Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Farley, Peter x23353]

In reverse order of your questions:

Sorry, I am not free to discuss the actual application details.

And I did not get that from Peter R.'s statement -- quite the contrary in fact. 
 With the z/OS generated programmable field LPAR value (whatever it may be), 
the STCKE result is in fact guaranteed unique in a sysplex.

Considering that byte 0 of the STCKE result is the epoch index and thus is zero 
until 2042 and that byte 1 (byte 0 of the TOD clock) changes in far more than 
one 24 hour period, bytes 2-10 or 11 of the STCKE result combined with byte 15 
can comprise quite a reasonably unique value when results only have to be 
unique for the day.  Not guaranteed perhaps, but "good enough".

I ran 100 billion loops returning a value constructed from the STCKE result and 
got no duplicate values.  Admittedly this was done with a COBOL driver and a 
dynamically loaded STCKE subroutine, so it's probable the result location was 
not in the same cache line as the STCKE, so not as stressful a test as one 
could possibly construct, but definitely more stressful than the environment in 
which the real world application lives, so I'm good with that.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 9:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 22:55:25 +, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:

>Sounds to me like the first 12 bytes of STCKE plus the last byte of the 
>"programmable field" in the STCKE result.
> 
Peter R's statement implies that no proper substring of the STCKE value is 
guaranteed unique.

It's surprising that any process requires so many UUIDs that performance is a 
concern.

Must the values be sortable in chronological order?

Are you free to disclose the maximum permitted value of your UUIDs?

--

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

Re: z/TPF questions

[Tom Brennan]

Ah... that makes sense.  Then they might have been going over that 32 CP 
limit fairly soon after the limit was changed.  Being the first on your 
block to run new code is no fun at 2 in the morning.


On 3/19/2021 8:15 PM, Mike Schwab wrote:

I think the limit was 32 z processors in an LPAR.  They might have
raised it by now.  z15 can have 190 in high capacity order.


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

Re: z/TPF questions

[Mike Schwab]

Yep.  Flight / hotel number + seat / room number + date (/ time) +
customer number as the key with billing details.

On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 8:59 PM Bill Johnson
<0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
> Yup, hotel reservation isn’t much different than an airline reservation.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Friday, March 19, 2021, 9:25 PM, Attila Fogarasi  
> wrote:
>
> Why be surprised at hotels on the list (of zTPF users)?  A hotel is just an
> airplane without wings :)
> zTPF is great for any high volume transaction where there are few
> transaction types but many per second (IBM claims million tps) and at low
> cost.  The tradeoff is constrained application function, but not so bad now
> with zTPF support all the open interfaces such as REST.  Think of it as a
> stripped down IMS or CICS, with much leaner application interface.
> Currently only C/C++, Java and assembler are supported as a programming
> language, and some things only in C/C++.  zTPF has no LE malaise that z/OS
> is saddled with :)
>
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 12:00 PM Bill Johnson <
> 0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
> > Been around for decades as the airline system but usable by any industry
> > requiring massive throughput.
> >
> >
> > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> >
> >
> > On Friday, March 19, 2021, 8:16 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka <
> > r.skoru...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Old only?
> > I have read about relatively new and small airlines, not mentioned below.
> > And of course airline control program is not really applicable to banks
> > and hotels. In fact I understand banks, but I'm really surprized at the
> > hotels on the list. What transaction workload do the have???
> >
> >
> > --
> > Radoslaw Skorupka
> > (looking for new job)
> > Lodz, Poland
> >
> >
> >
> > W dniu 20.03.2021 o 01:11, Bill Johnson pisze:
> > > The old yet still used airline control program.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> > >
> > >
> > > On Friday, March 19, 2021, 8:03 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka <
> > r.skoru...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I know the IBM-MAIN forum is mostly about z/OS, but I wanted to ask
> > > about about z/TPF - it seems to be on topic.
> > >
> > > z/TPF
> > >
> > > TPF is the system I have never seen.
> > > I'm pretty sure there is no TPF installation in Poland.
> > > However I'm curious about the following:
> > > 1. What is typical size of TPF system? I mean MIPS sizing. Is it huge or
> > > rather small?
> > > 2. Does TPF typically run in bare LPAR or it is usually run under z/VM,
> > > like z/VSE is?
> > > 3. What is the pricing of TPF?
> > > 3.1 Is it just single price per system, I mean no paid optional features
> > > like in z/OS?
> > > 3.2 Is it expensive? I heard, it is much more expensive, when compared
> > > to z/OS running on the same MIPS base.
> > > 4. Any special settings in LPAR definitions? I remember about specia
> > > LPAR mode - ESA/TPF or so. However I don't know any explanation of the
> > > difference.
> > > 5. Does it use regular CP's only? Or maybe there are some workloads
> > > applicable to zIIP or even other processors?
> > > 6. Does it use SAP processors more extensively than other OSes? I heard
> > > about it.
> > > 7. Does exist any z/TPF forum like IBM-MAIN?
> > > 8. What are known customers? I'm not asking about company secrets, but I
> > > know (knowledge publicly available) about Citi, Marriott, VISA, BofA,
> > > American Airlines, BA, Sabre, Amadeus and some more. Any other known
> > > notable customers? Banks? ATMs? Reservations? Hotels? Anything else?
> > >
> > > Any clue will be appreciated. I have to secret plan, I just want to
> > > learn about it. Just curiosity.
> > >
> >
> > --
> > 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



-- 
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

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

Re: z/TPF questions

[Mike Schwab]

I think the limit was 32 z processors in an LPAR.  They might have
raised it by now.  z15 can have 190 in high capacity order.

On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 9:09 PM Radoslaw Skorupka
 wrote:
>
> Yes, I also heard about quick IPL time, I was even heard about under
> minute times. Of course I cannot test it.
>
> Regarding 3215 - it is another type of console. In z/OS realm we use
> 3270 family, but z/VM (CMS) like 3215 and there is TERMINAL CONMODE
> command to change the type of emulated device.
> However it seems TPF expect 3215 device and no CONMODE is available.
> Many years ago (z10?) new optional (paid) hardware feature was added to
> the machine - it is 3215 mode of OSA-ICC emulated terminals. When you
> have it enabled you see more tabs and windows on HMC.
>
> BTW: 30 CPs sounds amazing for me. I have never touch such big
> configurations except some drills in Montpellier (IBM site). Fortunately
> I had not to pay for it.
>
> --
> Radoslaw Skorupka
> (looking for new job)
> Lodz, Poland
>
>
>
>
> W dniu 20.03.2021 o 02:45, Tom Brennan pisze:
> > I hardly know anything about it, but about a year ago I watched an IPL
> > at one of the customers you mentioned.  TPF was running on a z15 with
> > over 30 full-speed CP's.  Their support guy mentioned he was concerned
> > that they may be running more TPF CP's on a single box than anyone
> > else in the world (bleeding edge).  There were no zIIPs on the
> > machine, but that doesn't necessarily mean TPF can't use them... I
> > just don't know.
> >
> > I asked the support guy, So what do you do for a local backup, when an
> > IPL is needed like tonight?  Nothing!  There is no HA backup other
> > than DR (local and remote).  Why?  Because the IPL took maybe 3
> > minutes total!  I guess there is little reason for sysplex or whatever
> > (if TPF even supports such things).
> >
> > This was one LPAR bare metal running a single TPF instance for the
> > entire company processing.  Amazingly fast compared to z/OS.  The only
> > special thing I remember was a feature code that allows TPF to have a
> > kind of ICC terminal - FC 0034 OSA ICC- 3215 Enablement - whatever a
> > 3215 is I don't know.
> >
> > On 3/19/2021 5:03 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka wrote:
> >> I know the IBM-MAIN forum is mostly about z/OS, but I wanted to ask
> >> about about z/TPF - it seems to be on topic.
> >>
> >> z/TPF
> >>
> >> TPF is the system I have never seen.
> >> I'm pretty sure there is no TPF installation in Poland.
> >> However I'm curious about the following:
> >> 1. What is typical size of TPF system? I mean MIPS sizing. Is it huge
> >> or rather small?
> >> 2. Does TPF typically run in bare LPAR or it is usually run under
> >> z/VM, like z/VSE is?
> >> 3. What is the pricing of TPF?
> >> 3.1 Is it just single price per system, I mean no paid optional
> >> features like in z/OS?
> >> 3.2 Is it expensive? I heard, it is much more expensive, when
> >> compared to z/OS running on the same MIPS base.
> >> 4. Any special settings in LPAR definitions? I remember about specia
> >> LPAR mode - ESA/TPF or so. However I don't know any explanation of
> >> the difference.
> >> 5. Does it use regular CP's only? Or maybe there are some workloads
> >> applicable to zIIP or even other processors?
> >> 6. Does it use SAP processors more extensively than other OSes? I
> >> heard about it.
> >> 7. Does exist any z/TPF forum like IBM-MAIN?
> >> 8. What are known customers? I'm not asking about company secrets,
> >> but I know (knowledge publicly available) about Citi, Marriott, VISA,
> >> BofA, American Airlines, BA, Sabre, Amadeus and some more. Any other
> >> known notable customers? Banks? ATMs? Reservations? Hotels? Anything
> >> else?
> >>
> >> Any clue will be appreciated. I have to secret plan, I just want to
> >> learn about it. Just curiosity.
> >>
> >
> > --
> > 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



-- 
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

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

Re: z/TPF questions

[Radoslaw Skorupka]

Yes, I also heard about quick IPL time, I was even heard about under 
minute times. Of course I cannot test it.


Regarding 3215 - it is another type of console. In z/OS realm we use 
3270 family, but z/VM (CMS) like 3215 and there is TERMINAL CONMODE 
command to change the type of emulated device.
However it seems TPF expect 3215 device and no CONMODE is available. 
Many years ago (z10?) new optional (paid) hardware feature was added to 
the machine - it is 3215 mode of OSA-ICC emulated terminals. When you 
have it enabled you see more tabs and windows on HMC.


BTW: 30 CPs sounds amazing for me. I have never touch such big 
configurations except some drills in Montpellier (IBM site). Fortunately 
I had not to pay for it.


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
(looking for new job)
Lodz, Poland




W dniu 20.03.2021 o 02:45, Tom Brennan pisze:
I hardly know anything about it, but about a year ago I watched an IPL 
at one of the customers you mentioned.  TPF was running on a z15 with 
over 30 full-speed CP's.  Their support guy mentioned he was concerned 
that they may be running more TPF CP's on a single box than anyone 
else in the world (bleeding edge).  There were no zIIPs on the 
machine, but that doesn't necessarily mean TPF can't use them... I 
just don't know.


I asked the support guy, So what do you do for a local backup, when an 
IPL is needed like tonight?  Nothing!  There is no HA backup other 
than DR (local and remote).  Why?  Because the IPL took maybe 3 
minutes total!  I guess there is little reason for sysplex or whatever 
(if TPF even supports such things).


This was one LPAR bare metal running a single TPF instance for the 
entire company processing.  Amazingly fast compared to z/OS.  The only 
special thing I remember was a feature code that allows TPF to have a 
kind of ICC terminal - FC 0034 OSA ICC- 3215 Enablement - whatever a 
3215 is I don't know.


On 3/19/2021 5:03 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka wrote:
I know the IBM-MAIN forum is mostly about z/OS, but I wanted to ask 
about about z/TPF - it seems to be on topic.


z/TPF

TPF is the system I have never seen.
I'm pretty sure there is no TPF installation in Poland.
However I'm curious about the following:
1. What is typical size of TPF system? I mean MIPS sizing. Is it huge 
or rather small?
2. Does TPF typically run in bare LPAR or it is usually run under 
z/VM, like z/VSE is?

