Archive-Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1993 00:04:00 CST Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1993 00:03:50 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00965EF0.ADA608E0.16174@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: MX-LIST Administrivia: Monthly Post Last modified: 2-JUL-1992 00:40 01:26 (Created) Welcome to MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET, an electronic mailing list established for the discussion of the Message Exchange mail software. This is a routine posting you will see from time to time on MX-List. The MX-List archives are maintained at ARCHIVES@WKUVX1.BITNET. To get a copy of any month's postings, send an e-mail message with the body SEND MX-List.yyyy-mm to ARCHIVES@WKUVX1.BITNET, where "yyyy" is the year and "mm" is the numeric representation of the month. For example, the message SENDME MX-List.1992-04 will send the archives for April 1992. To remove yourself from the mailing list, send the following command to LISTSERV@WKUVX1.BITNET: SIGNOFF MX-List LISTSERV supports a few other commands for your convenience. The following commands can be handled automatically by the list processor: SIGNOFF MX-List - to remove yourself from the list REVIEW MX-List - to get a list of subscribers QUERY MX-List - to get the status of your entry on the list SET MX-List NOMAIL - to remain on the list but not receive mail SET MX-List MAIL - to resume receiving mail from the list SET MX-List CONCEAL - to not report your address in a REVIEW SET MX-List NOCONCEAL - to report your address in a REVIEW SET MX-List REPRO - to receive posts you make to MX-List SET MX-List NOREPRO - to not receive posts you make to MX-List LIST - to get a list of mailing lists served by WKUVX1 HELP - to receive a help file By default, subscriptions are set to MAIL, REPRO, NOCONCEAL. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions about MX-List, please contact the list owner at the address below. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Hunter Goatley, VAX Systems Programmer goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Western Kentucky University Academic Computing, STH 226 (502) 745-5251 Bowling Green, KY 42101 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 19:00:18 CST Date: Fri, 1 Jan 93 02:23:26 GMT From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <9301010223.AA04521@sndsu1.sinet.slb.com> To: mx-list%wkuvx1.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu CC: SEM@kljm22.sinet.slb.com SUBSCRIBE MOHAMAD KASIM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 21:48:47 CST Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 09:17:51 PST From: "Bob Johns, (604)363-6520" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List%wkuvx1.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu CC: bob@ccs.ios.bc.ca Message-ID: <00965E74.E8EF1BC0.9908@ccs.ios.bc.ca> Subject: Re: Picky logical name translation I don't have any information to offer concerning an MX -> Message Router gateway. But as I indicated in a previous posted note, I am very interested in a proper implementation. By that, I mean one that: - does not require any non-standard workarounds - behaves in an analagous way to MRGATE for SMTP to Message Router and equally Message Router clients (e.g. Mailworks for Windows) to SMTP - uses analagous addressing to that used for MRGATE (e.g. Mailworks client to SMTP: user@mxgate@host.domain, or SMTP to Message Router on same system: mxgate::"am::user") Having said the above, however, the primary need is for a Message Router to SMTP (i.e. to MX) gateway that would allow Message Router clients to send outgoing SMTP mail. Incoming SMTP mail can always be routed into Message Router by setting the appropriate forwarding address within VMSmail. So altho it would be nice to have a bi-directional gateway, only the one direction is critical. Bob Johns (bob@ios.bc.ca) Manager, Central Systems & Networks Scientific Computing Institute of Ocean Sciences Sidney, B.C. Canada ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1993 14:24:22 CST Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1993 11:55:24 EST From: pat@che.phys.Virginia.EDU Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: pat@gomez.phys.Virginia.EDU Message-ID: <009661af.9535cae0.3642@gomez.phys.virginia.edu> Subject: Followup to: "error in device name" message on MX 3.1 Thanks to Hunter Goatley and Carl Lydick, both of whom correctly suggested that I had a problem with the definition of FLQ_DIR which was causing me to encounter the following error whenever I tried to SEND using MX 3.1: >MAIL> send >To: mx%"user@site.edu" ! dummy user and site, of course >%RMS-F-DEV, error in device name or inappropriate device type for operation It turns out that I had defined FLQ_DIR in a nonstandard way which was perfectly legal as far as VMS is concerned, but unacceptable to MX; thus DCL commands like $ DIR FLQ_DIR worked normally, leaving me with the false impression that everything was set up properly. (I set up the faulty definition of FLQ_DIR some weeks back, and I'm afraid I can't remember why I was using a nonstandard definition; it was probably just part of a trial- and-error process.) Now I have a new question: my SMTP process is dying on me as soon as I try to SEND. The appropriate *.HDR_INFO, *.MSG_TEXT, *.SRC_INFO and *.SMTP_INFO files are being created in the (now correctly-defined) FLQ_DIR directory, but they all end up stranded there because SMTP has died. The VMS accounting utility tells me that SMTP is dying with status code 1000043C, %SYSTEM-F-OPCDEC, opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault at PC=!XL Does this ring a bell with anyone? A bug in MX 3.1 (i.e., "Try 3.1C, dummy!), or am I still doing something wrong? (A review of my MX environment: 7-node Vaxcluster, all nodes running VMS 5.5 and CMU-TEK 6.6-5. MX 2.0 currently running successfully on all nodes with the exception of occasional failures to deliver, particularly to CERN in Europe (addresses ending in .CH). ROUTER, LOCAL and MLF run on 3 of the 7 nodes; SMTP runs on these 3 plus 1 other node, and all 7 nodes run SMTP Server.) - Patrick Walsh University of Virginia Department of Physics pw@virginia.bitnet, pw@virginia.edu, pat@gomez.phys.virginia.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1993 15:57:51 CST Sender: wbradford@UDCVAX.BITNET Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1993 15:38:57 EST From: wbradford@UDCVAX.BITNET Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: wbradford@UDCVAX.BITNET Message-ID: <00966297.F9CACE40.18185@UDCVAX.BITNET> Subject: MX and Disk Space Quota We have run into a strange problem that may be linked to MX. We recently noticed that some user accounts on our system have exceeded disk quota storage with mainly mail messages. For example: A user is given a permanent disk quota of 5000 blocks and 100 blocks overdraft, but, that user has 28000 blocks tied up with mostly .MAI files. After contacting our software support at DEC, it was confirmed that this is due to a change in DEC's VMS and VMS MAIL software. As a result, any user, who has EXQUOTA or SETPRV privileges, can send a mail message and that mail message would go into the target user's mail file whether they had the spare disk space or not. DEC is still researching to find out when this change came about. We have had JNET running on our system for several years and have never seen this problem before. As for MX, we are coming up on our first year of running it. DEC's solution: Remove EXQUOTA and SETPRV from the user id that is sending the mail message. The problem with DEC's solution is that our MX Mailer account is setup with EXQUOTA privileges. Our software configuration is: VMS V5.4-3, JNET V3.5 and MX V3.1 My questions: 1) Has any seen or heard of this problem before? 2) Can we remove the EXQUOTA privilege from our MX mailer account without any problems to MX? Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thank you. William Bradford WBRADFOR@UDCVAX.BITNET ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1993 16:20:32 CST Subject: Mailworks/MRGATE and nasty quotes Message-ID: <1993Jan5.145714.1@woods.ulowell.edu> From: byrnee@woods.ulowell.edu Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 5 Jan 93 19:57:14 GMT Sender: (News manager - ulowell) To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET We are about to switch our users from VAXmail to Mailworks. Users groaned a lot when they had to address VAXmail to MX: MX%"user@node.blah.edu" You can image the groans we'll hear when under Mailworks/Message Router they will have to enter: "MX%""user@node.blah.edu"""@MRGATE Has anyone out there in MX land figured out a simpler way to address? I just can't find any way around those quotes. Eileen ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1993 16:54:05 CST From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: MX and Disk Space Quota Date: 5 Jan 1993 17:18:08 -0500 Message-ID: <1id1f0INNo0l@dayub.dayton.saic.com> References: <00966297.F9CACE40.18185@UDCVAX.BITNET> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET wbradford@UDCVAX.BITNET wrote: : DEC's solution: Remove EXQUOTA and SETPRV from the user id that is sending : the mail message. : The problem with DEC's solution is that our MX Mailer account is setup with : EXQUOTA privileges. : Our software configuration is: VMS V5.4-3, JNET V3.5 and MX V3.1 : My questions: : 1) Has any seen or heard of this problem before? : 2) Can we remove the EXQUOTA privilege from our MX mailer account without : any problems to MX? I don't think you can remove the SETPRV quota. You could probably remove the EXQUOTA as long as you give the mailer account plenty of quota! -Earle -- Earle Ake Internet: NSI-DECnet (SPAN): 28276::ake ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 05:00:12 CST From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Queue entries stuck in READY state Message-ID: <1993Jan4.150455.1831@elcsci.com> Date: 4 Jan 93 23:04:55 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I recently managed to get my MX components hung up while attempting to update the MX logicals to match my new registered domain name. I noticed there was a problem when I discovered that my messages to test the new address were not being delivered. A STATUS command to MCP resulted in the error 'no such agent processes are running', while a show system did show that the MX processes existed. Attempting to restart the MX components resulted in errors such as %MX-F-AGENTALRDY, agent MX_UUCP is already running -SYSTEM-F-IVBUFLEN, invalid buffer length Restoring MX_logicals.dat to its original state solved the above problem. However, messages posted during the time that MX was not running correctly now appear in my queue in a READY state and have for several days. Other messages posted after I got MX running again are delivered correctly and promptly. What steps should I perform to cause these pending entries to be delivered. I can find nothing in the trace logs that indicates any MX component is attempting to process these entries. I have attempted a QUEUE READY command to no affect. Thanks for any helpful hints. MCP>show version MX version is is: MX V3.1C MCP>que show /all/full Entry: 577, Origin: [VMSmail] CAMPBELLL "Laura @Forty Two Ten" Status: READY, size: 1498 bytes Created: 11-DEC-1992 16:05:45.16, expires 10-JAN-1993 16:05:45.16 Last modified 15-DEC-1992 16:21:29.57 Recipient #1: Entry: 578, Origin: [VMSmail] RONNINGK Status: READY, size: 254 bytes Created: 14-DEC-1992 09:02:15.11, expires 13-JAN-1993 09:02:15.11 Last modified 15-DEC-1992 16:32:18.49 Recipient #1: Chuck Lewis | UUCP esimis!lewisc Electro Scientific Ind. | lewisc@elcsci.com 13900 NW Science Park, Portland Or | Compuserve 71140,2271 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 11:24:18 CST Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 17:15 GMT From: VAX SYSTEM MANAGER - 0224-318611 x2111 Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-LIST%BITNET.WKUVX1@NSFNET-RELAY.AC.UK Subject: MX HHELP CONFIG. Hello, I would be grateful if you could answer the following questions relating to MX as this product is a new one on me. I can send mail from VAX - SUN and vice-versa using MX I can set incomming mail to VAX to forward to any SUN workstation Q. What will MX offer me in terms of facilities over and above the above mentioned ?. Will it allow me to use SMTP over X25 i.e MX%"SYSTEM@UK.AC....ETC" I really need to send mail from SUN route through the VAX to the outside world. Does MX offer this routing capability ? Q. I am unclear when running the configuration program when configuring for using MX over X25 what is the exact requirement in terms of ROUTER node spec and REMOTE user spec. I think this is where I am going wrong because I get unknown user and unknown node error messages when sending mail using MX. (would it be possible to have a look at an example CONFIG file) ? Many thanks Tony Sunman ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 05:07:16 CST Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 11:02:38 GMT From: David