----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 14:53:15 on 97/05/06 GMT (by 72437085 at EHONE) Subject: 9121-210 Is the hardware timer of the 9121-210 tested for Year2000 calendar integrity requirements ? This model is not mentioned in publication GC28-1251-05 on page A-85. Does anybody have an idea if IBM will test this model ? Horst Winkelmann ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 14:59:13 on 97/05/06 GMT (by IYORK at KGNVMC) Subject: 9121-210 Ref: Append at 14:53:15 on 97/05/06 GMT (by 72437085 at EHONE) <10000> 9121-210 is year 2000 ready. The xxx-based machines include several models. I believe 210 is part of the 320 based models. The April 1997 edition is available now so you probably want the latest. Iris ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 15:24:07 on 97/05/06 GMT (by MLDUCKWO at STLVM6) Subject: COBOL Migration Experiences Ref: Append at 14:58:26 on 97/04/29 GMT (by DTERECK at TORVM3) A couple of years ago, I was the lead Technical Support analyst for one of the Baby Bell Companies and managed to drag them from OS/VS COBOL to COBOL for MVS & VM. The migration from COBOL II to COBOL for MVS & VM was easy: from a source code perspective. From an execution perspective, there were some problems with mixing AMODE/RMODE's, but for the most part it was very simple. Planning was the key! Migrating to LE/COBOL for MVS & VM should not be a trivial undertaking. Let me know off-line if you'd like to talk in more detail about what we did: the planning, testing and implementation phases, etc. - Mark Duckworth STLVM20(MLDUCKWO) ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 08:25:50 on 97/05/07 GMT (by JOHNORR at ISSCAUS) Subject: Non-IT Areas I hope this is a suitable place to ask this question... Apart from the "traditional" IT areas (mainframe, midrange, desktop, network, etc), does anyone have a checklist or other documentation for other areas that an organisation needs to consider for potential Y2K problems? I mean things like telephone systems, elevators, power supply, cooling systems, security access control, fax machines, photocopiers, etc. Apart from wanting to keep all aspects of our company operating smoothly, I'd hate to put all this effort into making our computer systems ready, only to find e.g. the power supply to our machine rooms cuts out on 1/1/2000 because an intelligent power switchboard suddenly thought it was 99 years overdue for maintenance... John Orr Sydney, Australia JOHNORR at ISSCAUS johnorr@isscaus.vnet.ibm.com ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 10:57:35 on 97/05/07 GMT (by GBCBHG00 at ELINK) Subject: OS/VS Cobol and CICS V4 There has been some discussion with regards to run-time migration of OS/VS Cobol programs to use Language Environment run times. This is fine for batch, but can a run-time migration be performed for CICS Cobol? E.G. A CICS V1/2/3 Cobol module includes OS/VS Cobol modules and CICS modules. Run time migration for OS/VS Cobol will require re-linking to replace the OS/VS Cobol runtimes with LE run times. 1) Is there a re-link required to obtain the CICS V4 modules ? 2) Does CICS V4 support OS/VS Cobol ? 3) Are there any other areas for review or recommended reading ? This append was created on the External IBMLink system by Peter Gammage Tel 0141-204 2737 SEMA Group Outsourcing Fax 0141-204 2523 1 Atlantic Quay Broomielaw, Glasgow G2-8JE Email: Peter.Gammage@mail.sema.co.uk ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 00:28:46 on 97/05/08 GMT (by ZIEMBA at BCRVM1) Subject: Non-IT Areas Ref: Append at 08:25:50 on 97/05/07 GMT (by JOHNORR at ISSCAUS) John, Essentially any place someone could put a computer, you have the potential for Y2K problems. You hit on the most obvious ones (another one closer to home is that some thermostats have computers embedded in them that will not be able to handle Y2K, so your house may decide to to stop running your air-conditioning--or my heating system when the date arrives.) I read an article recently that said that Boeing's airplanes (at least their most recent models) have computers that are Y2K compliant. I've also read that Lufthansa is not planning to fly at all over that weekend. I would suggest you watch the various 2K Web pages (many of them have been mentioned here) for new and surprising places where Y2K problems can surface. C. A. Ziemba Austin Y2K