Brian Westerman wrote:
>It would have been smarter for IBM to keep z/OSMF based installation
>optional until the z13s was no longer a supported processor.
IBM released the current (as I write this) latest release of z/OS (z/OS 2.5) in
September, 2021, with the older ISPF CustomPac Dialog format
OK, I totally missed your point. Sorry about that.
Going back to gil's post, I agree (with Tom) that SVC 99 has no business
getting into the parsing business. It's a well-defined interface.
I see no reason why various different "languages" shouldn't be used to
express the functionality. No
Where did I get the idea that SVC 99 code runs in Supervisor state?
It is an SVC.
SVC code receives control in Supervisor state.
It doesn't require that the program issuing the SVC 99 have any privileges
--
Tom Marchant.
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 20:27:27 -0400, Steve Smith wrote:
>Let me be the
Let me be the first of likely many who will say "where did you get that
idea?" It doesn't require any more privilege than ALLOC or bpxwdyn. Or
// DD.
sas
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 7:47 PM Tom Marchant <
000a2a8c2020-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 14:32:18
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 14:32:18 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>The parsing and interpretation should be done by SVC 99, not in
>code replicated and maintained in the various utilities/
I disagree. SVC 99 is a Supervisor state function.
Parsing and interpretation is a function that does not require
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 13:35:47 +, Pommier, Rex
wrote:
>We're running a 2-way, 316 MSU machine and my business customers would squawk
>loudly if I had to move our workload to a 4 way with no more horsepower. We
>have several single-threaded processes that run that would be woefully
On 27/06/2023 11:35 pm, Pommier, Rex wrote:
If a company is using a 20 MSU system and is forced to buy a 200 MSU system because that's the
smallest available, unless something drastic happens to hardware AND software pricing, the company
isn't going to be looking for "what else can I put on
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 20:07:26 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>This is the old horizontal versus vertical argument: should an application
>look the same regardless of the environment in which it is running or should
>all applications in an environment follow the conventions of that environment?
That to me would be an IVP and not a use case.
Use Case is more like what the list has been commenting on:
A use case is a concept used in software development, product design, and
other fields to describe how a system can be used to achieve specific goals
or tasks. It outlines the interactions
Hi Lizette
These are some that I have seen used. Now in that environment,
they had Fed and State Gov't contracts to abide by.
USE CASE: updates must be done to make audit requirements
relative to security
USE CASE: Audit requirement, must be on supported software. Have
to put on the maint
Your use cases would be to write a tape, read a tape, scratch a tape etc. etc.
J
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Lizette Koehler
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2023 1:02 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: EXTERNAL EMAIL: Re: Does the term USE CASE
A use case is simply a formal description of how you use a product, software or
infrastructure (there can be many use cases for a single piece of software). In
many cases the use case is used to document the things that must be tested in a
rollout of the software.
J
-Original Message-
Is you have business or regulatory incentives to remain supported, then the
case seems made.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Lizette Koehler
> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2023 1:02 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Does the term USE
This is the old horizontal versus vertical argument: should an application look
the same regardless of the environment in which it is running or should all
applications in an environment follow the conventions of that environment?
That's especioally true for ISPF, wheree users often expect
So if I am planning to update my tape management system, would I be able to
create a use case? The software is from a vendor. The process is invoked
whenever a tape mount request is made.
So I am not sure how w Use Case would apply
Thank you
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe
I would suggest choosing a function or two that you’re planning on exploiting
on the new release, and have those be the use cases.
--
Kevin McKenzie
External Phone: 845-435-8282, Tie-line: 8-295-8282
z/OS Test Services - Test Architect, Provisioning
z/OS Hardware/Software Interlock
From: IBM
Seems to me that a "use case" in this situation would be simply a comparison of
pros and cons of upgrading. Part of it would simply be a business case of why
the upgrade should happen, part could be more of a "here are the enhancements
in the upgraded software and here is how our company could
Um, what about "no support if we don't keep up with the continuous and
progressive upgrades"? "Keep up with continuous security upgrades"? "It's
just like MS Windows Update, if you don't keep up the criminals will break in
and steal your data"?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe
Why? In order to catch the ones who DON'T die and grow their business to the
size IBM finds (more) profitable. I'm not talking about "next gen" IT
companies but the startups and family companies in practical, everyday
businesses.
If they grow without IBM technology they probably won't ever
List -
I am being aske to create USE CASES for system software. My brain is not
able to coordinate USE CASE with system software updates
It seems the phrase USE CASE applies more to SYSTEM Software development
than a System Software Upgrade
For Example, If I am upgrading from z/OS
Why would IBM offer state of the art technology that they’ve spent billions to
develop to “next generation” companies, most of whom will die within a decade?
Wouldn’t that tick off their current customers who might then ask for a similar
discount? Do automakers offer discounts to those who
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 08:47:57 -0500, Lionel B. Dyck wrote:
>There are several RFE's (now Ideas)
>
Wow! But there should be a single *Unique* string representation
of GDG and PDSE member generation manipulations,honored
alike in:
o JCL DD statements
o TSO ALLOCATE
o ISPF
o BPXWDYN
o XLC fopen()
o
> Am 27.06.2023 um 19:34 schrieb Tom Ross :
>
>
>>
>> As the very first computer language I learned was COBOL, I have been always=
>> interested to learn=20
>> about OO COBOL but never had the necessary time to research it.
>>
>> Are there by any chance simple COBOL snippets that would
>As the very first computer language I learned was COBOL, I have been always=
> interested to learn=20
>about OO COBOL but never had the necessary time to research it.
