I don't think it matters much. If the PC gets hacked then the hacker
can probably figure out ways to get access to the mainframe whether it's
setup to automatically logon or not.
On 5/4/2020 1:31 PM, Tom Marchant wrote:
On Mon, 4 May 2020 19:14:31 +, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
What I would
The vast majority of z/OS users don't need elevated authority, unlike much of
Windows Workstations.
I don't think it would be a good idea to include Sysprogs and z/OS Security
Admins in the extended length world.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf
In article <6673472942485742.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu> you wrote:
> On Mon, 4 May 2020 17:39:39 -0500, Wendell Lovewell wrote:
> >
> >Installing Rocket's bash provided the cursor history scrolling I was looking
> >for.
> >
> >I don't perceive a difference between
On Mon, 4 May 2020 17:39:39 -0500, Wendell Lovewell wrote:
>
>Installing Rocket's bash provided the cursor history scrolling I was looking
>for.
>
>I don't perceive a difference between TERM=xterm+256color and TERM=xterm in
>the command-line-only functions I use. (I don't see any coloring in
On 5/4/20 4:39 PM, Wendell Lovewell wrote:
I have "bash" as the last line in /etc/profile. This seems to work, but I do have to enter "exit" twice to
close the window. Is there a way to invoke bash so that this is not necessary? I'm also not sure if this matters, but
"echo $SHELL" still
Thanks to everyone for the advice.
Installing Rocket's bash provided the cursor history scrolling I was looking
for.
I don't perceive a difference between TERM=xterm+256color and TERM=xterm in the
command-line-only functions I use. (I don't see any coloring in the ls or
other output for
I know on my MQ instance I have installed on my home Windows machine, MQ
truncates my Windows user ID "Frank Swarbrick" to "Frank Swarbr".
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 2:46 PM
To:
Well, in our case at least the workstation refers to a company provided and
managed workstation. We can't log on to z/OS from our personal devices. And
we use SSO for many applications. I don't know how it works; only that it does
work.
From: IBM Mainframe
On Mon, 4 May 2020 15:31:52 -0500, Tom Marchant wrote:
>On Mon, 4 May 2020 19:14:31 +, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>
>>What I would love to see is some sort of "single signon" option, where a user
>>would only need
>>to sign on to their personal workstation and not need to explicitly sign on
The maximum length on Linux is 32; whether MQ will work with a name longer than
12 is a separate issue. There are also Linux commands that will display the UID
instead of a username longer than 8. LDAP can map long names to short. I don't
know about non-IBM LDAP.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
On Mon, 4 May 2020 19:14:31 +, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>What I would love to see is some sort of "single signon" option, where a user
>would only need
>to sign on to their personal workstation and not need to explicitly sign on to
>z/OS at all.
IMO, this is a bad idea unless you can count
On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 04:23, Barbara Nitz wrote:
> Doesn't matter. With an IMS region, you cannot use cancel (z/OS:
> "non-cancelable, use force arm"). You cannot use force arm (z/OS: "cancel
> first, please"). And you cannot use force because IMS intercepts that and
> tells you to terminate
It's simple enough to write your own CICS signon screen to allow for longer
user IDs (and passwords/phrases), but I think CICS would have to add support
for the EXEC CICS SIGNON command to allow for a longer user ID. Currently:
"
USERID(data-value)
Specifies the 8-byte sign-on user ID.
The
Interesting stuff. I certainly won't claim to understand it all.
What I would love to see is some sort of "single signon" option, where a user
would only need to sign on to their personal workstation and not need to
explicitly sign on to z/OS at all. It seems like (to me, anyway!) a user could
The root, is not the same as the sysplex root.
/* syplex root file system - z/OS sysplex root */
<- /global/zosmf needs to be here
ROOT FILESYSTEM('OMVS.')
TYPE(ZFS) MODE(RDWR) AUTOMOVE
MQ does, in fact, support that, and I've used it. It's the "Channel
Authentication" user mapping feature.
I was just wondering if it was "directly supported" without a mapping, if the
presented user ID was more than 8 characters.
Thanks.
From: IBM Mainframe
> As a side note, why won't JCL accept all legal e-mail address?
I thought there was an IBM stated aim to get to this, but I cannot find it.
