RE: Several subsystems

[Neil Palmer <npalmer@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Well, now that I see you are only talking about 5
shareholders/subsystems my violent opposition to this idea is tempered
somewhat,  However, what happens if 5 should become 10, 20, 30 etc. ? 
(What happens if you go public and have several thousand shareholders ?
- yeah I know Rochester will gladly sell you a 12-way model 650    :-)
)
If you continue with the subsystem idea you will soon reach the point
where the administration becomes unmanageable and the system performance
may start to suffer.

Normally you would use a separate interactive subsystem to control
things like easily segregating users from different remote locations, or
users of different applications.  You want to keep everyone off the
system from Branch X, or who is using application Y, then take down the
subsystem that their workstation names are assigned to.  (Yes this
becomes a whole lot more difficult when using Telnet sessions and all
your devices as QPADEVnnnn - but that's another story).

Yes, I would suggest you control their access at the userid level
instead.  If you want to keep someone out you can easily disable their
profile, or use available tools/programs to control conditions (like
time of day, phase of the moon, etc.) when they are allowed to sign on.

... Neil Palmer                                     AS/400~~~~~      
... NxTrend Technology - Canada     ____________          ___  ~     
... Thornhill, Ontario,  Canada     |OOOOOOOOOO| ________  o|__||=   
... Phone: (905) 731-9000  x238     |__________|_|______|_|______)   
... Cell.: (416) 565-1682  x238      oo      oo   oo  oo   OOOo=o\   
... Fax:   (905) 731-9202         ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
... mailto:NPalmer@NxTrend.com          http://www.NxTrend.com


        -----Original Message-----
        From:   Maurice Langeveld [SMTP:MauriceLa@EnerTel.nl]
        Sent:   Thursday, January 29, 1998 7:36 AM
        To:     'MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com'
        Subject:        RE: Several subsystems

        The IT Service Delivery manager suggested it, I can see his
problem when
        we wo'nt do this, because we will give them limeted access, you
can just
        shut down the subsystem and no problem at all, w'll have to
create about
        5 extra subsystems in the beginning.

        What's you're suggestion, secure this on userlevel????

        Or do you have other suggestions???

        Greetz,

        Maurice.

        >----------
        >From:  Neil Palmer[SMTP:npalmer@NxTrend.com]
        >Sent:  woensdag 28 januari 1998 18:26
        >To:    'MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com'
        >Subject:       RE: Several subsystems
        >
        >How many shareholders is a lot ?
        >How many chickens in a pot ?
        >You gonna have a subsystem for everyone ?
        >Your performance will be bad when you're done !
        >
        >My first opinion on this is that this is totally unnecessary,
will
        >create a ton of subsystems on your machine, will affect
performance, and
        >has no apparent benefit.  So who suggested it and why ?
        >
        >... Neil Palmer                                     AS/400~~~~~

        >... NxTrend Technology - Canada     ____________          ___
~     
        >... Thornhill, Ontario,  Canada     |OOOOOOOOOO| ________
o|__||=   
        >... Phone: (905) 731-9000  x238
|__________|_|______|_|______)   
        >... Cell.: (416) 565-1682  x238      oo      oo   oo  oo
OOOo=o\   
        >... Fax:   (905) 731-9202
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
        >... mailto:NPalmer@NxTrend.com          http://www.NxTrend.com
        >
        >
        >       -----Original Message-----
        >       From:   Maurice Langeveld [SMTP:MauriceLa@EnerTel.nl]
        >       Sent:   Wednesday, January 28, 1998 5:42 AM
        >       To:     'AS/400 mailinglijst'
        >       Subject:        Several subsystems
        >
        >       We gonna give a lot of our shareholders access to our
AS/400,
        >now the
        >       customer made a plan to make different subsystems for
each
        >shareholder
        >       who wants access to the system.
        >
        >       Can this cause problems and can someone give me the
advantage
        >and
        >       disadvantage of this solution.
        >
        >       In my opinion the only thing you problem you can get, is
a
        >performance
        >       problem, but therefor there is a solution ;).
        >
        >       The connection will be made through *anynet
(netsoftrouter).
        >       >
        >       >How often can you afford to be unexpectedly out of
business?
        >       >Get an AS/400.
        >
        >       >Maurice Langeveld
        >       >IT Service Delivery @ EnerTel HQ
        >       >Technical specialist
        >       >Tel:010-8803772
        >       >fax:010-8803910
        >       >Email:
        >       - Business@Enertel:    Mauricela@Enertel.nl
        >       - Business@Tas:         Maurice_langeveld%TAS@TAS.nl
        >       - Private:                       CFC@DDS.NL
        >

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---