Archive-Date: Sun, 01 Aug 1993 00:06:21 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Sun, 01 Aug 1993 00:06:00 CDT From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970588.1AC817B3.26185@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: MX-LIST Administrivia: Monthly Post Last modified: 31-MAY-1993 23:55 (Added digest info.) 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. MX-List postings are also available in a daily digest format. To subscribe to the digest, send the following command in the body of a mail message to MXserver@WKUVX1.BITNET: SUBSCRIBE MX-List-Digest "Your real name here" 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 MXserver@WKUVX1.BITNET: SIGNOFF MX-List MXserver 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: Sun, 01 Aug 1993 11:16:58 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Sun, 01 Aug 1993 09:55:57 EST From: "Tim McKee, SunBelt.Net (803) 324-6205" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <009705DA.852E3DE7.251@dev.sunbelt.net> Subject: ALPHA port of ANU news My apologies, I know that this is off the subject, but here goes... Geoff tells me that several people have ported the ANU NEWS package to the ALPHA and DEC-C. I would rather not spend the time redoing what others have already done. Does anyone in this list know who has done the port ? Please respond direct to avoid cluttering up the list any more than I already have! tim ==================================================== Timothy R. McKee Network Manager, SunBelt.Net mckee@sunbelt.net (803) 324-6205 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 01 Aug 1993 11:17:13 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Assistance and/or advice needed for mail forwarding. Date: 31 Jul 1993 15:48 MST Message-ID: <31JUL199315484896@apsicc.aps.edu> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hello all, I have a problem and this group appears to know more about what I need than the Digital reps I contacted at Colorado Springs so I am directing my question to you. I am rapidly increasing my mailing distribution lists for various groups and many of them are getting in the position of needing to receive mail from other sites on the net. I have asked Digital how I can set up a distribution so that incoming mail messages can be sent to a list on my VAX (running VMS 5.5) and then redistributed to the appropriate people but have been told that Digital knows of no way to do this. Considering the number of knowledgable VMS people on the NET I am sure that there is someone here who can point me in the right direction. This is starting to turn into a strong need for me and I am hoping some of you may be able to help. I thank you sincerely in advance, Jim Skeba ====================================================================== We are rapidly ascending through prosperity to poverty... Twain Internet: jim@apsicc.aps.edu Albuquerque Public Schools - Instructional System Manager ====================================================================== ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 01 Aug 1993 11:23:54 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: Assistance and/or advice needed for mail forwarding. Message-ID: <1993Aug1.083031.11546@colorado.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Sun, 1 Aug 1993 08:30:31 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <31JUL199315484896@apsicc.aps.edu>, jim@apsicc.aps.edu (frost...) writes: [...] > I am rapidly increasing my mailing distribution lists for various >groups and many of them are getting in the position of needing to >receive mail from other sites on the net. I have asked Digital how >I can set up a distribution so that incoming mail messages can be >sent to a list on my VAX (running VMS 5.5) and then redistributed to >the appropriate people but have been told that Digital knows of no >way to do this. [...] Since VMS V5.0, you cannot set mail forwarding to a distribution list. To get the functionality you desire, you can install MX, PMDF, or DELIVER, which all give you the capability of running a LISTSERV-like list (DELIVER can do it, but it isn't as sophisticated as MX or PMDF wrt automatic subscribe/unsubscribe). I'm reading your post in the MX newsgroup, so I assume you have MX. Read the MLF documentation (MX_DOC:MLF_GUIDE.*). -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 01 Aug 1993 14:18:17 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Sun, 01 Aug 1993 12:13:25 -0700 From: "Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: rharwood@Data.Basix.COM Message-ID: <009705ED.B9342760.2168@Data.Basix.COM> Subject: RE: Assistance and/or advice needed for mail forwarding. > I am rapidly increasing my mailing distribution lists for various > groups and many of them are getting in the position of needing to > receive mail from other sites on the net. I have asked Digital how > I can set up a distribution so that incoming mail messages can be > sent to a list on my VAX (running VMS 5.5) and then redistributed to > the appropriate people but have been told that Digital knows of no > way to do this. I can think of a couple of creative ways to use a "local" MX mailing list to take incoming messages (from the REAL list source) and "explode" them to all the local users, but I'll first let the more-experienced MX folks try that approach. (There's always BULLETIN's BBOARDs...) However, I recently had a similar problem with a different twist: A Political Science teacher wanted me to capture the Whitehouse press briefings distributed over Internet and placed in an area where "anyone can read them", even WITHOUT a computer account. (Who would routinely give give accounts to PoliSci students anyway!) I developed a quick kludge -- but it works. I created a VMS userID called WHITEHOUSE, which receives EMail from Clinton-Info@I.Forget.Where, and uses the public domain DELIVER utility to put the mail in a file, and creates a record in an indexed file along with the subject of the message. WHITEHOUSE is a captive account without a password, so anyone logging in runs a special LOGIN.COM that presents the entries in reverse chronological order, along with an index number. The user can enter the number of any article and get a paged display of the contents. I still have some tweaking to do. It's something like a BBOARD in the BULLETIN utility, except it goes into it's own account, "publicly" accessible and with no real set of "commands" to learn. If anyone else wants to know the details of how I did this, please EMail me your interest... I may put the two .COM files in an anoymous FTP area if there's enough interest. Ray ----- Ray Harwood | Data Basix | Adjunct Faculty, East Campus, Voice: (602)721-1988 | PO Box 18324 | Pima Community College FAX: (602)721-7240 | Tucson, AZ 85731 | Instructor in Ada and Pascal rharwood@Data.Basix.COM | Info@Data.Basix.COM | rharwood@east.pima.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1993 11:11:17 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1993 11:03:11 EDT From: allin1@adhe.arknet.edu Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <009706AD.13DD7B20.802@adhe.arknet.edu> Subject: rewrite rules Arkansas Department of Higher Education I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M Date: 08-02-1993 11:02am GMT From: KEN MCCOY KENM Dept: Information Services Tel No: 501-324-9300 FAX 501-324-9308 TO: Remote Addressee ( _mx-list@wkuvx1.bitnet ) Subject: rewrite rules Hello All-In-1 fans, How do you specify a rewrite rule in MX so that when the message is received into All-In-1 the return address (FROM: line) would look like _"MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET" instead of MX%"MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET". I've included the header that I see in All-In-1? Thanks in advance!!! Ken McCoy Arkansas Dept. of Higher Ed. ============================================================= ============================================================= Arkansas Department of Higher Education I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M Date: 06-30-1993 06:22pm GMT From: MX%"MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET" MX%"MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET"@MRGATE@SPEEDY Dept: Tel No: TO: kenm@A1 Subject: Rewrite Rules Return-Path: <@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU:list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET> Received: from ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU by speedy.adhe.arknet.