Conversion Center ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 15:49:07 on 97/05/08 GMT (by YAEGER at SJFEVMX) Subject: New Smart DFSORT Trick The DFSORT home page at URL: http://www.storage.ibm.com/software/sort/srtmhome.htm has a new "trick" - sorting '000000', 'yymmdd' and '999999' dates. Frank L. Yaeger - DFSORT Team (Specialties: ICETOOL, OUTFIL, Y2K :-) ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 07:35:59 on 97/05/09 GMT (by JOHNORR at ISSCAUS) Subject: PC/390 as test machine Ref: Append at 13:36:13 on 96/12/31 GMT (by 83200226 at EHONE) Ref: Append at 16:25:29 on 97/04/29 GMT (by DTERECK at TORVM3) These are the only references I've seen on this forum to the possible use of PC/390 as a test machine - there don't appear to have been any answers on the forum to the questions asked. Would anyone care to share anything they've learned about its suitability? Pros and cons? Good idea, or out of the question? Will it work??? e.g. one thing I've heard is that software licencing may be more expensive than at first glance, since some software vendors don't recognise software licence groups below 40. Any other experience or thoughts? John Orr Sydney, Australia JOHNORR at ISSCAUS johnorr@isscaus.vnet.ibm.com ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 20:48:47 on 97/05/09 GMT (by AACL0X9 at EHONE7) Subject: PC/390 as test machine Ref: Append at 07:35:59 on 97/05/09 GMT (by JOHNORR at ISSCAUS) I do believe that TAB (the racetrack betting organization in your part of the world) is one of the world leaders in using P390's in production. Wanna bet on it? ;-) You might want to check with them -- Neale Ferguson. 'dunno his address off hand. Mike Walter, Hewitt Associates LLC Phone: (847) 771-4814, FAX: (847) 295-5528, IBMMAIL: USHEWMCU ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 18:05:17 on 97/05/10 GMT (by IL35816 at ELINK) ..... YEAR2000 CFORUM modified at 18:19:49 on 97/05/10 GMT (by IL35816 at ELINK) ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 10:45:43 on 97/05/12 GMT (by 36601943 at EHONE) Subject: PC/390 as test machine Ref: Append at 07:35:59 on 97/05/09 GMT (by JOHNORR at ISSCAUS) John, Take a look at PC500390 CFORUM on IBMPC. That is where the P/390 folk hang out. The machine is an excellent tool for year 2000 testing. You get a lot of the software you need ready to run, pkunzip the CD and MVS can be ipl'd. IMS, CICS and DB2 are included. What I would expect folk to do with a P/390 is to build a test system and pour some real production data into it. Setting the date forward is a ten minute job. Open an OS/2 window, use the date command, then IPL MVS. Test the code and make changes to fix the problems (not really bugs). Then lift the code back out and implement into production. Then you can rebuild the system back to 1997 in two hours. Simply set the OS/2 date back, re-install MVS from the CD, IPL and away you go for the next test. The main benefit is that you get a real MVS system that is totally divorced from your normal systems. "No shared DASD, no problems." But the P/390 has good connectivity so you can use TCP/IP FTP to move the critical data on to it for testing. After the test throw the data in the trash can. As you can probably tell I'm a real fan of this box. Dougie Lawson, IBM Basingstoke, UK. (aka 8LAWSOD at NHBVM2) ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 12:35:36 on 97/05/12 GMT (by GBOAMU00 at ELINK) Subject: PC/390 as test machine Ref: Append at 10:45:43 on 97/05/12 GMT (by 36601943 at EHONE) Beware of IBM euphoria. The PC500390 Cforum is populated mainly by IBM Development Partners, i.e. companies developing software for MVS (or VM or VSE). THESE guys get a terrific deal from IBM on pricing of the hardware and software (e.g. zip). What software would be available to a commercial customer and at what costs is for you to sort out with your vendor - I believe this will not be IBM. This append was created on the External IBMLink system by David Cartwright Technical Consultant ++44 1827 710618 dc@dcuk.demon.co.uk ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 05:59:42 on 97/05/13 GMT (by AS102028 at ELINK) Subject: MVS Y2K Testing Ref: Append at 15:24:42 on 96/11/29 GMT (by GBCAGM48 at ELINK) This is my first experience using the Forum type options so hopefully this question ends up in the correct place....anyway.... We have bulit a Y2000 