Candlin Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: david@v2.ph.ed.ac.uk Message-ID: <009664CC.DF539060.2842@v2.ph.ed.ac.uk> Subject: Name resolution Edinburgh, 8-JAN-1993 I'm a newcomer, and have just installed MX 3.1c over CMUIP 6.6. Name completion for outgoing smtp isn't working; what am I doing wrong? The NAMRES$CONFIG file is: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ; ; NAMRES.CONFIG ; ; Description: ; ; Define domain server context of system ; ; Syntax: ; ; DOMAIN_SERVER:domain:servername:address:port ; Domain_Server:.:DIRECTORY:129.215.128.1:53 Domain_Server:.:cancer.eucs:129.215.200.7:53 Domain_Server:.:xlab-0:129.215.168.33:53 ;nameserver 129.215.128.1 ;nameserver 129.215.168.33 ;nameserver 129.215.200.22 ;nameserver 129.215.200.7 ;nameserver 129.215.160.140 ; ; Define parital name resolvers ; DOMAIN_Resolver:Servername:address:port ; ; ; Define suffix table for local domain. ; Suffix table not used if Domain_Resolver present. ; Syntax: Domain_Suffix:suffix-string ; Domain_Suffix:ph.ed.ac.uk. Domain_Suffix:ed.ac.uk. Domain_Suffix:ac.uk. Domain_Suffix:uk. Domain_Suffix:. ; ; Initialize Logging state. Use 0 unless debugging ; Logging:0 ; ; Set server debug. Nonzero means debugging. ; Variable:DEBUG:0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- If I sit on v2.ph.ed.ac.uk and send to MX%"djc@th", it fails: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MX%"Postmaster@v2.ph.ed.ac.uk" 7-JAN-1993 23:50:45.41 To: DAVID CC: Subj: SMTP delivery error Return-Path: <> Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 23:50:35 EST From: SMTP delivery agent To: Subject: SMTP delivery error Note: this message was generated automatically. A problem occurred during SMTP delivery of your message. Error occurred sending to the following user(s): (via th): %MX-F-RETRYEXCD, retry count exceeded -MX-F-NOHOST, no such host ======================================================================== Message follows. Received: by v2.ph.ed.ac.uk (MX V3.1C) id 2834; Thu, 07 Jan 1993 17:48:58 EST Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 17:48:52 GMT From: David Candlin To: djc@th Message-ID: <0096643C.747A8400.2834@v2.ph.ed.ac.uk> Subject: test test ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- However, if I ask the DNS (via IPNCP) about th, it's OK: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- edphv4$ ipncp IPNCP> rr th/mx # of RRs = [00000005] MX: Pref = [0000000A] Name = [aida.ph.ed.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [0000000D] Name = [castle.ed.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [0000000E] Name = [festival.ed.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [00000014] Name = [nsfnet-relay.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [0000001E] Name = [sun2.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk] IPNCP> rr th.ph.ed.ac.uk/mx # of RRs = [00000005] MX: Pref = [0000000A] Name = [aida.ph.ed.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [0000000D] Name = [castle.ed.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [0000000E] Name = [festival.ed.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [00000014] Name = [nsfnet-relay.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [0000001E] Name = [sun2.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, if I send to MX%"djc@th.ph.ed.ac.uk" it succeeds; so it's name completion in MXLOOK, I suppose, which is failing. I tried a few things, without success. The doc says it's supposed to use the built-in NAMRES, which seems to work OK for IPNCP. Help, please!! David Candlin ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 07:50:06 CST From: system@condor.navsses.navy.mil Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: mx supports which tcp/ip packages? Message-ID: <1993Jan8.073208.369@condor.navsses.navy.mil> Date: 8 Jan 93 12:32:08 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET What tcp/ip packages does the current version of MX support? -- Mike Jacobi NAVSSES VAXCluster system manager System@Eagle.Navsses.Navy.Mil System@Condor.Navsses.Navy.Mil Disclaimer - I speak for myself. No-one else. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 10:11:33 CST Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 10:59:09 EST From: pat@che.phys.Virginia.EDU Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: pat@gomez.phys.Virginia.EDU Message-ID: <009664cc.6323e080.4879@gomez.phys.virginia.edu> Subject: "opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault" still killing SMTP A few days ago I wrote (in part): >Now I have a new question: my SMTP process is dying on me as soon as I try >to SEND. The appropriate *.HDR_INFO, *.MSG_TEXT, *.SRC_INFO and *.SMTP_INFO >files are being created in the (now correctly-defined) FLQ_DIR directory, >but they all end up stranded there because SMTP has died. The VMS accounting >utility tells me that SMTP is dying with status code 1000043C, >%SYSTEM-F-OPCDEC, opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault at PC=!XL >Does this ring a bell with anyone? A bug in MX 3.1 (i.e., "Try 3.1C, dummy!), >or am I still doing something wrong? >(A review of my MX environment: 7-node Vaxcluster, all nodes running VMS 5.5 > and CMU-TEK 6.6-5. MX 2.0 currently running successfully on all nodes with > the exception of occasional failures to deliver, particularly to CERN in > Europe (addresses ending in .CH). ROUTER, LOCAL and MLF run on 3 of the > 7 nodes; SMTP runs on these 3 plus 1 other node, and all 7 nodes run > SMTP Server.) Well, I've just tried reinstalling MX 3.1 from scratch, creating a new CONFIG.MCP, etc., and I'm getting the same "opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault" error. Any ideas? Any more information I can supply? Thanks. - Patrick Walsh University of Virginia Department of Physics pw@virginia.bitnet, pw@virginia.edu, pat@gomez.phys.virginia.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 10:22:53 CST Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 10:20:35 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: pat@che.phys.Virginia.EDU Message-ID: <009664C6.FF4C6FA0.13173@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: "opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault" still killing SMTP pat@che.phys.Virginia.EDU writes: > >A few days ago I wrote (in part): > >>Now I have a new question: my SMTP process is dying on me as soon as I try >>to SEND. The appropriate *.HDR_INFO, *.MSG_TEXT, *.SRC_INFO and *.SMTP_INFO [....] >Well, I've just tried reinstalling MX 3.1 from scratch, creating a new >CONFIG.MCP, etc., and I'm getting the same "opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault" >error. Any ideas? Any more information I can supply? Thanks. > The first thing to do, if you haven't already, is to turn on SMTP debugging by defining the following logical: $ define/sys/exec mx_smtp_debug true That'll create log files in MX_SMTP_DIR: that might help provide more info. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 10:23:09 CST Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 10:18:51 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: pw@virginia.bitnet Message-ID: <009664C6.C19B96E0.13171@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: "opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault" still killing SMTP From: MX%"MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET" 8-JAN-1993 10:12:10.76 To: GOATHUNTER CC: Subj: "opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault" still killing SMTP Return-Path: Received: from WKUVX1 (WKUVX1::MXMAILER) by HUNTER (MX V3.1C) with SMTP (DECnet); Fri, 08 Jan 1993 10:12:06 CST Errors-To: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET X-ListName: Message Exchange Discussion List Received: from watson.acc.Virginia.EDU (MAILER) by WKUVX1 (MX V3.1C) with BSMTP; Fri, 08 Jan 1993 10:07:32 CST Received: from WATSON by watson.acc.Virginia.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 3389; Fri, 08 Jan 93 11:01:30 EST Received: from Virginia.EDU by WATSON.ACC.VIRGINIA.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R1) with TCP; Fri, 08 Jan 93 11:01:29 EST Received: from che.phys.virginia.edu by uvaarpa.Virginia.EDU id aa27979; 8 Jan 93 10:59 EST Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 10:59:09 EST From: pat@che.phys.Virginia.EDU Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: pat@gomez.phys.Virginia.EDU Subject: "opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault" still killing SMTP A few days ago I wrote (in part): >Now I have a new question: my SMTP process is dying on me as soon as I try >to SEND. The appropriate *.HDR_INFO, *.MSG_TEXT, *.SRC_INFO and *.SMTP_INFO >files are being created in the (now correctly-defined) FLQ_DIR directory, >but they all end up stranded there because SMTP has died. The VMS accounting >utility tells me that SMTP is dying with status code 1000043C, >%SYSTEM-F-OPCDEC, opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault at PC=!XL >Does this ring a bell with anyone? A bug in MX 3.1 (i.e., "Try 3.1C, dummy!), >or am I still doing something wrong? >(A review of my MX environment: 7-node Vaxcluster, all nodes running VMS 5.5 > and CMU-TEK 6.6-5. MX 2.0 currently running successfully on all nodes with > the exception of occasional failures to deliver, particularly to CERN in > Europe (addresses ending in .CH). ROUTER, LOCAL and MLF run on 3 of the > 7 nodes; SMTP runs on these 3 plus 1 other node, and all 7 nodes run > SMTP Server.) Well, I've just tried reinstalling MX 3.1 from scratch, creating a new CONFIG.MCP, etc., and I'm getting the same "opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault" error. Any ideas? Any more information I can supply? Thanks. - Patrick Walsh University of Virginia Department of Physics pw@virginia.bitnet, pw@virginia.edu, pat@gomez.phys.virginia.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 10:37:25 CST Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 16:34:49 GMT From: David Candlin Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <009664FB.4720CFE0.2857@v2.ph.ed.ac.uk> Subject: Name resolution Edinburgh, 8-JAN-1993 I'm a newcomer, and have just installed MX 3.1c over CMUIP 6.6. Name completion for outgoing smtp isn't working; what am I doing wrong? The NAMRES$CONFIG file is: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ; ; NAMRES.CONFIG ; ; Description: ; ; Define domain server context of system ; ; Syntax: ; ; DOMAIN_SERVER:domain:servername:address:port ; Domain_Server:.:DIRECTORY:129.215.128.1:53 Domain_Server:.:cancer.eucs:129.215.200.7:53 Domain_Server:.:xlab-0:129.215.168.33:53 ;nameserver 129.215.128.1 ;nameserver 129.215.168.33 ;nameserver 129.215.200.22 ;nameserver 129.215.200.7 ;nameserver 129.215.160.140 ; ; Define parital name resolvers ; DOMAIN_Resolver:Servername:address:port ; ; ; Define suffix table for local domain. ; Suffix table not used if Domain_Resolver present. ; Syntax: Domain_Suffix:suffix-string ; Domain_Suffix:ph.ed.ac.uk. Domain_Suffix:ed.ac.uk. Domain_Suffix:ac.uk. Domain_Suffix:uk. Domain_Suffix:. ; ; Initialize Logging state. Use 0 unless debugging ; Logging:0 ; ; Set server debug. Nonzero means debugging. ; Variable:DEBUG:0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- If I sit on v2.ph.ed.ac.uk and send to MX%"djc@th", it fails: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MX%"Postmaster@v2.ph.ed.ac.uk" 7-JAN-1993 23:50:45.41 To: DAVID CC: Subj: SMTP delivery error Return-Path: <> Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 23:50:35 EST From: SMTP delivery agent To: Subject: SMTP delivery error Note: this message was generated automatically. A problem occurred during SMTP delivery of your message. Error occurred sending to the following user(s): (via th): %MX-F-RETRYEXCD, retry count exceeded -MX-F-NOHOST, no such host ======================================================================== Message follows. Received: by v2.ph.ed.ac.uk (MX V3.1C) id 2834; Thu, 07 Jan 1993 17:48:58 EST Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 17:48:52 GMT From: David Candlin To: djc@th Message-ID: <0096643C.747A8400.2834@v2.ph.ed.ac.uk> Subject: test test ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- However, if I ask the DNS (via IPNCP) about th, it's OK: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- edphv4$ ipncp IPNCP> rr th/mx # of RRs = [00000005] MX: Pref = [0000000A] Name = [aida.ph.ed.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [0000000D] Name = [castle.ed.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [0000000E] Name = [festival.ed.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [00000014] Name = [nsfnet-relay.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [0000001E] Name = [sun2.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk] IPNCP> rr th.ph.ed.ac.uk/mx # of RRs = [00000005] MX: Pref = [0000000A] Name = [aida.ph.ed.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [0000000D] Name = [castle.ed.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [0000000E] Name = [festival.ed.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [00000014] Name = [nsfnet-relay.ac.uk] MX: Pref = [0000001E] Name = [sun2.