On Mon, 2012-04-30 at 16:01 -0400, Walt Farrell wrote: > If no one complains to them, they won't know anyone has a problem.
John Eells told me two years ago that he would be "frightened" to learn that installations were using those RACF* jobs as-is. Since he wasn't doing ServerPac anymore, he passed on my comments to Lucy Miller, who said "ServerPac provides these [optional] jobs for folks to use as samples if they want to just upgrade their RACF database because it is very large and they don't want to risk rebuilding it or if they are using non-RACF security products." Lucy emphasized that I "review all the warnings documented in the Installing Your Order book for all the RACF jobs and especially for RACFDRV". Still a big pain, but John reminded me that RACF isn't the only security system out there. "It would be much harder for us to understand ACF2 and TopSecret environments and create appropriate definitions for them" he explained. I understand their problems, so I think I'd settle for a set of diffs between current RACF* jobs and those of yore. If IBM would tell me what recommendations/requirements have changed since my last ServerPac, that would ease my workload. (Or maybe a changelog -does- exist, and I haven't noticed it?) -- David Andrews A. Duda & Sons, Inc. [email protected] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
