Skip to Main Content
IBM Sterling

This portal is to open public enhancement requests for IBM Sterling products and services. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (

Shape the future of IBM!

We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Search existing ideas

Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,

Post your ideas
  1. Post an idea.

  2. Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.

  3. Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.

Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use

Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.

IBM Unified Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM. - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.

Status Not under consideration
Created by Guest
Created on May 30, 2023

Implement config or variable to enforce DGADBATC to use specific tcp stack in batch

We're using batch utility DGADBATC in a multiple tcpip stack(cinet) environment and would like to have a parm variable or other config option to specify the utility to utilize specific tcpip stack. The standard options like :


or //SYSTCPD DD definitions don't seem to have any effect for the DGADBATC utility.
The recommended action from case by adding additional step infront of utility "STEP 0 EXECUTE PGM=BPXTCAFF,PARTM=TCP_Stack_Name" is sometimes confusing and being often missed, in case of batch restarts. We'd need some implementation of specifing stack option inside utility itself, ex via PARM=xxx or SYSIN variable.

What is your industry? Financial Markets
How will this idea be used?

Will be used in production envrioment, where there are mutliple tcpip stacks enabled and secured and DGADBATC shouldn't try to access all those tcpip stacks

  • Admin
    James Joseph
    Nov 16, 2023

    Thank you for opening this request with us. We have tried to contact you for more details, but unfortunately have not received a response. Hence we assume that this enhancement is no longer needed and close this out as declined, but please don't hesitate to use the tool in the future if you have other ideas we should consider.


    Product Management Team.

  • Guest
    Aug 18, 2023

    The DGADBATC utility gets the IP (stack) information from the NETMAP so you really need to look at your NETMAP definition for local node API information. In particular, do not use IP= for the TCPAPI. We understand how BPXTCAFF could be bypassed in a restart scenario but the SYSTCPD DD in the DGADBATC step should take effect to identify the desired stack. If it does not, you should contact TCP Support for assistance configuring the SYSTCPD file.

  • Guest
    Jun 9, 2023

    We've racf protected the other tcp stacks, but if user forgets to add additional JCL step PGM=BPXTCAFF,PARM=TCP_Stack_Name" or misses it in batch restarts, it is generating unnecessary ICH408I EZB.STACKACCESS.* messages for the protected tcp stacks, which are followed up by SOC team usually. We'd like to avoid those false positives. In all other batch utilities utilizing tcpip, we've resolved those issues with either //CEEOPTS DD or //SYSTCPD DD definitions usually. We've diifferent network access in different stacks and connect direct batch utility shouldn't access other stacks.

  • Guest
    Jun 9, 2023

    May we have some more details?

    • What is the fundamental problem to be resolved? Perhaps there is another approach to resolving it?

    • What errors are happening today?

    • Is the same IP address being used in multiple stacks?