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, if I send to MX%"djc@th.ph.ed.ac.uk" it succeeds; so it's name completion in MXLOOK, I suppose, which is failing. I tried a few things, without success. The doc says it's supposed to use the built-in NAMRES, which seems to work OK for IPNCP. Help, please!! David Candlin [Apologies if you already had this....my subscription may or may not have been in order, the first time] ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 15:43:24 CST Subject: Re: mx supports which tcp/ip packages? Message-ID: <1993Jan8.183107.26242@news.arc.nasa.gov> From: Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 18:31:07 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Sender: usenet@news.arc.nasa.gov References: <1993Jan8.073208.369@condor.navsses.navy.mil> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Jan8.073208.369@condor.navsses.navy.mil>, system@condor.navsses.navy.mil writes: >What tcp/ip packages does the current version of MX support? CMU-Tek V6.4 and later DEC VMS/ULTRIX Connection V1.2 and later (as of V2.0 called TCP/IP Services for VMS) TGV MultiNet V2.2 and later Process Software TCPware (no known version restrictions) -Matt -- Matthew Madison | madison@tgv.com | +1 408 427 4366 TGV, Inc. | 603 Mission Street | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1993 10:49:58 CST From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: what is mx ? Message-ID: Sender: (Netnews Admin) Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 15:51:10 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Can somebody tell me what is MX ( well I know it does SMTP on a VAX ). Or my question should be: I have UCX 2.0, what would MX do for me that UCX does not provide ? Or is there a FAQ ? Alain Martineau Hydro Quebec martineau@macmartineau.ccr.hydro.qc.ca ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 13:51:38 CST From: Subject: RE: "opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault" still killing SMTP Message-ID: <2530@sunny.lif.de> Date: 9 Jan 93 15:16:33 GMT References: <009664C6.FF4C6FA0.13173@WKUVX1.BITNET> Sender: news@lif.de Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <009664C6.FF4C6FA0.13173@WKUVX1.BITNET>, goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (Hunter Goatley) writes: >pat@che.phys.Virginia.EDU writes: >> >>Well, I've just tried reinstalling MX 3.1 from scratch, creating a new >>CONFIG.MCP, etc., and I'm getting the same "opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault" >>error. Any ideas? Any more information I can supply? Thanks. Just a hint, because I had the same situation two days ago (with an own program, not with MX). Your problem may have other reasons. I have a ci-cluster and made a new version of a shared library on one node and installed it there. My small program used an entry from that library. It worked on one node, but gave the above error message, when executed on the other node. The solution: (after a lot of gray hair) I installed the sharable library on the other node. I think the above message is some sort of all-purpose message... :-( Hans. -- Hans-Joachim Koch, Computer department of Lahmeyer International Lyoner Strasse 22, POB 71 06 51, D-6000 Frankfurt (Main) 71, Germany Phone: +49 69 6677-642, Fax: +49 69 6677-571, Tx: 413478 li d EUnet: koch@lifra.lif.de, AMPRnet: dk9om@db0lj.ampr.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 13:51:44 CST From: Subject: Looking for rewriting rules Message-ID: <2531@sunny.lif.de> Date: 9 Jan 93 15:27:34 GMT Sender: news@lif.de Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hello, can someone please give me a hint where I can find the rules for address rewriting (for MX of course). I have no problems to rewrite simple adresses, but now I have a rather complicated one. Our VAX routes all mail to a SUN. Problems arises, when I send some mail to *.uucp. The SUN tries to transfer the mail with uucp (nothing is set up for that purpose), rather than sending it via our ISDN link to the EUnet mail server. I know, we should fix it in the SUN routing, but didn't succeed until know. I thought I could fix it with a rewrite rule in MX. Address: hamcall.ampr.org!hamcall@uucphost.uucp (strange!) It works, when I send to: hamcall.ampr.org!hamcall%uucphost.uucp@germany.eu.net How can I deal with this situation? Is there a multitoken variable, like {everything@uucphost.uucp}->{everything%uucphost.uucp@germany.eu.net}, because I never know the number of tokens of the first part... Hans. -- Hans-Joachim Koch, Computer department of Lahmeyer International Lyoner Strasse 22, POB 71 06 51, D-6000 Frankfurt (Main) 71, Germany Phone: +49 69 6677-642, Fax: +49 69 6677-571, Tx: 413478 li d EUnet: koch@lifra.lif.de, AMPRnet: dk9om@db0lj.ampr.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 17:46:21 CST Subject: Reverse rewrite rules?? Message-ID: <1993Jan11.112445.673@fri.cri.nz> From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 11 Jan 93 11:24:45 +1300 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hi all Just a quick question on rewrite rules. Are they designed to work in reverse? That is, am I able to rewrite outgoing addresses so the recipients get a globally acceptable From: address? The situation is this: I have defined a rewrite rule to establish a PSI gateway so that addresses of the format J.Bloggs@12345678.psigate... are translated to psi%12345678::J.Bloggs. This works wonderfully well except the recipients see 'psi%12345678::J.Bloggs'@psigate... which some mailers don't like. The idea is to translate the From address back to J.Bloggs@12345678.psigate... which is generally acceptable so people can do replies. Any thoughts? Cheers Nick Wykes N.Wykes@fcnz.co.nz ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 17:47:10 CST From: byrnee@woods.ulowell.edu Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Also need rewrite rules help Message-ID: <1993Jan10.170816.1@woods.ulowell.edu> Sender: (News manager - ulowell) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 22:08:16 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I also need help with re-write rules. I applied the [mx.examples]name_conversion module and defined the re-write rules as indicated in the 00README.NAME_CONVERSION instructions, but am having no luck. I want to re-route all incoming Internet mail through MRGATE to users' Mailworks accounts. (The mailbox in MRGATE is "AM") To do this from VAXmail I would type: TO: mx%"'MRGATE::AM::username'@nodex.ulowell.edu" What rewrite rule would essentially translate: username@nodex.ulowell.edu to 'MRGATE::AM::username'@nodex.ulowell.edu ? I have tried every combination I can think of, but nothing works. I would like to avoid the obvious, which is setting all VAXmail accounts to Mailworks. (NOT a pretty solution for 13,000 accounts!) Thanks, Eileen Byrne ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 18:06:49 CST Date: 10 Jan 1993 19:00:24 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Reverse rewrite rules?? To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: wykesn@fri.cri.nz, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009666A1.F27DD8E0.8569@garnet.nist.gov> > The situation is this: I have defined a rewrite rule to establish a PSI > gateway so that addresses of the format J.Bloggs@12345678.psigate... are > translated to psi%12345678::J.Bloggs. This works wonderfully well except the > recipients see 'psi%12345678::J.Bloggs'@psigate... which some mailers don't > like. The idea is to translate the From address back to > J.Bloggs@12345678.psigate... which is generally acceptable so people can do > replies. I don't understand -- is J.Bloggs the sender or the recipient of the message? In any event, I think you can do what you want to do with a SITE agent. With the understanding that I know nothing about PSI gateways, if you explain again what you want to do I can show you how the SITE command file can call the editor to fiddle what you want to fiddle. - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 18:23:21 CST Date: 10 Jan 1993 19:15:07 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: what is mx ? To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: martineau@MacMartineau.ccr.hydro.qc.ca, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009666A4.00D61C20.8568@garnet.nist.gov> > Can somebody tell me what is MX ( well I know it does SMTP on a VAX ). Or > my question should be: I have UCX 2.0, what would MX do for me that UCX > does not provide ? Or is there a FAQ ? In the words of its author: Message Exchange V3.1 Message Exchange (MX) is electronic mail distribution and routing software for VMS V5.0 or later. It supports Internet mail over TCP/IP using CMU-Tek, DEC VMS/ULTRIX Connection, TGV MultiNet, and Process Software Corporation's TCPware, as well as SMTP over DECnet and X.25; BITNET mail over Jnet; also interfaces with DECUS UUCP. MX uses VMS Mail for local message entry and delivery, and includes support for mailing lists and mail-based file servers. Support is included for interfacing MX with a custom mail transport and for providing custom address handling routines. V3.1 includes the following new features over previous releases: * SMTP over X.25 is now supported, using VAX P.S.I. * The Jnet interface no long requires a special account to run. * Mailing list processor supports NOCASE, CONCEAL, and NOREPRO flags for subscriber entries. * A NAME_CONVERSION module is included in the examples save set that handles address conversions for both DECnet and MRGATE users. * MX processes now log their startups and exits to log files, and will also log to an operator class, if desired. * New STATUS command added to MCP that lists all running MX processes. * Several other minor improvements and bug fixes. MX V3.1, including installation kit, docs, and sources, is available via anonymous FTP on ftp.spc.edu, in directory [.MX]. If you do not have FTP access, you can obtain MX by requesting it via E-mail. Send the following commands in the body of a mail message to MXSERVER@WKUVX1.BITNET: SEND MX031 SEND FILESERV_TOOLS It's a huge package and, because of BITNET delays, make take a few days for all the pieces to arrive. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 18:53:11 CST Date: 10 Jan 1993 19:40:38 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Also need rewrite rules help To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: byrnee@woods.ulowell.edu, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009666A7.9126A940.8574@garnet.nist.gov> I want to re-route all incoming Internet mail through MRGATE to users' Mailworks accounts. (The mailbox in MRGATE is "AM") To do this from VAXmail I would type: TO: mx%"'MRGATE::AM::username'@nodex.ulowell.edu" > What rewrite rule would essentially translate: > > username@nodex.ulowell.edu to 'MRGATE::AM::username'@nodex.ulowell.edu ? > > I have tried every combination I can think of, but nothing works. Have you tried: MCP> DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{u}@nodex.ulowell.edu>" - _MCP> "<""MRGATE::AM::{u}""@nodex.ulowell.edu>" MCP> SAVE MCP> RESET ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 19:14:34 CST Date: 10 Jan 1993 19:59:47 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Looking for rewriting rules To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: sys_hjk@LIFRA.LIF.DE, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009666AA.3DE21AA0.8578@garnet.nist.gov> > can someone please give me a hint where I can find the rules for address > rewriting (for MX of course). The Message Exchange Management Guide, edition of March 1992, for MX V3.1, page 3-1. > How can I deal with this situation? Is there a multitoken variable, like > {everything@uucphost.uucp}->{everything%uucphost.uucp@germany.eu.net}, > because I never know the number of tokens of the first part... To quote from the above reference, "the rule processor treats the addresses as ordinary text strings and does not understand the syntax of RFC 821 addresses." In other words, don't worry about tokenizing. MCP> DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{u}@{h}.uucp>" "<{u}%{h}.uucp@germany.eu.net>" MCP> SAVE MCP> RESET More to the point, why fool with rewrite rules? MCP> DEFINE PATH *.UUCP SMTP/ROUTE="germany.eu.net" ^^^^-or different, as appropriate (Remember that the order of the DEFINE commands is important; you may have to edit CONFIG.MCP and start over.) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 20:34:49 CST Date: 10 Jan 1993 21:26:26 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Name resolution To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: david@v2.ph.ed.ac.uk, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009666B6.58DF2B20.8591@garnet.nist.gov> > I'm a newcomer, and have just installed MX 3.1c over CMUIP 6.6. Name > completion for outgoing smtp isn't working; what am I doing wrong? MX refers to what you want as "host name expansion." It happens "just before PATH identification." So, if this step failed, you shouldn't be surprised if the mail was sent to the literal address, rather than to the expanded address. Do you have the following logical defined: (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE) "MX_SITE_DOM_EXPANSION" = "MX_EXE:DOMAIN_EXPANSION" And is that file present? I rather suspect that there's nothing wrong with C**/T** (formerly CMU/TEK) TCP/IP, since IPNCP works alright. All I can tell you is that version 6.6-4 of IP_ACP and MX 3.1c do correctly expand addresses on my system, and I didn't have to do anything special to make it happen. A difference between my system and yours, though, is that your addresses apparently only have MX records on the nameserver, not A records. So, the search to see which addresses are "valid" might not work. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 13:39:49 CST From: Subject: Re: Also need rewrite rules help Message-ID: <1993Jan11.174848.26485@news.arc.nasa.gov> Sender: usenet@news.arc.nasa.gov Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET References: <1993Jan10.170816.1@woods.ulowell.edu> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 17:48:48 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Jan10.170816.1@woods.ulowell.edu>, byrnee@woods.ulowell.edu writes: >To do this from VAXmail I would type: > >TO: mx%"'MRGATE::AM::username'@nodex.ulowell.edu" > >What rewrite rule would essentially translate: > >username@nodex.ulowell.edu to 'MRGATE::AM::username'@nodex.ulowell.edu ? > >I have tried every combination I can think of, but nothing works. I would >like to avoid the obvious, which is setting all VAXmail accounts to Mailworks. >(NOT a pretty solution for 13,000 accounts!) What I would suggest is to set up a new domain name - call it something like mrgate.nodex.ulowell.edu or something like that - with an MX record pointing to nodex. That makes the rewrite simple: "<{user}@mrgate.nodex.ulowell.edu>" -> "<""MRGATE::AM::{user}""@nodex.ulowell.edu>" If you have MX V3.1C, you could also use the improved name_conversion interface in that version that lets you rewrite an entire address, so your users' return addresses would look cleaner. A bit of coding would be required, though. If you didn't want to add the extra record in the DNS, you should still be able to work it with the following pair of rewrite rules: "<""MRGATE::{anything}""@nodex.ulowell.edu>" -> "<""MRGATE::{anything}""@nodex.ulowell.edu>" and "<{user}@nodex.ulowell.edu>" -> "<""MRGATE::AM::{user}@nodex.ulowell.edu>" The first rewrite rule, which does nothing to the address, prevents the gatewayed addresses from getting rewritten any further. Using the extra DNS host name has the added advantage that users could then choose whether they wanted to use VMS Mail or MAILworks. -Matt -- Matthew Madison | madison@tgv.com | +1 408 427 4366 TGV, Inc. | 603 Mission Street | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 13:48:31 CST Sender: pat@gomez.phys.virginia.edu Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 14:04:01 EST From: pat@CHE.PHYS.VIRGINIA.EDU Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: pat@gomez.phys.virginia.edu Message-ID: <009668D4.09F05820.1328@CHE.PHYS.VIRGINIA.EDU> Subject: "error in device name" and "opcode reserved to DIGITAL" errors - SOLVED! Over the past several weeks I've posted 2 or 3 times with requests for help upgrading from MX 2.0 to MX 3.1 on a 7-node Vaxcluster running VMS 5.5 and CMU-TEK 6.6-5. I've now had 3.1 running successfully for 5 days and wanted 1) to thank those who helped me out and 2) to summarize the problems I experienced and what had to be done to fix them, in hope that the knowledge may be useful to someone else in the future. My first problem was as follows: >Here's my problem: I've customized the 3.1 installation for our site (the >ROUTER, LOCAL, and MLF processes all run on 3 of the 7 nodes; SMTP runs on >these 3 plus one other node; and SMTP_SERVER runs on all 7 nodes). As best >I can tell, I've modified it so it should be configured just as it has been >to successfully run MX 2.0. I start up MX and all the appropriate processes >start up, and will run until I stop them myself. However, as soon as I try >to send an outgoing message, I receive the following error: >MAIL> send >To: mx%"user@site.edu" ! dummy user and site, of course >%RMS-F-DEV, error in device name or inappropriate device type for operation >I've checked all of the appropriate logicals I'm aware of (SHOW LOGICAL *MX* >and SHOW LOGICAL *NETLIB*), and as best I can tell they're all defined >properly; i.e., all logicals defined to point to directories or files do so >successfully and MX_INET_HOST, MX_NODE_NAME, MX_SMTP_DEFAULT_ROUTER and >MX_VMSMAIL_LOCALHOST all point to the correct machines. As it turned out, there was a critical logical I'd overlooked: FLQ_DIR. The problem was that I'd defined FLQ_DIR in MX_LOGICALS.DAT to point to a directory on a concealed device as follows: FLQ_DIR\/SYSTEM/EXEC\UVA_PACKAGES:[MX031.QUEUE] where UVA_PACKAGES itself is a directory on a disk. Now, this is perfectly legal as far as VMS and DCL are concerned; i.e., I could do things like $ DIR FLQ_DIR and get a directory of the files in that area, leaving me with the false impression that everything was okay with my definition of FLQ_DIR; however, MX apparently didn't know what to do with UVA_PACKAGES and thus returned the %RMS-F-DEV error. I now have FLQ_DIR defined to point to MX_ROOT:[QUEUE] and this seems to work just fine. Thanks to Hunter Goatley and Carl Lydick for help with this problem. Second problem: >Now I have a new question: my SMTP process is dying on me as soon as I try >to SEND. The appropriate *.HDR_INFO, *.MSG_TEXT, *.SRC_INFO and *.SMTP_INFO >files are being created in the (now correctly-defined) FLQ_DIR directory, >but they all end up stranded there because SMTP has died. The VMS accounting >utility tells me that SMTP is dying with status code 1000043C, >%SYSTEM-F-OPCDEC, opcode reserved to DIGITAL fault at PC=!XL This one was a little more straightforward. It turned out that NETLIB wasn't getting started because I'd installed the NETLIB software in a subdirectory of MX_ROOT, but MX_START.COM was looking for the NETLIB_STARTUP file in SYS$STARTUP (from which I'd moved it by hand after running VMSINSTAL). I edited MX_START.COM to look for NETLIB_STARTUP.COM in the appropriate place, MX_ROOT:[NETLIB], and this change allowed MX 3.1 to start up properly. Thanks to Matthew Madison and Hunter Goatley for help with this one (and to Hunter for showing me how I was improperly going about turning on SMTP debugging). Now I'm waiting to see whether upgrading to 3.1 has solved the problems my users have experienced trying to send mail to the CERN particle accelerator site in Europe and a few other sites. If not, I'll probably be posting here to ask for more help! - Patrick Walsh University of Virginia Department of Physics pw@virginia.bitnet, pw@virginia.edu, pat@gomez.phys.virginia.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 11:43:42 CST From: Subject: "To:" field in the SMTP accounting file? Message-ID: <1993Jan14.155905.21812@aragorn.unibe.ch> Sender: news@aragorn.unibe.ch Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 15:59:05 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hi, would it be possible to include in a future version of MX a modification so that the address to which the mail will been sent ("To:"-field) is being written to the SMTP accounting file, not only the host, to which the message is delivered. As we have many x.400 addresses here in Europe and all of them are sent to one host, which does the conversion x.400 <-> SMTP, we have for those messages only the address of this gatewayhost recorded, but not the address to where the message is actually sent. Martin ******************************************************************************* Martin Egger, Ph.D., Computing Services - Head System and User Support Group University of Bern, P.O. Box, Laenggassstrasse 51, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland Phone: ++41 (0)31 65 38 45, Fax: ++41 (0)31 65 38 65, Telex: 753 112 unib ch RFC: egger@id.unibe.ch, X.400: S=egger;OU=id;O=unibe;P=switch;A=arcom;C=ch; HEPNET/SPAN: 20579::49202::egger, DECnet (Switzerland): 49202::egger ******************************************************************************* ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 16:50:27 CST Subject: Help with MX 3.1C SMTP-over-DECnet (long) Message-ID: <1993Jan14.075454.902@nrlvx1.nrl.navy.mil> From: koffley@nrlvx1.nrl.navy.mil Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 14 Jan 93 07:54:54 -0400 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I saw a posting from Earle Akefrom last year regarding the MX mailer SMTP-over-DECnet settings. I am trying to get it to work to no avail. Attached are the particulars. I will post to vmsnet.mail.mx as well. Node NRLVX6 was built with the base MX 3.1C and DECNET-SMTP options only. NRLVX6 also had CMUTEK 6.6 but I did not turn it on for this testing. NRLVX6 is to be my DECnet only node in this testing. Node NRLVX5 is a full-fledged CMUTEK 6-6 MX 3.1C node with fully (as far as I can tell) functioning CMUTEK and MX. Both nodes have accounts for MXMAILER and MX_SMTP. The MX_SMTP account is used for my DECNET-SMTP. I've already checked "obvious" things i.e. DECNET object passwords match UAF record for MX_SMTP account, both objects on both nodes use same object number (253) and both objects called DECSMTP. ---------------------------- NODE NRLVX6 ----------------------------------- ---------------------------- NODE NRLVX6 ----------------------------------- ---------------------------- NODE NRLVX6 ----------------------------------- Username: MXMAILER Owner: MX_Mailer Account: NETSTUF UIC: [700,1] ([NETSTUF,MXMAILER]) CLI: DCL Tables: DCLTABLES Default: DKA200:[USER200.MX_MAILER] LGICMD: LOGIN Flags: DisCtlY DefCLI Primary days: Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Secondary days: Sat Sun Primary 000000000011111111112222 Secondary 000000000011111111112222 Day Hours 012345678901234567890123 Day Hours 012345678901234567890123 Network: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Batch: ##### Full access ###### ##### Full access ###### Local: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Dialup: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Remote: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Expiration: (none) Pwdminimum: 8 Login Fails: 0 Pwdlifetime: 60 00:00 Pwdchange: 14-JAN-1993 07:11 Last Login: (none) (interactive), 13-JAN-1993 12:32 (non-interactive) Maxjobs: 0 Fillm: 127 Bytlm: 128000 Maxacctjobs: 0 Shrfillm: 0 Pbytlm: 0 Maxdetach: 0 BIOlm: 300 JTquota: 1024 Prclm: 10 DIOlm: 4096 WSdef: 2048 Prio: 4 ASTlm: 327 WSquo: 4096 Queprio: 100 TQElm: 10 WSextent: 16384 CPU: (none) Enqlm: 2048 Pgflquo: 128000 Authorized Privileges: CMKRNL SYSNAM DETACH TMPMBX WORLD EXQUOTA NETMBX PHY_IO SYSPRV SYSLCK Default Privileges: CMKRNL SYSNAM DETACH TMPMBX WORLD EXQUOTA NETMBX PHY_IO SYSPRV SYSLCK Username: MX_SMTP Owner: mx_mailer Account: NETSTUF UIC: [700,2] ([NETSTUF,MX_SMTP]) CLI: DCL Tables: DCLTABLES Default: DKA200:[USER200.DECNET_SMTP] LGICMD: LOGIN Flags: DisCtlY DefCLI Primary days: Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Secondary days: Sat Sun Primary 000000000011111111112222 Secondary 000000000011111111112222 Day Hours 012345678901234567890123 Day Hours 012345678901234567890123 Network: ##### Full access ###### ##### Full access ###### Batch: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Local: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Dialup: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Remote: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Expiration: (none) Pwdminimum: 8 Login Fails: 0 Pwdlifetime: (none) Pwdchange: 12-JAN-1993 16:10 Last Login: (none) (interactive), (none) (non-interactive) Maxjobs: 0 Fillm: 127 Bytlm: 128000 Maxacctjobs: 0 Shrfillm: 0 Pbytlm: 0 Maxdetach: 0 BIOlm: 300 JTquota: 1024 Prclm: 10 DIOlm: 4096 WSdef: 2048 Prio: 4 ASTlm: 327 WSquo: 4096 Queprio: 100 TQElm: 10 WSextent: 16384 CPU: (none) Enqlm: 2048 Pgflquo: 128000 Authorized Privileges: TMPMBX NETMBX SYSPRV SYSLCK Default Privileges: TMPMBX NETMBX SYSPRV SYSLCK 14-JAN-1993 07:25:50.80 Processing queue entry number 118 on node NRLVX6 14-JAN-1993 07:25:50.89 Recipient: , route=NRLVX5 14-JAN-1993 07:25:50.89 SMTP_SEND: connecting to NRLVX5::"DECSMTP=" 14-JAN-1993 07:25:53.48 SMTP_SEND: Connected 14-JAN-1993 07:25:53.58 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 220 NRLVX5 MX V3.1C SMTP server ready at Thu, 14 Jan 1993 07:22:40 EST 14-JAN-1993 07:25:53.60 SMTP_SEND: Sent: HELO NRLVX6 14-JAN-1993 07:25:53.94 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 14-JAN-1993 07:25:53.98 SMTP send failed, sts=0C27804A, sts2=0C278042 14-JAN-1993 07:25:53.99 Recipient status=0C27804A for 14-JAN-1993 07:25:54.83 Entry now completely processed, no retries needed. 