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Wed, 30 Jun 1993 18:18:01 EDT Received: from ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU by ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R1) with BSMTP id 5681; Wed, 30 Jun 93 19:18:34 EDT Received: from WKUVX1.BITNET by ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU (Mailer R2.08 R208004) with BSMTP id 7512; Wed, 30 Jun 93 19:18:32 EDT X-ListName: Message Exchange Discussion List Warnings-To: <> Errors-To: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1993 01:13:12 +0100 From: Per Hogstedt Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Rewrite Rules To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0096ED35.5AEC8CE0.9960@plab.se> ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1993 13:47:16 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1993 14:41:58 EST From: wbradford@UDCVAX.BITNET Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: wbradford@UDCVAX.BITNET Message-ID: <009706CB.A40185C0.6054@UDCVAX.BITNET> Subject: Follow-up to Question about MX V3.3 Upgrade > > However, the *easiest* thing to do would be: > > o Install MX V3.3 over the top on V3.1 on the system disk. > o Once that's done, use BACKUP to move the entire MX directory tree > from the system disk to the new disk. > o Modify SYS$STARTUP:MX_STARTUP.COM to refer to the new disk name. > > Hunter > ------ First, thank you for your suggestion Hunter. We went ahead and installed MX V3.3 over V3.1 with no installation errors. We will relocate the software to another disk at a later time after we decided which user disk to put it on. However, we did get mildly bitten by the Bug fix for mail to DISUSER accounts. We also run the Bulletin program for handling some of popular electronic digest, such as INFO-VAX, so everyone doesn't have to have their own copy of a given digest. Bulletin background info: Bulletin allows you to have mail forwarded from a specified account to a mail like folder within Bulletin. The Bulletin docs suggests that once you have everything configured, you should DISUSER the account(s) you have subscribed to a digest. After installing MX V3.3, I received the following from another site: : Return-Path: <@UDCVAX.BITNET:$MAILER@UMDD.BITNET> : Received: from UMDD ($MAILER) by UDCVAX.BITNET (MX V3.3 VAX) with Jnet; Fri, 3 0 : Jul 1993 17:45:22 EST : Received: by UMDD (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) id 4527; Fri, 30 Jul 93 17:42:29 EDT : Date: Fri, 30 Jul 93 17:38:39 EDT : From: Bruce Crabill : Subject: Bounced mail : To: POSTMASTER@UDCVAX.BITNET : : I am receiving bounced mail from your site. Part of the problem appears that : your mail system does not recognize our mailer ($MAILER) as a registered : mailer and thinks it is a user. This is causing me a large headache since : INFO-VAX seems to get new items every 10 seconds or so. Please make it stop. : I can't get any work done. : : -----Forwarded mail: : Received: by UMDD (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) id 3978; Fri, 30 Jul 93 17:26:14 EDT : ReSent-Date: Fri, 30 Jul 93 17:26:13 EDT : ReSent-From: Network Mailer <$MAILER@UMDD> : ReSent-To: BRUCE@UMDD : X-Delivery-Notice: SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender. : Received: from UDCVAX.BITNET (MXMAILER) by UMDD.UMD.EDU (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) : with BSMTP id 3977; Fri, 30 Jul 93 17:26:13 EDT : Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1993 16:56:32 EST : From: Local delivery agent : To: $MAILER@UMDD.BITNET : Subject: LOCAL delivery error : X-Report-Type: Nondelivery; boundary="> Error description:" : : Note: this message was generated automatically. : : An error was detected while processing the enclosed message. A list of : the affected recipients follows. This list is in a special format that : allows software like LISTSERV to automatically take action on incorrect : addresses; you can safely ignore the numeric codes. : : --> Error description: : Error-For: net_prv1@UDCVAX.BITNET : Error-Code: 3 : Error-Text: No such local user : : Error-End: 1 error detected : : ------------------------------ Rejected message ------------------------------ At first, like Bruce, I thought it may have been MX. After spending a few hours looking things over, I realized that it was the subscribed account being set DISUSER that was causing the problem. I wanted to mention this because the error messages gave me the impression that as if the account itself was totally gone as opposed to just being DISUSER or unavailable for receiving mail. Since I knew the account did exist, I turned most of my attention to other possibilities and didn't check the account more closely until some time later. Would it be possible to add an error message such that: if an account exists but is simply DISUSERed, the sender of the bounced message would get something like Error-Text: Local user cannot receive mail or Error-Text: Insufficient Mail Privileges this may give someone a better indication of the problem in the future. Again, thank you for your assistance. William Bradford WBRADFOR@UDCVAX.BITNET ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1993 16:56:50 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Follow-up to Question about MX V3.3 Upgrade Message-ID: <1993Aug2.201641.25538@colorado.edu> From: Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1993 20:16:41 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <009706CB.A40185C0.6054@UDCVAX.BITNET>, wbradford@UDCVAX.BITNET writes: [...] >: I am receiving bounced mail from your site. Part of the problem appears that >: your mail system does not recognize our mailer ($MAILER) as a registered >: mailer and thinks it is a user. This is causing me a large headache since >: INFO-VAX seems to get new items every 10 seconds or so. Please make it stop. >: I can't get any work done. Why should $MAILER be recognized by MX as a 'registered' mailer? Or am I missing some RFC (or BITNET standard)? [...] >Would it be possible to add an error message such that: > > if an account exists but is simply DISUSERed, the sender of the bounced >message would get something like > > Error-Text: Local user cannot receive mail > > or > > Error-Text: Insufficient Mail Privileges [...] As is decribed in the paragraph above the "--> Error description" line in the message sent my MX, the error code (and the text, I believe) are used by Eric Thomas' LISTSERV software to automatically UNSUBscribe a user from a LISTSERV distribution list. What might be useful to humans, though, would be the regular VMS error message being displayed above the LISTSERV "--> Error description" line, such as "%MAIL-E-USERDSABL, user XXX cannot receive new mail". Hunter?? -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 02:46:03 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1993 23:41:15 +0200 From: "E. Niederacher, System and Network Manager" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970716.FA2C6F00.27200@oetv02.tvlbg.ac.at> Subject: MCP QUEUE RECLAIM troubles What's wrong here ? $ MCP QUEUE RECLAIM /LOG %MCP-E-QRECLERR, error attempting CONVERT/RECLAIM on system message queue -CONV-F-OPENIN, error opening !AS as input I think this could be the reason for some strange behavior of MX (???). Please help - thanks in advance. --- egon Egon Niederacher niederacher@oetv02.tvlbg.ac.at System