3. What is the pricing of TPF?
3.1 Is it just single price per system, I mean no paid optional 
features like in z/OS?
3.2 Is it expensive? I heard, it is much more expensive, when 
compared to z/OS running on the same MIPS base.
4. Any special settings in LPAR definitions? I remember about specia 
LPAR mode - ESA/TPF or so. However I don't know any explanation of 
the difference.
5. Does it use regular CP's only? Or maybe there are some workloads 
applicable to zIIP or even other processors?
6. Does it use SAP processors more extensively than other OSes? I 
heard about it.

7. Does exist any z/TPF forum like IBM-MAIN?
8. What are known customers? I'm not asking about company secrets, 
but I know (knowledge publicly available) about Citi, Marriott, VISA, 
BofA, American Airlines, BA, Sabre, Amadeus and some more. Any other 
known notable customers? Banks? ATMs? Reservations? Hotels? Anything 
else?


Any clue will be appreciated. I have to secret plan, I just want to 
learn about it. Just curiosity.




--
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: z/TPF questions

[John McKown]

I worked at Braniff Airways back in the late '70s and early 80s' supporting
MVT (yes MVT on a 3033 which required an RQP). They ran ACP (Airline
control Program), which I think is the origin of z/TPF. I watched them do
an IPL once. It seems just a few seconds and the operators were busy typing
commands on the console. They said they were activating teleprocessing
lines for airports. I just stood there with my jaw on the floor.


The programmers also said that all the programs they wrote, in assembler on
MVT curiously enough, had to be exactly 4K in size. If it was longer, they
would do the equivalent of an XCTL as the last thing to continue.All the
DASD was formatted in 4K records. IIRC, it was considered one bit database,
even the programs. But my mind is fuzzy on all this.


On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 8:45 PM Tom Brennan 
wrote:

> I hardly know anything about it, but about a year ago I watched an IPL
> at one of the customers you mentioned.  TPF was running on a z15 with
> over 30 full-speed CP's.  Their support guy mentioned he was concerned
> that they may be running more TPF CP's on a single box than anyone else
> in the world (bleeding edge).  There were no zIIPs on the machine, but
> that doesn't necessarily mean TPF can't use them... I just don't know.
>
> I asked the support guy, So what do you do for a local backup, when an
> IPL is needed like tonight?  Nothing!  There is no HA backup other than
> DR (local and remote).  Why?  Because the IPL took maybe 3 minutes
> total!  I guess there is little reason for sysplex or whatever (if TPF
> even supports such things).
>
> This was one LPAR bare metal running a single TPF instance for the
> entire company processing.  Amazingly fast compared to z/OS.  The only
> special thing I remember was a feature code that allows TPF to have a
> kind of ICC terminal - FC 0034 OSA ICC- 3215 Enablement - whatever a
> 3215 is I don't know.
>
> On 3/19/2021 5:03 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka wrote:
> > I know the IBM-MAIN forum is mostly about z/OS, but I wanted to ask
> > about about z/TPF - it seems to be on topic.
> >
> > z/TPF
> >
> > TPF is the system I have never seen.
> > I'm pretty sure there is no TPF installation in Poland.
> > However I'm curious about the following:
> > 1. What is typical size of TPF system? I mean MIPS sizing. Is it huge or
> > rather small?
> > 2. Does TPF typically run in bare LPAR or it is usually run under z/VM,
> > like z/VSE is?
> > 3. What is the pricing of TPF?
> > 3.1 Is it just single price per system, I mean no paid optional features
> > like in z/OS?
> > 3.2 Is it expensive? I heard, it is much more expensive, when compared
> > to z/OS running on the same MIPS base.
> > 4. Any special settings in LPAR definitions? I remember about specia
> > LPAR mode - ESA/TPF or so. However I don't know any explanation of the
> > difference.
> > 5. Does it use regular CP's only? Or maybe there are some workloads
> > applicable to zIIP or even other processors?
> > 6. Does it use SAP processors more extensively than other OSes? I heard
> > about it.
> > 7. Does exist any z/TPF forum like IBM-MAIN?
> > 8. What are known customers? I'm not asking about company secrets, but I
> > know (knowledge publicly available) about Citi, Marriott, VISA, BofA,
> > American Airlines, BA, Sabre, Amadeus and some more. Any other known
> > notable customers? Banks? ATMs? Reservations? Hotels? Anything else?
> >
> > Any clue will be appreciated. I have to secret plan, I just want to
> > learn about it. Just curiosity.
> >
>
> --
> 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: z/TPF questions

[Bill Johnson]

Yup, hotel reservation isn’t much different than an airline reservation.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, March 19, 2021, 9:25 PM, Attila Fogarasi  wrote:

Why be surprised at hotels on the list (of zTPF users)?  A hotel is just an
airplane without wings :)
zTPF is great for any high volume transaction where there are few
transaction types but many per second (IBM claims million tps) and at low
cost.  The tradeoff is constrained application function, but not so bad now
with zTPF support all the open interfaces such as REST.  Think of it as a
stripped down IMS or CICS, with much leaner application interface.
Currently only C/C++, Java and assembler are supported as a programming
language, and some things only in C/C++.  zTPF has no LE malaise that z/OS
is saddled with :)

On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 12:00 PM Bill Johnson <
0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> Been around for decades as the airline system but usable by any industry
> requiring massive throughput.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Friday, March 19, 2021, 8:16 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka <
> r.skoru...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Old only?
> I have read about relatively new and small airlines, not mentioned below.
> And of course airline control program is not really applicable to banks
> and hotels. In fact I understand banks, but I'm really surprized at the
> hotels on the list. What transaction workload do the have???
>
>
> --
> Radoslaw Skorupka
> (looking for new job)
> Lodz, Poland
>
>
>
> W dniu 20.03.2021 o 01:11, Bill Johnson pisze:
> > The old yet still used airline control program.
> >
> >
> > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> >
> >
> > On Friday, March 19, 2021, 8:03 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka <
> r.skoru...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I know the IBM-MAIN forum is mostly about z/OS, but I wanted to ask
> > about about z/TPF - it seems to be on topic.
> >
> > z/TPF
> >
> > TPF is the system I have never seen.
> > I'm pretty sure there is no TPF installation in Poland.
> > However I'm curious about the following:
> > 1. What is typical size of TPF system? I mean MIPS sizing. Is it huge or
> > rather small?
> > 2. Does TPF typically run in bare LPAR or it is usually run under z/VM,
> > like z/VSE is?
> > 3. What is the pricing of TPF?
> > 3.1 Is it just single price per system, I mean no paid optional features
> > like in z/OS?
> > 3.2 Is it expensive? I heard, it is much more expensive, when compared
> > to z/OS running on the same MIPS base.
> > 4. Any special settings in LPAR definitions? I remember about specia
> > LPAR mode - ESA/TPF or so. However I don't know any explanation of the
> > difference.
> > 5. Does it use regular CP's only? Or maybe there are some workloads
> > applicable to zIIP or even other processors?
> > 6. Does it use SAP processors more extensively than other OSes? I heard
> > about it.
> > 7. Does exist any z/TPF forum like IBM-MAIN?
> > 8. What are known customers? I'm not asking about company secrets, but I
> > know (knowledge publicly available) about Citi, Marriott, VISA, BofA,
> > American Airlines, BA, Sabre, Amadeus and some more. Any other known
> > notable customers? Banks? ATMs? Reservations? Hotels? Anything else?
> >
> > Any clue will be appreciated. I have to secret plan, I just want to
> > learn about it. Just curiosity.
> >
>
> --
> 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: z/TPF questions

[Tom Brennan]

I hardly know anything about it, but about a year ago I watched an IPL 
at one of the customers you mentioned.  TPF was running on a z15 with 
over 30 full-speed CP's.  Their support guy mentioned he was concerned 
that they may be running more TPF CP's on a single box than anyone else 
in the world (bleeding edge).  There were no zIIPs on the machine, but 
that doesn't necessarily mean TPF can't use them... I just don't know.


I asked the support guy, So what do you do for a local backup, when an 
IPL is needed like tonight?  Nothing!  There is no HA backup other than 
DR (local and remote).  Why?  Because the IPL took maybe 3 minutes 
total!  I guess there is little reason for sysplex or whatever (if TPF 
even supports such things).


This was one LPAR bare metal running a single TPF instance for the 
entire company processing.  Amazingly fast compared to z/OS.  The only 
special thing I remember was a feature code that allows TPF to have a 
kind of ICC terminal - FC 0034 OSA ICC- 3215 Enablement - whatever a 
3215 is I don't know.


On 3/19/2021 5:03 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka wrote:
I know the IBM-MAIN forum is mostly about z/OS, but I wanted to ask 
about about z/TPF - it seems to be on topic.


z/TPF

TPF is the system I have never seen.
I'm pretty sure there is no TPF installation in Poland.
However I'm curious about the following:
1. What is typical size of TPF system? I mean MIPS sizing. Is it huge or 
rather small?
2. Does TPF typically run in bare LPAR or it is usually run under z/VM, 
like z/VSE is?

3. What is the pricing of TPF?
3.1 Is it just single price per system, I mean no paid optional features 
like in z/OS?
3.2 Is it expensive? I heard, it is much more expensive, when compared 
to z/OS running on the same MIPS base.
4. Any special settings in LPAR definitions? I remember about specia 
LPAR mode - ESA/TPF or so. However I don't know any explanation of the 
difference.
5. Does it use regular CP's only? Or maybe there are some workloads 
applicable to zIIP or even other processors?
6. Does it use SAP processors more extensively than other OSes? I heard 
about it.

7. Does exist any z/TPF forum like IBM-MAIN?
8. What are known customers? I'm not asking about company secrets, but I 
know (knowledge publicly available) about Citi, Marriott, VISA, BofA, 
American Airlines, BA, Sabre, Amadeus and some more. Any other known 
notable customers? Banks? ATMs? Reservations? Hotels? Anything else?


Any clue will be appreciated. I have to secret plan, I just want to 
learn about it. Just curiosity.