system where the matter of isolation depends on who you talk to, however we have the Y2000 image on a processor with another MVS image. We have all ESCON DASD Gened to all images on all Processors at this site (2 processors 5 images). The channels to the DASD subsystem from the processor are shared via EMIF and are online to all systems. All devices on the controller are gened to all systems. We do not share DASD between systems i.e. some devices on a controller ma y be online to the Y2000 systems and some may be online to any other of the 4 systems at the site however none will be online to both Y2000 image AND another at the same time. I can't think of a reason why having the devices physically able to be varied online but NEVER online to both the Y2000 and another image should cause a problem HOWEVER we would like to confirm this with IBM. Thanks This append was created on the External IBMLink system by Commonwealth Bank ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 06:55:01 on 97/05/13 GMT (by SRCRINT at ISSCAUS) Subject: Year2000 product compatibility. Is there a list of PTFs that needs to be applied to make the following Y2K compliant? PL/1 | 2.3.0 COBOL II |V1 Rel 3.2 C/370 | 2.1.0 FORTRAN | 2.4 CSP AE/AD | 4.1 CSP/370 Runtime services | 2.1 ADF II | 2.2 High-level Assembler | 1.2 or is it recommended to upgrade to a new release? ,-_|\ Kal Rintala. / \Sydney \_,-\_/ 2000 v ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 11:32:33 on 97/05/13 GMT (by GAD at KGNVMC) - Subject: MVS Y2K Testing Ref: Append at 05:59:42 on 97/05/13 GMT (by AS102028 at ELINK) The DASD isolation is *not* a matter of only being online to one of the systems at any time. The DASD volumes assigned for use in your production environment must *never* become online to the Year 2000 test system, or the possibility of VTOC updates occurring exists. Date information in the VTOC is updated more often then you would expect for reasons you may not expect. These updates can cause you a world of grief. I'm a little less concerned about the DASD volumes assigned for use in your Year 2000 test system may. If they ever do become online to the production system and the DFSMS/MVS code on it is Year 2000 ready the risk is low. Just don't expect HSM or equivalents to perform space management on the volume. Greg Dyck MVS BCP Kernel and CURE support ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 11:55:50 on 97/05/13 GMT (by GBCBHG00 at ELINK) Subject: MVS Y2K Testing Ref: Append at 05:59:42 on 97/05/13 GMT (by AS102028 at ELINK) Firstly, could you please change you confer sign so we know who to refer to. We are planning to use a similar setup, with one MAJOR change. All devices are hardware isolated from each LPAR. One reason for this is that during the IPL process (prior to your vary offlines being processed) MVS accesses all devices. What implications this has for DASD I am not sure except to say why take the risk. This recommendation has been put in many discussions/appends and is (in my opinion) the only way of ensuring the integrity of you production data Isolate, Isolate, Isolate. The last thing you need is for non-current dates to populated onto production devices/data. This append was created on the External IBMLink system by Peter Gammage Tel 0141-204 2737 SEMA Group Outsourcing Fax 0141-204 2523 1 Atlantic Quay Broomielaw, Glasgow G2-8JE Email: Peter.Gammage@mail.sema.co.uk ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 13:32:46 on 97/05/13 GMT (by GBCAAP03 at ELINK) Subject: Non-IT Areas Ref: Append at 00:28:46 on 97/05/08 GMT (by ZIEMBA at BCRVM1) There were a couple of articles about embedded chips in last week's "Computer Weekly". One example they gave was an infusion pump in some hospital IVs: it requires regular re-calibration and if it is more than six months overdue it shuts down! It also seems that not all "identical" PLCs are the same: the manufacturers may use different chips in different batches. They've got a web site which might have the articles: http://www.computerweekly.co.uk This append was created on the External IBMLink system by Simon Green Kraft Jacobs Suchard UK IEA DEKJSG3E 01242 284318 ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 14:46:21 on 97/05/13 GMT (by WZ01383 at ELINK) Subject: PC/390 as test machine Ref: Append at 12:35:36 on 97/05/12 GMT (by GBOAMU00 at ELINK) David, please let me