Re: listcat with only dsn

[Mark Zelden]

using "NAME" produces two lines (one that includes that catalog).  Once you 
know that catalog
adding "CAT(blahblah)" to the LISTCAT will give one line per dataset name.

A better option is my version of IGGCSI00 - CATSRCH.  It can be used with a 
panel or
just by itself -"TSO CATSRCH dsn.pattern.** .   However, the output goes in 
a browse
temp data set so you have to use TSO ISRDDN (or the DDLIST line command) to 
edit the data set
or save it some place from there.

The best option may be to use this simple CLIST (not on my web site / CBT).  
You can
pass the DSN level to it (default is your userid).  I call it "DSLISTSV".  It 
will save the list
as a single data set per line in "userid.SAVE.DATASETS".  

Examples:

TSO %DSLISTSV 
TSO %DSLISTSV L(SYS1.L*)



PROC 0 L(&SYSUID)  G(SAVE)   
 /* */   
 /* Quick ISPF save of data set names. This is much quicker */   
 /* than using OPT 3.4, because it does not do an obtain*/   
 /* for each data set in the list because of STATS(NO). */   
 /* The dsn created will be USERID.SAVE.DATASETS*/   
 /* */   
 ISPEXEC CONTROL ERRORS RETURN   
 ISPEXEC LMDINIT LISTID(LISTID)  LEVEL(&L)   
 ISPEXEC LMDLIST LISTID(&LISTID) OPTION(SAVE) STATS(NO) GROUP(&G)
 WRITE COMPLETE!! RETURN CODE WAS &LASTCC
 ISPEXEC LMDFREE LISTID(&LISTID) 


Should I add this to my CBT file?  If I do, I would also add "MEMLISTSV":


/* rexx */ 
/* Quick ISPF save of member stats. */ 
ARG DS G   
/* DS is the data set name to get the stats from.   */ 
/* G is the middle qualifer of the saved data set   */ 
/* The saved data set name will be userid.g.MEMBERS */ 
If G = '' then G = 'STATS' 
If DS = '' then DS = 'MPSYS3.USZCZT0.PRINT'
Address ISPEXEC
 "CONTROL ERRORS RETURN"   
 "LMINIT DATAID(STATID)  DATASET('"DS"')"  
 If RC = 0 then do 
   "LMOPEN DATAID("STATID")"   
   "LMMLIST DATAID("STATID") OPTION(SAVE) STATS(YES) GROUP("G")"   
 End   
 "LMFREE DATAID("STATID")" 




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/




On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 09:59:35 -0700, Lizette Koehler  
wrote:

>If you are not keen on coding IGGCSI00,  I might suggest going to 
>http://mzelden.com/mvsutil.html
>
>Find the TSOV function Mark wrote.
>
>Then you could do TSO TSOV LISTC LEVEL('dsnHLQ') name
>
>This would put the results in a sequential dataset for editing.
>
>There are also functions on cbttape.org for this type of work as well
>
>Or you can go into ISMF Option 1 DATASETS and save it to a TSO Profile entry 
>or Print the results
>
>
>
>Lizette
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
>> Elaine Beal
>> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2019 7:15 AM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: listcat with only dsn
>> 
>> I need to generate a listcat with only the dsn. like in 3.4 but I want it in
>> a dataset with ONLY the dsn.
>> TSO SAVE and IDCAMS produce additional lines.
>> Any recommendations?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Elaine
>> 
>> --
>> 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: controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

[Charles Mills]

Of course! You use the best available tool for the job.

Now yes, "best" involves many factors including whether there is more than one 
person in the shop who can maintain the code.

But this just sounds like resistance to change. I have always that many in this 
industry ironically tended to be Luddites. I work with a professional, capable, 
experienced assembler programmer who does not use the "new" (read "Z" as in 
2000) machine instructions. He is not exactly opposed to them, he just never 
uses them. He gets the advantage of the relative jump, but is not quite 
comfortable coding one.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of John McKown
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2019 7:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

This is just for discussion. I am seemingly one of few z/OS sysprogs (et
al.) who view UNIX services as just another set of tools in the box, along
with the "legacy" z/OS tools. E.g. I am just as willing to use "awk" for
something as REXX. But I've noticed that many, my manager included, who
basically avoid any programming other than REXX, and then only "TSO" REXX.
Even when I use UNIX for an "ad hoc" report for myself, my manager is
"unhappy" with it and asks why I don't just use REXX. Why don't I? Well,
for one thing, I like and use Extended Regular Expressions. Oh, wait, those
are evil too. It's just mildly irritating to be shackled to "how I do it".
It's the same attitude that the CIO has -- he doesn't understand z/OS,
doesn't want to learn z/OS, and so z/OS must be eliminated for efficiency
reasons.

I am so glad that my time is short. I don't know how short, but I'm sure
that the new company will RIF me in less than 2 years. Because it's
efficient and cost effective.

-- 
Money is the root of all evil.
Evil is the root of all money.
With that in mind, money is made by the government ...


Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
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: controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

[scott Ford]

John,

A very familiar tune. After reading through this thread, it illustrates the
level on ignorance that exists in some companies. I have been seeing unless
it paid for we don’t do it .

Scott

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 2:04 PM Tom Marchant <
000a2a8c2020-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:42:16 +, Seymour J Metz  wrote:
>
> >> Even when I use UNIX for an "ad hoc" report for myself, my manager is
> >> "unhappy" with it and asks why I don't just use REXX.
> >
> >A perfect example of micromanagement, straight out of Dilbert (which is
> autobiographical, IMHO.)
>
> Yes.
> It takes a lot more time to pound a nail with a screwdriver.
> And trying to drive in a screw with a hammer doesn't do nearly as nice a
> job.
>
> --
> Tom Marchant
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
-- 
Scott Ford
IDMWORKS
z/OS Development

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

Re: WTO for message that will require explicit deletion?

[Tom Marchant]

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:49:45 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:

>Thanks everyone for your input. Sorry for the delays in responding -- I was 
>OOO for a day plus.
>
>I am going to re-phrase this question and post it again. I am going to drop up 
>one level to the "real" problem to be solved.
>
>I *suspect* that my problem with DESC=3 not behaving exactly as I hoped may be 
>that it is coming from a batch program, and at end of step MVS effectively 
>DOM's the message.

That may be. But it seems you also expect that the message will be at the 
bottom of the log display in SDSF along with the WTOR messages, and I'm pretty 
sure that they are not handled that way.

-- 
Tom Marchant

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

Re: WTO for message that will require explicit deletion?

[Charles Mills]

Thanks everyone for your input. Sorry for the delays in responding -- I was OOO 
for a day plus.

I am going to re-phrase this question and post it again. I am going to drop up 
one level to the "real" problem to be solved.

I *suspect* that my problem with DESC=3 not behaving exactly as I hoped may be 
that it is coming from a batch program, and at end of step MVS effectively 
DOM's the message. I am going to -- just as an experiment -- stick a one minute 
delay into the program between the WTO and the return to MVS to see how the 
message behaves in that case.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Tom Marchant
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2019 8:10 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WTO for message that will require explicit deletion?

On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 16:07:29 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:

>My "console" experience is with SDSF LOG, not a real console, so my perception 
>of where messages hang is a little skewed I guess.

That is not a console at all, and doesn't behave like one. Messages 
that are not deletable (if the console is in RD mode), including WTOR 
messages, roll up to the top but do not roll off the top when other 
messages are issued. In SDSF outstanding reply messages are displayed 
at the bottom of the the LOG display, in addition to their original 
location. If I remember correctly non-deletable messages are flagged, 
IIRC with an "*". before the message.

As Dave alluded to, a console lines are a very limited finite resource 
that has not significantly increased in capacity over the years. Even 
back in the early 80's many shops ran their consoles in roll mode 
rather than roll-deletable mode because too many programs issued 
either WTOR messages or non-deletable messages. Even way back then, 
when running a console in RD mode could cause the console to fill up 
with non-deletable messages and no new messages could be issued to 
that terminal, whether or not the new message is deletable.

Indeed, when I started in this business in 1970 as a Cobol 
application programmer running  on MVT with three active regions, 
the rule that DISPLAY UPON CONSOLE was not to be used unless it was 
for an explicitly approved purpose, so as not to clutter the console

I never worked as an operator, but in the late 70's to the mid 80's 
I worked as an Amdahl Field SE and would sometimes be at a console. 
Sometimes I would set the console in RD mode just to see what the 
message traffic looked like, and was occasionally surprised with 
how quickly the console would fill up with non-deletable messages. 
In those days it was unusual to have much more than 100 address 
spaces active.

On the quite small LPAR that I am working at right now, there are 3
25 started tasks active and 512 total address spaces. At the moment, 
there are 11 WTOR messages outstanding. That in itself is half of a 
24 x 80 3270 display (there are two lines for command input). Add s
ome products that think that it is important to issue messages that 
stick on the console, and the console quickly becomes unusable in 
RD mode unless messages are explicitly deleted. In my opinion, the 
use of console messages, especially non-deletable messages, should 
be kept at a minimum.

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
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: Mapping macro for RCWs?

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 22:38:13 +, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
> ...
>I did also mean to say to Dave that I have always seen these prefix fields 
>referred to as Record or Block *Descriptor* Words, not *Control* Words., but 
>either or both could be considered appropriate.
> 
For RECFM=VBS, I've also seen "Segment Descriptor Word".

-- gil

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

Re: Mapping macro for RCWs?

[Dave Cole]

Thanks Peter. That pretty much confirms the negative. Oh well. Dave





At 6/23/2019 06:38 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
The end of that DFSMS section on "Variable-Length Record Formats" 
does cover the VBS differences and bit settings and capabilities.

But again, I'm not aware of any existing mapping macro from IBM.
I did also mean to say to Dave that I have always seen these prefix 
fields referred to as Record or Block *Descriptor* Words, not 
*Control* Words., but either or both could be considered appropriate.

Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On 
Behalf Of Binyamin Dissen

Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2019 10:46 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Mapping macro for RCWs?
Also look up spanned records (VBS)
On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 14:14:39 + "Farley, Peter x23353"
 wrote:
:>The only detailed description I've ever seen for BDW/RDW fields 
is in the "DFSMS Using Data Sets" manual, chapter 20, 
"Variable-Length Record Formats", pp 306-311.

:>
:>If there is a mapping macro I've never seen it.
:>
:>Peter
:>
:>-Original Message-
:>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  
On Behalf Of Dave Cole

:>Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2019 5:26 AM
:>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
:>Subject: Mapping macro for RCWs?
:>
:>It there a formal IBM mapping macro for RECFM=V type "Record 
Control Words"?

--
This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of 
the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and 
confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended 
recipient or an authorized representative of the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail 
and delete the message and any attachments from your system.

--
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: controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

[Tom Marchant]

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:42:16 +, Seymour J Metz  wrote:

>> Even when I use UNIX for an "ad hoc" report for myself, my manager is
>> "unhappy" with it and asks why I don't just use REXX.
>
>A perfect example of micromanagement, straight out of Dilbert (which is 
>autobiographical, IMHO.)

Yes.
It takes a lot more time to pound a nail with a screwdriver.
And trying to drive in a screw with a hammer doesn't do nearly as nice a job.

-- 
Tom Marchant

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

Re: Dataset encryption question

[Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw]

Using RACF multi-level security will enable you to do this.
See Chapter 5 of the RACF Security Administrators manual, SA23-2289-30.

Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw | Security Lead | RSM Partners Ltd  

Web:  www.rsmpartners.com
‘Dance like no one is watching. Encrypt like everyone is.’

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Mark Jacobs
Sent: 28 June 2019 12:39
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [IBM-MAIN] Dataset encryption question

Outside of using dataset conditional access rules is there anyway to prevent 
someone from copying encrypted dataset HLQ1.data to HLQ2.data? They have access 
rights to both HLQ's and the encryption key.

Mark Jacobs

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&search=markjac...@protonmail.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: Dataset encryption question

[Seymour J Metz]

Actually, with MLS authorized personnel can write down. That's necessary in 
order to provide unclassified summaries of classified data.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
John McKown 
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2019 9:05 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Dataset encryption question

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 6:39 AM Mark Jacobs <
0224d287a4b1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> Outside of using dataset conditional access rules is there anyway to
> prevent someone from copying encrypted dataset HLQ1.data to HLQ2.data? They
> have access rights to both HLQ's and the encryption key.
>

Multi Level Security? Or maybe Security Labels? I don't really know
anything except that these things exist. And that, at least with MLS, you
cannot "write down", but you can "write up". I.e. you cannot copy from high
security to low, but under the proper conditions you can copy from low to
high./



>
> Mark Jacobs
>
> Sent from 
> [ProtonMail](https://secure-web.cisco.com/1txoMZpSb-ahi31O6HAWes_jGBZbERambAQnttY2AAdHLcdXuKjalU7qn-fWMqtX65wNjjW4zmxkee3yKgE5kHJiqQN27Qk9uW_Jt6xnv7b5njJLcN6y0w1V4KUK_OFvAMtbZpzG4Pr_XZNjMM2pKhoA5oxJBRGsD0U_Zm2jsmJTW_alztQlPBK9QVHaf-iSvTvV_amELiVNGws8HrNQm5ck0wlYh1Pth3Q32hzBwhI4LosVizwBVpfAa0f784Se_sOie4YiklXMxeYGc_xQ-DD8fCJVcHLJ1j6ezivSD4dZBF5OowLtzVz9fhNt63pHENpo3cre7wsj1A11It-Np1pFHEa0d7eSlOyyo7LPFaBWKUglxz621Yso8IhjEydSWN3kXyPt-KL68hEqi5Cit4BPTAU7DIqz2DDYS6dcltgnLHkyw3rUbwnPTUda4UPIL/https%3A%2F%2Fprotonmail.com),
>  Swiss-based encrypted
> email.
>
> GPG Public Key -
> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1Mp0E3a5FcJFPDOMRfelxhA9iqDxiGRbUzi-eGWfJ1npi9ldx-SWHr3ajQQrv55KgkNDwdRbRvR2BwgpdX-IICeH5L0OLB2ykNEsW2NKR4a4XtGq0jrososfhCEiiAay3xkSHUGdFeiC-htw12j7_RegP0_Fng6nZtytXtA0hArTTvMrPPT4qZy5bYqc7iIXwNnI5SBwf4MtFmP_9jiD4EomEuwljmiIbnph-eWbYE1VoI9GjKO18EX5cUUkJl0RXdHvyg8U8lB3svWCUVrMwbrrXegEo9vrMVQ5lDdr-JcUOblyMnhJzwEHbVHTZXpH1SrnWp2MVOya0ezsKztwLGvbR4fk7kVplXbv1O9Ktr0DeH6wkHrvt6kIDaLf3s7CMEbGX4HD7Vb6G5dihUJ7Fm1yZusBylF8aAtdWexzX_bJyXd_9R89weAiCkRicE1NE/https%3A%2F%2Fapi.protonmail.ch%2Fpks%2Flookup%3Fop%3Dget%26search%3Dmarkjacobs%40protonmail.com
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>


--
Money is the root of all evil.
Evil is the root of all money.
With that in mind, money is made by the government ...


Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
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: controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

[Seymour J Metz]

You have to carve the bird at the joints. When the only too in your toolbox is  
pipe, everything looks like a filter.

REXX is a wonderful language for some purposes, but there are things that it 
does not do well. Does your management really want you to use REXX instead of 
PL/I or SAS to analyze your RMF data?

> Even when I use UNIX for an "ad hoc" report for myself, my manager is
> "unhappy" with it and asks why I don't just use REXX.

A perfect example of micromanagement, straight out of Dilbert (which is 
autobiographical, IMHO.)


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
John McKown 
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2019 10:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

This is just for discussion. I am seemingly one of few z/OS sysprogs (et
al.) who view UNIX services as just another set of tools in the box, along
with the "legacy" z/OS tools. E.g. I am just as willing to use "awk" for
something as REXX. But I've noticed that many, my manager included, who
basically avoid any programming other than REXX, and then only "TSO" REXX.
Even when I use UNIX for an "ad hoc" report for myself, my manager is
"unhappy" with it and asks why I don't just use REXX. Why don't I? Well,
for one thing, I like and use Extended Regular Expressions. Oh, wait, those
are evil too. It's just mildly irritating to be shackled to "how I do it".
It's the same attitude that the CIO has -- he doesn't understand z/OS,
doesn't want to learn z/OS, and so z/OS must be eliminated for efficiency
reasons.

I am so glad that my time is short. I don't know how short, but I'm sure
that the new company will RIF me in less than 2 years. Because it's
efficient and cost effective.

--
Money is the root of all evil.
Evil is the root of all money.
With that in mind, money is made by the government ...


Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
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: controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

[Seymour J Metz]

Management by inertia. How well does your manager knw REXX (I have my 
suspicions.)?

FWIW, I don't care for Perl syntax but it's one of the languages I use at home. 
Why? Regexen are too powerful to ignore and CPAN maintains an awesome package 
library.

A programmer with only one language is like a bird with only one wing.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Pew, Curtis G 
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2019 11:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

On Jun 28, 2019, at 9:27 AM, John McKown 
mailto:john.archie.mck...@gmail.com>> wrote:

This is just for discussion. I am seemingly one of few z/OS sysprogs (et
al.) who view UNIX services as just another set of tools in the box, along
with the "legacy" z/OS tools. E.g. I am just as willing to use "awk" for
something as REXX. But I've noticed that many, my manager included, who
basically avoid any programming other than REXX, and then only "TSO" REXX.
Even when I use UNIX for an "ad hoc" report for myself, my manager is
"unhappy" with it and asks why I don't just use REXX. Why don't I? Well,
for one thing, I like and use Extended Regular Expressions. Oh, wait, those
are evil too. It's just mildly irritating to be shackled to "how I do it".
It's the same attitude that the CIO has -- he doesn't understand z/OS,
doesn't want to learn z/OS, and so z/OS must be eliminated for efficiency
reasons.


Well, I’m with you on using Unix tools wherever appropriate. I’m currently 
moving a bunch of 30+ year old assembler code to Unix directories so I can use 
git to manage it.

I’m fortunate that the management that was in place when I was hired here 
explicitly looked for candidates that were willing to learn new things, and 
despite the efforts of subsequent generations of management that ethos hasn’t 
completely disappeared.


--
Pew, Curtis G
curtis@austin.utexas.edu






--
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: controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

[Seymour J Metz]

> In the late 1960s, 

That mens that ISYS/IBJOB was available, hence Fortran IV.

> FORTRAN II on a 7090.  

Was that a leftover from the 1950s?

> On the 3600, I began using FORTRAN IV facilities.  My immediate
supervisor frowned

Why, when it was also available on the 7090?

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2019 11:47 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 09:27:28 -0500, John McKown wrote:

>This is just for discussion. I am seemingly one of few z/OS sysprogs (et
>al.) who view UNIX services as just another set of tools in the box, along
>with the "legacy" z/OS tools. E.g. I am just as willing to use "awk" for
>something as REXX. But I've noticed that many, my manager included, who
>basically avoid any programming other than REXX, and then only "TSO" REXX.
>Even when I use UNIX for an "ad hoc" report for myself, my manager is
>"unhappy" with it and asks why I don't just use REXX. Why don't I? Well,
>for one thing, I like and use Extended Regular Expressions. Oh, wait, those
>are evil too. It's just mildly irritating to be shackled to "how I do it".
>It's the same attitude that the CIO has -- he doesn't understand z/OS,
>doesn't want to learn z/OS, and so z/OS must be eliminated for efficiency
>reasons.
>
o There's some argument from the weight of the toolbox you and your
  co-workers must tote around.

o Portability?  In the broad view, nowadays Legacy OS is more a obstacle
  than an aid to portability.