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

Re: z/TPF questions

[Attila Fogarasi]

Why be surprised at hotels on the list (of zTPF users)?  A hotel is just an
airplane without wings :)
zTPF is great for any high volume transaction where there are few
transaction types but many per second (IBM claims million tps) and at low
cost.  The tradeoff is constrained application function, but not so bad now
with zTPF support all the open interfaces such as REST.  Think of it as a
stripped down IMS or CICS, with much leaner application interface.
Currently only C/C++, Java and assembler are supported as a programming
language, and some things only in C/C++.  zTPF has no LE malaise that z/OS
is saddled with :)

On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 12:00 PM Bill Johnson <
0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> Been around for decades as the airline system but usable by any industry
> requiring massive throughput.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Friday, March 19, 2021, 8:16 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka <
> r.skoru...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Old only?
> I have read about relatively new and small airlines, not mentioned below.
> And of course airline control program is not really applicable to banks
> and hotels. In fact I understand banks, but I'm really surprized at the
> hotels on the list. What transaction workload do the have???
>
>
> --
> Radoslaw Skorupka
> (looking for new job)
> Lodz, Poland
>
>
>
> W dniu 20.03.2021 o 01:11, Bill Johnson pisze:
> > The old yet still used airline control program.
> >
> >
> > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> >
> >
> > On Friday, March 19, 2021, 8:03 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka <
> r.skoru...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I know the IBM-MAIN forum is mostly about z/OS, but I wanted to ask
> > about about z/TPF - it seems to be on topic.
> >
> > z/TPF
> >
> > TPF is the system I have never seen.
> > I'm pretty sure there is no TPF installation in Poland.
> > However I'm curious about the following:
> > 1. What is typical size of TPF system? I mean MIPS sizing. Is it huge or
> > rather small?
> > 2. Does TPF typically run in bare LPAR or it is usually run under z/VM,
> > like z/VSE is?
> > 3. What is the pricing of TPF?
> > 3.1 Is it just single price per system, I mean no paid optional features
> > like in z/OS?
> > 3.2 Is it expensive? I heard, it is much more expensive, when compared
> > to z/OS running on the same MIPS base.
> > 4. Any special settings in LPAR definitions? I remember about specia
> > LPAR mode - ESA/TPF or so. However I don't know any explanation of the
> > difference.
> > 5. Does it use regular CP's only? Or maybe there are some workloads
> > applicable to zIIP or even other processors?
> > 6. Does it use SAP processors more extensively than other OSes? I heard
> > about it.
> > 7. Does exist any z/TPF forum like IBM-MAIN?
> > 8. What are known customers? I'm not asking about company secrets, but I
> > know (knowledge publicly available) about Citi, Marriott, VISA, BofA,
> > American Airlines, BA, Sabre, Amadeus and some more. Any other known
> > notable customers? Banks? ATMs? Reservations? Hotels? Anything else?
> >
> > Any clue will be appreciated. I have to secret plan, I just want to
> > learn about it. Just curiosity.
> >
>
> --
> 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: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 22:55:25 +, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
>
>The GENERATE_UNIQUE function returns a bit data character string 13 bytes long 
>(CHAR(13) FOR BIT DATA) that is unique compared to any other execution of the 
>same function. The function is defined as not deterministic. Although the 
>function has no arguments, the empty parentheses must be specified when the 
>function is invoked.
>The result of the function is a unique value that includes the internal form 
>of the Universal Time, Coordinated (UTC) and, if in a sysplex environment, the 
>sysplex member where the function was processed.
>The result cannot be null.
>The result of this function can be used to provide unique values in a table. 
>The sequence is based on the time when the function was executed.
>
Does "based" imply relative to the first call to the function?

>Sounds to me like the first 12 bytes of STCKE plus the last byte of the 
>"programmable field" in the STCKE result.
> 
Peter R's statement implies that no proper substring of the STCKE value
is guaranteed unique.

It's surprising that any process requires so many UUIDs that performance
is a concern.

Must the values be sortable in chronological order?

Are you free to disclose the maximum permitted value of your UUIDs?

-- gil

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

Re: Overlapped I/O completion

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 21:50:57 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:

>> Is there any reason to do a WAIT before the CHECK? 
>EOV processing.
> 
It was long ago and I no longer have the code.  IIRC, I coded a CHECK,
but never a WAIT.  It was specialized code, and I may not have accounted
for EOV.

What ill at EOV befalls a programmer who codes a CHECK but not a WAIT.

>> There's little reason to use BSAM. 
>NOTE, POINT.
> 
The OP did not mention a need for NOTE or POINT so I did not
consider them requirements.

-- gil

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

Re: z/TPF questions

[Bill Johnson]

Been around for decades as the airline system but usable by any industry 
requiring massive throughput. 


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, March 19, 2021, 8:16 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka  
wrote:

Old only?
I have read about relatively new and small airlines, not mentioned below.
And of course airline control program is not really applicable to banks 
and hotels. In fact I understand banks, but I'm really surprized at the 
hotels on the list. What transaction workload do the have???


-- 
Radoslaw Skorupka
(looking for new job)
Lodz, Poland



W dniu 20.03.2021 o 01:11, Bill Johnson pisze:
> The old yet still used airline control program.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Friday, March 19, 2021, 8:03 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka 
>  wrote:
>
> I know the IBM-MAIN forum is mostly about z/OS, but I wanted to ask
> about about z/TPF - it seems to be on topic.
>
> z/TPF
>
> TPF is the system I have never seen.
> I'm pretty sure there is no TPF installation in Poland.
> However I'm curious about the following:
> 1. What is typical size of TPF system? I mean MIPS sizing. Is it huge or
> rather small?
> 2. Does TPF typically run in bare LPAR or it is usually run under z/VM,
> like z/VSE is?
> 3. What is the pricing of TPF?
> 3.1 Is it just single price per system, I mean no paid optional features
> like in z/OS?
> 3.2 Is it expensive? I heard, it is much more expensive, when compared
> to z/OS running on the same MIPS base.
> 4. Any special settings in LPAR definitions? I remember about specia
> LPAR mode - ESA/TPF or so. However I don't know any explanation of the
> difference.
> 5. Does it use regular CP's only? Or maybe there are some workloads
> applicable to zIIP or even other processors?
> 6. Does it use SAP processors more extensively than other OSes? I heard
> about it.
> 7. Does exist any z/TPF forum like IBM-MAIN?
> 8. What are known customers? I'm not asking about company secrets, but I
> know (knowledge publicly available) about Citi, Marriott, VISA, BofA,
> American Airlines, BA, Sabre, Amadeus and some more. Any other known
> notable customers? Banks? ATMs? Reservations? Hotels? Anything else?
>
> Any clue will be appreciated. I have to secret plan, I just want to
> learn about it. Just curiosity.
>

--
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: z/TPF questions

[Radoslaw Skorupka]

Old only?
I have read about relatively new and small airlines, not mentioned below.
And of course airline control program is not really applicable to banks 
and hotels. In fact I understand banks, but I'm really surprized at the 
hotels on the list. What transaction workload do the have???



--
Radoslaw Skorupka
(looking for new job)
Lodz, Poland



W dniu 20.03.2021 o 01:11, Bill Johnson pisze:

The old yet still used airline control program.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, March 19, 2021, 8:03 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka  
wrote:

I know the IBM-MAIN forum is mostly about z/OS, but I wanted to ask
about about z/TPF - it seems to be on topic.

z/TPF

TPF is the system I have never seen.
I'm pretty sure there is no TPF installation in Poland.
However I'm curious about the following:
1. What is typical size of TPF system? I mean MIPS sizing. Is it huge or
rather small?
2. Does TPF typically run in bare LPAR or it is usually run under z/VM,
like z/VSE is?
3. What is the pricing of TPF?
3.1 Is it just single price per system, I mean no paid optional features
like in z/OS?
3.2 Is it expensive? I heard, it is much more expensive, when compared
to z/OS running on the same MIPS base.
4. Any special settings in LPAR definitions? I remember about specia
LPAR mode - ESA/TPF or so. However I don't know any explanation of the
difference.
5. Does it use regular CP's only? Or maybe there are some workloads
applicable to zIIP or even other processors?
6. Does it use SAP processors more extensively than other OSes? I heard
about it.
7. Does exist any z/TPF forum like IBM-MAIN?
8. What are known customers? I'm not asking about company secrets, but I
know (knowledge publicly available) about Citi, Marriott, VISA, BofA,
American Airlines, BA, Sabre, Amadeus and some more. Any other known
notable customers? Banks? ATMs? Reservations? Hotels? Anything else?

Any clue will be appreciated. I have to secret plan, I just want to
learn about it. Just curiosity.



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

Re: z/TPF questions

[Bill Johnson]

The old yet still used airline control program. 


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, March 19, 2021, 8:03 PM, Radoslaw Skorupka  
wrote:

I know the IBM-MAIN forum is mostly about z/OS, but I wanted to ask 
about about z/TPF - it seems to be on topic.

z/TPF

TPF is the system I have never seen.
I'm pretty sure there is no TPF installation in Poland.
However I'm curious about the following:
1. What is typical size of TPF system? I mean MIPS sizing. Is it huge or 
rather small?
2. Does TPF typically run in bare LPAR or it is usually run under z/VM, 
like z/VSE is?
3. What is the pricing of TPF?
3.1 Is it just single price per system, I mean no paid optional features 
like in z/OS?
3.2 Is it expensive? I heard, it is much more expensive, when compared 
to z/OS running on the same MIPS base.
4. Any special settings in LPAR definitions? I remember about specia 
LPAR mode - ESA/TPF or so. However I don't know any explanation of the 
difference.
5. Does it use regular CP's only? Or maybe there are some workloads 
applicable to zIIP or even other processors?
6. Does it use SAP processors more extensively than other OSes? I heard 
about it.
7. Does exist any z/TPF forum like IBM-MAIN?
8. What are known customers? I'm not asking about company secrets, but I 
know (knowledge publicly available) about Citi, Marriott, VISA, BofA, 
American Airlines, BA, Sabre, Amadeus and some more. Any other known 
notable customers? Banks? ATMs? Reservations? Hotels? Anything else?

Any clue will be appreciated. I have to secret plan, I just want to 
learn about it. Just curiosity.

-- 
Radoslaw Skorupka
(looking for new job)
Lodz, Poland

--
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

z/TPF questions

[Radoslaw Skorupka]

I know the IBM-MAIN forum is mostly about z/OS, but I wanted to ask 
about about z/TPF - it seems to be on topic.


z/TPF

TPF is the system I have never seen.
I'm pretty sure there is no TPF installation in Poland.
However I'm curious about the following:
1. What is typical size of TPF system? I mean MIPS sizing. Is it huge or 
rather small?
2. Does TPF typically run in bare LPAR or it is usually run under z/VM, 
like z/VSE is?

3. What is the pricing of TPF?
3.1 Is it just single price per system, I mean no paid optional features 
like in z/OS?
3.2 Is it expensive? I heard, it is much more expensive, when compared 
to z/OS running on the same MIPS base.
4. Any special settings in LPAR definitions? I remember about specia 
LPAR mode - ESA/TPF or so. However I don't know any explanation of the 
difference.
5. Does it use regular CP's only? Or maybe there are some workloads 
applicable to zIIP or even other processors?
6. Does it use SAP processors more extensively than other OSes? I heard 
about it.

7. Does exist any z/TPF forum like IBM-MAIN?
8. What are known customers? I'm not asking about company secrets, but I 
know (knowledge publicly available) about Citi, Marriott, VISA, BofA, 
American Airlines, BA, Sabre, Amadeus and some more. Any other known 
notable customers? Banks? ATMs? Reservations? Hotels? Anything else?


Any clue will be appreciated. I have to secret plan, I just want to 
learn about it. Just curiosity.


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
(looking for new job)
Lodz, Poland

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

Re: DB/2 and CICS security

[Radoslaw Skorupka]

W dniu 19.03.2021 o 22:23, Pierre Fichaud pisze:

If a security (RACF) violation occurs in a CICS region, where does the 
violation get reported?
I couldn't find anything in the CICS SMF records but I'll look again.
Do they get reported in the JESMSGLG or in a CICS ?
Does a CICS exit need to be installed?
There's tons of documentation to go through.
I figured it might be faster to use this forum to get an asnwer.

I don't have a CICS system to play with at the moment.

I need the same kind of info for DB/2.
I've yet to check the SMF record layouts.

Again I don't have a DB/2 system to play with.


It depends.
CICS resource violations *are* reported in CICS syslog, but (assuming 
RACF shop) it is also recorded in SMF80.

Caution: your installation can suppress logging in many ways.
Caution: your CICS setup may not enforce RACF checking of given resources.

No exit is needed.