know where I can get a P/390 and software for "(e.g. zip)" because we are paying almost $1000/mo currently for our system. Yes, a good price to some but not as good as zip. ;-) Dave Twaddle DeRivera Associates Naples, Florida ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 15:00:25 on 97/05/13 GMT (by 86698663 at EHONE) Subject: Y2K Guide and IBM Products Looking through the latest (7th) Version of 'The Year 2000 and 2-Digit Dates: A Guide for Planning and Implementation' I find that some IBM Program Products which previously showed 'X*' against a release ie. Y2K support available through the service stream (PTF etc.) now show 'X' against the same release ie. Y2K ready. Does this indicate that no PTF or whatever has been found to be necessary to achieve Y2K readiness ? An example is 5684-157 HMF 1.1.1 in the VM Platform Products table, Appendix A. Also can you tell me what release of the following products is Y2K ready and when this is available for the VM/ESA platform : 5654-007 Automated Network Operations Code 5785-DJD VMBARS 5668-767 VS Pascal Compiler and Library Thanks. Debbie. BARTODA at UKSSVM1 (GBIBMC75 at IBMMAIL) ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 17:24:00 on 97/05/13 GMT (by TMAGEE at LEXVM2) Subject: Magazine Supplement about Year 2000 Testing....... A few weeks ago, I was informed that a data processing publication came out with a supplement about Year 2000 testing. It was either PC WEEK, RESELLER NEWS, INFORMATION WEEK, LAN TIMES, INFO WEEK, etc. Is anyone aware of what the magazine was and the week of the issue? T.D. Magee Lexington TMAGEE at LEXVM2 tie 545-4849 ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 16:12:10 on 97/05/14 GMT (by GBCADH00 at ELINK) Subject: PC/390 as test machine Ref: Append at 10:45:43 on 97/05/12 GMT (by 36601943 at EHONE) What is performance like for batch type I/O? I am under the impression that response times will be much lower than 3390 cache because of the emulation that take place. This append was created on the External IBMLink system by Nick Hands-Clarke (GBFPLNHC at IBMMAIL.COM) FPLO (+44-1306 740123 ext 3121) ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 17:38:57 on 97/05/14 GMT (by MA00957 at EHONE7) Subject: Magazine Supplement about Year 2000 Testing....... Ref: Append at 17:24:00 on 97/05/13 GMT (by TMAGEE at LEXVM2) There have been a lot of articles about Y2K and testing. One recent one was Computerworld but I don't have it handy here. You might try some resources on the web. Many of the magazines have sites with articles and there are several Y2K specific sites that include magazine references. If the article you're thinking of might have been in Computerworld, let me know or call and I can try to search for it. My company, Princeton Softech, has tools in this area and we have been profiled in a number of the articles. Our Version Merger product is used to reconcile multiple versions of source code etc. Typically this occurs when you want to integrate your site customizations into a new Y2K version of a purchased application. Another case is when you have the Y2K project making changes but enhancements and fixes are necessary to the production version. Eventually, you have to put them together. More specific to testing, our Relational Tools products easily move related (sub)sets of DB2 data. For example you can pull out a representative sample of your production database (1000 customers and _their_ orders and _the related_ details. You can then use this subset for Y2K testing. There is a feature to "age" the data for Y2K testing. Just setting the date forward may not test the application fully if there isn't data in the 21st century. Our editor allows related data to easily insert special test cases and the Compare tools identifies how the data has been changed across a set of related tables to help make sure the appropriate (and only the appropriate) changes were made. If you need more information on testing articles or the products mentioned, feel free to call or email. Regards, Rich Specht | 609/497-0205 | RichSpecht@PrincetonSoftech.com ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 18:48:26 on 97/05/14 GMT (by AACL0X9 at ELINK) Subject: Magazine Supplement about Year 2000 Testing....... Ref: Append at 17:24:00 on 97/05/13 GMT (by TMAGEE at LEXVM2) One article at hand is "Testing the Year 2000 Date Change" in