and Network management phone/fax +43 5572 20336-82/83 Technikum Vorarlberg, Hoechster strasse 73, 6850 Dornbirn, Austria Disclaimer : I speak for myself - not my company or someone else ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 07:15:23 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 14:12:36 EDT From: Herve CHOPLIN - UNIVERSITE FRANCOIS RABELAIS - TOURS Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970790.B41E9FE0.9989@UNIV-TOURS.FR> Subject: RE: MCP QUEUE RECLAIM troubles E. Niederacher (system@cetv02.tvlbg.ac.at) write: >Subject: MCP QUEUE RECLAIM troubles > >What's wrong here ? > >$ MCP QUEUE RECLAIM /LOG >%MCP-E-QRECLERR, error attempting CONVERT/RECLAIM on system message queue >-CONV-F-OPENIN, error opening !AS as input > >I think this could be the reason for some strange behavior of MX (???). > >Please help - thanks in advance. --- egon > > > Egon Niederacher niederacher@oetv02.tvlbg.ac.at > System and Network management phone/fax +43 5572 20336-82/83 > Technikum Vorarlberg, Hoechster strasse 73, 6850 Dornbirn, Austria > Disclaimer : I speak for myself - not my company or someone else I have no problem and no error with this command MCP QUEUE RECLAIM /LOG VAX VMS 5.4-3 UCX 2.0 MX 3.3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Herve CHOPLIN (System Manager and Node Administrator) UNIVERSITY FRANCOIS RABELAIS Computing Center (Bat. D) Parc de Grandmont 37200 TOURS FRANCE _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._. Phone: (33).47.36.69.03 E-mail: INTERNET: CHOPLIN@UNIV-TOURS.FR VMS DecNet (EDUnet): RABLAI::CHOPLIN or 51410::CHOPLIN (node 50.210) Fax : (33).47.36.69.02 **************************************************************************** LA TOURAINE, JARDIN DE FRANCE - THE TOURAINE, GARDEN OF FRANCE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 08:39:18 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 08:38:52 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970762.14ED0A07.12643@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: MCP QUEUE RECLAIM troubles "E. Niederacher, System and Network Manager" writes: > >What's wrong here ? > >$ MCP QUEUE RECLAIM /LOG >%MCP-E-QRECLERR, error attempting CONVERT/RECLAIM on system message queue >-CONV-F-OPENIN, error opening !AS as input > >I think this could be the reason for some strange behavior of MX (???). > This should only happen when the Router is doing a reclaim pass on the SYSTEM_QUEUE.FLQ_CTL file. Note that you're at least one version behind on MX. The current version is V3.3, which is available via anonymous ftp from ftp.spc.edu in [.MX.MX033]. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 10:16:12 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: HELP! Message-ID: <1993Aug3.140732.21429@ncsu.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1993 14:07:32 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET -- Folks, I am in dire straits! I'm running v3.3 under vms 5.5-2 on a vaxcluster and after restarting the cluster last evening, mail is not getting delivered. Mail is being rejected by the system with the following: > > Note: this message was generated automatically. > > A problem occurred during SMTP delivery of your message. > > Error occurred sending to the following user(s): > (via ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu): > %MX_SMTP-F-TRANSACTION_FAI, transaction failed > > Transcript: > Rcvd: 220 ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu MX V3.3 VAX SMTP server ready at Tue, 03 Aug 1993 09:37:21 EDT > Sent: HELO ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu > Rcvd: 250 Hello, ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu > Sent: MAIL FROM: > Rcvd: 250 MAIL command accepted. > Sent: RCPT TO: > Rcvd: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) > Sent: DATA > Rcvd: 354 Start mail input; end with . > Rcvd: 554 Received too many times by this host. > Sent: QUIT > Rcvd: 221 ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu Service closing transmission channel > ======================================================================== > > Message follows. > > Received: from ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu by ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Tue, 03 Aug 1993 09:24:51 EDT > Received: from ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu by ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Tue, 03 Aug 1993 09:24:26 EDT > Received: from ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu by ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Tue, 03 Aug 1993 09:23:47 EDT > Received: from ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu by ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Tue, 03 Aug 1993 09:22:28 EDT > Received: from ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu by ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Tue, 03 Aug 1993 09:22:14 EDT > Received: from ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu by ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Tue, 03 Aug 1993 09:21:02 EDT > Received: from ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu by ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Tue, 03 Aug 1993 09:20:47 EDT > Received: from sparc02.cc.ncsu.edu by ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Tue, 03 Aug 1993 09:15:24 EDT > Received: by sparc02.cc.ncsu.edu (4.1/SYSTEMS 12-28-92 15:15:00) id AA22048; Tue, 3 Aug 93 09:01:23 EDT > Return-Path: > Received: from (localhost.eos.ncsu.edu) by sparc02.cc.ncsu.edu (4.1/SYSTEMS 12-28-92 15:15:00) id AA22015; Tue, 3 Aug 93 09:01:18 EDT > Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 09:01:17 EDT > Posted-Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 09:01:17 EDT > Received-Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 09:01:18 EDT > Message-ID: <9308031300.AA08881@shaman.cc.ncsu.edu> > Errors-To: debora@unity.ncsu.edu > Reply-To: change-l@listserv.ncsu.edu > Originator: change-l@listserv.ncsu.edu > Sender: change-l@listserv.ncsu.edu > Precedence: bulk > From: Randy Buckland > To: hmn@unity.ncsu.edu > Subject: fbi reboot > X-Listserver-Version: 6.0 -- UNIX ListServer by Anastasios Kotsikonas > X-Comment: Computing Center Changes > ..the body of the message... I'm sorry I haven't provided any logging, but I'm not sure what to log. Thanks in advance for any help! BTW, please reply via email to hmn@unity.ncsu.edu Harry -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Harry Nicholos KD4TCS |>>Not always correct, but never in doubt<< VMS Systems Programmer | hmn@unity.ncsu.edu Computing Center | hmn@ncsuvax.bitnet North Carolina State University | (919) 515-5497 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 11:12:00 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: mrl@fredjr.pfc.mit.edu Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Floating periods Message-ID: <3AUG93.15420874@fredjr.pfc.mit.edu> Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1993 15:42:08 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In a previous article, "Brian Tillman" wrote: >So far, only Dan Wing's (I don't know what it is) and mine (Mark London's >BULLETIN) see two the periods that SMTP substitutes for single periods. I'd >really like to know whether this fault lies with the news reader (the NNTP >client) or the NNTP server, which should, in my opinion, convert the double >period back to a single period prior to storing the message on disk (i.e. when >it is received). How do the rest of you who read this group via news see the >periods in Hunter's message - one period or two? I just fixed BULLETIN so it won't have a problem with periods. Mark London MRL@NERUS.PFC.MIT.EDU ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 12:25:40 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 03 Aug 1993 13:18:18 -0500 (EST) From: Teresa Feck Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Listserver problem on mx 3.3 