Documentations: there are two good sources:
1. CICS RACF Security Guide - a part of CICS doco.
2. ES84 course - Implementing RACF Security for CICS. Of course it is 
paid. (I taught it)


DB2 is different animal.
1. DB2 access control may be internal (GRANT/REVOKE) or external (RACF).
2. CICS access to DB2 resources is not the same as user access to DB2, 
like in SPUFI.


Record layouts. Described in details in RACF Macros and Interfaces 
manual. Part of RACF doco.


It is good to ask than to stay uninformed. Especially, your question are 
well phrased.




HTH


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
(looking for new job)
Lodz, Poland

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

Re: DB/2 and CICS security

[Charles Mills]

Ah! I somewhat misread the question.

Security violations for Db2 are reported as SMF Type 102, IFCID (which is kind 
of like a subtype, but not in the subtype field) 140.

They are not really documented in a manual. They are documented in macros in 
the Db2 product.

They are not reported in SMF 80.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Charles Mills
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 3:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: DB/2 and CICS security

There is a DB2 mailing list, run by IDUG. Google can find it for you.

I do not *know* the DB2 answer for certain but I believe all RACF violations 
are caught internally by DB2 and reported as SQL completion codes. RACF manages 
the whole security process itself -- either (the old way) totally internally or 
(the new way) by interfacing with RACF, ACF2 or TSS. I believe you are not 
going to get "classic" RACF violation messages for DB2 security violations. 
(Nor for CICS, but I know even less about CICS.)

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Pierre Fichaud
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 2:23 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: DB/2 and CICS security

If a security (RACF) violation occurs in a CICS region, where does the 
violation get reported?
I couldn't find anything in the CICS SMF records but I'll look again.
Do they get reported in the JESMSGLG or in a CICS ?
Does a CICS exit need to be installed?
There's tons of documentation to go through.
I figured it might be faster to use this forum to get an asnwer.

I don't have a CICS system to play with at the moment.

I need the same kind of info for DB/2.
I've yet to check the SMF record layouts.

Again I don't have a DB/2 system to play with.

Thanks in advance, Pierre.

--
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: DB/2 and CICS security [EXTERNAL]

[Matt Hogstrom]

You indicated RACF which sometimes people use generically for SAF).   If you 
have Top Secret or ACF2 there is an additional SMF record (type 230 IIRC).  TSS 
and ACF2 also generate the type 80s for consistency.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org
+1-919-656-0564
PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
Facebook   LinkedIn 
  Twitter 

“It may be cognitive, but, it ain’t intuitive."
— Hogstrom

> On Mar 19, 2021, at 7:14 PM, Feller, Paul 
> <02fc94e14c43-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> 
> Pierre, have you tried to look at the SMF Record Type 80 (Security Product 
> Processing) record for the information you want?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks.. 
>   
> Paul Feller
> GTS Mainframe Technical Support
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
> Pierre Fichaud
> Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 4:23 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: DB/2 and CICS security [EXTERNAL]
> 
> If a security (RACF) violation occurs in a CICS region, where does the 
> violation get reported?
> I couldn't find anything in the CICS SMF records but I'll look again.
> Do they get reported in the JESMSGLG or in a CICS ?
> Does a CICS exit need to be installed?
> There's tons of documentation to go through.
> I figured it might be faster to use this forum to get an asnwer.
> 
> I don't have a CICS system to play with at the moment.
> 
> I need the same kind of info for DB/2.
> I've yet to check the SMF record layouts.
> 
> Again I don't have a DB/2 system to play with.
> 
> Thanks in advance, Pierre.
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
> lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> 
> --
> Please note:  This message originated outside your organization. Please use 
> caution when opening links or attachments.
> 
> --
> 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: DB/2 and CICS security [EXTERNAL]

[Feller, Paul]

Pierre, have you tried to look at the SMF Record Type 80 (Security Product 
Processing) record for the information you want?



Thanks.. 
  
Paul Feller
GTS Mainframe Technical Support

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Pierre Fichaud
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 4:23 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: DB/2 and CICS security [EXTERNAL]

If a security (RACF) violation occurs in a CICS region, where does the 
violation get reported?
I couldn't find anything in the CICS SMF records but I'll look again.
Do they get reported in the JESMSGLG or in a CICS ?
Does a CICS exit need to be installed?
There's tons of documentation to go through.
I figured it might be faster to use this forum to get an asnwer.

I don't have a CICS system to play with at the moment.

I need the same kind of info for DB/2.
I've yet to check the SMF record layouts.

Again I don't have a DB/2 system to play with.

Thanks in advance, Pierre.

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

--
Please note:  This message originated outside your organization. Please use 
caution when opening links or attachments.

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

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Farley, Peter x23353]

Thanks Charles, I did already think of that, and it has performance 
disadvantages that I can't ignore.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 4:47 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

@Peter do you mean alphanumeric (A-Z, 0-9) or do you mean "any bit combination 
00 to FF"? I read it as "any bits" but you did say alphanumeric.

If you mean alphanumeric then you need a table of the 36 or 62 or whatever 
characters comprise your set. Then take my method, generate a number 0 to 35 or 
61, and use it to index into the table, and store that in each character 
position.

Alphanumeric guaranteed.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 11:58 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 18:20:04 +, Farley, Peter wrote:
>
>The actual application requirement is for alphanumeric random values of a 
>certain length.  I can’t say more than that without revealing company IP.
>
708 $ head -c16 /dev/random | uuencode -m Random.string
begin-base64 644 Random.string
bpREwrn14giB65RLelIW5A==


(but alphanumeric not guaranteed.)
--


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

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Farley, Peter x23353]

Thanks for the idea Gil, but I need guaranteed alphanumeric (upper case letters 
plus digits, nothing else).

Plus invoking z/OS *nix services dynamically is not cheap either.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 2:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 18:20:04 +, Farley, Peter wrote:
>
>The actual application requirement is for alphanumeric random values of a 
>certain length.  I can’t say more than that without revealing company IP.
>
708 $ head -c16 /dev/random | uuencode -m Random.string
begin-base64 644 Random.string
bpREwrn14giB65RLelIW5A==


(but alphanumeric not guaranteed.)

-- gil

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

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

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Farley, Peter x23353]

Yes, but then we have to have a loop to call random, multiply by 100, use the 
integer value of the result to pick a random character from the allowed ones 
for the field to be filled, with as many iterations as the length of the field. 
 Not cheap.

One STCKE is far easier and quicker.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 2:51 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

If it is like the crypto things I am familiar with, you could simulate it by 
generating a RANDOM value and multiplying by 255 or 256 (depending on the exact 
specs for RANDOM, which I do not have open at the moment) to get a value 
between 0 and 255. Do that repeatedly until you have a string of the length you 
need. It will not be crypto quality. It will be adequate for testing (but watch 
out for the tendency of things that work in test to move into production 
unchanged).

If you need crypto quality, there is no substitute for a crypto quality true 
random number generator.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 11:20 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

Charles,

The actual application requirement is for alphanumeric random values of a 
certain length.  I can’t say more than that without revealing company IP.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 1:31 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

> that only returns a fraction between 0 and 1, which could be useful 
> but quite a bit more work

What do you need? An integer between 0 or 1 and 'n'?

Multiplying the result of RANDOM times 'n' should give you that integer pretty 
readily, no?

This may not give you crypto quality, but the idea is right. What am I missing?

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 8:32 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

Update: It seems we are on z13 boxes at the moment, and they do not have the 
Message-Security-Assist Extension 7 feature necessary to use the TRNG functions 
of PRNO.  I could try the DRNG functions of PRNO but they seem to be a lot of 
work to use the right way (seeding, parameter blocks, etc.).  It would be far 
easier to use the COBOL RANDOM intrinsic, but that only returns a fraction 
between 0 and 1, which could be useful but quite a bit more work to incorporate 
into the application function at issue.

Lacking the COBOL UUID4 function here, the KISS principle says STCKE it will be 
for now.
--

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

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Farley, Peter x23353]

Thanks Salva, but as I said in my prior reply, this is not a case where DB2 is 
already in use.  The additional overhead to use DB2 for this would be far too 
large.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Salva Carrasco
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 2:31 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

Peter, 

Cobol UUID4 (available in 6.3) had a horrible performance on a z13. In z15, the 
performance is excellent. We opened a SR and they tell us about the random 
number generator.

If you can't wait and have Db2, I wrote a Db2 Funct to generate UUID based on 
TOD. It is available in 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/salva-rczero/Db2Functs__;!!Ebr-cpPeAnfNniQ8HSAI-g_K5b7VKg!bCD5fmMuILDyjE79RSciUFpZkrh4i2-_wegcax59ksCzii9Ga3lzg_g1ngbi7VsWVVb8NQ$
 

regards, salva.
--

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

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Farley, Peter x23353]

Thanks for the reference.  I see from the DB2 documentation that:

The GENERATE_UNIQUE function returns a bit data character string that is 
unique, compared to any other execution of the same function.

GENERATE_UNIQUE()

The schema is SYSIBM.

The GENERATE_UNIQUE function returns a bit data character string 13 bytes long 
(CHAR(13) FOR BIT DATA) that is unique compared to any other execution of the 
same function. The function is defined as not deterministic. Although the 
function has no arguments, the empty parentheses must be specified when the 
function is invoked.
The result of the function is a unique value that includes the internal form of 
the Universal Time, Coordinated (UTC) and, if in a sysplex environment, the 
sysplex member where the function was processed.
The result cannot be null.
The result of this function can be used to provide unique values in a table. 
The sequence is based on the time when the function was executed.

Sounds to me like the first 12 bytes of STCKE plus the last byte of the 
"programmable field" in the STCKE result.

That looks like lots of overhead to connect to and call a DB2 function when a 
simple STCKE gets you the same information.

The application program at issue is not already using DB2, so this one is not 
in the running on a performance basis alone.

If the program needing the value was already using DB2, maybe not so bad,  but 
in my case it is not already accessing DB2.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Salva Carrasco
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 2:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

Peter, GENERATE UNIQUE Db2 function, warrants the uniqueness aceoss a Sysplex 
and it is based on TODE.
--

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

Re: DB/2 and CICS security

[Charles Mills]

There is a DB2 mailing list, run by IDUG. Google can find it for you.

I do not *know* the DB2 answer for certain but I believe all RACF violations 
are caught internally by DB2 and reported as SQL completion codes. RACF manages 
the whole security process itself -- either (the old way) totally internally or 
(the new way) by interfacing with RACF, ACF2 or TSS. I believe you are not 
going to get "classic" RACF violation messages for DB2 security violations. 
(Nor for CICS, but I know even less about CICS.)

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Pierre Fichaud
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 2:23 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: DB/2 and CICS security

If a security (RACF) violation occurs in a CICS region, where does the 
violation get reported?
I couldn't find anything in the CICS SMF records but I'll look again.
Do they get reported in the JESMSGLG or in a CICS ?
Does a CICS exit need to be installed?
There's tons of documentation to go through.
I figured it might be faster to use this forum to get an asnwer.

I don't have a CICS system to play with at the moment.

I need the same kind of info for DB/2.
I've yet to check the SMF record layouts.

Again I don't have a DB/2 system to play with.

Thanks in advance, Pierre.

--
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: Overlapped I/O completion

[Seymour J Metz]

> Is there any reason to do a WAIT before the CHECK? 

EOV processing.

> There's little reason to use BSAM. 

NOTE, POINT.

> The consensus in this thread has been,
> QSAM is at least nearly as good as BSAM;
> perhaps better

There's a good deal of overlap between the BSAM and QSAM code.


