Ah yes, that does make a difference.  Sorry, the impression I got from your
previous message was that the domains were being used to separate the mgmt
classes, as opposed to provide different organization for different groups.
I think you may indeed be right about the dirmc only working for backups,
I'll have to go double check on that one.

It is true that by having archived directories go to the default mgmt class
instead of the one with the longest retention it is possible for them to end
up in a different tape pool, but then, does that really matter?  It's not
going to eat up tape space in the wrong destination pool, if you need to
mount a tape from one pool as opposed to another, is that a major problem?

I guess I could see it being an issue if the node is collocated, but the
directories end up in a non-collocated pool.  Perhaps IBM...err...Tivoli
should consider changing the destination of the directory to be whatever
mgmt the include list specifies.  After all, if the only reason they sent
directories to the longest mgmt class was to prevent them from being expired
before dependant files, and this has been fixed now, then why not just send
it where it's supposed to go?

Ok, I'm done ranting now... :)

Later,

Paul