full" e-mail clients. So
the e-mail path works for them, but there's no e-mail-to-SMS gateway in the
loop.

By the way, please take advantage of the lovely CICS SupportPac CA1Y, just
recently updated:

http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg24033197

This SupportPac is provided "as is," but it's a great little kit
nonetheless. It equips CICS Transaction Server for z/OS with a very
easy-to-consume capability, based on JavaMail, to send e-mails either
asynchronously (recommended) or synchronously. Although not tested, the
same SupportPac includes functions for CICS programs to *retrieve* e-mails
as well, via standard IMAP and POP3 protocols. TLS encryption is supported,
you can generate PDF and other attachments -- loads of wonderful stuff
there, all at no additional charge to those of you with CICS Transaction
Server.

If you don't have a CICS Transaction Server license then you can go grab
JavaMail from here:

https://java.net/projects/javamail/pages/Home

and use it right away on z/OS's JVM in other contexts.


Timothy Sipples
IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM z Systems, AP/GCG/MEA
E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com

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

Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

[Vernooij, CP (ITOPT1) - KLM]

I am quite sure, at least for the z196, that you can online config CPs online, 
if they have been defined as Reserved. To do so, you must change the LPAR 
profile and de/reactivate the LPAR. So dynamically, in a running z/OS: no.

Kees.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Mark Zelden
Sent: 11 May, 2016 19:09
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Dynamic CPU ADD to a z/OS lpar

On Tue, 10 May 2016 16:56:32 -0400, Richards, Robert B. 
 wrote:

>I am in the middle of a CBU test and was wondering if it is possible on z/OS 
>yet to dynamically add (config or otherwise) a CP or two to an lpar *without* 
>that partition already having any specified as reserved in their activation 
>profile. A friend said yes, but I was unable locate how using the HMC.
>
>Bob

I didn't see a response to this.   It would be "Logical Processor Add " under 
Operational
Customization for the LPAR, but you need (digging back in memory now) z10 and
z/OS 1.10.I assume you meet the requirements by now.  :-)

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

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