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Paul Gilmartin [000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 3:57 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Overlapped I/O completion

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 12:43:38 -0700, Ed Jaffe wrote:

>On 3/19/2021 12:35 PM, Joseph Reichman wrote:
>> So this is what I will do
>>
>> I’ll do 3 reads in the first since i need to get myself going I’ll issue the
>> WAIT using the ECB from the DECB
>> Than when I finish processing that buffer and need to go to the second I/O 
>> I’ll issue a WAIT for that
>> etc
>
>Don't forget to issue CHECK after WAIT.
>
Is there any reason to do a WAIT before the CHECK?  I never did.

There's little reason to use BSAM.  The consensus in this thread
has been, QSAM is at least nearly as good as BSAM; perhaps
better because it knows the best way to deal with current
devices, when to WAIT, etc.  And has far less coding effort.

GET LOCATE might save a few instructions/record vis-a-vis
GET MOVE.

-- 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

DB/2 and CICS security

[Pierre Fichaud]

If a security (RACF) violation occurs in a CICS region, where does the 
violation get reported?
I couldn't find anything in the CICS SMF records but I'll look again.
Do they get reported in the JESMSGLG or in a CICS ?
Does a CICS exit need to be installed?
There's tons of documentation to go through.
I figured it might be faster to use this forum to get an asnwer.

I don't have a CICS system to play with at the moment.

I need the same kind of info for DB/2.
I've yet to check the SMF record layouts.

Again I don't have a DB/2 system to play with.

Thanks in advance, Pierre.

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

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Charles Mills]

@Peter do you mean alphanumeric (A-Z, 0-9) or do you mean "any bit combination 
00 to FF"? I read it as "any bits" but you did say alphanumeric.

If you mean alphanumeric then you need a table of the 36 or 62 or whatever 
characters comprise your set. Then take my method, generate a number 0 to 35 or 
61, and use it to index into the table, and store that in each character 
position.

Alphanumeric guaranteed.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 11:58 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 18:20:04 +, Farley, Peter wrote:
>
>The actual application requirement is for alphanumeric random values of a 
>certain length.  I can’t say more than that without revealing company IP.
>
708 $ head -c16 /dev/random | uuencode -m Random.string
begin-base64 644 Random.string
bpREwrn14giB65RLelIW5A==


(but alphanumeric not guaranteed.)

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

Re: Overlapped I/O completion

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:58:57 -0400, Joseph Reichman wrote:

>Data is not there after check 
>
WTF!?

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 11:25:12 -0700, Ed Jaffe wrote:

>On 3/19/2021 11:09 AM, Joseph Reichman wrote:
>>...
>> I check to see if the first fullword has been populated by the BDW
>
That's called "Bit Spinning".  Not advised.

>The DECB that you issue CHECK against contains an actual embedded ECB at
>offset +0. There is an implied WAIT inside CHECK, ...

Guess whom I trust.

-- gil

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

DUMP command options

[Steve Horein]

Hi!
If I have a DB2 data sharing group that has a well defined naming scheme,
is there any effective difference between using:

   - an IEADMCxx member that identifies the job names to dump with properly
   placed wildcards and using RO (sys1,sys2,sysx,...),DUMP PARMLIB=xx
   - an IEADMCxx member that identifies the job names to dump, but uses
   properly defined REMOTE=(SYSLIST=()) statements and using DUMP
   PARMLIB=xx (no ROUTE command)

The goal is to DUMP all members of the data sharing group regardless of
what system the members reside on.
I feel defining an IEADMCxx member that takes advantage of wildcards would
be less complex than defining a member with REMOTE= statements.
Would there be a concern relating to timing between using the ROUTE command
vs. using REMOTE= statements?

Thoughts?

Thanks in advance,
Steve

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

Re: Overlapped I/O completion

[Joseph Reichman]

Checks checks for eodad

Thanks 



> On Mar 19, 2021, at 4:02 PM, Ed Jaffe  wrote:
> 
> On 3/19/2021 12:57 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 12:43:38 -0700, Ed Jaffe wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Don't forget to issue CHECK after WAIT.
>>> 
>> Is there any reason to do a WAIT before the CHECK?  I never did.
> 
> You would issue WAIT first if you were in an environment that could not 
> tolerate implied WAITs and required you to use a WAIT service (such as CICS 
> in the QR TCB).
> 
> If you're just coding a batch program or TSO, then you can just code CHECK.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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

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

Re: Overlapped I/O completion

[Ed Jaffe]

On 3/19/2021 12:57 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 12:43:38 -0700, Ed Jaffe wrote:



Don't forget to issue CHECK after WAIT.


Is there any reason to do a WAIT before the CHECK?  I never did.


You would issue WAIT first if you were in an environment that could not 
tolerate implied WAITs and required you to use a WAIT service (such as 
CICS in the QR TCB).


If you're just coding a batch program or TSO, then you can just code CHECK.


--
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

Re: IPL from SCSI DVD or via NVMe

[Seymour J Metz]

CP DEFINE Reader as 00C

Still valid in 7.2.


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Ed 
Jaffe [edja...@phoenixsoftware.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 10:51 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IPL from SCSI DVD or via NVMe

On 3/18/2021 12:03 AM, Timothy Sipples wrote:
>
> Just to keep you amused (or something?) the z/OS Customized Offerings
> Driver has different version and release numbers than the skinny/mini z/OS
> it contains, so just be aware of that. Now you are. :-)

Thanks, Tim. I'll try to order one. Hopefully inspection of the COD
deliverable will help me figure out how to make my own. Then I can share
the details in a SHARE Bit Bucket...

It seems ridiculous to me that IBM still documents how to IPL DSS from a
card deck (A CARD DECK!), yet puts zero effort into helping customers
IPL their utilities from FTP and other modern 21st-Century locations.
Yet, they do it themselves internally (e.g., as part of COD) because
doing so is necessary!

This is a prime example of the kind of nonsensical "baggage" that holds
our great platform down...


--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1IbB307d5cjMve2IshLdUNOsTo4N5yGdPWfmuhFaYpTlbewPTDOLXwnm9l-d03OQxqUpDuWfMZTflRRMCxCr38Ymebm5N806yV8j6ekMfbdyJoI3Tz3zRHVXS4T5ryr5CHJIgErjZQvBYbcTYHXcDAhBulw5YpizpxxI3hH7yU8322dGhPbN3ekrx6c3Os5ZzNAC4j_adfsf0vJ9nM3yanA_UF9uWrNcScy6qHjd3SBAilPmdhqM4FDG1sI8_eJDZwP61DJmLPjkfOGFFnHQBHNaU7msXkftaK13brkWWuOC681NPTKCkPveaIs8qpPreNxL2MxcsMThqEdiDPdjjLnYOQZqGDEv8qrvCGSaV95A4kFAU9Zjze3sKLgsWKCOjqPrbdXbStg14vqr2xaPn_EKbuUQhxznu61XoIh9ycGyEa7QD7HdN8k5vCRK65X9F/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.phoenixsoftware.com%2F

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

Re: Overlapped I/O completion

[Joseph Reichman]

Data is not there after check 



> On Mar 19, 2021, at 3:57 PM, Paul Gilmartin 
> <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 12:43:38 -0700, Ed Jaffe wrote:
> 
>>> On 3/19/2021 12:35 PM, Joseph Reichman wrote:
>>> So this is what I will do
>>> 
>>> I’ll do 3 reads in the first since i need to get myself going I’ll issue the
>>> WAIT using the ECB from the DECB
>>> Than when I finish processing that buffer and need to go to the second I/O 
>>> I’ll issue a WAIT for that
>>> etc
>> 
>> Don't forget to issue CHECK after WAIT.
>> 
> Is there any reason to do a WAIT before the CHECK?  I never did.
> 
> There's little reason to use BSAM.  The consensus in this thread
> has been, QSAM is at least nearly as good as BSAM; perhaps
> better because it knows the best way to deal with current
> devices, when to WAIT, etc.  And has far less coding effort.
> 
> GET LOCATE might save a few instructions/record vis-a-vis
> GET MOVE.
> 
> -- 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: Overlapped I/O completion

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 12:43:38 -0700, Ed Jaffe wrote:

>On 3/19/2021 12:35 PM, Joseph Reichman wrote:
>> So this is what I will do
>>
>> I’ll do 3 reads in the first since i need to get myself going I’ll issue the
>> WAIT using the ECB from the DECB
>> Than when I finish processing that buffer and need to go to the second I/O 
>> I’ll issue a WAIT for that
>> etc
>
>Don't forget to issue CHECK after WAIT.
> 
Is there any reason to do a WAIT before the CHECK?  I never did.

There's little reason to use BSAM.  The consensus in this thread
has been, QSAM is at least nearly as good as BSAM; perhaps
better because it knows the best way to deal with current
devices, when to WAIT, etc.  And has far less coding effort.

GET LOCATE might save a few instructions/record vis-a-vis
GET MOVE.

-- gil

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

Re: Overlapped I/O completion

[Ed Jaffe]

On 3/19/2021 12:35 PM, Joseph Reichman wrote:

So this is what I will do

I’ll do 3 reads in the first since i need to get myself going I’ll issue the
WAIT using the ECB from the DECB
Than when I finish processing that buffer and need to go to the second I/O I’ll 
issue a WAIT for that
etc


Don't forget to issue CHECK after WAIT.

--

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

Re: Overlapped I/O completion

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:35:39 -0400, Joseph Reichman wrote:

>So this is what I will do 
>
>I’ll do 3 reads in the first since i need to get myself going I’ll issue the 
>WAIT using the ECB from the DECB 
>Than when I finish processing that buffer and need to go to the second I/O 
>I’ll issue a WAIT for that 
>etc 
> 
What's wrong with CHECK?

-- gil

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

Re: Overlapped I/O completion

[Joseph Reichman]

So this is what I will do 

I’ll do 3 reads in the first since i need to get myself going I’ll issue the 
WAIT using the ECB from the DECB 
Than when I finish processing that buffer and need to go to the second I/O I’ll 
issue a WAIT for that 
etc 



> On Mar 19, 2021, at 3:05 PM, Seymour J Metz  wrote:
> 
> The only safe way is to check the ECB. Relying on the buffer without first 
> testing for completion will lead to errors.
> 
> 
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
> 
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
> Joseph Reichman [reichman...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 2:09 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Overlapped I/O completion
> 
> Hi
> 
> When doing overlapped I/O is there a way to tell if the I/O had completed on 
> the subsequent reads
> 
> I check to see if the first fullword has been populated by the BDW
> 
> --
> 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: MSG

[Seymour J Metz]

It would be helpful to include the message number in the subject.

As I recall, there is a discussion of SDSF security requirements in both the 
RACF and SDSF documentation. In addition to authorizing access to the SDSF 
address space, you will probably need to tailor authorization to commands. What 
are you currently doing for SDSF security?


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Steve Beaver [st...@stevebeaver.com]
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 11:26 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: MSG

Has anyone seen this message before know how to fix the prblem

ISF458E Not authorized to connect to the SDSF server. Verify read
access to the ISF.CONNECT.system resource in the SDSF class.






--
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: Overlapped I/O completion

[Seymour J Metz]

The only safe way is to check the ECB. Relying on the buffer without first 
testing for completion will lead to errors.


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Joseph Reichman [reichman...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 2:09 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Overlapped I/O completion

Hi

When doing overlapped I/O is there a way to tell if the I/O had completed on 
the subsequent reads

I check to see if the first fullword has been populated by the BDW

--
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: Overlapped I/O completion

[Seymour J Metz]

There may be a delay for EOV processing. AFAIK there is never a delay for 7F.