In the late 1960s, our research project had been using FORTRAN II on
a 7090.  We switched to a CDC 3600 for economic reasons.  (Partly
fabricated; our Principal Investigator had political connections from the
Manhattan Project and was quite good at shopping around for the
cheapest computer time she could cajole from outside agencies.)

On the 3600, I began using FORTRAN IV facilities.  My immediate
supervisor frowned when he saw "IF (boolean-expression) ...",
arguing portability.  I perceive his reaction as largely future shock.

-- 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: controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 09:27:28 -0500, John McKown wrote:

>This is just for discussion. I am seemingly one of few z/OS sysprogs (et
>al.) who view UNIX services as just another set of tools in the box, along
>with the "legacy" z/OS tools. E.g. I am just as willing to use "awk" for
>something as REXX. But I've noticed that many, my manager included, who
>basically avoid any programming other than REXX, and then only "TSO" REXX.
>Even when I use UNIX for an "ad hoc" report for myself, my manager is
>"unhappy" with it and asks why I don't just use REXX. Why don't I? Well,
>for one thing, I like and use Extended Regular Expressions. Oh, wait, those
>are evil too. It's just mildly irritating to be shackled to "how I do it".
>It's the same attitude that the CIO has -- he doesn't understand z/OS,
>doesn't want to learn z/OS, and so z/OS must be eliminated for efficiency
>reasons.
> 
o There's some argument from the weight of the toolbox you and your
  co-workers must tote around.

o Portability?  In the broad view, nowadays Legacy OS is more a obstacle
  than an aid to portability.

In the late 1960s, our research project had been using FORTRAN II on
a 7090.  We switched to a CDC 3600 for economic reasons.  (Partly
fabricated; our Principal Investigator had political connections from the
Manhattan Project and was quite good at shopping around for the
cheapest computer time she could cajole from outside agencies.)

On the 3600, I began using FORTRAN IV facilities.  My immediate
supervisor frowned when he saw "IF (boolean-expression) ...",
arguing portability.  I perceive his reaction as largely future shock.

-- gil

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

Re: controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

[Tom Marchant]

For a manager to insist that every program should be written in ReXX is a 
little like a conductor insisting that everyone in the orchestra should be 
playing a trombone.

-- 
Tom Marchant

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 09:27:28 -0500, John McKown wrote:

>This is just for discussion. I am seemingly one of few z/OS sysprogs (et
>al.) who view UNIX services as just another set of tools in the box, along
>with the "legacy" z/OS tools. E.g. I am just as willing to use "awk" for
>something as REXX. But I've noticed that many, my manager included, who
>basically avoid any programming other than REXX, and then only "TSO" REXX.
>Even when I use UNIX for an "ad hoc" report for myself, my manager is
>"unhappy" with it and asks why I don't just use REXX. Why don't I? Well,
>for one thing, I like and use Extended Regular Expressions. Oh, wait, those
>are evil too. It's just mildly irritating to be shackled to "how I do it".
>It's the same attitude that the CIO has -- he doesn't understand z/OS,
>doesn't want to learn z/OS, and so z/OS must be eliminated for efficiency
>reasons.
>
>I am so glad that my time is short. I don't know how short, but I'm sure
>that the new company will RIF me in less than 2 years. Because it's
>efficient and cost effective.
>
>--
>Money is the root of all evil.
>Evil is the root of all money.
>With that in mind, money is made by the government ...
>
>
>Maranatha! <><
>John McKown
>
>--
>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: [External] controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

[Pommier, Rex]

John,

There is nothing "efficient and cost effective" in eliminating brain trust 
material and people who are willing/able to dig in and use the tools available. 
 I've seen firsthand (as I'm sure, many on this list) the short term "gain" and 
long term crippling of a company by doing just that - eliminating the 
experience in favor of button pushers that cost a few bucks an hour less, or 
expecting the experience to train their replacements in 2 weeks or a month.  
Stupidity from the top due to "management by airline magazine".  

Rex 

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
John McKown
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2019 9:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External] controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

This is just for discussion. I am seemingly one of few z/OS sysprogs (et
al.) who view UNIX services as just another set of tools in the box, along with 
the "legacy" z/OS tools. E.g. I am just as willing to use "awk" for something 
as REXX. But I've noticed that many, my manager included, who basically avoid 
any programming other than REXX, and then only "TSO" REXX.
Even when I use UNIX for an "ad hoc" report for myself, my manager is "unhappy" 
with it and asks why I don't just use REXX. Why don't I? Well, for one thing, I 
like and use Extended Regular Expressions. Oh, wait, those are evil too. It's 
just mildly irritating to be shackled to "how I do it".
It's the same attitude that the CIO has -- he doesn't understand z/OS, doesn't 
want to learn z/OS, and so z/OS must be eliminated for efficiency reasons.