Enterprise Systems Journal, May 1997. It addresses testing from the application point of view, not relating to any specific OS. Mike Walter, Hewitt Associates LLC Phone: (847) 771-4814, FAX: (847) 295-5528, IBMMAIL: USHEWMCU ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 20:31:34 on 97/05/14 GMT (by PIZZAZZ at STLVM20) Subject: PC/390 as test machine Ref: Append at 07:35:59 on 97/05/09 GMT (by JOHNORR at ISSCAUS) Besides the forum already mentioned, there are a couple of Web sites: http://www.s390.ibm.com/products/p390/p390_prh.html http://www.s390.ibm.com/stories/950522_p390ann.html Karen R. Barney ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 21:19:34 on 97/05/14 GMT (by CLAUDTAS at SPOVMSIB) Subject: cobol and mvs Hello forumers, I know that Cobol for MVS/VM is the minimum cobol that supports the year 2000, and it runs under MVS/ESA v4.3.0 (according to installa- tion and customization guide). As far as MVS/ESA v4.3.0 does not support the year 2000, the question is: Will Cobol for MVS/VM work with 4 digits for the year under MVS/ESA v4.3.0 ? Thanks a lot for your help. Claudia Pelster ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 09:46:24 on 97/05/15 GMT (by 36601943 at EHONE) Subject: PC/390 as test machine Ref: Append at 16:12:10 on 97/05/14 GMT (by GBCADH00 at ELINK) There are some figures available for MVS performance in GK20-2763-03 IBM PC Server System/390 Model 330 Technical Application Brief V4.0.f\ (I have one spare copy of that book so I will post it to you.) The newer machine the PC330 S/390 has a 133MHz Pentium rather than a 90MHz so any delay due to MVS waiting for OS/2 should be reduced. Dougie Lawson, IBM Basingstoke, UK. (aka 8LAWSOD at NHBVM2) ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 11:08:46 on 97/05/15 GMT (by GAD at KGNVMC) - ..... YEAR2000 CFORUM modified at 12:28:21 on 97/05/15 GMT (by GAD at KGNVMC) . Subjecamodifyl and mvs Ref: Append at 21:19:34 on 97/05/14 GMT (by CLAUDTAS at SPOVMSIB) I'm not sure what you are asking. MVS/ESA has always returned a date that included the century indicator. The reason that MVS/ESA 4.3 is not year 2000 ready is in areas where they ignore the century indicator. This leads to a number of problems. If you are asking will the same Cobol code work on both on a year 2000 ready version of MVS and MVS/ESA V4 then the answer is yes. They will receive the same date. Greg Dyck MVS BCP Kernel and CURE support ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 11:59:24 on 97/05/15 GMT (by CLAUDTAS at SPOVMSIB) Subject: cobol and mvs Hello Greg Dyck, Yes, you've answered my question. Thanks a lot for your help. Claudia Pelster. ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 14:50:46 on 97/05/15 GMT (by VAIS001 at ELINK) Subject: Y2K Testing I need some assistance in from an Operating System viewpoint. We are a Data Center with many users in various states of Y2K readiness/testing. We are NOT a SYSPLEX. We have 2 mainframes that run in LPAR mode. We would like to IPL one LPAR in Y2K and have users test there. ALL our DASD & usercatalogs are shared. We want to clone test databases and test using those and the modified programs. (P.S. at the point we start testing we will be OS390 1.3 - we're now OS390 1.1) What's the going opinion of not isolating DASD? It would be a nighmare here, since we do virtually no DASD management. Thanks in advance. sam ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 16:18:53 on 97/05/15 GMT (by SHERRY at SJFEVMX) Subject: Y2K Testing Ref: Append at 14:50:46 on 97/05/15 GMT (by VAIS001 at ELINK) Sam, The reason for DASD isolation is the data sets themselves but that information that pertains to multiple data sets, such as the VTOC and catalog. These contain dates for all the related data sets and therefore can cause problems when the dates are from systems with different system dates. Additionally, there are occassions where dates are written to VTOC, catalog, and other system management data sets (including RACF) where it is not obvious to the application. Using shared DASD in this situation is not recommended and could result in unexpected loss of information. Sherry Goncharsky IBM Storage Systems Division DFSMS/MVS Investment, Strategy, & Plans SGONCHA @ IBMUSM51 sgoncha@us.ibm.com ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 20:17:47 on 97/05/15 GMT (by YAEGER at SJFEVMX) Subject: New Smart DFSORT/VSE Trick The DFSORT/VSE home page at URL: http://www.storage.ibm.com/software/sort/srtvhome.htm has been updated with a new "trick" - sorting '000000', 'yymmdd' and '999999' dates. Take a look. Frank L. Yaeger - DFSORT/VSE Team ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 03:17:32 on 97/05/16 GMT (by 73850840 at EHONE) Subject: Networking Hardware Hello, couldn't find 8274-913, 8273 on the Y2000 ready list, would like to confirm, and if they are really not Y2000 ready, are there plans or directions? Thanks! Teresa Lam HKGVM8(LAMTBS) teresal@vnet.ibm.com ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 09:51:47 on 97/05/16 GMT (by IYORK at KGNVMC) Subject: Networking Hardware Ref: Append at 03:17:32 on 97/05/16 GMT (by 73850840 at EHONE) <10034> These are Year 2000 ready: 8273-100 IBM 8273 Nways Ethernet Route Switch 8273-10E IBM 8273 Nways Ethernet Route Switch 8273-10U IBM 8273 Nways Ethernet Route Switch 5697-B69 IBM 8273 Nways Route Switch Software Program (V3R0.X) 8274-500 IBM 8274 Nways LAN Route Switch 8274-513 IBM 8274 Nways LAN Route Switch 8274-548 IBM 8274 Nways LAN Route Switch 8274-900 IBM 8274 Nways LAN Route Switch 8274-913 IBM 8274 Nways LAN Route Switch 8274-W53 IBM 8274 Nways LAN Route Switch 8274-W93 IBM 8274 Nways LAN Route Switch 5697-B70 IBM 8274 Nways Route Switch Software Program (V3R0.X) Iris York ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 11:09:39 on 97/05/16 GMT (by 86614092 at EHONE) Subject: Do OS/VS Cobol and OS PL/I return '00' for year 2000 I have a few questions - apologies if they have been raised before. 1. Will OS PLI programs compile and work after Y2000 ? 2. Will OS PLI programs which return a date, definitely return '00' for the year 2000? 3. Will OS/VS Cobol programs which return a date, definitely return '00' for the year 2000 ? Thanks, Mala Gupta ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 18:01:28 on 97/05/16 GMT (by HUYKHAC at SJFEVMX) Subject: Do OS/VS Cobol and OS PL/I return '00' for year 2000 Ref: Append at 11:09:39 on 97/05/16 GMT (by 86614092 at EHONE) 1. Will OS PLI programs compile and work after Y2000 ? >>>> YES 2. Will OS PLI programs which return a date, definitely return '00' for the year 2000? >>>> YES if you apply UN56802 (or UN56803) and relink-edit the programs that were link-edited before applying the PTF. Note that if you only worry about the year, you may not need the PTF. However, without the PTF, the month and day are not correct and the PTF is strongly recommended. Huy K. Le ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 21:55:18 on 97/05/16 GMT (by Y2KTSC2 at STLVM6) Subject: Do OS/VS Cobol and OS PL/I return '00' for year 2000 Ref: Append at 11:09:39 on 97/05/16 GMT (by 86614092 at EHONE) 3. Will OS/VS Cobol programs which return a date, definitely return '00' for the year 2000 ? <<< Yes. - Be aware though that the OS/VS COBOL compiler and <<< runtime libraries are no longer supported. Year 2000 Technical Support Center (TSC2) ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 13:50:53 on 97/05/19 GMT (by VAIS001 at ELINK) Subject: Y2K Testing Ref: Append at 16:18:53 on 97/05/15 GMT (by SHERRY at SJFEVMX) Sherry, Could you expound on this(i.e. maybe an example). I'm not quite clear on what may happen. I should also mention that we are NOT SMS-managed yet here - we come up› with a NULL configuration. Thanks . sam ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 16:04:13 on 97/05/19 GMT (by CALZATO at LASVM1) Subject: Year2000 product compatibility. Kal: Here it is the information I've gathered from the guide GUIDE FOR PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION. Remeber that (X) represents Year2000-Ready and (X *) represents Year2000-Ready with PTFs. PL/1 | 2.3.0 +----------+-----------------------------------------+-----------+ | 5688-235 | PL/I for MVS & VM V1 R1 | X | +----------+-----------------------------------------+-----------+ COBOL II |V1 Rel 3.2 Refer this forum at 01:34:39 on 97/03/04 GMT (by ALANDP at SYDVMXA2) Subject: COBOL and Y2K on the VSE Platform and at 16:26:49 on 97/02/25 GMT (by PALIN at CANVM2) Subject: Cobol/II upgrade required? C/370 | 2.1.0 +----------+-----------------------------------------+-----------+ | 5688-187 | C/370 Compiler V2 R1 | X | +----------+-----------------------------------------+-----------+ | 5688-188 | C/370 Library