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


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Ed 
Jaffe [edja...@phoenixsoftware.com]
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 2:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Overlapped I/O completion

On 3/19/2021 11:09 AM, Joseph Reichman wrote:
> Hi
>
> When doing overlapped I/O is there a way to tell if the I/O had completed on 
> the subsequent reads
>
> I check to see if the first fullword has been populated by the BDW

The DECB that you issue CHECK against contains an actual embedded ECB at
offset +0. There is an implied WAIT inside CHECK, but you can certainly
inspect the POST bit yourself and/or WAIT on the ECB yourself using
whatever mechanisms you have available (such as placing its address into
a larger WAIT list). Once the WAIT has been satisfied, you still need to
issue CHECK, but it runs immediately without suspending...

--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 18:20:04 +, Farley, Peter wrote:
>
>The actual application requirement is for alphanumeric random values of a 
>certain length.  I can’t say more than that without revealing company IP.
>
708 $ head -c16 /dev/random | uuencode -m Random.string
begin-base64 644 Random.string
bpREwrn14giB65RLelIW5A==


(but alphanumeric not guaranteed.)

-- gil

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

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Charles Mills]

If it is like the crypto things I am familiar with, you could simulate it by 
generating a RANDOM value and multiplying by 255 or 256 (depending on the exact 
specs for RANDOM, which I do not have open at the moment) to get a value 
between 0 and 255. Do that repeatedly until you have a string of the length you 
need. It will not be crypto quality. It will be adequate for testing (but watch 
out for the tendency of things that work in test to move into production 
unchanged).

If you need crypto quality, there is no substitute for a crypto quality true 
random number generator.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 11:20 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

Charles,

The actual application requirement is for alphanumeric random values of a 
certain length.  I can’t say more than that without revealing company IP.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 1:31 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

> that only returns a fraction between 0 and 1, which could be useful 
> but quite a bit more work

What do you need? An integer between 0 or 1 and 'n'?

Multiplying the result of RANDOM times 'n' should give you that integer pretty 
readily, no?

This may not give you crypto quality, but the idea is right. What am I missing?

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 8:32 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

Update: It seems we are on z13 boxes at the moment, and they do not have the 
Message-Security-Assist Extension 7 feature necessary to use the TRNG functions 
of PRNO.  I could try the DRNG functions of PRNO but they seem to be a lot of 
work to use the right way (seeding, parameter blocks, etc.).  It would be far 
easier to use the COBOL RANDOM intrinsic, but that only returns a fraction 
between 0 and 1, which could be useful but quite a bit more work to incorporate 
into the application function at issue.

Lacking the COBOL UUID4 function here, the KISS principle says STCKE it will be 
for now.
--

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: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Salva Carrasco]

Peter, 

Cobol UUID4 (available in 6.3) had a horrible performance on a z13. In z15, the 
performance is excellent. We opened a SR and they tell us about the random 
number generator.

If you can't wait and have Db2, I wrote a Db2 Funct to generate UUID based on 
TOD. It is available in https://github.com/salva-rczero/Db2Functs

regards, salva.

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

Re: Overlapped I/O completion

[Joseph Reichman]

First byte Of DECB/ECB was x’7F’ 40 bit ( posted bit was on )



> On Mar 19, 2021, at 2:25 PM, Ed Jaffe  wrote:
> 
> On 3/19/2021 11:09 AM, Joseph Reichman wrote:
>> Hi
>> 
>> When doing overlapped I/O is there a way to tell if the I/O had completed on 
>> the subsequent reads
>> 
>> I check to see if the first fullword has been populated by the BDW
> 
> The DECB that you issue CHECK against contains an actual embedded ECB at 
> offset +0. There is an implied WAIT inside CHECK, but you can certainly 
> inspect the POST bit yourself and/or WAIT on the ECB yourself using whatever 
> mechanisms you have available (such as placing its address into a larger WAIT 
> list). Once the WAIT has been satisfied, you still need to issue CHECK, but 
> it runs immediately without suspending...
> 
> -- 
> 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

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

Re: Overlapped I/O completion

[Ed Jaffe]

On 3/19/2021 11:09 AM, Joseph Reichman wrote:

Hi

When doing overlapped I/O is there a way to tell if the I/O had completed on 
the subsequent reads

I check to see if the first fullword has been populated by the BDW


The DECB that you issue CHECK against contains an actual embedded ECB at 
offset +0. There is an implied WAIT inside CHECK, but you can certainly 
inspect the POST bit yourself and/or WAIT on the ECB yourself using 
whatever mechanisms you have available (such as placing its address into 
a larger WAIT list). Once the WAIT has been satisfied, you still need to 
issue CHECK, but it runs immediately without suspending...


--
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

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Salva Carrasco]

Peter, GENERATE UNIQUE Db2 function, warrants the uniqueness aceoss a Sysplex 
and it is based on TODE.

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

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Farley, Peter x23353]

Charles,

The actual application requirement is for alphanumeric random values of a 
certain length.  I can’t say more than that without revealing company IP.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 1:31 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

> that only returns a fraction between 0 and 1, which could be useful 
> but quite a bit more work

What do you need? An integer between 0 or 1 and 'n'?

Multiplying the result of RANDOM times 'n' should give you that integer pretty 
readily, no?

This may not give you crypto quality, but the idea is right. What am I missing?

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 8:32 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

Update: It seems we are on z13 boxes at the moment, and they do not have the 
Message-Security-Assist Extension 7 feature necessary to use the TRNG functions 
of PRNO.  I could try the DRNG functions of PRNO but they seem to be a lot of 
work to use the right way (seeding, parameter blocks, etc.).  It would be far 
easier to use the COBOL RANDOM intrinsic, but that only returns a fraction 
between 0 and 1, which could be useful but quite a bit more work to incorporate 
into the application function at issue.

Lacking the COBOL UUID4 function here, the KISS principle says STCKE it will be 
for now.
--

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

Re: Overlapped I/O completion

[Joseph Reichman]

Running under test check doesn’t seem to wait after check the buffer is hex 
zeros 
Maybe I issue wait of the DECB->ECB

> On Mar 19, 2021, at 2:15 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 
> <031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> 
> Joe,
> 
> That is what the READ ECB is for.  When that ECB is posted then the READ is 
> complete.
> 
> Use the CHECK macro to determine if a particular READ is complete.
> 
> Peter
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
> Joseph Reichman
> Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 2:10 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Overlapped I/O completion
> 
> Hi 
> 
> When doing overlapped I/O is there a way to tell if the I/O had completed on 
> the subsequent reads 
> 
> I check to see if the first fullword has been populated by the BDW
> --
> 
> 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: Overlapped I/O completion

[Farley, Peter x23353]

Joe,

That is what the READ ECB is for.  When that ECB is posted then the READ is 
complete.

Use the CHECK macro to determine if a particular READ is complete.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Joseph Reichman
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 2:10 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Overlapped I/O completion

Hi 

When doing overlapped I/O is there a way to tell if the I/O had completed on 
the subsequent reads 

I check to see if the first fullword has been populated by the BDW
--

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

Overlapped I/O completion

[Joseph Reichman]

Hi 

When doing overlapped I/O is there a way to tell if the I/O had completed on 
the subsequent reads 

I check to see if the first fullword has been populated by the BDW

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

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Charles Mills]

> that only returns a fraction between 0 and 1, which could be useful but quite 
> a bit more work

What do you need? An integer between 0 or 1 and 'n'?

Multiplying the result of RANDOM times 'n' should give you that integer pretty 
readily, no?

This may not give you crypto quality, but the idea is right. What am I missing?

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 8:32 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

Update: It seems we are on z13 boxes at the moment, and they do not have the 
Message-Security-Assist Extension 7 feature necessary to use the TRNG functions 
of PRNO.  I could try the DRNG functions of PRNO but they seem to be a lot of 
work to use the right way (seeding, parameter blocks, etc.).  It would be far 
easier to use the COBOL RANDOM intrinsic, but that only returns a fraction 
between 0 and 1, which could be useful but quite a bit more work to incorporate 
into the application function at issue.

Lacking the COBOL UUID4 function here, the KISS principle says STCKE it will be 
for now.

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

Re: MSG

[Charles Mills]

Did you consider

https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.3.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r3
.e0zm100/SDSF_SDSFAUX_V2R3.htm 

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Steve Beaver
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 8:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: MSG

Has anyone seen this message before know how to fix the prblem

ISF458E Not authorized to connect to the SDSF server. Verify read
access to the ISF.CONNECT.system resource in the SDSF class. 



 


--
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: MSG

[Carmen Vitullo]

I forgot about the ISFPARM part, yes I set; 
  
   CONNECT AUXPROC(SDSFAUX),    AUXNAME(SDSFAUX),   
   AUXSAF(NOFAILRC4), 
   DEFAULT(YES) 
Carmen Vitullo 

   

-Original Message-

From: Todd <0316e668f7df-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
To: IBM-MAIN 
Date: Friday, 19 March 2021 10:32 AM CDT
Subject: Re: MSG

Try doing a SET SECTRACE in SDSF and then re-attempt the failing command. You 
should get a good amount of info in the SYSLOG to help resolve. 

We ran into some similar issues when going to 2.4. 

We also set this in SDSF to resolve when some things are not defined:

CONNECT DEFAULT(COND),/* Default server if not already assigned */ 
AUXSAF(NOFAILRC4), 

Thanks

Todd Burrell | Sr. IT Systems Engineer | Mainframe

todd.burr...@bcbsfl.com
M 404.723.2017



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Steve Beaver
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 11:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: MSG

Has anyone seen this message before know how to fix the prblem

ISF458E Not authorized to connect to the SDSF server. Verify read access to the 
ISF.CONNECT.system resource in the SDSF class. 






--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
We comply with applicable Federal civil rights laws and do not discriminate.

You may access the Non-Discrimination and Accessibility Notice here 
.

Language Assistance Available:

Español, Kreyol Ayisien, Tiếng Việt, Português, 中文, français, Tagalog, русский, 
italiano, Deutsche, 한국어, Polskie, Gujarati, ไทย, العربية, 日本語, فارسی 


Florida Blue is a trade name of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. 
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, Inc., and its subsidiary and affiliate 
companies are not responsible for errors or omissions in this e-mail message. 
Any personal comments made in this e-mail do not reflect the views of Blue 
Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. The information contained in this 
document may be confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual 
or entity to whom it is addressed. This document may contain material that is 
privileged or protected from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not 
the intended recipient or the individual responsible for delivering to the 
intended recipient, please (1) be advised that any use, dissemination, 
forwarding, or copying of this document IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED; and (2) notify 
sender immediately by telephone and destroy the document. THANK YOU.


-- 
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: MSG

[Carmen Vitullo]

It's been a long time since the SDSFAUX address space has been used for certain 
SDSF functions, When I first saw this message, I want to say back in z/OS 2.2 I 
used the migration guide + the SDSF operations and customization Guide to 
define all the new security resources I needed. once defined no more error 
messages   
   
Carmen Vitullo 

   

-Original Message-

From: Steve 
To: IBM-MAIN 
Date: Friday, 19 March 2021 10:27 AM CDT
Subject: MSG

Has anyone seen this message before know how to fix the prblem 

ISF458E Not authorized to connect to the SDSF server. Verify read 
access to the ISF.CONNECT.system resource in the SDSF class. 