Certainly the recently added (Z/OS 1.3 I think) email field (WAEMAIL) in the
RACF WORKATTR segment has a requirement to be unique within the RACF
Allan
It is the first entry off the root
All the other zFS of interest are hung off of /REL240 meaning the JAVA's and
the Liberty_zos
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Allan Staller
Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 1:48 PM
Is the mountpoint /global/zosmf hung off of the sysplex root?
In all cases, I would think any system would complain the ZFS is already
mounted.
Check the mount mode for the zosmf zfs (s/b R/W)
SYSPLEX(YES) should make the zosmf zfs visible to all images provided the
mountpoint is available.
Wow! That's a lot to digest.
A couple of things. First, I see the following documented:
“On z/OS® and UNIX and Linux, the maximum length of a user ID is 12
characters.” From
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSFKSJ_9.1.0/com.ibm.mq.sec.doc/q010300_.htm
I wonder how this works if
We have SYSPLEX(YES) and FORK(COW)
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Jousma, David
Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 12:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: zOSHF / zFS
Steve,
I replied earlier to one of your other
Do you see all the zOSMF zfs file systems when you issue the /D Omvs,f command
in the LPAR IZUANG1 fails. And what kind of messages do you see in the IZUANG1
joblog referencing failure?
Saygılarımla / Best Regards.
Bülent Dülger
Principal Mainframe IT Consultant and CoFounder
ServiZ
Steve,
I replied earlier to one of your other threads about this. Unless you are
running with Shared Sysplex Root, you cannot mount the same filesystem on
multiple systems for READ/WRITE. You will know if you are or are not by
BPMPRMxx SYSPLEX (YES|NO) setting.There is quite a bit of
I have come up against and INTERESTING problem. Ona zOS 2.4 system
On my MONOPLEX the zFS for zOSMF showed MOUTED in ISH and when I look at in
SDSF FS it's all good zOSMF operates as it should.
In my 4-way SYSPLEX the JAVA's and the LIBERTY zFS are correct in ISH and in
SDSF FS
Now the ZOSMF
Your claim was "You can specify pretty much anything you want in JCL."
Regardless of why it is coded that way, the code is in the C/I and the error
message comes from the C/I. The fact remains that you are limited in what you
can specify in JCL. My first thought was that you meant that JECL had
Never. Dynamic LPAR addition and deletion.
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:09 PM Nai, Dean wrote:
>
> Anyone know if we need a POR to activate a new Z/VM LPAR
>
>
> Dean Nai
>
>
>
>
> >
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff /
Keep in mind that it would be the short userid that would be used to complete
unqualified data set names, except when the prefix is used.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
Thanks, everyone. We are running z/OS v2.1, just upgraded from z/OS v1.12.
Over the weekend, I add a second structure to the CLASSDEF SML. Hopefully,
that will help with the issues.
Thanks again,
Jerry
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Anyone know if we need a POR to activate a new Z/VM LPAR
Dean Nai
>
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
This is the whole "bound to another address space" issue. Does it matter
what sequence you take the address spaces down in? And I wonder if the
same applies to Db2 and MQ. (I would guess not as the binding/attachment
must be different.)
Cheers, Martin
Martin Packer
zChampion, Systems
Not CESL.
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 6:40 PM Wayne Bickerdike wrote:
> There are more CICS users than TSO users. Is there a howto for the CICS
> signon screen to accept long IDs and Passphrases?
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 6:03 PM Timothy Sipples wrote:
>
>> Bob Bridges wrote:
>> >So maybe -
There are more CICS users than TSO users. Is there a howto for the CICS
signon screen to accept long IDs and Passphrases?
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 6:03 PM Timothy Sipples wrote:
> Bob Bridges wrote:
> >So maybe - maybe, I don't know either - if I sign on to z/OS with a
> >certificate, or LDAP, or
On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 09:09:32 -0400, Peter Relson wrote:
>
>z/OS FORCE did not work
>
>
>Wanna bet?
>
>FORCE,ARM runs in the address space so would have been affected.
>FORCE does not.
Doesn't matter. With an IMS region, you cannot use cancel (z/OS:
"non-cancelable, use force arm"). You cannot
Bob Bridges wrote:
>So maybe - maybe, I don't know either - if I sign on to z/OS with a
>certificate, or LDAP, or anything other than the usual, the sign-on
routine
>MAKES UP an 8-byte ID and stores it in the ACEE. If so, after that
>everything works fine, I guess.
I don't think RACF itself
34 matches
Mail list logo