I am so glad that my time is short. I don't know how short, but I'm sure that 
the new company will RIF me in less than 2 years. Because it's efficient and 
cost effective.

--
Money is the root of all evil.
Evil is the root of all money.
With that in mind, money is made by the government ...


Maranatha! <><
John McKown

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


The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from 
disclosure and may be legally privileged.  If the reader of this message is not 
the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this 
message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, 
distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it, 
is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this 
message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard 
copy format.  Thank you.


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

Re: controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

[Pew, Curtis G]

On Jun 28, 2019, at 9:27 AM, John McKown 
mailto:john.archie.mck...@gmail.com>> wrote:

This is just for discussion. I am seemingly one of few z/OS sysprogs (et
al.) who view UNIX services as just another set of tools in the box, along
with the "legacy" z/OS tools. E.g. I am just as willing to use "awk" for
something as REXX. But I've noticed that many, my manager included, who
basically avoid any programming other than REXX, and then only "TSO" REXX.
Even when I use UNIX for an "ad hoc" report for myself, my manager is
"unhappy" with it and asks why I don't just use REXX. Why don't I? Well,
for one thing, I like and use Extended Regular Expressions. Oh, wait, those
are evil too. It's just mildly irritating to be shackled to "how I do it".
It's the same attitude that the CIO has -- he doesn't understand z/OS,
doesn't want to learn z/OS, and so z/OS must be eliminated for efficiency
reasons.


Well, I’m with you on using Unix tools wherever appropriate. I’m currently 
moving a bunch of 30+ year old assembler code to Unix directories so I can use 
git to manage it.

I’m fortunate that the management that was in place when I was hired here 
explicitly looked for candidates that were willing to learn new things, and 
despite the efforts of subsequent generations of management that ethos hasn’t 
completely disappeared.


--
Pew, Curtis G
curtis@austin.utexas.edu






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

Re: LOAD/LINK exit

[Ed Jaffe]

On 6/28/2019 4:29 AM, Peter Relson wrote:

It has nothing to do with "knowing" anything. It has to do with the
environment in which the code calling the exit runs, and avoiding
crippling the system by doing something differently that would likely have
horrendous performance characteristcs..


It is indeed a very difficult/restrictive exit environment due to the 
local lock being held at entry! :-\


But... thank you, Thank You, THANK YOU for providing it! It has been 
truly "life altering" for one of our products!



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



This e-mail message, including any attachments, appended messages and the
information contained therein, is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient or have otherwise
received this email message in error, any use, dissemination, distribution,
review, storage or copying of this e-mail message and the information
contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies
of this email message and do not otherwise utilize or retain this email
message or any or all of the information contained therein. Although this
email message and any attachments or appended messages are believed to be
free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into
which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient
to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the
sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its opening or use.

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

controversy? Using _any_ tool or only _specific_ tools?

[John McKown]

This is just for discussion. I am seemingly one of few z/OS sysprogs (et
al.) who view UNIX services as just another set of tools in the box, along
with the "legacy" z/OS tools. E.g. I am just as willing to use "awk" for
something as REXX. But I've noticed that many, my manager included, who
basically avoid any programming other than REXX, and then only "TSO" REXX.
Even when I use UNIX for an "ad hoc" report for myself, my manager is
"unhappy" with it and asks why I don't just use REXX. Why don't I? Well,
for one thing, I like and use Extended Regular Expressions. Oh, wait, those
are evil too. It's just mildly irritating to be shackled to "how I do it".
It's the same attitude that the CIO has -- he doesn't understand z/OS,
doesn't want to learn z/OS, and so z/OS must be eliminated for efficiency
reasons.

I am so glad that my time is short. I don't know how short, but I'm sure
that the new company will RIF me in less than 2 years. Because it's
efficient and cost effective.

-- 
Money is the root of all evil.
Evil is the root of all money.
With that in mind, money is made by the government ...


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: listcat with only dsn

[Lizette Koehler]

One last thought

Depending on what you are going to list

Option 3.4 can do a good job.

When the list is presented, you can issue the SAVE command

SAVE without any thing else will place the listing in an ISPF dataset (USE the 
PF1 HELP Key to see where it goes)

Or you can use

SAVE MYLIST

Then look for TSOID.MYLIST.DATASETS

The dataset will contain one line per dataset.  If the dataset is on DASD it 
will list its attributes.

Lizette



> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
> Steve Smith
> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2019 11:26 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: listcat with only dsn
> 
> In TSO at least, LISTCAT will produce one line per dataset if you add the CAT
> parameter.
> 
> For anything more than a one-time thing, Lionel's suggestion is not much work
> or difficult.  That sample is REXX.
> 
> sas
> 
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 1:39 PM Elaine Beal  wrote:
> 
> > Thanks all for the options.
> > Elaine
> >
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
> > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >
> 
> 
> --
> sas
> 
> --
> 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: LOAD/LINK exit

[Thomas David Rivers]

Peter Relson wrote:



I suppose there might be security concerns around knowing what gets 
fetched?