-- 
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: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Farley, Peter x23353]

Update: It seems we are on z13 boxes at the moment, and they do not have the 
Message-Security-Assist Extension 7 feature necessary to use the TRNG functions 
of PRNO.  I could try the DRNG functions of PRNO but they seem to be a lot of 
work to use the right way (seeding, parameter blocks, etc.).  It would be far 
easier to use the COBOL RANDOM intrinsic, but that only returns a fraction 
between 0 and 1, which could be useful but quite a bit more work to incorporate 
into the application function at issue.

Lacking the COBOL UUID4 function here, the KISS principle says STCKE it will be 
for now.

Thanks all for the discussion and recommendations.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 4:21 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

Thanks Ed, I hadn't actually looked at the RNG capabilities in CPACF in recent 
times.  From an initial once-over of the TRNG capability described in the 
latest PoOP, it may be a better source of data than STCKE for my application.  
I will need to make some performance measurements to make sure I am not slowing 
the application process flow too much.

The COBOL UUID4 function may be the "future state" version for my application 
requirements, once we are up to date enough to use it.  That will need some 
performance measuring too once we are there.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Ed 
Jaffe
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 10:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

On 3/18/2021 6:38 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>
> Using clock values as a source of entropy is discouraged.  If a 
> (fe)malefactor can make a good guess at an interval during which the 
> clock is sampled there's little entropy available.

IBM Z was recently enhanced with a true random source in CPACF.

For all the many decades before that, all "random" numbers on the mainframe 
were actually pseudo-random...

--

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

Re: MSG

[Burrell, Todd]

Try doing a SET SECTRACE in SDSF and then re-attempt the failing command.  You 
should get a good amount of info in the SYSLOG to help resolve.  

We ran into some similar issues when going to 2.4. 

We also set this in SDSF to resolve when some things are not defined:

CONNECT DEFAULT(COND),/* Default server if not already assigned*/ 
  AUXSAF(NOFAILRC4),  

Thanks

Todd Burrell | Sr. IT Systems Engineer | Mainframe

todd.burr...@bcbsfl.com
M 404.723.2017



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Steve Beaver
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 11:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: MSG

Has anyone seen this message before know how to fix the prblem

ISF458E Not authorized to connect to the SDSF server. Verify read access to the 
ISF.CONNECT.system resource in the SDSF class. 



 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
We comply with applicable Federal civil rights laws and do not discriminate.

You may access the Non-Discrimination and Accessibility Notice here 
.

Language Assistance Available:

Español, Kreyol Ayisien, Tiếng Việt, Português, 中文, français, Tagalog, русский, 
italiano, Deutsche, 한국어, Polskie, Gujarati, ไทย, العربية, 日本語, فارسی 


Florida Blue is a trade name of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, Inc.  
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, Inc., and its subsidiary and affiliate 
companies are not responsible for errors or omissions in this e-mail message. 
Any personal comments made in this e-mail do not reflect the views of Blue 
Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, Inc.  The information contained in this 
document may be confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual 
or entity to whom it is addressed.  This document may contain material that is 
privileged or protected from disclosure under applicable law.  If you are not 
the intended recipient or the individual responsible for delivering to the 
intended recipient, please (1) be advised that any use, dissemination, 
forwarding, or copying of this document IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED; and (2) notify 
sender immediately by telephone and destroy the document. THANK YOU.


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

MSG

[Steve Beaver]

Has anyone seen this message before know how to fix the prblem

ISF458E Not authorized to connect to the SDSF server. Verify read
access to the ISF.CONNECT.system resource in the SDSF class. 



 


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

Re: This Call-Assembler-inside-COBOL technique works, but is it risky to use?

[Farley, Peter x23353]

Thanks Charles.  As I indicated in one of my earlier responses, I agree with 
you and am taking that route.  Too many chances for failure in the future.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Charles Mills
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 10:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: This Call-Assembler-inside-COBOL technique works, but is it risky 
to use?

@Peter, I have given this some serious thought. Thanks for the interesting 
problem!

I believe you should eschew the clever "assembler in working storage"
approach. If the UUID4 approach works for you, then of course, by all means use 
it.

If not, then you should go with a conventional external callable assembler 
routine. Here is my logic.

I hear you on the assembler maintenance issues. I think the external assembler 
is very unlikely to fail or require maintenance, but if it does, the task is 
straightforward. If there is no talent at your shop that can do it, then 
certainly they can find a contractor to do it. There is no complex business 
logic embedded in the assembler. It will be a simple problem.

OTOH if you go with the working storage approach, I think there is a decent 
likelihood of failure sometime in the future. Perhaps they change the COBOL 
compiler, as I suggested. Perhaps IBM changes the "executability" of working 
storage, as @Peter suggested. If that happens then your organization has a 
complex and difficult problem. If it is an exception on non-executable storage 
LE is likely to be totally boggled by the error. Your shop will have a complex 
problem that someone with knowledge of the hardware, knowledge of COBOL, and 
then ultimately decent assembler skills, is going to have to sort out. That is 
going to be tricky. Some future programmer may be cursing your memory.

That is why I think you should eschew your working storage technique, as clever 
and as fascinating as it is, and go with either UUID4 or a conventional call to 
assembler.

Charles
--

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

Re: This Call-Assembler-inside-COBOL technique works, but is it risky to use?

[Charles Mills]

@Peter, I have given this some serious thought. Thanks for the interesting
problem!

I believe you should eschew the clever "assembler in working storage"
approach. If the UUID4 approach works for you, then of course, by all means
use it.

If not, then you should go with a conventional external callable assembler
routine. Here is my logic.

I hear you on the assembler maintenance issues. I think the external
assembler is very unlikely to fail or require maintenance, but if it does,
the task is straightforward. If there is no talent at your shop that can do
it, then certainly they can find a contractor to do it. There is no complex
business logic embedded in the assembler. It will be a simple problem.

OTOH if you go with the working storage approach, I think there is a decent
likelihood of failure sometime in the future. Perhaps they change the COBOL
compiler, as I suggested. Perhaps IBM changes the "executability" of working
storage, as @Peter suggested. If that happens then your organization has a
complex and difficult problem. If it is an exception on non-executable
storage LE is likely to be totally boggled by the error. Your shop will have
a complex problem that someone with knowledge of the hardware, knowledge of
COBOL, and then ultimately decent assembler skills, is going to have to sort
out. That is going to be tricky. Some future programmer may be cursing your
memory.

That is why I think you should eschew your working storage technique, as
clever and as fascinating as it is, and go with either UUID4 or a
conventional call to assembler.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 8:50 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: This Call-Assembler-inside-COBOL technique works, but is it risky
to use?

I discovered that one can code and call extremely simple assembler code from
completely within a COBOL source program, but it is a two-step process which
I will describe below.

My question is whether using a technique like this is "risky" in the sense
that it may someday, under a future incarnation of the compiler, stop
working?

The technique:

Code a simple assembler program like the following and browse the resulting
listing that shows the generated object code:

COBSTCKE CSECT ,
 L 15,0(,1)  GET ARGUMENT ADDRESS
 STCKE 0(15) STCKE INTO ARGUMENT AREA
 XR15,15 SET RETURN CODE = 0
 BR14RETURN TO CALLER

Then copy the generated object code into a COBOL source program as follows:

   ID DIVISION.
   PROGRAM-ID. COBSTCKE.
   ENVIRONMENT DIVISION.
   DATA DIVISION.
   WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
   01  WS-TOD-VALUE  PIC  X(16).

   01  WS-GETTOD-PROGRAM.
  * GET ARGUMENT ADDRESS L  15,0(,1)
   05  FILLER   PIC  X(04) VALUE X'58F01000'.
  * STCKE INTO ARGUMENT AREA STCKE 0(15)
   05  FILLER   PIC  X(04) VALUE X'B278F000'.
  * SET RETURN-CODE = 0  XR 15,15
   05  FILLER   PIC  X(02) VALUE X'17FF'.
  * RETURN TO CALLER BR 14
   05  FILLER   PIC  X(02) VALUE X'07FE'.

   01  WS-GETTOD-PTR.
   05  GETTOD-ADDRPROCEDURE-POINTER VALUE NULL.
   05  FILLER REDEFINES GETTOD-ADDR.
   10  GETTOD-ADDR1   POINTER.
   10  GETTOD-ADDR2   POINTER.

   PROCEDURE DIVISION.

   SET GETTOD-ADDR1 TO ADDRESS OF WS-GETTOD-PROGRAM.
   CALL GETTOD-ADDR USING WS-TOD-VALUE.
   DISPLAY FUNCTION HEX-OF (WS-TOD-VALUE).
   GOBACK.

Peter

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: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Peter Relson]

Regarding the questions about order of clock values in a multi-system 
environment, if you want/need such ordering, you should use the STCKSYNC 
service. It has never been clear to me how useful that is since the saving 
of the time and the processing of the event are not atomic.

There are likely thousands of things within the operating system that are 
done in order to meet architectural requirements. They are not documented 
as such. That is why there is an operating system, so you don't have to 
deal with them. If the architecture indicates that something needs to be 
done, it is done. If there is architectural flexibility in "how" then the 
OS might take advantage of that. 

If we thought it appropriate for someone to code to it, then it could be 
an interface. For the programmable field of the clock, we do not. It is 
just more bits. If someone makes a case that it can help with diagnosis to 
understand (but not code to), then we would consider documenting (in a 
diagnosis guide) the current, but could change at any time, 
implementation.

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: CBT Tape Updates

[Doug]

Tom has a Very Good point. 
Keep the ‘tape’ and save all the searches. Not to mention all the web page 
maintenance.

Just my 2 cents.
Doug 

.

On Mar 18, 2021, at 23:35, Ron Wells 
<02ebc63ff5ef-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

Good idea

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Dana Mitchell
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 5:28 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CBT Tape Updates

** EXTERNAL EMAIL - USE CAUTION **


On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 06:52:19 -0400, Tony Thigpen  wrote:

> Skip the "real"/AWS tape. Maybe just cut one only on request.

I agree, another vote for skipping the tape paradigm all together.  Just a web 
page maybe with the listing of the descriptions from file 001  (without all the 
extra tape info).   And a link to download each file.


Dana

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


Email Disclaimer

This E-mail contains confidential information belonging to the sender, which 
may be legally privileged information. This information is intended only for 
the use of the individual or entity addressed above. If you are not the 
intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering it to 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, 
distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of the 
E-mail or attached files is strictly prohibited.

--
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: TRNG (was: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?)

[Radoslaw Skorupka]

W dniu 19.03.2021 o 12:59, Paul Gilmartin pisze:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 14:43:05 +0800, Timothy Sipples wrote:

...
Paul Gilmartin wrote:

The latter suggests that a pseudo RNG is periodically reseeded
by the TRNG

Yes, that's right. CPACF on the IBM z14 and LinuxONE II models, and
higher, have this feature. If you try to use the TRNG for every random
number request it's really slow, but fortunately that's not required to
achieve the desired, certified outcome. Seeding is rather important,
though, and that's why they're there.


Thanks.  UNIX has long had /dev/random, a TRNG (subject to hardware
availability) and /dev/urandom, a seeded PRNG.

For a while I had a Solaris tower under my desk.  The perceptible
difference was that "cat /dev/random >/dev/null" caused the fan
to speed up audibly; "cat /dev/urandom >/dev/null" was silent.


Didn't you get B37 abend on /dev/null dataset?
;-)


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
(looking for new job)
Lodz, Poland

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

Re: Any z/OS sandbox available for a university student I know?