14-JAN-1993 07:25:54.87 *** End of processing pass *** (LNM$PROCESS_TABLE) (LNM$JOB_8155BAC0) (LNM$GROUP_000200) (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE) "MX_DEVICE" = "NRLVX6$DKA200:" "MX_DIR" = "MX_DEVICE:[MX_MAILER]" "MX_DNSMTP_DEBUG" = "TRUE" "MX_DNSMTP_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[DNSMTP]" "MX_DNSMTP_SERVER_DEBUG" = "TRUE" "MX_DOC" = "MX_ROOT:[DOC]" "MX_EXAMPLES_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[EXAMPLES]" "MX_EXE" = "MX_ROOT:[EXE]" "MX_LOCAL_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[LOCAL]" "MX_MAILSHR" = "MX_EXE:MX_MAILSHR" "MX_MAILSHRP" = "MX_EXE:MX_MAILSHRP" "MX_MLF_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[MLF]" "MX_MLIST_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[MLF.MAILING_LISTS]" "MX_MSG" = "MX_EXE:MX_MSG" "MX_NODE_NAME" = "nrlvx6.nrl.navy.mil" "MX_QUEUE_DEV" = "DUA1:[MX.]" "MX_ROOT" = "MX_DEVICE:[MX_MAILER.]" "MX_ROUTER_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[ROUTER]" "MX_SHR" = "MX_EXE:MX_SHR" "MX_SITE_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[SITE]" "MX_SITE_DOM_EXPANSION" = "MX_EXE:DOMAIN_EXPANSION" "MX_SMTP_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[SMTP]" "MX_SMTP_SERVER_THREADS" = "10" "MX_VMSMAIL_LOCALHOST" = "@nrlvx6.nrl.navy.mil" ! Configuration file: MX_DEVICE:[MX_MAILER]MX_CONFIG.MXCFG;1 ! MX version id: MX V3.1C DEFINE SYSTEM_USERS - "koffley@NRLVX6" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<@{route}:{user}@{host}.UUCP>" - "<@{route}:{user}@{host}.UUCP>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<{user}@{host}.UUCP>" - "<@uunet.uu.net:{user}@{host}>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<@{route}:{user}@{host}.CSNET>" - "<@{route}:{user}@{host}.CSNET>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<{user}@{host}.CSNET>" - "<@relay.cs.net:{user}@{host}.CSNET>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<@{route}:{user}@{host}.BITNET>" - "<@{route}:{user}@{host}.BITNET>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<{user}@{host}.BITNET>" - "<@cunyvm.cuny.edu:{user}@{host}.BITNET>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<{user}@{host}.nrlvax.area60>" - "<""{host}::{user}""@nrlvax.nrl.navy.mil>" DEFINE PATH "nrlvx6.nrl.navy.mil" Local DEFINE PATH "nrlvx6.nrl.navy" Local DEFINE PATH "nrlvx6.nrl" Local DEFINE PATH "nrlvx6" Local DEFINE PATH "[128.60.21.41]" Local DEFINE PATH "NRLVX6.DNET.NRL.NAVY.MIL" Local DEFINE PATH "NRLVX6.DNET.NRL.NAVY" Local DEFINE PATH "NRLVX6.DNET.NRL" Local DEFINE PATH "NRLVX6.DNET" Local DEFINE PATH "smovax.dnet.nrl.navy.mil" DECnet_SMTP /ROUTE="NRLVX5" DEFINE PATH * Decnet /ROUTE="NRLVX5" DEFINE ALIAS "Postmaster" "koffley@nrlvx6.nrl.navy.mil" DEFINE ALIAS "POSTMAST" "koffley@nrlvx6.nrl.navy.mil" SET SMTP/ACCOUNTING/RETRY_INTERVAL=" 0 00:01:00.00" - /MAXIMUM_RETRIES=10 /DNS_RETRIES=12- /NODEFAULT_ROUTER SET LOCAL/ACCOUNTING/RETRY_INTERVAL=" 0 00:01:00.00" - /MAXIMUM_RETRIES=10/HEADERS=(TOP=(- FROM,SENDER,TO,RESENT_TO,CC,RESENT_CC,BCC,RESENT_BCC,MESSAGE_ID,- RESENT_MESSAGE_ID,IN_REPLY_TO,REFERENCES,KEYWORDS,SUBJECT,- ENCRYPTED,DATE,REPLY_TO,RECEIVED,RESENT_REPLY_TO,RESENT_FROM,- RESENT_SENDER,RESENT_DATE,RETURN_PATH,OTHER), BOTTOM=(- NOALL)) SET ROUTER/PERCENT_HACK SET JNET/PERCENT_HACK/NOBSMTP_REPLY/NOACCOUNTING/NOLENIENT/NOUSERNAME SET DECNET_SMTP/ACCOUNTING/RETRY_INTERVAL=" 0 00:01:00.00" - /MAXIMUM_RETRIES=10 SET SITE/RETRY_INTERVAL=" 0 00:10:00.00" - /MAXIMUM_RETRIES=10 SET X25_SMTP/NOACCOUNTING/RETRY_INTERVAL=" 0 00:30:00.00" - /MAXIMUM_RETRIES=10 ---------------------------- NODE NRLVX5 ----------------------------------- ---------------------------- NODE NRLVX5 ----------------------------------- ---------------------------- NODE NRLVX5 ----------------------------------- Username: MX_SMTP Owner: mx_mailer Account: NETSTUF UIC: [700,2] ([NETSTUF,MX_SMTP]) CLI: DCL Tables: DCLTABLES Default: DKA200:[USER200.DECNET_SMTP] LGICMD: LOGIN Flags: DisCtlY DefCLI DisPwdDic DisPwdHis Primary days: Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Secondary days: Sat Sun Primary 000000000011111111112222 Secondary 000000000011111111112222 Day Hours 012345678901234567890123 Day Hours 012345678901234567890123 Network: ##### Full access ###### ##### Full access ###### Batch: ##### Full access ###### ##### Full access ###### Local: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Dialup: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Remote: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Expiration: (none) Pwdminimum: 8 Login Fails: 0 Pwdlifetime: (none) Pwdchange: 14-JAN-1993 07:09 Last Login: (none) (interactive), 14-JAN-1993 07:22 (non-interactive) Maxjobs: 0 Fillm: 127 Bytlm: 128000 Maxacctjobs: 0 Shrfillm: 0 Pbytlm: 0 Maxdetach: 0 BIOlm: 300 JTquota: 1024 Prclm: 10 DIOlm: 4096 WSdef: 2048 Prio: 4 ASTlm: 327 WSquo: 4096 Queprio: 100 TQElm: 10 WSextent: 16384 CPU: (none) Enqlm: 2048 Pgflquo: 128000 Authorized Privileges: TMPMBX NETMBX SYSPRV SYSLCK Default Privileges: TMPMBX NETMBX SYSPRV SYSLCK Username: MXMAILER Owner: MX_Mailer Account: NETSTUF UIC: [700,1] ([NETSTUF,MXMAILER]) CLI: DCL Tables: DCLTABLES Default: DKA200:[USER200.MX_MAILER] LGICMD: LOGIN Flags: DisCtlY DefCLI DisPwdDic DisPwdHis Primary days: Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Secondary days: Sat Sun Primary 000000000011111111112222 Secondary 000000000011111111112222 Day Hours 012345678901234567890123 Day Hours 012345678901234567890123 Network: ##### Full access ###### ##### Full access ###### Batch: ##### Full access ###### ##### Full access ###### Local: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Dialup: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Remote: ----- No access ------ ----- No access ------ Expiration: (none) Pwdminimum: 8 Login Fails: 0 Pwdlifetime: 90 00:00 Pwdchange: 14-JAN-1993 07:09 Last Login: (none) (interactive), 14-JAN-1993 07:18 (non-interactive) Maxjobs: 0 Fillm: 127 Bytlm: 128000 Maxacctjobs: 0 Shrfillm: 0 Pbytlm: 0 Maxdetach: 0 BIOlm: 300 JTquota: 1024 Prclm: 10 DIOlm: 4096 WSdef: 2048 Prio: 4 ASTlm: 327 WSquo: 4096 Queprio: 100 TQElm: 10 WSextent: 16384 CPU: (none) Enqlm: 2048 Pgflquo: 128000 Authorized Privileges: CMKRNL SYSNAM DETACH TMPMBX WORLD EXQUOTA NETMBX PHY_IO SYSPRV SYSLCK Default Privileges: CMKRNL SYSNAM DETACH TMPMBX WORLD EXQUOTA NETMBX PHY_IO SYSPRV SYSLCK (LNM$PROCESS_TABLE) (LNM$JOB_8116A5B0) (LNM$GROUP_000200) (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE) "MX_DEVICE" = "NRLVX5$DKA200:" "MX_DIR" = "MX_DEVICE:[MX_MAILER]" "MX_DNSMTP_DEBUG" = "TRUE" "MX_DNSMTP_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[DNSMTP]" "MX_DNSMTP_SERVER_DEBUG" = "TRUE" "MX_DOC" = "MX_ROOT:[DOC]" "MX_EXAMPLES_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[EXAMPLES]" "MX_EXE" = "MX_ROOT:[EXE]" "MX_LOCAL_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[LOCAL]" "MX_MAILSHR" = "MX_EXE:MX_MAILSHR" "MX_MAILSHRP" = "MX_EXE:MX_MAILSHRP" "MX_MLF_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[MLF]" "MX_MLIST_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[MLF.MAILING_LISTS]" "MX_MSG" = "MX_EXE:MX_MSG" "MX_NODE_NAME" = "nrlvx5.nrl.navy.mil" "MX_QUEUE_DEV" = "DUA1:[MX.]" "MX_ROOT" = "MX_DEVICE:[MX_MAILER.]" "MX_ROUTER_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[ROUTER]" "MX_SHR" = "MX_EXE:MX_SHR" "MX_SITE_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[SITE]" "MX_SITE_DOM_EXPANSION" = "MX_EXE:DOMAIN_EXPANSION" "MX_SMTP_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[SMTP]" "MX_SMTP_SERVER_THREADS" = "10" "MX_VMSMAIL_LOCALHOST" = "@nrlvx5.nrl.navy.mil" Below is NETSERVER.LOG for the MX_SMTP account: $ Set noverify ******************************************************************************* * --------------------------------- * * ***** W A R N I N G ***** * * --------------------------------- * * * * This is a U.S. Government Computer System. Unauthorized access is * * prohibited by Title 18, United States Code, Section 1030. * * * ******************************************************************************* Load Average (LA) is a measure of machine usage. The lower the number the better the response: LA: 0.17 System is merely fast Thursday, January 14, 1993 7:22:39 AM -------------------------------------------------------- Connect request received at 14-JAN-1993 07:22:39.74 from remote process NRLVX6::"0=MXMAILER" for object "MX_ROOT:[EXE]DNSMTP_SERVER.EXE" -------------------------------------------------------- %SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO, access violation, reason mask=04, virtual address=00000072, PC=0000DFF0, PSL=03C00021 %TRACE-F-TRACEBACK, symbolic stack dump follows module name routine name line rel PC abs PC 0000DFF0 0000DFF0 00035511 00035511 DNSMTP_SERVER SMTP_START 386 0000018B 00001829 DNSMTP_SERVER DNSMTP_SERVER 262 000001F3 000015F3 MX_SMTP job terminated at 14-JAN-1993 07:22:40.58 Accounting information: Buffered I/O count: 127 Peak working set size: 593 Direct I/O count: 78 Peak page file size: 3347 Page faults: 880 Mounted volumes: 0 Charged CPU time: 0 00:00:01.02 Elapsed time: 0 00:00:03.13 ! Configuration file: MX_DEVICE:[MX_MAILER]MX_CONFIG.MXCFG;1 ! MX version id: MX V3.1C DEFINE SYSTEM_USERS - "koffley@NRLVX5" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<@{route}:{user}@{host}.UUCP>" - "<@{route}:{user}@{host}.UUCP>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<{user}@{host}.UUCP>" - "<@uunet.uu.net:{user}@{host}>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<@{route}:{user}@{host}.CSNET>" - "<@{route}:{user}@{host}.CSNET>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<{user}@{host}.CSNET>" - "<@relay.cs.net:{user}@{host}.CSNET>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<@{route}:{user}@{host}.BITNET>" - "<@{route}:{user}@{host}.BITNET>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<{user}@{host}.BITNET>" - "<@cunyvm.cuny.edu:{user}@{host}.BITNET>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<{user}@{host}.nrlvax.area60>" - "<""{host}::{user}""@nrlvax.nrl.navy.mil>" DEFINE PATH "nrlvx5.nrl.navy.mil" Local DEFINE PATH "nrlvx5.nrl.navy" Local DEFINE PATH "nrlvx5.nrl" Local DEFINE PATH "nrlvx5" Local DEFINE PATH "[128.60.21.40]" Local DEFINE PATH "*.UUCP" SMTP /ROUTE="uunet.uu.net" DEFINE PATH "*.BITNET" SMTP /ROUTE="cunyvm.cuny.edu" DEFINE PATH "nrlvx5.dnet.nrl.navy.mil" Local DEFINE PATH "nrlvx5.dnet.nrl.navy" Local DEFINE PATH "nrlvx5.dnet.nrl" Local DEFINE PATH "nrlvx5.dnet" Local DEFINE PATH "nrlvx6.nrl.navy.mil" DECnet_SMTP /ROUTE="NRLVX6" DEFINE PATH "nrlvx6.dnet.nrl.navy.mil" DECnet_SMTP /ROUTE="NRLVX6" DEFINE PATH "*NRLVX6.NRL.NAVY.MIL" DECnet_SMTP /ROUTE="NRLVX6" DEFINE PATH "*NRLVX6.DNET.NRL.NAVY.MIL" DECnet_SMTP /ROUTE="NRLVX6" DEFINE PATH "*" SMTP DEFINE ALIAS "Postmaster" "KOFFLEY@NRLVX5.NRL.NAVY.MIL" DEFINE ALIAS "POSTMAST" "KOFFLEY@NRLVX5.NRL.NAVY.MIL" SET SMTP/ACCOUNTING/RETRY_INTERVAL=" 0 00:05:00.00" - /MAXIMUM_RETRIES=10 /DNS_RETRIES=12- /NODEFAULT_ROUTER SET LOCAL/ACCOUNTING/RETRY_INTERVAL=" 0 00:05:00.00" - /MAXIMUM_RETRIES=10/HEADERS=(TOP=(- FROM,SENDER,TO,RESENT_TO,CC,RESENT_CC,BCC,RESENT_BCC,MESSAGE_ID,- RESENT_MESSAGE_ID,IN_REPLY_TO,REFERENCES,KEYWORDS,SUBJECT,- ENCRYPTED,DATE,REPLY_TO,RECEIVED,RESENT_REPLY_TO,RESENT_FROM,- RESENT_SENDER,RESENT_DATE,RETURN_PATH,OTHER), BOTTOM=(- NOALL)) SET ROUTER/PERCENT_HACK SET JNET/PERCENT_HACK/NOBSMTP_REPLY/NOACCOUNTING/NOLENIENT/NOUSERNAME SET DECNET_SMTP/ACCOUNTING/RETRY_INTERVAL=" 0 00:05:00.00" - /MAXIMUM_RETRIES=10 SET SITE/RETRY_INTERVAL=" 0 00:05:00.00" - /MAXIMUM_RETRIES=10 SET X25_SMTP/NOACCOUNTING/RETRY_INTERVAL=" 0 00:30:00.00" - /MAXIMUM_RETRIES=10 Any help is appreciated. Joe -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ < J.J. Koffley KOFFLEY@NRLVAX.NRL.NAVY.MIL > < Naval Research Laboratory KOFFLEY@NRLVX5.NRL.NAVY.MIL > < Code 8101 KOFFLEY@NRLVX6.NRL.NAVY.MIL > < Space Systems Division AT&T : 202-767-0894 > \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 08:52:48 CST Date: 13 Jan 1993 16:56:34 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: "error in device name" and "opcode reserved to DIGITAL" errors - SOLVED! To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: pat@CHE.PHYS.VIRGINIA.EDU, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009668EC.24BDFDC0.8673@garnet.nist.gov> > I've now had 3.1 running successfully for 5 days and wanted 1) to thank > those who helped me out and 2) to summarize the problems I experienced and > what had to be done to fix them, in hope that the knowledge may be useful > to someone else in the future. Thank you. I wish everyone who asks for help would summarize what actually fixed the problem. We all learn from it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 10:55:18 CST From: newsmgr@logica.co.uk Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: BUG in SITE ?? Message-ID: <1993Jan17.161125.56@condor> Date: 17 Jan 93 16:11:25 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I think I have found a bug in the SITE delivery code. If the From: address of the mail message is long enough,SITE_DELIVER.COM dows not get invoked. The log file logs a message with a truncated From: address, and does not give any indication that an attempt has been made to call SITE_DELIVER.COM. The address I am having problems with is 100 characters long (it is a bastardised X.400 address). I would love to find and fix the problem, but unfortunately I don't have a BLISS compiler. If anyone else wants to fix it and needs further info to diagnose the problem, please mail me. William Lees leesw@logica.co.uk ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 10:55:26 CST From: newsmgr@logica.co.uk Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Mailworks/MRGATE and nasty quotes Message-ID: <1993Jan17.160739.55@condor> Date: 17 Jan 93 16:07:39 GMT References: <1993Jan5.145714.1@woods.ulowell.edu> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Jan5.145714.1@woods.ulowell.edu>, byrnee@woods.ulowell.edu writes: > We are about to switch our users from VAXmail to Mailworks. Users groaned > a lot when they had to address VAXmail to MX: > > MX%"user@node.blah.edu" > > You can image the groans we'll hear when under Mailworks/Message Router > they will have to enter: > > "MX%""user@node.blah.edu"""@MRGATE > > Has anyone out there in MX land figured out a simpler way to address? I > just can't find any way around those quotes. > > Eileen One thing you can try is the user-contributed patch which gets around the need to use MX%. This is on the distribution in the user-contributed directory. With the patch in place, it is possible to write a template (in a1mail for Windows, at any rate) which gets around the need for any funny syntax - the user just selects the template and types the Internet mail address. I can't find a way of doing this without the patch, though. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 11:10:05 CST Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 11:09:40 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00966BE0.588ED380.15579@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: BUG in SITE ?? newsmgr@logica.co.uk writes: > >I think I have found a bug in the SITE delivery code. > >If the From: address of the mail message is long enough,SITE_DELIVER.COM dows >not get invoked. The log file logs a message with a truncated From: address, >and does not give any indication that an attempt has been made to call >SITE_DELIVER.COM. > My initial guess (without testing it yet) is that the DCL command line that's created and passed to the subprocess is probably too long (longer than 255 characters). I'll see what I can do about it this week. Using continuation lines may help. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@UKCC.UKY.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 10:38:30 CST Subject: Bounced Mail to MLF Message-ID: <1993Jan18.150806.6089@news.weeg.uiowa.edu> From: meadows@cslvax.weeg.uiowa.edu Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 15:08:06 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Sender: (News) To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I have been running a Mail-List and File Server here for several months and have just encountered a problem with bounced mail to the Mail-List. Here's a sketch of what's happening: The list is set up so replies come back to the list. We had a subscriber who's address was non-existant at the remote site. The remote site bounced the mail back to the list which promptly relayed it to all subscribers including the one with the problem address which generated another bounced mail message, and so on until I stopped the Mail-List and set the bad subscription to NOMAIL. The List Server generates an "Errors-To" header list that says to send errors to the list manager. The two questions are: 1. Who or what is at fault here? 2. How do we fix it? I tried to blame it on the mailer generating the bounced mail claiming that they should have sent it to the "Errors-To" address. They countered with the following: -> Be careful here; was it REALLY a LISTSERV list, or was it some U*NX -> mailing list distributor? The REAL LISTSERV has some very extensive -> checks for bounced mail, although mailers can be very creative in how -> they bounce mail. -> -> Only an IBM VM host has LISTSERV; all others are something else. -> ->Also... -> -> "Errors-To:" is not an RFC822 defined field. -> Now I guess the ball is back in my court. Is there some nice way out of this predicament. People here are really enjoying the List Server, but this looks like a fairly serious problem if it can't be "fixed". Thanks for any help you can give... -Howard *************************************************************************** * Howard Meadows Sr. Systems Programmer Weeg Computing Center * * University Of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa 52242 Phone: 319-335-5519 * * email: howard-meadows@uiowa.edu * *************************************************************************** ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:45:16 CST Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 02:40:30 EST From: "Anthony J. Rzepela" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00967119.602113E0.27667@hal.hahnemann.edu> Subject: Q: MX over DEC UCX 2.0 - summarize? Hi all, I read this list on a utility that currently has ~300 postings stored, so I have done *some* checking, and I see questions about using MX over specific TCP/IP packages, and I noted the following reply from Matt - >What tcp/ip packages does the current version of MX support? : : DEC VMS/ULTRIX Connection V1.2 and later (as of V2.0 called TCP/IP Services for VMS) : : -Matt At our site, we are abandoning the recently abandoned CMU-Tek, with which we successfully used MX 3.0 for more than a year. Now we are on UCX 2.0 (CSLG license). For the sole reason that we have published user manuals and done training using MX, we do not want to abandon it as our VMS system mailer. UCX, as of 2.0, ships with an SMTP<-->VAXMail interface, and unless someone can warn me of a hidden hell with UCX' SMTP mail, the manuals/training thing will remain the only reason. Can someone answer: * Do I have to use the MX SMTP server? Can't MX communicate with the UCX SMTP server? * To test it, do I have to install from scratch? The MX CONFIG programs don't seem able to give me a working MX that will fly with UCX. (NB: I *have* been trying different things, testing, and RTFMing. I'm not supplying excessive detail because I'm just looking for general advice and/or warnings.) From reading the docs, it seems to me that there should be a way to just have MX handle the VMSMail interface, and let SMTP service, routing, et al., be handled by UCX, but am I wrong? This is not only for the sake of a few manuals, but also compatibility with other University systems, so I can't exactly just drop MX. Any thoughts appreciated. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Anthony Rzepela ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 17:05:10 CST Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 18:00:08 EST From: "Anthony J. Rzepela" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00967199.D86AA0C0.28124@hal.hahnemann.edu> Subject: RE: Q: MX over DEC UCX... (ignore,pls) In a recent posting, I posed a question that I could have answered myself with the correct version of the MX docs. I was reading from MX 2.3 hardcopy, and had my question answered when I found some online 3.0. It dealt with whose SMTP (MX's or the TCP/IP package's) gets to run, and whether MX could function just as a VMS Mail interface, using the TCP/IP package's components. Since it took less time to FTP MX3.1C, install and run it, than to diagnose other, unrelated problems with my SMTP component of UCX 2.0, (not to mention coming up with substitutes for .sig file capability, correct aliasing, etc. all of which I came to know and love under MX3.0 on CMU-Tek) I now have MX3.1C going, and am a happy camper once again. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Anthony Rzepela ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 10:50:08 CST From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Rewriting of From lines... Message-ID: <1993Jan25.100655.1175@dmc.com> Date: 25 Jan 93 10:06:55 EST To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I have a customer who has noticed that MX (3.1C) modifies the From: lines of his messages, e.g., From: foo@bar.baz (Name) turns into: From: His specific complaint is that information is being lost in the translation, the "(Name)" goes away. I haven't poured over the RFCs enough to know if this sort of rewriting is reasonable, but why would MX be rewriting the From: portion of the envelope? The other question is: should MX be preserving the rest of the information in the line instead of just dropping it? -- Dick Munroe Internet: munroe@dmc.com Doyle Munroe Consultants, Inc. UUCP: ...uunet!thehulk!munroe 267 Cox St. Office: (508) 568-1618 Hudson, Ma. FAX: (508) 562-1133 GET CONNECTED!!! Send mail to info@dmc.com to find out about DMConnection. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 12:42:43 CST From: Subject: Re: Rewriting of From lines... Message-ID: <1993Jan25.172842.2971@news.arc.nasa.gov> Date: 25 Jan 93 17:28:42 GMT References: <1993Jan25.100655.1175@dmc.com> Sender: usenet@news.arc.nasa.gov Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Jan25.100655.1175@dmc.com>, munroe@dmc.com (Dick Munroe) writes: >I have a customer who has noticed that MX (3.1C) modifies the From: lines of >his messages, e.g., > > From: foo@bar.baz (Name) > >turns into: > > From: >His specific complaint is that information is being lost in the translation, >the "(Name)" goes away. I haven't poured over the RFCs enough to know if this >sort of rewriting is reasonable, but why would MX be rewriting the From: >portion of the envelope? The other question is: should MX be preserving the >rest of the information in the line instead of just dropping it? What is the origin of the message? Are the address and comment syntactcally valid? MX does the best it can, including mapping comments into personal names when it can (although some would say that that is a dubious practice, because no direct mapping can be made for all cases). Can your customer provide more details about the problem? -Matt -- Matthew Madison | madison@tgv.com | +1 408 427 4366 TGV, Inc. | 603 Mission Street | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 20:58:22 CST From: daveh@vax.oxford.ac.uk Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: SMTP Server error status=20EC Message-ID: <1993Jan25.145527.11506@vax.oxford.ac.uk> Date: 25 Jan 93 14:55:27 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hi, We hit a problem with the MX SMTP Server today. It received a message with an invalid address from our campus mailer, and instead of aborting the message in a tidy way it just rejected the message with status 20EC. This left the mailer thinking that the message had not been sent, so it requeued the message and tried to send it again 15 minutes later, when the same thing happened on the VAX. This is a portion of the SMTP Server log file: STM[4]: Receive "MAIL FROM:<@jnt.ac.uk,@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk, @[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+ JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+ STM[4]: Send "501 Invalid address: <@jnt.ac.uk,@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JA NET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JANET .JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.a STM[4]: Error: status=20EC We are running MX 3.1C and VMS V5.5-1. Is this a known error, and if so is there a patch for it? Thanks in advance, Dave -- David Hastings | "The technical axiom that nothing is VAX Systems Programmer | impossible sinisterly conditions one to Oxford University Computing Services| the pitfall corollary that nothing is daveh@vax.oxford.ac.uk | ridiculous" ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 05:41:25 CST From: Subject: Re: SMTP Server error status=20EC Date: 26 Jan 1993 10:28:39 GMT Message-ID: <1k33onINN29k@gap.caltech.edu> References: <1993Jan25.145527.11506@vax.oxford.ac.uk> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Jan25.145527.11506@vax.oxford.ac.uk>, daveh@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes: =We hit a problem with the MX SMTP Server today. It received a message with an =invalid address from our campus mailer, and instead of aborting the message in a =tidy way it just rejected the message with status 20EC. This left the mailer =thinking that the message had not been sent, so it requeued the message and =tried to send it again 15 minutes later, when the same thing happened on the =VAX. = =This is a portion of the SMTP Server log file: = =STM[4]: Receive "MAIL FROM:<@jnt.ac.uk,@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk, @[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+ JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+ =STM[4]: Send "501 Invalid address: <@jnt.ac.uk,@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk, @[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk, @[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.ac.uk,@[+JANET.JNT],@gec-b.rutherford.a =STM[4]: Error: status=20EC Now, wait a minute. The SMTP Server process only deals with INCOMING mail. If the same thing happened 15 minutes later, it means the SENDING machine is screwed up. Your machine complained of an invalid address, but the remote machine insisted on retrying the mail. Could you clarify your claim? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 17:13:42 CST Subject: Re: Q: MX over DEC UCX 2.0 - summarize? Message-ID: <1993Jan27.081410.106@iwsd01.itwol.bhp.com.au> From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 27 Jan 93 08:14:10 +1000 References: <00967119.602113E0.27667@hal.hahnemann.edu> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <00967119.602113E0.27667@hal.hahnemann.edu>, "Anthony J. Rzepela" writes: > Hi all, > [introduction deleted] > > At our site, we are abandoning the recently abandoned CMU-Tek, with which > we successfully used MX 3.0 for more than a year. Now we are on UCX 2.0 > (CSLG license). For the sole reason that we have published user manuals and > done training using MX, we do not want to abandon it as our VMS system mailer. I have recently abandoned UCX 2.0 SMTP mail in favour of MX for a couple of reasons (detailed below). What sort of training, etc have you done? If you're worried about having to use SMTP% instead of MX% for specifying the protocol, VMS mail allows any transport to use any prefix by defining a (system) logical like: $ DEFINE/SYSTEM MAIL$PROTOCOL_xxx Basically, you can make MX% use the UCX SMTP transport, or vice-versa. > > UCX, as of 2.0, ships with an SMTP<-->VAXMail interface, and unless someone can > warn me of a hidden hell with UCX' SMTP mail, the manuals/training thing > will remain the only reason. > > Can someone answer: > > * Do I have to use the MX SMTP server? Can't MX communicate with the UCX > SMTP server? The sending and receiving of SMTP mail are quite different things. It is not really possible for the UCX SMTP server to pass things on to MX (since it doesn't know anything about it) - the SMTP server calls the mail callable interface directly to deliver the message to the user. > > * To test it, do I have to install from scratch? The MX CONFIG programs don't > seem able to give me a working MX that will fly with UCX. > > (NB: I *have* been trying different things, testing, and RTFMing. I'm > not supplying excessive detail because I'm just looking for general > advice and/or warnings.) > I suspect you have to use the original install kit to get the correct version of the NETLIB support. When you install MX, it links a lot of the programs against a shareable image which provides the TCP/IP mechanisms. > > From reading the docs, it seems to me that there should be a way to > just have MX handle the VMSMail interface, and let SMTP service, routing, > et al., be handled by UCX, but am I wrong? > I can't think of a way to make this work (but you could be right :-). The reason I switched from UCX SMTP to MX is simply that MX is quite a bit richer than UCX. In fact, I read somewhere in the UCX doco that the SMTP mail implementation is a fairly "minimal" implementation - it handles sending and receiving SMTP mail, but is not very sophisticated when it comes to routing, etc. MX allows me to do a few key things which I couldn't find a way to do with UCX. The first was the ability to define routing paths. This allowed me to define some "intelligent" routing paths, so that local mail got delivered locally, while other mail goes out through our corporate mail server. It also let me set up mail so that our domain name is the mailing address - i.e. my e-mail address is wewila@itwol.bhp.com.au instead of wewila@.itwol.bhp.com.au on each machine where I have an account. With MX, it was as simple as defining the path "iwtol.bhp.com.au" as "Local". I couldn't find a way to do it with UCX (has anyone else?). The other nice feature of MX is address rewriting. This lets me use the MX machine as a gateway to other machines which don't have direct SMTP mail capability. Even without using "SMTP over DECnet" (a feature provided by MX, but not UCX), I can get mail delivered to DECnet nodes by address rewriting. In general, MX is more complete than UCX SMTP, easier to configure, more flexible, and much better documented. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------/\/\--- Alan Wilkie, Analyst/Programmer, Process & Engineering Section / / /\ BHP Information Technology, Wollongong Australia / / / \ Mail : P.O. Box 261, Warrawong 2502 / / / /\ \ Telephone : +61 42 755667 Fax: +61 42 755215 \ \/ / / / Internet : wewila@itwol.bhp.com.au \ / / / ------------------------------------------------------------------\/\/\/-- "you are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike" ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 18:16:24 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: cragen@aspentec.com Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Message-ID: <1993Jan27.170153.903@aspentec.com> Date: 27 Jan 93 22:01:53 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hi, I am having trouble with MX3.1 with VMS 5-5.2 in a VAX cluster. When I try to ADD a SUBSCRIBER to a list a get the error message, Error in delivery to mailing list WORLD_WIDE_DIRECTORS: ADD failed; insufficient provilege I have DEFINED the list with myself as the OWNER, I am in the SYSTEM_USER list and the PROTECTION is: Protection: (SYSTEM:RWED,OWNER:RWED,GROUP:RWED,WORLD:W) I have SAVED this configuration and RESET the MX delivery agent processors. Any ideas please respond or E-mail me directly. Thanks ---- Jim Cragen Email: Aspen Technology, Inc. Tel: +1-617-577-0100 x243 Ten Canal Park Fax: +1-617-577-0303 Cambridge, Ma. 02141 Telex: +1-948-038(ASPEN TECH) U.S.A. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 18:59:55 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: Message-ID: <1993Jan28.002114.1985@news.arc.nasa.gov> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 00:21:14 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Jan27.170153.903@aspentec.com>, cragen@aspentec.com writes: >When I try to ADD a SUBSCRIBER to a list a get the error message, > >Error in delivery to mailing list WORLD_WIDE_DIRECTORS: > ADD failed; insufficient provilege > >I have DEFINED the list with myself as the OWNER, I am in the SYSTEM_USER >list and the PROTECTION is: > >Protection: (SYSTEM:RWED,OWNER:RWED,GROUP:RWED,WORLD:W) I have SAVED this >configuration and RESET the MX delivery agent processors. Try turning on debugging in the MLF processor. That will tell exactly what it thinks your address is when it's performing the access checks. A typical mistake is to specify your address in upper case in the MX configuration, when MX actually generates lower-case addresses (it's just the username part where that's significant). Another is to specify what you think the host name is, when MX thinks it is something different. Whatever the problem is, turning on MX_MLF_DEBUG and checking out the resulting log file from one of your ADD attempts will probably tell you exactly what's wrong. -Matt -- Matthew Madison | madison@tgv.com | +1 408 427 4366 TGV, Inc. | 603 Mission Street | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 04:41:27 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Message-ID: <1k8antINN52q@gap.caltech.edu> From: Date: 28 Jan 1993 09:58:21 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Jan27.170153.903@aspentec.com>, cragen@aspentec.com writes: =Hi, I am having trouble with MX3.1 with VMS 5-5.2 in a VAX cluster. = =When I try to ADD a SUBSCRIBER to a list a get the error message, = =Error in delivery to mailing list WORLD_WIDE_DIRECTORS: = ADD failed; insufficient provilege = =I have DEFINED the list with myself as the OWNER, I am in the SYSTEM_USER =list and the PROTECTION is: = =Protection: (SYSTEM:RWED,OWNER:RWED,GROUP:RWED,WORLD:W) I have SAVED this =configuration and RESET the MX delivery agent processors. = =Any ideas please respond or E-mail me directly. There are two questions you need to answer before your problem can be reasonably diagnoses: 1) What's the exact definition of the owner of the group? and 2) What address did MX use when it bounced your ADD request? SHEESH! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 13:12:36 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 09:45:33 EST From: Alan Simon Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-LIST@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00967479.6ADAFE00.16093@shrsys.hslc.org> Subject: MAILSHR Patch Has anyone created a new patch to MAILSHR.EXE that eliminates the need to enter MX% at the beginning of mail addresses, since the current patch does not work for 5.5-2? If so, where can I find it? Thanks for your help. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alan Simon simon@hslc.org Associate Director simon@shrsys.hslc.org Health Sciences Libraries Consortium VOICE: (215) 222-1532 3600 Market Street, Suite 550 FAX: (215) 222-0416 Philadelphia, PA 19104 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:12:50 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:12:21 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: simon@shrsys.hslc.org Message-ID: <0096749E.AFF93CC0.18987@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: MAILSHR Patch Alan Simon writes: > >Has anyone created a new patch to MAILSHR.EXE that eliminates the need to enter >MX% at the beginning of mail addresses, since the current patch does not work >for 5.5-2? If so, where can I find it? > You can get the patch from my FILESERV. Send the following command in the body of a mail message to FILESERV@WKUVX1.BITNET: SEND MX_MAILSHR_PATCH Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@UKCC.UKY.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:45:15 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:44:13 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <009674A3.240E3300.18997@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: MX_MAILSHR_PATCH via ftp I just made the MX_MAILSHR_PATCH file available via anonymous ftp from ftp.spc.edu in [.MACRO32.SAVESETS] and in [.MX]. It's called MX_MAILSHR_PATCH.ZIP; you'll need UnZip v5.x+ to unzip (you can find UNZIP.EXE on ftp.spc.edu too). Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@UKCC.UKY.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 17:45:15 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Local delivery with Decnet? Message-ID: <2541@sunny.lif.de> Date: 28 Jan 93 13:53:51 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hello all, sorry, if this is a FAQ... I try to use MX for the delivery to decnet nodes. My hope: if the node is down, MX will retry (not only abort on the first try like vmsmail). I tested with a nonexisting node named "down" :-) DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{USER}@DOWN>" "" The rewrite takes place, but then MX attemps to deliver via the smtp path (which is the last one in the path list). My questions: can I really do this with MX? Where are my faults, what definitions are missing? What is the recommended procedure for this task? Thank you. Hans. -- Hans-Joachim Koch, Computer department of Lahmeyer International Lyoner Strasse 22, POB 71 06 51, D-6000 Frankfurt (Main) 71, Germany Phone: +49 69 6677-642, Fax: +49 69 6677-571, Tx: 413478 li d EUnet: koch@lifra.lif.de, AMPRnet: dk9om@db0lj.ampr.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 17:45:24 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Invalid "To" header Message-ID: <4589@winnie.fit.edu> Date: 28 Jan 93 20:23:55 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Howdy fellow MX-users, Now that I've used MX for a while and am very happy with it's ins and outs, I decided that I prefer reading and sending mail from my own node. I've set up my accounts on other nodes to forward to this address. All seems to work fine in that I do receive all my mail, but any mail that is forwarded from another VMS node running Process Software's SMTP comes with the message: X-MX-Warning: Warning -- Invalid "To" header. I still get the message, but the warning only appears in the mail from that node. I can ignore these, but it would be nice to eliminate them completely. Your help is appreciated... Another question I have: Is it at all possible to run MX on a non-UCX TCP/IP, e.g. Process Software's TCP/IP? Can I just turn their SMTP off and fire up MX? Are they even compatible? Thanks in advance! -- .-.| | | | | /------------------\ Karin Nicholson | |-..-.|/.-.|-..-.|*|/ < karin@zach.fit.edu > VAX Sys Mgr @ Florida Tech `-'| |`-'|\`-'| |`-'|||\ \------------------/ Florida Space Coast LUG Chair ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 17:52:04 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 17:50:55 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: sys_hjk@LIFRA.LIF.DE Message-ID: <009674BD.389AABE0.19039@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Local delivery with Decnet? writes: > >Hello all, > >sorry, if this is a FAQ... > >I try to use MX for the delivery to decnet nodes. My hope: if the node >is down, MX will retry (not only abort on the first try like vmsmail). > >I tested with a nonexisting node named "down" :-) > >DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{USER}@DOWN>" "" > >The rewrite takes place, but then MX attemps to deliver via the smtp >path (which is the last one in the path list). > >My questions: can I really do this with MX? Where are my faults, what >definitions are missing? What is the recommended procedure for this >task? > Yes, you can do that with MX. That's how my mail is delivered to my VAXstation. One way to do this is to define a new path: DEFINE PATH HUNTER.DNET DECNET_SMTP/ROUTE=HUNTER Then a rewrite rule to catch it: DEFINE REWRITE RULE "{u}@HUNTER.DNET" "{u}@HUNTER.DNET" Or variations on that. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@UKCC.UKY.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 08:16:30 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 09:03:26 EST From: "Brian Tillman, Smiths Industries, VAX Support, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0096753C.B30D9DE0.10755@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: Local delivery with Decnet? Hunter Goatley says: > writes: >> >>I try to use MX for the delivery to decnet nodes. My hope: if the node >>is down, MX will retry (not only abort on the first try like vmsmail). >> >>I tested with a nonexisting node named "down" :-) >> >>DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{USER}@DOWN>" "" >> >>The rewrite takes place, but then MX attemps to deliver via the smtp >>path (which is the last one in the path list). >> >>My questions: can I really do this with MX? Where are my faults, what >>definitions are missing? What is the recommended procedure for this >>task? >> >Yes, you can do that with MX. That's how my mail is delivered to my >VAXstation. > >One way to do this is to define a new path: > > DEFINE PATH HUNTER.DNET DECNET_SMTP/ROUTE=HUNTER > >Then a rewrite rule to catch it: > > DEFINE REWRITE RULE "{u}@HUNTER.DNET" "{u}@HUNTER.DNET" > >Or variations on that. Doesn't this require that the DECNET_SMTP agent be running on the node HUNTER? What about not defining any special PATH and using the following rule: DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{u}@{node}.dnet>" "<""{node}::{user}""@thisnode>" where "thisnode" is the local system? Naturally, this would need to be properly placed in the rewrite rule list. I'm not at all trying to imply I know more about MX than Hunter (heaven forbid!). I, too, am unclear about how some of the rewrite rules work and am glad the question was asked. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- Brian Tillman | Internet: tillman@swdev.si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. | tillman_brian@si.com 4141 Eastern Ave., MS129 | Hey, I said this stuff myself. Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 | My company has no part in it. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 08:45:17 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 08:44:57 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0096753A.1DA4F020.19187@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Local delivery with Decnet? "Brian Tillman, Smiths Industries, VAX Support, x8425" writes: > >Hunter Goatley says: > >> writes: >>> >>>I try to use MX for the delivery to decnet nodes. My hope: if the node >>>is down, MX will retry (not only abort on the first try like vmsmail). [...] >>Yes, you can do that with MX. That's how my mail is delivered to my >>VAXstation. >> >>One way to do this is to define a new path: >> >> DEFINE PATH HUNTER.DNET DECNET_SMTP/ROUTE=HUNTER [...] > >Doesn't this require that the DECNET_SMTP agent be running on the node HUNTER? Yes, it does. >What about not defining any special PATH and using the following rule: > > DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{u}@{node}.dnet>" "<""{node}::{user}""@thisnode>" > >where "thisnode" is the local system? Naturally, this would need to be properly >placed in the rewrite rule list. > Yes, that works too, and that's what Hans ended up doing. >I'm not at all trying to imply I know more about MX than Hunter (heaven >forbid!). I, too, am unclear about how some of the rewrite rules work and am >glad the question was asked. > Hey, just 'cause I'm working on the stuff doesn't mean I know all about it! 8-) DECNET_SMTP was the first thing I tried when setting up my VAXstation. Using the rewrite rule above, the mail will get retried by MX Local; with mine, it's retried with MX DNSMTP. Same difference, except that the "To:" takes on the "node::user"@localnode format in the latter, which I don't care for. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@UKCC.UKY.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 15:48:34 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: MX and Alpha machines Message-ID: <1993Jan28.151639.15294@crash> From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 28 Jan 93 23:16:39 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hello, Has anyone tried MX on Alpha machines? We'll be getting our systems next week, and I'm considering installing this package. Thanks, -- Javier Henderson jav@crash.cts.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 15:48:48 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Invalid "To" header Message-ID: <1ka1m0INNphm@gap.caltech.edu> From: Date: 29 Jan 93 01:36:00 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <4589@winnie.fit.edu>, karin@zach.fit.edu (Karin Nicholson) writes: > X-MX-Warning: Warning -- Invalid "To" header. > >I still get the message, but the warning only appears in the mail from >that node. I can ignore these, but it would be nice to eliminate them >completely. Your help is appreciated... Well, the first step is to figure out what's wrong with the To: header. Turn on debugging of the ROUTER and/or SMTP server, and look at what's coming in. >Another question I have: Is it at all possible to run MX on a non-UCX >TCP/IP, e.g. Process Software's TCP/IP? MX also works with MULTInet and CMU-TEK TCP/IP. I don't know about Process Software's product. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 15:49:43 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Need help with auto-subscribe Message-ID: <1993Jan27.161941.898@aspentec.com> From: cragen@aspentec.com Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 27 Jan 93 16:19:41 EST To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET -- ---- Jim Cragen Email: Aspen Technology, Inc. Tel: +1-617-577-0100 x243 Ten Canal Park Fax: +1-617-577-0303 Cambridge, Ma. 02141 Telex: +1-948-038(ASPEN TECH) U.S.A. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1993 15:14:17 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 29 Jan 1993 15:31:37 -0700 (MST) From: Dan Wing Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: MX and Alpha machines To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <01GU3GO71QQA0000FK@VAXF.COLORADO.EDU> Javier Henderson, jav@crash.cts.com, writes: >Has anyone tried MX on Alpha machines? We'll be getting our systems next >week, and I'm considering installing this package. MX is written in Bliss, and DEC has said the Bliss compiler won't be ported to Alpha. However, DEC is releasing Rdb on Alpha, and Rdb is written almost entirely in Bliss (well, as least that's what I've heard). I've also heard a rumor that Bliss is going to be made available on Alpha, but maybe not for customers.... Has anyone VESTed MX? -Dan Wing, dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet (DGW11) Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1993 15:24:11 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: MX and Alpha machines Message-ID: <1993Jan29.115425.5309@wkuvx1.bitnet> From: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 29 Jan 93 11:54:25 CDT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Jan28.151639.15294@crash>, jav@crash.cts.com (Javier Henderson) writes: > Hello, > > Has anyone tried MX on Alpha machines? We'll be getting our systems next > week, and I'm considering installing this package. > Porting MX to Alpha is my next project. I'm trying to finish up MX v3.2, which I hope to do in the next couple of weeks. V3.2 includes a BLISS rewrite (by Matt Madison) of the FLQ routines, which were written in PL/1. The rewrite was necessary since there is no Alpha PL/1 compiler yet. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@UKCC.UKY.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1993 15:45:57 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Local delivery with Decnet? Message-ID: <1ka1hlINNphm@gap.caltech.edu> From: Date: 29 Jan 93 01:33:41 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <2541@sunny.lif.de>, sys_hjk@LIFRA.LIF.DE (Hans-Joachim Koch) writes: >I try to use MX for the delivery to decnet nodes. My hope: if the node >is down, MX will retry (not only abort on the first try like vmsmail). > >I tested with a nonexisting node named "down" :-) > >DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{USER}@DOWN>" "" You need to change this to: DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{USER}>@DOWN>" "<""DOWN::USER""@LIFRA.LIF.DE>" >The rewrite takes place, but then MX attemps to deliver via the smtp >path (which is the last one in the path list). >My questions: can I really do this with MX? Yes. >Where are my faults, what definitions are missing? What is the recommended >procedure for this task? Here's what I use: DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<{user}@{host}.DECNET>" - "<""{host}::{user}""@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU>" DEFINE PATH "SOL1" Local DEFINE PATH "SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU" Local DEFINE PATH "[131.215.64.165]" Local -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1993 16:00:01 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Need help with auto-subscribe Message-ID: <1kauieINN4q4@gap.caltech.edu> From: Date: 29 Jan 1993 09:49:02 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Jan27.161941.898@aspentec.com>, cragen@aspentec.com writes: >Jim Cragen Email: Jim also needs help learning to use his mailer or news reader software. Just what is it you were trying to ask, Jim? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1993 16:00:52 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Local delivery with Decnet? Message-ID: <1993Jan29.103655.113@logica.co.uk> From: gerry@pluto.logica.co.uk Date: 29 Jan 93 10:36:53 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <2541@sunny.lif.de>, sys_hjk@LIFRA.LIF.DE (Hans-Joachim Koch) writes: >Hello all, > >sorry, if this is a FAQ... > >I try to use MX for the delivery to decnet nodes. My hope: if the node >is down, MX will retry (not only abort on the first try like vmsmail). Hans, You shouldn't need a re-write rule for this simple case if you are using the latest version. MX 3.1C handles this for you if you send to mx%"'down::user'@lifra.lif.de" where lifra.lif.de is the internet address for the local machine MX is running on. The 3.1C manual describes how to create a "virtual decnet domain" for your decnet nodes so they respond to addresses of the form: mx%"user@down.dnet.lif.de", etc I've done a test here sending to mx%"'lixxx::user'@pluto.logica.co.uk" where pluto.logica.co.uk is the local machine running MX V3.1C and lixxx is a non-existent node (not defined in the local decnet database) and got an immediate Postmaster reply: Return-Path: <> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 10:26:05 GMT From: Local delivery agent To: Subject: LOCAL delivery error Note: this message was generated automatically. The following error(s) occurred during local delivery of your message. Error in delivery to user lixxx::user: %MAIL-E-LOGLINK, error creating network link to node LIXXX -SYSTEM-F-NOSUCHNODE, remote node is unknown Message follows. [...] >I tested with a nonexisting node named "down" :-) > >DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{USER}@DOWN>" "" > >The rewrite takes place, but then MX attemps to deliver via the smtp >path (which is the last one in the path list). Try DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{USER}@DOWN>" "<""DOWN::{USER}""@local.host.name>" >My questions: can I really do this with MX? Where are my faults, what >definitions are missing? What is the recommended procedure for this >task? I've also tried this sending to mx%"'li010::user'@pluto.logica.co.uk" where pluto.logica.co.uk is the local machine running MX V3.1C and li010 is an existing (defined in the local decnet database) but unreachable node and got: $USR:[GERRY]: mc mx_exe:mailqueue Entry: 2575, Origin: [Local] Status: IN-PROGRESS Local entry #2576, status: READY Waiting for retry until: 29-JAN-1993 10:39:16.37 Recipient #1: li010::user, Route=pluto.logica.co.uk Error count=1 Last error: %MAIL-E-LOGLINK, error creating network link to node !AS This seems to be what you want? :-) >Thank you. >Hans. >-- >Hans-Joachim Koch, Computer department of Lahmeyer International >Lyoner Strasse 22, POB 71 06 51, D-6000 Frankfurt (Main) 71, Germany >Phone: +49 69 6677-642, Fax: +49 69 6677-571, Tx: 413478 li d >EUnet: koch@lifra.lif.de, AMPRnet: dk9om@db0lj.ampr.org Alles Gute, -Gerry ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gerard Magennis | Logica Industry Ltd, London UK | Internet: gerry@logica.co.uk "Born to drive, learned to walk later" - CA bumper sticker