It has nothing to do with "knowing" anything. It has to do with the 
environment in which the code calling the exit runs, and avoiding 
crippling the system by doing something differently that would likely have 
horrendous performance characteristcs..


Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design


 


Oh - the  BPX ptrace facility provides this function, there
is a ptrace event when another module is loaded...

And - that facility does not require any special priviledge (you're not
in supervisor-state just to use BPX ptrace.)

Does that mean performance is not an issue in that case?

It might be nice to have a similar facility for monitoring/debugging
that didn't require supervisor state and also didn't cause a image
to be dub'd...

 - Dave R. -


--
riv...@dignus.comWork: (919) 676-0847
Get your mainframe programming tools at http://www.dignus.com

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

Re: Dataset encryption question

[Jousma, David]

No, and is one of the "problems or challenges" if you will with dataset 
encryption.An enterprise goes to the significan effort to do data at rest 
encryption, yet anyone that has legitimate READ access to the data can be 
sloppy, and re-create the exposure just by copying the data to another name.   
It would have been nice if there were some additional controls built-in that 
would enforce some sort of encryption "inheritance" requirements when using 
standard copy utilities that would disallow a copy from encrypted to 
unencrypted.

At my shop, and probably true at many others, the various application teams 
have READ access to much of the production data to be able to diagnose problems 
with their applications.Sadly this leads to laziness on their part, copying 
prod data to test, to do their application testing.   The answer is to put up a 
wall, and not allow that.   We've been trying to get to that point, but the 
PHB's of those area's dig their heels in.

We don’t have a good answer yet.  We are not yet doing dataset encryption as 
our IS department is looking at KMF infrastructure like EKMF or the like.   The 
administration overhead of managing the plethora of keys is going increase 
exponentially, and I'm afraid that in the process, there will be a "key 
mishap", and whatever data was encrypted with that key will be lost forever.   
That the balance that needs to be struck between "one key covering everything", 
or "one key per dataset", or "one per application", etc.

_
Dave Jousma
AVP | Manager, Systems Engineering  

Fifth Third Bank  |  1830 East Paris Ave, SE  |  MD RSCB2H  |  Grand Rapids, MI 
49546
616.653.8429  |  fax: 616.653.2717



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Mark Jacobs
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2019 7:39 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Dataset encryption question

**CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL**

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

Outside of using dataset conditional access rules is there anyway to prevent 
someone from copying encrypted dataset HLQ1.data to HLQ2.data? They have access 
rights to both HLQ's and the encryption key.

Mark Jacobs

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://protect2.fireeye.com/url?k=3440c8f7-681c3cf8-3440e26f-0cc47a33347c-879d4a15700b3947&u=https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&search=markjac...@protonmail.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: Dataset encryption question

[John McKown]

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 6:39 AM Mark Jacobs <
0224d287a4b1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> Outside of using dataset conditional access rules is there anyway to
> prevent someone from copying encrypted dataset HLQ1.data to HLQ2.data? They
> have access rights to both HLQ's and the encryption key.
>

Multi Level Security? Or maybe Security Labels? I don't really know
anything except that these things exist. And that, at least with MLS, you
cannot "write down", but you can "write up". I.e. you cannot copy from high
security to low, but under the proper conditions you can copy from low to
high./



>
> Mark Jacobs
>
> Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted
> email.
>
> GPG Public Key -
> https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&search=markjac...@protonmail.com
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>


-- 
Money is the root of all evil.
Evil is the root of all money.
With that in mind, money is made by the government ...


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: Dataset encryption question

[David Spiegel]

Maybe one is SMS-Managed and one isn't.

On 2019-06-28 08:52, Mark Jacobs wrote:
> They don't, but sometimes they do. We have several data management rules in 
> place for HLQ1 datasets, i.e. no backups, which wouldn't carry over if the 
> dataset was copied to HLQ2.
>
> Mark Jacobs
>
>
> Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.
>
> GPG Public Key - 
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fapi.protonmail.ch%2Fpks%2Flookup%3Fop%3Dget%26search%3Dmarkjacobs%40protonmail.com&data=02%7C01%7C%7C066837fc672f4ee955c408d6fbc79957%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636973232047520378&sdata=kA7QOlpjhFP6%2BD%2BydzRdsA2RsAz0XfP3n9tuChWk49I%3D&reserved=0
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Friday, June 28, 2019 8:45 AM, Bill Johnson 
> <0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
>> If they have access to HLQ1.data and the encryption key. Why would they need 
>> to copy it to another dataset?
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>
>> On Friday, June 28, 2019, 7:39 AM, Mark Jacobs 
>> 0224d287a4b1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu wrote:
>>
>> Outside of using dataset conditional access rules is there anyway to prevent 
>> someone from copying encrypted dataset HLQ1.data to HLQ2.data? They have 
>> access rights to both HLQ's and the encryption key.
>>
>> Mark Jacobs
>>
>> Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.
>>
>> GPG Public Key - 
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fapi.protonmail.ch%2Fpks%2Flookup%3Fop%3Dget%26search%3Dmarkjacobs%40protonmail.com&data=02%7C01%7C%7C066837fc672f4ee955c408d6fbc79957%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636973232047520378&sdata=kA7QOlpjhFP6%2BD%2BydzRdsA2RsAz0XfP3n9tuChWk49I%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> 
>>
>> 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: Dataset encryption question

[Mark Jacobs]

They don't, but sometimes they do. We have several data management rules in 
place for HLQ1 datasets, i.e. no backups, which wouldn't carry over if the 
dataset was copied to HLQ2.