V2 R2 | X | +----------+-----------------------------------------+-----------+ FORTRAN | 2.4 +----------+-----------------------------------------+-----------+ | 5668-806 | FORTRAN V2.5 | X (*) | | | Compiler/Library/Interactive Debug | | +----------+-----------------------------------------+-----------+ | 5688-087 | FORTRAN V2.5 Compiler/Library | X (*) | +----------+-----------------------------------------+-----------+ | 5668-805 | FORTRAN V2.5 Library only | X (*) | +----------+-----------------------------------------+-----------+ CSP AE/AD | 4.1 5668-814 CSP/AE V3.3 requires a PTF to be able to process 00 correctly. However, this version/release is not Year2000 ready. CSP/370 Runtime services | 2.1 No information found ADF II | 2.2 No information found High-level Assembler | 1.2 +----------+-----------------------------------------+-----------+ | 5696-234 | HLASM for MVS & VM & VSE V1 R2 | X | +----------+-----------------------------------------+-----------+ | 5696-234 | HLASM for MVS & VM & VSE V1 R2 Toolkit | X (*) | | | Feature | | +----------+-----------------------------------------+-----------+ Latin American Year 2000 Technical Support Center Phone: 54 - 1 - 319 - 7347 / 54 - 1 - 319 - 7348 Tie Line: 840 - 7347 840 - 7348 Fax: 54 - 1 - 319 - 6654 Internet: Y2KTSCLA@VNET.IBM.COM http://www.software.ibm.com/year2000/ ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 16:34:48 on 97/05/21 GMT (by MA00851 at ELINK) Subject: PC/390 as test machine Ref: Append at 09:46:24 on 97/05/15 GMT (by 36601943 at EHONE) Just thought I'd throw in my 2 cents. We are currently in the middle of a Y2K test using a P390 server. Things have gone very well so far. The setup was easy and OS/390 has had no problems. OEM Software pricing would be a concern but some vendors do have P390 pricing. SAS Institute is one that comes to mind. If anyone has any specific questions on how this was set up, let me know and I'll answer to the best of my ability. Paul Flynn Programart Corporation, Cambridge, Mass. (617) - 498-4216 ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 22:41:29 on 97/05/21 GMT (by Y2KTSC3 at STLVM6) Subject: COBOL and MVS Ref: Append at 21:19:34 on 97/05/14 GMT (by CLAUDTAS at SPOVMSIB) >Will COBOL for MVS & VM work with 4 digits for the year under MVS/ESA >v4.3.0 ? Yes. In fact, all of the functions will work correctly under any MVS, V3.1.3 or later. Year 2000 Technical Support Center ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 22:46:20 on 97/05/21 GMT (by Y2KTSC3 at STLVM6) Subject: Year2000 product compatibility. Ref: Append at 06:55:01 on 97/05/13 GMT (by SRCRINT at ISSCAUS) >Is there a list of PTFs that needs to be applied to make the >following Y2K compliant? > COBOL II |V1 Rel 3.2 VS COBOL II Release 3 ended service in June 1996. VS COBOL II Release 4 will not be considered year 2000 ready because there is no 4-digit year date COBOL language supported by the compiler. Only COBOL for MVS & VM V1R2 or COBOL for OS/390 & VM V2R1 are considered Year 2000 ready. IBM does not use the term Year 2000 compliant, since there is no standard to be compliant to! Year 2000 Technical Support Center ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 23:13:46 on 97/05/21 GMT (by Y2KTSC3 at STLVM6) Subject: OS/VS COBOL and CICS V4 Ref: Append at 10:57:35 on 97/05/07 GMT (by GBCBHG00 at ELINK) >There has been some discussion with regards to run-time migration of >OS/VS COBOL programs to use Language Environment run times. This is >fine for batch,but can a run-time migration be performed for CICS COBOL? Yes. >E.G. A CICS V1/2/3 COBOL module includes OS/VS COBOL modules and >CICS modules. Run time migration for OS/VS COBOL will require re-linking >to replace the OS/VS COBOL runtimes with LE run times. A re-link is required for your NORES case to replace your old library routines. The only CICS routine is the command level support stub. It does not need to be replaced. Note: A relink is not required to run with LE available, it is only required to make sure that you are using supported versions of the library routines. For the RES case, just replace OS/VS COBOL library with LE library. See the LE Installation & Customization manual. There are about 3 pages of instructions of how to make LE available to your CICS programs. >1) Is there a re-link required to obtain the CICS V4 modules ? No >2) Does CICS V4 support