To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <01H1B4U0UT7M9S6736@TOE.TOWSON.EDU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Date sent: 3-AUG-1993 12:40:41 We are currently running VMS 5.5-2, UCX 2.0 and MX 3.3. I just upgraded from MX 3.0 to MX 3.3 last week (30-Jul). Everything works fine except for the listservers which were define prior to the upgrade. I followed the post installation instructions regarding saving the configuration file prior to the upgrade and I re-created it after the upgrade. Basic Problems: The listserver will only allow someone with a priviledge account (me) to send request to the various list servers using the address "listname-request@internet addr". Before the upgrade, it would allow anyone that was a subscriber to send request using listname-request. I've checked the list server protection and they are the same as before the upgrade. It will not allow anyone at our site to post to a list which is located at our site even if they are a subscriber to that list. Common Problem: Subscribers that are not located at our site can post information to the various lists. Also, I believe that they can send request but I haven't verified this yet. The common problem seems to be with subscribers located at our site accessing the various lists. When a user at our site reviews or posts to the list, they do not receive any messages (including any error messages). Thanks in advance. Teresa _______________________________ Teresa J. Feck Internet: feck@fre.fsu.umd.edu Academic Computing Bitnet: feck@towson.edu Frostburg State University Phonemail: (301) 689-7090 Frostburg, Maryland 21532 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 14:22:41 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: MCP QUEUE RECLAIM troubles Date: 3 Aug 1993 21:47:38 +0400 Message-ID: <23m8bq$7vd@lpuds.oea.ihep.su> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET E. Niederacher, System and Network Manager () wrote: : What's wrong here ? : $ MCP QUEUE RECLAIM /LOG : %MCP-E-QRECLERR, error attempting CONVERT/RECLAIM on system message queue : -CONV-F-OPENIN, error opening !AS as input : I think this could be the reason for some strange behavior of MX (???). : Please help - thanks in advance. --- egon As I understand this error appears because the queue control file is locked by MX components. Try to shut down ROUTER. -- Igor Mandrichenko ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 15:09:00 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: Listserver problem on mx 3.3 Message-ID: <1993Aug3.190739.15217@colorado.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1993 19:07:39 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <01H1B4U0UT7M9S6736@TOE.TOWSON.EDU>, Teresa Feck writes: > The listserver will only allow someone with a priviledge account (me) to >send request to the various list servers using the address >"listname-request@internet addr". Before the upgrade, it would allow anyone >that was a subscriber to send request using listname-request. I've checked the >list server protection and they are the same as before the upgrade. > > It will not allow anyone at our site to post to a list which is >located at our site even if they are a subscriber to that list. > > Common Problem: > > Subscribers that are not located at our site can post information to the >various lists. Also, I believe that they can send request but I haven't >verified this yet. The common problem seems to be with subscribers located at >our site accessing the various lists. When a user at our site reviews or posts >to the list, they do not receive any messages (including any error messages). Well, I wish you could have provided us with more information, like the protections of the lists. I attempted to send commands to LISTSERV at the two addresses in your signature, but haven't gotten a bounce or a reply yet. fre.fsu.umd.edu seems to be your MX mailer, though.... >Teresa J. Feck Internet: feck@fre.fsu.umd.edu >Academic Computing Bitnet: feck@towson.edu By the way, the address you show as a BITNET address is not a BITNET address. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 21:12:12 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: HELP! Date: 4 Aug 1993 01:16:24 GMT Message-ID: <23n2l8INNbkh@gap.caltech.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Aug3.140732.21429@ncsu.edu>, hmn@unity.ncsu.edu (Harry Nicholos) writes: =Folks, I am in dire straits! I'm running v3.3 under vms 5.5-2 on a vaxcluster =and after restarting the cluster last evening, mail is not getting delivered. >> Sent: RCPT TO: >> Received: from ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu by ccvs2.cc.ncsu.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Tue, 03 Aug 1993 09:24:26 EDT You've got a routing loop to yourself. You need to make sure that you've got the path CCVS2.CC.NCSU.EDU defined as local in your MX configuration. If your TCP/IP package is UCX, you've also got to make sure that in your hosts database, the primary entry for CCVS2.CC.NCSU.EDU is the fully-qualified domain name rather than the nickname. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 03:21:07 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 11:25:46 +0200 From: Esra ESEN Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970842.903894C0.23720@trboun.bitnet> Subject: ERR_MSG files I have a problem. I find this file in message queue. But I can't solve why it is created. Is there anybody help me? Thanks in advance. -------------------------XXXX.ERR_MSG--------------------------------------- From: Message Exchange Jnet Interface To: MAILER@TRMETU Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 11:08:59 +0200 Subject: Error in BSMTP message proccessing BSMTP transcript: 220 TRBOUN.BITNET MX MX V3.3 VAX SMTP server ready at Wed, 04 Aug 1993 11:08:59 +0200 050 HELO TRMETU.BITNET 250 Hello, TRMETU.BITNET 050 TICK 8417 250 OK 050 MAIL FROM: 250 MAIL command accepted. 050 RCPT TO: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) 050 DATA 354 Start mail input; end with . 050 Received: from TRMETU (A03516) by TRMETU.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with 050 BSMTP id 8417; Wed, 04 Aug 93 10:58:25 TUR 050 Date: Wed, 04 Aug 93 10:57:37 TUR 050 From: pg 050 Subject: Re: askar 050 To: askarg@TRBOUN 050 In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 04 Aug 1993 10:34:29 +0200 050 050 ---------------THE MESSAGE IS HERE--------------- 050 . 250 Message received and queued. 050 QUIT 221 TRBOUN.BITNET Closing transmission channel ======================================================================== Esra ESEN System Manager Bogazici Universitesi ESEN@TRBOUN.BITNET Bilgisayar Merkezi Telf.:263 15 40 / Ext.:1246 80815 Bebek/Istanbul ========================================================================= ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 07:42:25 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 07:42:07 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970823.51B995F1.12890@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: ERR_MSG files Esra ESEN writes: > >I have a problem. I find this file in message queue. >But I can't solve why it is created. >Is there anybody help me? > The .ERR_MSG files are created for every Jnet file that's processed. If everything is OK, the files are not used. However, if there's an error in the BSMTP file, the .ERR_MSG file is mailed back to the sender. The presence of these files does *not* necessarily indicate that an error has occurred. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 13:46:16 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 11:33:35 EDT From: Virtual Bill Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970843.A7DE3DE0.10995@gtewd> Subject: Quirky Problem One of the users received the following as an internet mail message: From: MX%"fg00@redacam.redac.com" 4-AUG-1993 09:28:53.79 To: MAXWELL CC: Subj: authfile MAIL DELETED BECAUSE OF LACK OF DISK SPACE -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from uu3.psi.com by e.mtv.gtegsc.com (MX V3.2) with SMTP; Wed, 04 Aug 1993 09:28:46 EDT Received: by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA07405 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 93 12:22:00 -0400 Received: from frankg.master (frankg.ARPA) by redacam.redac.com (4.1/3.2.083191-Racal-Redac Inc.) id AA20986; Wed, 4 Aug 93 12:21:15 EDT Received: by frankg.master (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03188; Wed, 4 Aug 93 12:21:23 EDT Date: Wed, 4 Aug 93 12:21:23 EDT From: fg00@redacam.redac.com (Frank Guerino) Message-ID: <9308041621.AA03188@frankg.master> To: maxwell@gtewd.mtv.gtegsc.com Subject: authfile CC: Content-Type: X-sun-attachment The individual is far short of disk space, nor is his device. The disk whereupon the MX_FLQ_DIR resides is not short of disk space nor is diskquota enabled on that disk. This individual has received mail from other internet addresses without incident. Could this notification apply to the sending location and be just information to the recepient? I'm running MX V3.2 and VMS V5.5-2 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 13:57:20 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Upgrading to MX3.3 Message-ID: <1993Aug4.091206.23395@sparc4.ncu.edu.tw> From: Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1993 09:12:06 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hi... Where can I find the mx mail source code..? Someone can tell me ? e-mail --> im811177@im.mgt.ncu.edu.tw ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 13:57:35 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Where is the Source Code? Message-ID: <4AUG93.17332133@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw> From: u435634@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1993 17:33:21 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hello..! Where can I find the source code of mx-mail. If someone know, mail to me. my e-mail address----> im811177@im.mgt.ncu.edu.tw Thanks ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 14:10:18 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Listserver problem on mx 3.3 Message-ID: <1993Aug4.155618.29966@colorado.edu> From: Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1993 15:56:18 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Aug3.190739.15217@colorado.edu>, dwing@uh01.colorado.edu (Dan Wing) writes: >Well, I wish you could have provided us with more information, like the >protections of the lists. I attempted to send commands to LISTSERV at >the two addresses in your signature, but haven't gotten a bounce or a >reply yet. fre.fsu.umd.edu seems to be your MX mailer, though.... Teresa sent me a reply which shows the protection; I don't see anything wrong here. I recommended that MLF debugging be enabled... -Included below is an example of a list that users at our site are unable to -post or subscribe. - -Mailing lists: - Name: TIPS - Owner: "e2pytips@FRE.FSU.UMD.EDU" - Reply-to: List, NOSender - Archive: DISK02:[000000.E2PYDIS.TIPS] - Add message: MX_MLIST_DIR:TIPS_ADD.TXT - Remove message: MX_MLIST_DIR:TIPS_REMOVE.TXT - Errors-to: TIPSOWNER@FRE.FSU.UMD.EDU - Strip header: NOReceived - Private list: No - Protection: (SYSTEM:RWED,OWNER:RWED,GROUP:RWED,WORLD:WE) (Sorry for jumping all over you, Teresa.) -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 15:38:49 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 15:38:28 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970865.DD4AEEAC.12990@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Quirky Problem Virtual Bill writes: > > One of the users received the following as an internet mail message: [...] > >MAIL DELETED BECAUSE OF LACK OF DISK SPACE > [...] >Content-Type: X-sun-attachment > > The individual is far short of disk space, nor is his device. The > disk whereupon the MX_FLQ_DIR resides is not short of disk space > nor is diskquota enabled on that disk. This individual has received > mail from other internet addresses without incident. Could this > notification apply to the sending location and be just information > to the recepient? > > I'm running MX V3.2 and VMS V5.5-2 That's not an MX message. Looks like it's coming from a Sun.... Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 15:43:04 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 15:40:32 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: im811177@im.mgt.ncu.edu.tw Message-ID: <00970866.279F3C88.12992@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Upgrading to MX3.3 writes: > >Hi... > Where can I find the mx mail source code..? > Someone can tell me ? You can get it via anonymous ftp from ftp.spc.edu; you'll need: [.MX]UNZIP.EXE [.MX.MX033]MX033_SRC.ZIP !MX V3.3 sources [.MX.MX033]MX033.ZIP !MX V3.3 installation kit You can get them via e-mail by sending the following commands in the body of a mail message to FILESERV@WKUVX1.BITNET: SEND MX033_SRC SEND MX033 SEND FILESERV_TOOLS Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 15:52:36 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 13:45:19 -0700 From: "Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: rharwood@Data.Basix.COM Message-ID: <00970856.0EF73240.2378@Data.Basix.COM> Subject: Re: Listserver problem on mx 3.3 > Teresa sent me a reply which shows the protection; I don't see anything > wrong here. I recommended that MLF debugging be enabled... Question: Are the local users sending their requests to LISTNAME-REQUEST? If the VMS patch isn't installed and there is no VMSmail forwarding for LISTNAME-REQUEST to MX%LISTNAME-REQUEST, then it won't work *unless* they are mailing their requests explicitly to MX%LISTNAME-REQUEST. Could it be that simple? Ray ----- Ray Harwood | Data Basix | Adjunct Faculty, East Campus, Voice: (602)721-1988 | PO Box 18324 | Pima Community College FAX: (602)721-7240 | Tucson, AZ 85731 | Instructor in Ada and Pascal rharwood@Data.Basix.COM | Info@Data.Basix.COM | rharwood@east.pima.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 15:52:50 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 15:50:53 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970867.99BA130F.13004@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: Re: Listserver problem on mx 3.3 writes: > >Teresa sent me a reply which shows the protection; I don't see anything >wrong here. I recommended that MLF debugging be enabled... [...] >- Protection: (SYSTEM:RWED,OWNER:RWED,GROUP:RWED,WORLD:WE) The WORLD:WE allows anyone to post to the list. Re-reading Teresa's original post, I can't tell if that's what she intended or not. As for the original problem (people not being able to use the -request addresses), I can't think of any reason, so having the MLF debug log is necessary. Actually, the Router logs would probably be helpful. Perhaps the Router isn't recognizing the -request addresses for some reason? Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 17:01:48 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 14:23:35 EDT From: Virtual Bill Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0097085B.67ADD240.11111@gtewd> Subject: RE: Quirky Problem My thanks to Dan and Hunter on my "Quirky Problem". Both of you were right, the Sender's Sun crashed and the "MAIL DELETED BECAUSE OF LACK OF DISK SPACE" error was the result. Thanks for the quick response. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 17:03:18 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 14:01:35 PDT From: "Mike Johnson, Harris/Farinon - (415) 594-3530" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-LIST@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: mcjohnson@wizard.farinon.harris.com Message-ID: <00970858.549B09A0.11909@wizard.farinon.harris.com> Subject: SMTP Agent - message codes Specifics: MX 3.2 Multinet 3.2B VMS 5.4-3 ---------------------------------- I am attempting to solve a problem with sending mail to one location. Using the MX_SMTP_DEBUG logical to enable logging I can review what is happening, but the "message codes" do not mean much to me since I do not have a message code "decoder" (or have not found it). Is there a list (table) of message code to a more descriptive meaning that might help in our troubleshooting. One of the SMTP log files is attached for review and possible comment. -------------------------------- 4-AUG-1993 09:56:37.92 Processing queue entry number 11845 on node WIZARD 4-AUG-1993 09:56:39.01 Recipient: , route=wire.net 4-AUG-1993 09:56:39.05 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name wire.net 4-AUG-1993 09:56:39.39 SMTP_SEND: Attempting to start session with pandora.sf .ca.us. [192.190.111.22] 4-AUG-1993 09:56:39.63 SMTP_SEND: Connected 4-AUG-1993 09:56:40.35 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 4-AUG-1993 09:56:40.83 SMTP send failed, sts=0C27804A, sts2=0C278042 4-AUG-1993 09:56:40.83 Recipient status=0C27804A for 4-AUG-1993 09:56:41.52 1 rcpts need retry, next try 4-AUG-1993 10:26:41.52 4-AUG-1993 09:56:41.55 *** End of processing pass *** --------------------------------- Thanks for any assistance. Mike ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 17:07:31 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Quirky Problem Message-ID: <1993Aug4.202759.11652@colorado.edu> From: Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1993 20:27:59 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <00970843.A7DE3DE0.10995@gtewd>, Virtual Bill writes: > One of the users received the following as an internet mail message: > >From: MX%"fg00@redacam.redac.com" 4-AUG-1993 09:28:53.79 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >To: MAXWELL >CC: >Subj: authfile > > >MAIL DELETED BECAUSE OF LACK OF DISK SPACE > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - >Return-Path: >Received: from uu3.psi.com by e.mtv.gtegsc.com (MX V3.2) with SMTP; Wed, 04 Aug > 1993 09:28:46 EDT >Received: by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA07405 for > ; Wed, 4 Aug 93 12:22:00 -0400 >Received: from frankg.master (frankg.ARPA) by redacam.redac.com ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > (4.1/3.2.083191-Racal-Redac Inc.) id AA20986; Wed, 4 Aug 93 12:21:15 > EDT (redacam.redac.com is not an MX site, but something else.) >Received: by frankg.master (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03188; Wed, 4 Aug 93 12:21:23 EDT >Date: Wed, 4 Aug 93 12:21:23 EDT >From: fg00@redacam.redac.com (Frank Guerino) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Message-ID: <9308041621.AA03188@frankg.master> >To: maxwell@gtewd.mtv.gtegsc.com >Subject: authfile >CC: >Content-Type: X-sun-attachment This looks like: - a joke being sent by fg00@redacam.redac.com to maxwell@gtewd.mtv.gtegsc.com - that fg00@redacam.redac.com has *his* space full, and this is a (poor) bounce back to maxwell@gtewd.mtv.gtegsc.com informing him (maxwell) that maxwell's message wasn't delivered to fg00@redacam.redac.com due to lack of disk space. (redacam.redac.com isn't on the Internet, but has an MX record that points to uu3.psi.com (and some other uu#.psi.com's.)) -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 19:37:12 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Listserver problem on mx 3.3 Message-ID: <1993Aug4.221401.15377@colorado.edu> From: Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1993 22:14:01 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <00970856.0EF73240.2378@Data.Basix.COM>, "Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" writes: >> Teresa sent me a reply which shows the protection; I don't see anything >> wrong here. I recommended that MLF debugging be enabled... > >Question: Are the local users sending their requests to LISTNAME-REQUEST? If >the VMS patch isn't installed and there is no VMSmail forwarding for >LISTNAME-REQUEST to MX%LISTNAME-REQUEST, then it won't work *unless* they are >mailing their requests explicitly to MX%LISTNAME-REQUEST. I have a local list called POWERH-L, and: MAIL> SEND To: POWERH-L-REQUEST %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user POWERH-L-REQUEST -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1993 19:57:09 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: SMTP Agent - message codes Message-ID: <1993Aug4.234901.18232@colorado.edu> From: Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1993 23:49:01 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <00970858.549B09A0.11909@wizard.farinon.harris.com>, "Mike Johnson, Harris/Farinon - (415) 594-3530" writes: >Is there a list (table) of message code to a more descriptive meaning that >might >help in our troubleshooting. One of the SMTP log files is attached for review >and possible comment. The following commands will translate the MX error codes into human-readable error messages: $ SET MESSAGE MX_MSG $ WRITE SYS$OUTPUT F$MESSAGE(%X0C27804A) $ WRITE SYS$OUTPUT F$MESSAGE(%X0C278042) ^^ %X means "hex number follows") > 4-AUG-1993 09:56:37.92 Processing queue entry number 11845 on node WIZARD > 4-AUG-1993 09:56:39.01 Recipient: , route=wire.net > 4-AUG-1993 09:56:39.05 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name wire.net > 4-AUG-1993 09:56:39.39 SMTP_SEND: Attempting to start session with >pandora.sf.ca.us. [192.190.111.22] > 4-AUG-1993 09:56:39.63 SMTP_SEND: Connected > 4-AUG-1993 09:56:40.35 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: > 4-AUG-1993 09:56:40.83 SMTP send failed, sts=0C27804A, sts2=0C278042 > 4-AUG-1993 09:56:40.83 Recipient status=0C27804A for t> After MX connects with a remote node, it expects a greeting. It looks like it (MX) received a blank line (at timestamp 09:56:40.35). I sent a message test to through same node pandora.sf.ca.us, and didn't have any problems. The problem you sat at 9:56 this morning could have already been solved by the postmaster at pandora.sf.ca.us - you may want to contact him/her. 4-AUG-1993 17:35:45.28 Processing queue entry number 17154 on node BUCKIE 4-AUG-1993 17:35:45.50 Recipient: , route=pandora.sf.ca.us 4-AUG-1993 17:35:45.50 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name pandora.sf.ca.us 4-AUG-1993 17:35:45.56 SMTP_SEND: Attempting to start session with pandora.sf.ca.us. [192.190.111.22] 4-AUG-1993 17:35:45.71 SMTP_SEND: Connected 4-AUG-1993 17:35:46.29 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 220 pandora.sf.ca.us Server SMTP (Complaints/bugs to: postmaster) 4-AUG-1993 17:35:46.34 SMTP_SEND: Sent: HELO buckie.hsc.colorado.edu 4-AUG-1993 17:35:46.44 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 pandora.sf.ca.us ... -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1993 04:14:28 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: u435634@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Any Quick Method to install Message-ID: <5AUG93.15103981@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw> Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1993 15:10:39 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Someone has any easy method to install mx-mail in vms... Please let me know. my e-mail address---> im811177@im.mgt.ncu.edu.tw ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1993 07:05:37 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 5 Aug 93 07:58:14 -0400 Message-ID: <9308051158.AA21983@genrad.com> From: dongray@genrad.com Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET X-MX-Warning: Warning -- Invalid "To" header. To: "mx-list%wkuvx1.