"Why did you assume the profiles were discrete?" Because you mentioned WTORs.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of Radoslaw Skorupka <00000471ebeac275-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: Monday, November 25, 2024 7:47 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Logon to TSO+ISPF on multiple LPAR's at the same time? External Message: Use Caution Why did you assume the profiles were discrete? Actually no profile was discrete. I did it over 20 years ago, however I have never used discrete DATASET profiles. Rather the above it would be better to discuss about tiny ISPF setup - I mean minimum set of libraries in concatenations, etc. Instead of that I chose to prepare recovery using tech system. Oh, BTW: The above exercise was done because I *did* loose RACF dbs. *Both*. It wasn't my fault, however someone ran IRRMIN NEW over existing dbs. Fortunately I had UT200 copies so it was enough to logon from another system and recover datasets. (to be clear: UADS exercise was performed later, just for learning/evaluation.) Again, my opinion: tech system + disk copies of RACF db is much better than UADS. It is easier, more convenient, more flexible, less error-prone. -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland W dniu 25.11.2024 o 13:19, Seymour J Metz pisze: > 2. Why blame UADS instead of blaming discrete dataset profiles? > Generic profiles have been around for decades. > > I used to have an un privileged userid for testing and a privileged userid > for things that required it. I too see nothing wrong with it. > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי > נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר > > > > ________________________________________ > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List<IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of > Radoslaw Skorupka<00000471ebeac275-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> > Sent: Monday, November 25, 2024 5:53 AM > To:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Logon to TSO+ISPF on multiple LPAR's at the same time? > > External Message: Use Caution > > > My $0.02 > > (off-topic) > 1. UADS is not needed today. > 2. UADS is *bad* way to proceed when "security server fails to come up". > There are much better ways, like backup copy of RACF db and some tech > system. Once upon a time I tried to logon in failsafe mode. Access to > every dataset means WTOR. Approx 100 WTORs to get IPSF first screen. > > (on-topic) > 3. In sysplex multiple logons to TSO are possible, one logon per z/OS > image. > 4. The above is not black magic, however it require some simple changes > in ISPF configuration. > 5. I don't know about documentation, however it is well described on > some SHARE presentations available on Internet. > 6. The above is quite easy to test in some environment, in case of > mistake the backout is also easy. > 7. There are some (old, I suppose) "custom" ways to do it, however I > would not recommend it. There is no reason to make live harder. > > (again off-topic) > 8. From security point of view it is unacceptable to have single userid > used by several persons. However it is nothing wrong in having multiple > userids per person - each userid is owned by *one* person. And of course > sometimes it is convenient and justified to have more than one userid. > > -- > Radoslaw Skorupka > 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