OS/VS COBOL ? Yes >3) Are there any other areas for review or recommended reading ? GC26-4764, COBOL Migration Guide Year 2000 Technical Support Center ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 23:16:00 on 97/05/21 GMT (by Y2KTSC3 at STLVM6) Subject: Y2K Testing Ref: Append at 14:50:46 on 97/05/15 GMT (by VAIS001 at ELINK) >We are a Data Center with many users in various states of >Y2K readiness/testing. We are NOT a SYSPLEX. We have >2 mainframes that run in LPAR mode. We would like to >IPL one LPAR in Y2K and have users test there. ALL our >DASD & usercatalogs are shared. We want to clone >test databases and test using those and the modified >programs. (P.S. at the point we start testing we will be >OS390 1.3 - we're now OS390 1.1) >What's the going opinion of not isolating DASD? It would >be a nightmare here, since we do virtually no DASD You MUST isolate your "Time Machine" LPAR from your production environment, ESPECIALLY the DASD, or you will have lots of problems. Year 2000 Technical Support Center ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 23:19:50 on 97/05/21 GMT (by Y2KTSC3 at STLVM6) Subject: OS/390 and YEAR2000 Ref: Append at 12:00:42 on 97/04/25 GMT (by SEICAE00 at ELINK) >I'm involved in a Year2000-project at our company (as MVS >Systemsprogrammer), and a couple of days ago I ordered OS/390 >Release 3. According to IBM's "S390-Site" on Internet OS/390 Release 2 >is "YEAR2000 READY" (http://www.s390.ibm.com/stories/year2000/mvs.html) >That makes me believe that OS/390 Release 3 MUST be ready for >YEAR2000. >But how true is it ? Is there any "breakdown" of the various components >in OS/390 R2 & R3 listed somewhere ? Or is PSP the only place ? IBM guarantees that OS/390 R3 is Year 2000 ready. Is that not enough? Year 2000 Technical Support Center ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 05:32:42 on 97/05/22 GMT (by SYYEH at TAIVM1) Subject: 4700 FCS controller in Y2k In Guide for Planning and implementation(seventh edition,April 1997) Page A-152,There mentioned that 4700 FCS controller are year2000 ready, but requires service,what kind of service it need?pls specify detail, also is it fee or free charge ? where we can find detail inf about this. Thanks.. ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 14:38:36 on 97/05/22 GMT (by YAEGER at SJFEVMX) Subject: LE/VSE COBOL and DFSORT/VSE's Year 2000 Features Soon you'll be able to use DFSORT/VSE's Year 2000 features from LE/VSE COBOL (at the LE/VSE 1.4 level). LE/VSE APAR PQ04468 will provide this capability. For more details on the APAR, and DFSORT/VSE's Year 2000 features, visit the DFSORT/VSE home page at: http://www.storage.ibm.com/dfsortvse Frank L. Yaeger - DFSORT Team ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 21:16:44 on 97/05/22 GMT (by SHERRY at SJFEVMX) Subject: Y2K Testing Ref: Append at 13:50:53 on 97/05/19 GMT (by VAIS001 at ELINK) Sam, With ICF catalogs, the catalogs no longer are restricted to be on the volumes containing the data. Therefore, although you may be thinking that the data sets being accessed by the Year 2000 test system and the product system(s) are unique, they may be cataloged in the same catalog. Any operation searching through that catalog on the production system could encounter a data set which was created by the test system. It won't be a problem in all cases, but it is something to avoid. You will need unique RACF data sets as well as CDS's for DFSMShsm and DFSMSrmm if you use these products. You don't want any new information added to these that can be accessed by your product systems nor do you want any updates made with the time stamp of your test system. I understand that it may be possible to not totally segregate the systems, but we recommend it so that there are no inadvertent errors. Especially since you are non-SMS, it would be possible for a program to specify a specific volser and then run on the wrong system. By making sure that the volumes aren't accessible, you will prevent this sort of inadvertent error. Hope this helps. Sherry Goncharsky SGONCHA @ IBMUSM51 sgoncha@us.ibm.com ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 22:12:26 on 97/05/22 GMT (by Y2KTSC2 at STLVM6) Subject: 4700 FCS controller in Y2k Ref: Append at 05:32:42 on 97/05/22 GMT (by SYYEH at TAIVM1) You asked: < In Guide for Planning and implementation(seventh edition,April 1997)