Mark Jacobs


Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&search=markjac...@protonmail.com

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Friday, June 28, 2019 8:45 AM, Bill Johnson 
<0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> If they have access to HLQ1.data and the encryption key. Why would they need 
> to copy it to another dataset?
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
> On Friday, June 28, 2019, 7:39 AM, Mark Jacobs 
> 0224d287a4b1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu wrote:
>
> Outside of using dataset conditional access rules is there anyway to prevent 
> someone from copying encrypted dataset HLQ1.data to HLQ2.data? They have 
> access rights to both HLQ's and the encryption key.
>
> Mark Jacobs
>
> Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.
>
> GPG Public Key - 
> https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&search=markjac...@protonmail.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: Dataset encryption question

[Bill Johnson]

If they have access to HLQ1.data and the encryption key. Why would they need to 
copy it to another dataset?


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, June 28, 2019, 7:39 AM, Mark Jacobs 
<0224d287a4b1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

Outside of using dataset conditional access rules is there anyway to prevent 
someone from copying encrypted dataset HLQ1.data to HLQ2.data? They have access 
rights to both HLQ's and the encryption key.

Mark Jacobs

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&search=markjac...@protonmail.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: Dataset encryption question

[Allan Staller]

Nope!

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Mark Jacobs
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2019 6:39 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Dataset encryption question

Outside of using dataset conditional access rules is there anyway to prevent 
someone from copying encrypted dataset HLQ1.data to HLQ2.data? They have access 
rights to both HLQ's and the encryption key.

Mark Jacobs

Sent from 
[ProtonMail](https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fprotonmail.com&data=02%7C01%7Callan.staller%40HCL.COM%7C7448f4f9b2664db902ae08d6fbbd3b46%7C189de737c93a4f5a8b686f4ca9941912%7C0%7C0%7C636973187548893055&sdata=Q8vppEVFuPTvzDVLrVM7mXMNKE0m4XPY8BIewh9cgg0%3D&reserved=0),
 Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fapi.protonmail.ch%2Fpks%2Flookup%3Fop%3Dget%26search%3Dmarkjacobs%40protonmail.com&data=02%7C01%7Callan.staller%40HCL.COM%7C7448f4f9b2664db902ae08d6fbbd3b46%7C189de737c93a4f5a8b686f4ca9941912%7C0%7C0%7C636973187548893055&sdata=Pm9ZI5xes%2F9KC8hhzvSP2qqlnfVFXN5ty15zHJL62kw%3D&reserved=0

--
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

Dataset encryption question

[Mark Jacobs]

Outside of using dataset conditional access rules is there anyway to prevent 
someone from copying encrypted dataset HLQ1.data to HLQ2.data? They have access 
rights to both HLQ's and the encryption key.

Mark Jacobs

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&search=markjac...@protonmail.com

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

Re: z13s with single CPU able to use SMT?

[Peter Relson]

As Parwez correctly pointed out, z/OS's SMT 2 is limited to zIIPs. 
Since you cannot have an LPAR with only a zIIP (you could not IPL it), you 
therefore cannot have an LPAR with only a single CPU running z/OS that is 
able to use SMT. You could write your own operating system that allows 
that.

The doc does not suggest otherwise. The values allowed are shown:
MT_CP_MODE=1
MT_ZIIP_MODE=1|2

Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design


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

Re: LOAD/LINK exit

[Peter Relson]

I suppose there might be security concerns around knowing what gets 
fetched?


It has nothing to do with "knowing" anything. It has to do with the 
environment in which the code calling the exit runs, and avoiding 
crippling the system by doing something differently that would likely have 
horrendous performance characteristcs..

Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design


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

Re: z13s with single CPU able to use SMT?

[Parwez Hamid]

I think this was his response to CPs not supporting SMT 🙂

Regards

Parwez Hamid​


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Elardus Engelbrecht 
Sent: 28 June 2019 11:14
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z13s with single CPU able to use SMT?

Brian Westerman wrote:

>Bummer

About what do you say "bummer"?

TIA!

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: z13s with single CPU able to use SMT?

[Elardus Engelbrecht]

Brian Westerman wrote:

>Bummer

About what do you say "bummer"?

TIA!

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

Re: z13s with single CPU able to use SMT?

[Gadi Ben-Avi]

Agreed
Gadi

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Brian Westerman 
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2019 09:44
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z13s with single CPU able to use SMT?

Bummer


Brian

--
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