[Radoslaw Skorupka]

Yes, of course! It is just I mentioned: COCOM. Coordinating Committee 
for Multilateral Export Controls.
I even remember times when (some) hard disk drives were under CoCom 
restrictions.
Funny fact: devices under CoCom could not be legally exported to Poland, 
but some devices (oscilloscopes) were manufactured in Poland and 
exported - so re-export back to Poland was illegal.


And of course it was circumvented, mostly using secret service, TLA's 
and spies. Really.
We (Eastern Bloc) had even source codes long time after IBM stopped 
distribution. There were many interesting stories, IMHO it is good 
material for a movie. :-)


However our banks started almost from scratch. I remember my co-worker 
told me they started bank having two PC compatible machines. It was 
approx. 1990. Yes: two polish clones of IBM PC 286.
So, later popular platform was Novell Netware LAN with Clipper 
applications or something on Btrieve. And some Unix-based systems, 
mostly ICL machines (DRS 6000). Reason: ICL had an office in Poland and 
despite CoCom the sold us a license for their mainframe called Odra 1300 
in Poland or ICT 1900 in UK. Later they sold us other machines.


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
(looking for new job)
Lodz, Poland





W dniu 18.03.2021 o 23:54, Mike Schwab pisze:

I would say the the reason would be the Iron curtain.  IBM mainframes
weren't available behind the iron curtain and USSR clones were pretty
limited availability.

On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 5:33 PM Radoslaw Skorupka
 wrote:

W dniu 18.03.2021 o 01:55, Bill Johnson pisze:

Only 1 or 2 banks still use mainframes in 2009? The truth is, all but 1 or 2 
banks worldwide don’t use a mainframe in 2021.
I’ve worked at 15 different shops in 40 years and only 1 used visual basic and 
that was over 20 years ago. It was declared legacy in 2008.

To be honest there are three banks in Poland using mainframe located in
Poland. And maybe two or three using foreign mainframe (like Citi). The
rest is working on some unix or as/400 based systems.

However I have some recognition of banks in Europe and ...I don't know
ANY bank not using mainframe. I'm sure there are such banks, but I don't
know any of them. I could list several banks in Sweden, Danmark,
Netherland, Belgium, France, Germany, Spain, UK - all of the countries
have more mainframe-based bank than Poland! The insurance market is even
more interesting: none of polish insurers use mainframe, and all of the
insurers in the countries I mentioned (and I'm aware of) are using
mainframe.

Reasons? Lng story, IMHO the most important is our history and COCOM
restrictions.




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

Re: Any z/OS sandbox available for a university student I know?

[Radoslaw Skorupka]

W dniu 19.03.2021 o 09:10, Stefan Skoglund pisze:

ons 2021-03-17 klockan 10:13 + skrev Seymour J Metz:

Yes, z/OS on z is attractive for a medium or large customer, but it
is priced out of the market for a hobbyist or a "Mom and Pop"
business. The entry cost is much lower for, e.g., openSUSE on a PC. I
miss the days of 80% discounts for Academia.

Of course, if you need high I/O bandwidth or RAS, ...

I don't know if i want to agree with you ...

A medium business in the nordic countries don't uses mainframes.
It could be that it is more System i (depending on what application
package ie movex
they have choosen) or  something running on Windows server or some
version of Solaris or HP-UX. Telia earlier were a heavy user of VMS and
OSF.

So were Vattenfall - all of them is now i believe on Windows or
something.

One reason is the dearth of knowledgeable people who wants to bet their
careers on the mainframe (and COBOL and RPG.)

The banks run their central system on z/OS, though. But where is the
expansion ?

I dont know what workloads Volvo now runs on their mainframe, or what
Evry has on their machines for their customers.


Actually there are definitely more companies using mainframe than in 
Poland. Note: population of Poland is more than 4x population of Sweden.
And of course your banks and insurers use mainframe (Swedbank, 
Postgirot, ICA, If, Folksam, Skandia...), but also other organizations 
like Volvo (they actually have mainframes in Lyon, which is a little bit 
south of Sweden, and they have strong IT team in Poland),  Alecta, SPP, 
Svenska Spel, SJ, SCA, Barycent, SAS Airlines, Telia, Ericsson.

(note: it based on public information and may not be 100% up to date)

To be honest, similar situation is in Danmark, but it seems Finland and 
Norway have less mainframe users. And let's not forget about Iceland, 
which is Nordic as well - they have parallel sysplex (population: 304k)


Regarding dearth - to be honest I had to check this word, because I 
suspected it was typo in "death". :-)
However I know many people with non-scandinavian names which support 
mainframes in Sweden and other Nordic countries. I mean people who 
completed education in other countries and started job career there. In 
Poland we have offices where mainframers support Nordea and Danish 
banks. Some banks even opened IT offices in India.
So - there is dearth (or lack) of IT specialists, but: 1. It is not only 
mainframe problem, 2. there are solutions available.
BTW: approx. ten years ago I've got untypical job offer: they wanted to 
hire me and my team. Yes, they were looking for a team just to have time 
for knowledge transfer from older, almost-retired employees


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
(looking for new job)
Lodz, Poland

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

TRNG (was: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?)

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 14:43:05 +0800, Timothy Sipples wrote:
>...
>Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>>The latter suggests that a pseudo RNG is periodically reseeded
>>by the TRNG
>
>Yes, that's right. CPACF on the IBM z14 and LinuxONE II models, and 
>higher, have this feature. If you try to use the TRNG for every random 
>number request it's really slow, but fortunately that's not required to 
>achieve the desired, certified outcome. Seeding is rather important, 
>though, and that's why they're there.
>
Thanks.  UNIX has long had /dev/random, a TRNG (subject to hardware
availability) and /dev/urandom, a seeded PRNG.

For a while I had a Solaris tower under my desk.  The perceptible
difference was that "cat /dev/random >/dev/null" caused the fan
to speed up audibly; "cat /dev/urandom >/dev/null" was silent.

And:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavarand

-- gil

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

Re: Any z/OS sandbox available for a university student I know?

[Support, DUNNIT SYSTEMS LTD.]

Sonny,

Thank you very much! I have forwarded your email to the student. Here's hoping 
good things will come from this.

Have a great weekend!

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

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Farley, Peter x23353]

Thanks Ed, I hadn't actually looked at the RNG capabilities in CPACF in recent 
times.  From an initial once-over of the TRNG capability described in the 
latest PoOP, it may be a better source of data than STCKE for my application.  
I will need to make some performance measurements to make sure I am not slowing 
the application process flow too much.

The COBOL UUID4 function may be the "future state" version for my application 
requirements, once we are up to date enough to use it.  That will need some 
performance measuring too once we are there.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Ed 
Jaffe
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 10:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

On 3/18/2021 6:38 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>
> Using clock values as a source of entropy is discouraged.  If a 
> (fe)malefactor can make a good guess at an interval during which the 
> clock is sampled there's little entropy available.

IBM Z was recently enhanced with a true random source in CPACF.

For all the many decades before that, all "random" numbers on the mainframe 
were actually pseudo-random...

--

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

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Farley, Peter x23353]

I actually do not care what the value is, so long as it is guaranteed to be 
unique.  I am curious about the technique and value used, but I actually don't 
*need* my curiosity satisfied.

Documentation of a guarantee of uniqueness is all I think a management review 
would require, and in truth that is all that I would actually require because 
the actual value isn’t relevant to the need.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 9:38 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 23:33:25 +, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:

>Peter,
>
>I must disagree that it is not a programming interface.  The problem-state 
>instruction STCKE returns its value and the field is clearly defined in PoOP, 
>so problem-state users deserve to know how the contents are set by the only 
>program authorized to set it, the operating system.
>
>The particular application here involves generating unique application-related 
>values.  I can also see its application to entropy-gathering routines 
>determining a unique random seed for statistical purposes.
>
>There are probably other uses I haven't imagined.
>
Uncharacteristically, I'll agree with Peter R. here (mostly).  I said earlier:
A possible answer is that it's release-dependent, subject to change,
and as long as the [uniqueness] constraint is met IBM chooses not to
document it in order to retain flexibility for future releases.

My "mostly" is that IBM might provide in a software publication assurance that 
the OS sets bits 112-127 to values that guarantee uniqueness with a stated 
scope.

Using clock values as a source of entropy is discouraged.  If a (fe)malefactor 
can make a good guess at an interval during which the clock is sampled there's 
little entropy available.

As for "unique application-related values" and probable "other uses", present a 
business case.

But the PoOps does not disdain software topics.  It contains tables of a few 
dozen entries mapping TOD values to UTC.  These depend on a site's choice of 
TOD epoch (some still use local) and leap second conventions.  (We abandoned 
leap seconds for timestamp consistency across program products.)  Those tables 
might more properly appear in a software publication, perhaps in the 
description of the TIME and STCKCONV macros.

>-Original Message-
>From: Peter Relson
>Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 7:14 PM
>
>It should be expected that the principles of operation not have any 
>information about what data is placed there, as it is specifically defined to 
>be set by a program to whatever that program wants it to be.
>
>I'll bite: why would we want to document how the operating system sets this? 
>It is not a programming interface.
>In what way would having this information help diagnosis (that being the only 
>other reason I could think of)?

--

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

Re: Any z/OS sandbox available for a university student I know?

[Stefan Skoglund]

ons 2021-03-17 klockan 10:13 + skrev Seymour J Metz:
> Yes, z/OS on z is attractive for a medium or large customer, but it
> is priced out of the market for a hobbyist or a "Mom and Pop"
> business. The entry cost is much lower for, e.g., openSUSE on a PC. I
> miss the days of 80% discounts for Academia.
> 
> Of course, if you need high I/O bandwidth or RAS, ...

I don't know if i want to agree with you ...

A medium business in the nordic countries don't uses mainframes.
It could be that it is more System i (depending on what application
package ie movex
they have choosen) or  something running on Windows server or some
version of Solaris or HP-UX. Telia earlier were a heavy user of VMS and
OSF.  

So were Vattenfall - all of them is now i believe on Windows or
something.

One reason is the dearth of knowledgeable people who wants to bet their
careers on the mainframe (and COBOL and RPG.)

The banks run their central system on z/OS, though. But where is the
expansion ?

I dont know what workloads Volvo now runs on their mainframe, or what
Evry has on their machines for their customers.

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

Re: Contents of TOD Programmable Field under z/OS?

[Timothy Sipples]

Ed Jaffe wrote:
>IBM Z was recently enhanced with a true random source in CPACF.
>For all the many decades before that, all "random" numbers on the
>mainframe were actually pseudo-random...

The IBM Crypto Express features have had TRNGs aboard for many years (and 
still do). This is a fairly complex topic if you get into the details, and 
TRNGs are not my speciality. However, my understanding is that if you have 
a Crypto Express domain configured to a LPAR (in CCA mode I believe) then 
it automatically contributes to entropy for seeding. Having a TRNG (a.k.a. 
NDRNG) on chip with CPACF means you get an entropy boost even without a 
Crypto Express domain.

You should still get Crypto Express features, assuming you can get them in 
your country. They're more important than ever.

Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>The latter suggests that a pseudo RNG is periodically reseeded
>by the TRNG

Yes, that's right. CPACF on the IBM z14 and LinuxONE II models, and 
higher, have this feature. If you try to use the TRNG for every random 
number request it's really slow, but fortunately that's not required to 
achieve the desired, certified outcome. Seeding is rather important, 
though, and that's why they're there.

- - - - - - - - - -
Timothy Sipples
I.T. Architect Executive
Digital Asset & Other Industry Solutions
IBM Z & LinuxONE
- - - - - - - - - -
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