Does anyone have JCL that sends an email, using CSSMTP, from the Mainframe and 
if it is unable to be delivered, for any reason, sends an email back to the 
Sender with a corresponding message?


Thank You and Please Be Safe!

Len Sasso
Systems Administrator Senior
CSRA, A General Dynamics Information Technology Company
327 Columbia TPKE
Rensselaer, NY 12144

Office Hours: M-F  7 AM - 3:45 PM
Out-Of-Office: Friday, August 28, 2020  Noon - 3:45 PM
Phone: (518) 257-4209
Cell: (518) 894-0879
Fax: (518) 257-4300
[email protected]
URL: www.gdit.com<http://www.gdit.com>




________________________________
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of 
Timothy Sipples <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2020 5:56 AM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Sending email from the Mainframe



 [External: Use caution with links & attachments]

Grant Taylor asks:
>What happens to email if CSSMTP (AT-TLS) is configured
>to *require* encryption and the receiving system doesn't
>support encryption?

Fundamentally the same thing(s) that happen when the network connection is
down or too slow (times out), for whatever reasons. Network encryption is
part and parcel of the network path. This class of failures must already
be catered for. In this case, Len Sasso's organization is mandating TLS
1.2+, and I agree with Shmuel Metz who wrote:
>If management has decreed that all SMTP traffic be encrypted,
>then barring a configuration error the relay will accept
>encrypted traffic.

Moreover, it's entirely possible that your attitude would only increase
relay administrators' burdens, the people who currently have to manage,
support, monitor, and audit the e-mail traffic from the one and only
system still transmitting over an unencrypted connection, a connection
modality they'd very much like to retire as quickly as possible. You know,
that "old, obsolete mainframe" that you're actively arguing should
actually be as old and obsolete as you can possibly force it to be. (TLS
is *really* not new.) Or it's entirely possible that the relay
administrators aren't inclined or equipped to provide even mediocre
service levels for unencrypted connections, or even that there's a lone
dedicated relay gathering dust in a wiring closet somewhere to support
this one unencrypted connection, a relay that nobody left in the
organization even understands or really knows about, that isn't backed up
or DR protected, that still runs on a 10 Mbps Ethernet segment that
miraculously hasn't been disconnected yet. Hence the unencrypted
connection is MORE prone to failure, not less. All very possible, even
predictable and likely. And I haven't even gotten to the regulatory issues
and penalties.

Conceivably you could also reduce or eliminate your personal security
authentication failure planning and handling (hopefully automated)
responsibilities if you effectively disable your SAF security provider,
such as RACF. Then those few pesky authentication and authorization
rejections wouldn't occur, and everyone could just go to the pub and stay
there (or whatever). That's the logical consequence of your argument,
isn't it? I don't think you've got a strong argument.

Sorry to be blunt here, but I feel compelled to offer my personal view (as
always). My colleagues (and I mean that word expansively, in and out of
IBM) work really hard to deliver and support truly cutting edge
capabilities, including downright amazing security capabilities, in/for
this unique and indispensable platform. And this community, overall, often
works really hard to put these capabilities into practice, in many cases
literally to keep civilization functioning. Then there are a few people
who manage a few of these systems, and...well, let's all strive to do
better, OK?

[Why am I expecting a minor Twitter storm now? :-)]

- - - - - - - - - -
Timothy Sipples
I.T. Architect Executive
Digital Asset & Other Industry Solutions
IBM Z & LinuxONE
- - - - - - - - - -
E-Mail: [email protected]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to