>
>Are there by any chance simple COBOL snippets that would demonstrate how to=
> use OO COBOL to interact=20
>with Java (e.g.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Bill Johnson
> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2023 7:40 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: z/OSMF
>
> Why would anyone think IBM wants to sell a mainframe to everyone? Any
> more than Tesla
Sorry, finger check that went unnoticed. Ours is a 216 MSU machine, not 316.
Rex
-Original Message-
From: Pommier, Rex
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2023 8:36 AM
To: 'IBM Mainframe Discussion List'
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: z/OSMF
If a company is using a 20 MSU system and is forced to
The counter-argument to that is "How do you build the next generation(s) of
companies that need/want to buy mainframes?". By abandoning the low end (and
frankly the middle as well) IBM is cutting off any such development of a future
client base.
Hint: It isn't through outsourcers.
Peter
Why would anyone think IBM wants to sell a mainframe to everyone? Any more than
Tesla wants to sell to people who buy 15-20k autos. Someone needing 20 MSUs
would be a perfect candidate for outsourcing to someone who outsources
mainframe capacity.
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Tuesday,
Yow indeed.
בתאריך יום ג׳, 27 ביוני 2023 ב-17:15 מאת Charles Mills :
> Yow!
>
> https://crypto.stanford.edu/~dabo/pubs/abstracts/ssl-client-bugs.html
>
> CM
>
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 16:59:23 +0300, ITschak Mugzach
> wrote:
>
> >Surprise... Although the server certificate SHOULD be verified, IBM
Yow!
https://crypto.stanford.edu/~dabo/pubs/abstracts/ssl-client-bugs.html
CM
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 16:59:23 +0300, ITschak Mugzach wrote:
>Surprise... Although the server certificate SHOULD be verified, IBM did not
>perform this check until APAR OA63164...
Surprise... Although the server certificate SHOULD be verified, IBM did not
perform this check until APAR OA63164...
ITschak
ITschak Mugzach
*|** IronSphere Platform* *|* *Information Security Continuous Monitoring
for z/OS, x/Linux & IBM I **| z/VM coming soon *
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at
A GDS can be a PDSE2. However, there is no way to specify in JCL a combination
of relative generation, member name and member generation.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Charles Mills
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2023 9:51 AM
To:
I believe I recall correctly that a GDG may contain a PDS.
May it contain a PDSE Version 2?
So you could have member generations within PDSE generations?
Whee!!!
A PDS version within a GDG would be DSN=PDS.NAME(-n) . I am going to guess
there is no JCL syntax for a member (never mind member
There are several RFE's (now Ideas)
https://ibm-z-hardware-and-operating-systems.ideas.ibm.com/ideas/ZOS-I-2788
https://ibm-z-hardware-and-operating-systems.ideas.ibm.com/ideas/ZOS-I-1955
https://ibm-z-hardware-and-operating-systems.ideas.ibm.com/ideas/ZOS-I-1732
RFE? Member plus generation within PDSE2 GDS?
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Charles Mills
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2023 9:36 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: How batch create a PDSE2 with Generations?
I am good with
I am good with MAXGENS=. Like anything else in a software install, the user may
if they wish specify options that will fail.
I know now how I missed the ability to create a generation PDSE2 with JCL: I
conflated that issue with *referencing* a "back generation member" with JCL.
THAT is
If a company is using a 20 MSU system and is forced to buy a 200 MSU system
because that's the smallest available, unless something drastic happens to
hardware AND software pricing, the company isn't going to be looking for "what
else can I put on this expensive and woefully underutilized
The check is "optional" on the application's part for z/OS System SSL:
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=reference-gsk-validate-server
I use optional in quotes because the TLS protocol has two main purposes:
encryption (which is not under discussion here) and preventing a
Mainframe s/w giants may continue today's practice, but as a h/w provider, IBM
have really got to up their game.
If anyone has seen the hardware coming out of AMD and NVIDIA, they're wild...
w.i.l.d.
And without even seeing the TCO of an IBM vs AMD/NVIDIA solution, it's safe to
say you get far
Remember the days when you could purchase mainframe software? In 1987 we had
UCC-1, UCC-7, and UCC-11. And we had just gotten ACF2, which had just been
acquired by Uccel. The instructional material at the ACF2 class still had SKK
printed on it. Then CA came along and bought Uccel, within a
A long time ago, when the only computers available were mainframes, IBM and
ISV pricing strategy may have made a lot of sense.
When I first started working on IT, four decades ago, around here there
were a few dozen of places running IBM MVS, VSE and VM.
Today, after bank and insurance
On 27/06/2023 5:40 pm, Gibney, Dave wrote:
200 MSU was much more than we needed. Maybe 20 or so at our peaks. And the z/OS
and ISV charges at 200 levels would have been intolerable.
That's why I keep qualifying it with ISVs would have to adjust their
pricing. While the smallest system is 13
CICS also has a Java domain that is started as a resident part.
René.
> On 23 Jun 2023, at 20:45, Bill Giannelli wrote:
>
> Does JAVA have any started tasks on z/OS?
> We have a task that the vendor says needs JAVA "up" first.
> thanks
> Bill
>
>
200 MSU was much more than we needed. Maybe 20 or so at our peaks. And the z/OS
and ISV charges at 200 levels would have been intolerable.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Timothy Sipples
> Sent: Monday, June 26, 2023 10:08 PM
> To:
On 27/06/2023 3:07 pm, Timothy Sipples wrote:
IBM doesn't require anyone to order/configure less than 200 MSUs
(PCIs) of general purpose processor capacity. If you want to order a
configuration like that go for it!
Of course you can choose to configure larger machines, but these
smallest
45 matches
Mail list logo