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu" CC: Subject: Re: SMTP Agent - message codes >> 4-AUG-1993 09:56:37.92 Processing queue entry number 11845 on node WIZARD >> 4-AUG-1993 09:56:39.01 Recipient: , route=wire.net >> 4-AUG-1993 09:56:39.05 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name wire.net >> 4-AUG-1993 09:56:39.39 SMTP_SEND: Attempting to start session with >>pandora.sf.ca.us. [192.190.111.22] >> 4-AUG-1993 09:56:39.63 SMTP_SEND: Connected >> 4-AUG-1993 09:56:40.35 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: >> 4-AUG-1993 09:56:40.83 SMTP send failed, sts=0C27804A, sts2=0C278042 >> 4-AUG-1993 09:56:40.83 Recipient status=0C27804A for > t> > > After MX connects with a remote node, it expects a greeting. It looks like > it (MX) received a blank line (at timestamp 09:56:40.35). I quite frequently get mail rejected like this (protocol error). I think, but haven't confirmed, that it's due to mailing to a 'UCXcluster' address. Is it possible to change MX so that it ignores 'leading' blank lines while looking for the ident? > -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver > dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name :Derek Dongray, Systems Manager, GenRad Ltd. Phone :061 486 1511 InterNet : Dongray@GenRad.com UKnet : Derek.Dongray@GenRad.co.uk PSS : 234261600119::Dongray CompuServe : 70374,2745 Address : Monmouth House, Monmouth Road, Cheadle Hulme, Cheshire, SK8 7AY, UK. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1993 08:18:25 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 5 Aug 93 07:49:00 EST From: "Scott Redmon" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Does MX3.3 work with WIN/TCP??? To: "mx-list" I saw the section in the manual dealing with Wollongong Pathway, but does this apply to WIN/TCP as well??? I commented out the section in servers.dat dealing with the Wollongong SMTP sever. I killed the inet_server process. A few seconds after (@twg$tcp:[netdist.misc]inetserv) a message comes back to the screen. get_token() null token Inet_server then dies. I deleted the changed version of servers.dat and restarted inetserv. Everything seems okay until I comment out the smtp server section in servers.dat Does anyone have MX running with WIN/TCP?? -=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Scott Redmon Internet: redmons@indy.navy.mil Communications Group Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division Phone: (317) 351-4846 Indianapolis, IN -=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1993 08:27:46 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1993 08:27:17 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <009708F2.CBCACC05.13128@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Does MX3.3 work with WIN/TCP??? "Scott Redmon" writes: > >I saw the section in the manual dealing with Wollongong Pathway, but does >this apply to WIN/TCP as well??? > Definitely not. The only reason some people can use MX with Pathway is that Pathway claims to emulate UCX. I've heard from several people, though, who still couldn't get it to work with Pathway. The TWG people have been approached several times about adding support, but they're not very responsive. Twice, TWG people have contacted me, saying that they'd be willing to help---but both ignored my followup messages. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1993 09:18:00 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1993 10:02:13 EDT From: "Brian Tillman" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: WKUVX1.BITNET!MX-list@esseye.si.com CC: redmons@indy.navy.mil Message-ID: <00970900.0E9E1480.18515@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: Does MX3.3 work with WIN/TCP??? >I saw the section in the manual dealing with Wollongong Pathway, but does >this apply to WIN/TCP as well??? > >I commented out the section in servers.dat dealing with the Wollongong >SMTP sever. I killed the inet_server process. > >A few seconds after (@twg$tcp:[netdist.misc]inetserv) a message comes back >to the screen. > >get_token() > >null token > >Inet_server then dies. > >I deleted the changed version of servers.dat and restarted inetserv. >Everything seems okay until I comment out the smtp server section in >servers.dat > >Does anyone have MX running with WIN/TCP?? It won't work with V5.2 of WIN/TCP (the last version before the change to Pathway/VMS). It works with Pathway because MX thinks it's talking to UCX. Pathway has a UCX emulation mode. I'm pretty sure the problem you have with the SERVERS.DAT file is because, when you commented the SMTP server part out, you commented out only the non-blank text lines. It is *documented* in the WIN/TCP manual that you cannot have more than a single blank line between server entries. This is probably what you did: # FINGER FINGER dedfinition stuff Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Listserver problem on mx 3.3 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <01H1DYRF8IIA9X6KIV@TOE.TOWSON.EDU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Date sent: 5-AUG-1993 13:17:39 >From: TOE::IN%"MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET" 4-AUG-1993 20:42:54.34 >To: IN%"MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET" >CC: >Subj: RE: Listserver problem on mx 3.3 > >Return-path: >Received: from ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU by TOE.TOWSON.EDU (PMDF #3807 ) id > <01H1D00CYX809X6KNT@TOE.TOWSON.EDU>; Wed, 4 Aug 1993 20:40:44 EST >Received: from ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU by ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU (IBM VM SMTP > V2R1) with BSMTP id 6973; Wed, 04 Aug 93 20:40:31 EDT >Received: from WKUVX1.BITNET by ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU (Mailer R2.08 R208004) > with BSMTP id 2441; Wed, 04 Aug 93 20:40:30 EDT >Date: 04 Aug 1993 22:14:01 +0000 (GMT) >From: dwing@uh01.colorado.edu >Subject: RE: Listserver problem on mx 3.3 >Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET >To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET >Errors-to: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET >Warnings-to: <> >Reply-to: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET >Message-id: <1993Aug4.221401.15377@colorado.edu> >Organization: University of Colorado Hospital Authority, Denver >X-Envelope-to: D2DCFEC@FRE00 >Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT >X-ListName: Message Exchange Discussion List >X-Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx >Nntp-Posting-Host: buckie.hsc.colorado.edu >Lines: 19 >X-Gateway-Source-Info: USENET > >In article <00970856.0EF73240.2378@Data.Basix.COM>, >"Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" writes: > >>> Teresa sent me a reply which shows the protection; I don't see anything >>> wrong here. I recommended that MLF debugging be enabled... First I would like to thank all of those who responded to my question. I've fixed the problem that we were having with MX. The MX software is started using the MXmailer account instead of the SYSTEM account. When I installed MX, I used the system account. Because I used this account, it made the system the owner of all of the MX files and directories including the QUEUE, SMTP and MLF. To fix the problem, I changed the owner of the MX files and directories from system to mxmailer. >> >>Question: Are the local users sending their requests to LISTNAME-REQUEST? If >>the VMS patch isn't installed and there is no VMSmail forwarding for >>LISTNAME-REQUEST to MX%LISTNAME-REQUEST, then it won't work *unless* they are >>mailing their requests explicitly to MX%LISTNAME-REQUEST. > >I have a local list called POWERH-L, and: > > MAIL> SEND > To: POWERH-L-REQUEST > %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user POWERH-L-REQUEST > >-Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver > dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet Although, we have lists installed locally, the only way that we can access a local list is by using the list as if it wasn't local. For example we have a local list TFSERV. To issue a request, I would enter MX%"TFSERV-REQUEST@FRE.FSU.UMD.EDU" at the To: prompt. _______________________________ Teresa J. Feck Internet: feck@fre.fsu.umd.edu Academic Computing Bitnet: feck@fre.towson.edu Frostburg State University Phonemail: (301) 689-7090 Frostburg, Maryland 21532 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1993 14:30:48 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 05 Aug 1993 15:26:20 -0400 (EDT) From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Listserver problem on mx 3.3 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <0097092D.560426C0.19656@garnet.nist.gov> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT > Although, we have lists installed locally, the only way that we can access a > local list is by using the list as if it wasn't local. > > For example we have a local list TFSERV. To issue a request, I would enter > MX%"TFSERV-REQUEST@FRE.FSU.UMD.EDU" at the To: prompt. TFSERV-REQUEST would not work. MX%"TFSERV-REQUEST" would work. This is standard behavior. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1993 15:53:02 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: Any Quick Method to install Message-ID: <1993Aug5.201030.6037@colorado.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1993 20:10:30 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <5AUG93.15103981@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw>, u435634@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw writes: >Someone has any easy method to install mx-mail in vms... $ @SYS$UPDATE:VMSINSTAL MX033 disk:[device] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ disk and device that has your MX kit And answer the questions based on your configuration (JNET node, type of TCP/IP software, host node name, etc.). When you're done, do: $ @MX_ROOT:[000000]MXCONFIG and answer its questions. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1993 19:06:28 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: Listserver problem on mx 3.3 Message-ID: <1993Aug5.224507.10364@colorado.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1993 22:45:07 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <01H1DYRF8IIA9X6KIV@TOE.TOWSON.EDU>, Teresa Feck writes: >I've fixed the problem that we were having with MX. The MX software is started >using the MXmailer account instead of the SYSTEM account. When I installed MX, >I used the system account. Because I used this account, it made the system the >owner of all of the MX files and directories including the QUEUE, SMTP and MLF. >To fix the problem, I changed the owner of the MX files and directories from >system to mxmailer. Glad you got the problem fixed! I'm surprised that MLF kept running when it was encountering file protection problems. >Although, we have lists installed locally, the only way that we can access a >local list is by using the list as if it wasn't local. > >For example we have a local list TFSERV. To issue a request, I would enter >MX%"TFSERV-REQUEST@FRE.FSU.UMD.EDU" at the To: prompt. You "should" be able to omit the @FRE.FSU.UMD.EDU portion, and just enter: MX%TFSERV-REQUEST This works because if you omit the "host" portion of the address, MX assumes you want to send mail to a user on the local host. Or, you could setup mail forwarding with: MAIL> SET FORWARD/USER=TFSERV-REQUEST MX%TFSERV-REQUEST which would allow users to send mail to TFSERV-REQUEST (saves a lot of typing!). -d -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1993 19:51:57 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1993 17:43:29 -0700 From: "Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Listserver problem on mx 3.3 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: rharwood@Data.Basix.COM Message-ID: <00970940.7F21FD80.2502@Data.Basix.COM> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT "Jonathan E. Hardis" writes: > > For example we have a local list TFSERV. To issue a request, I would enter > > MX%"TFSERV-REQUEST@FRE.FSU.UMD.EDU" at the To: prompt. > > TFSERV-REQUEST would not work. > MX%"TFSERV-REQUEST" would work. > > This is standard behavior. Two minor additional points: (1) Get VMS PRIV=SYSNAM, then inside mail, enter: SET FORWARD /USER=TFSERV-REQUEST "MX%TFSERV-REQUEST" SET FORWARD /USER=TFSERV "MX%TFSERV" and then sending to TFSERV-REQUEST and TFSERV without the MX% prefix WILL work. (2) In the second example above: MX%"TFSERV-REQUEST" The quotation marks are unnecessary. You only need the quotes when the address portion contains the @ sign, if I understand correctly. Ray ----- Ray Harwood | Data Basix | Adjunct Faculty, East Campus, Voice: (602)721-1988 | PO Box 18324 | Pima Community College FAX: (602)721-7240 | Tucson, AZ 85731 | Instructor in Ada and Pascal rharwood@Data.Basix.COM | Info@Data.Basix.COM | rharwood@east.pima.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1993 04:46:07 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: SMTP Agent - message codes Date: 6 Aug 1993 02:04:59 +0400 Message-ID: <23s06b$j78@lpuds.oea.ihep.su> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET dongray@genrad.com wrote: : I quite frequently get mail rejected like this (protocol error). I think, but : haven't confirmed, that it's due to mailing to a 'UCXcluster' address. I used MX smtp server on UCX cluster and noticed that UCX IP-cluster software works not very well too. : ... Is it : possible to change MX so that it ignores 'leading' blank lines while looking : for the ident? Simple Mail Transfer Protocol that MX uses for mail transferring is Internet standard and I am not sure that it would be a good idea to violate it. -- Igor Mandrichenko ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1993 04:57:20 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Problem of Bulletin Source Code Message-ID: Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 09:36:00 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Does anybody know where to get the source code of BULLETIN in VMS. My os version is VMS 5.4 Any any related software about it? My E-mail address----> im811177@im.mgt.ncu.edu.tw Thanks a lot. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1993 07:19:23 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Problem of Bulletin Source Code Message-ID: <1993Aug6.072903.2045@dmc.com> Date: 6 Aug 93 07:29:03 EDT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article , WOLFY@IMNV110 (Wolfy) writes: > > Does anybody know where to get the source code of BULLETIN in VMS. > My os version is VMS 5.4 > Any any related software about it? > My E-mail address----> im811177@im.mgt.ncu.edu.tw > Thanks a lot. Its available via anonymous FTP from dmc.com: Directory UUCP_PUBLIC:[VAX92B.BULLETIN.SRC] AAAREADME.TXT;1 ALLMACS.MAR;1 BOARD_DIGEST.COM;1 BOARD_SPECIAL.COM;1 BULLCOM.CLD;2 BULLCOMS1.HLP;1 BULLCOMS2.HLP;1 BULLDIR.INC;1 BULLETIN.CLD;2 BULLETIN.FOR;1 BULLETIN.HLP;1 BULLETIN.LNK;1 BULLETIN0.FOR;1 BULLETIN1.FOR;1 BULLETIN10.FOR;1 BULLETIN11.FOR;1 BULLETIN2.FOR;1 BULLETIN3.FOR;1 BULLETIN4.FOR;1 BULLETIN5.FOR;1 BULLETIN6.FOR;1 BULLETIN7.FOR;1 BULLETIN8.FOR;1 BULLETIN9.FOR;1 BULLFILES.INC;1 BULLFOLDER.INC;1 BULLMAIN.CLD;2 BULLNEWS.INC;1 BULLSTART.COM;1 BULLUSER.INC;1 BULL_NEWS.C;1 BULL_NEWSDUMMY.FOR;2 CREATE.COM;1 HANDOUT.TXT;1 INSTALL.COM;1 INSTRUCT.COM;1 INSTRUCT.TXT;1 MAKEFILE.;1 MX.COM;1 NEWS.COM;1 NEWS.TXT;1 NONSYSTEM.TXT;1 OPTIMIZE_RMS.COM;1 PMDF.COM;1 RESTART.COM;1 SETUSER.MAR;2 UPGRADE.COM;1 WRITEMSG.TXT;1 Total of 48 files. Also via anonymous UUCP. For instructions, send a message containing: SEND SERVICES.ANONYMOUS-UUCP QUIT to fileserv@dmc.com. -- Dick Munroe Internet: munroe@dmc.com Doyle, Munroe Consultants, Inc. UUCP: ...uunet!thehulk!munroe 267 Cox St. Office: (508) 568-1618 Hudson, Ma. 01749 USA FAX: (508) 562-1133 GET CONNECTED!!! Send mail to info@dmc.com to find out about DMConnection. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1993 07:51:49 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1993 08:37:57 EDT From: "Brian Tillman" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: im811177@im.mgt.ncu.edu.tw CC: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <009709BD.737622E0.19213@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: Problem of Bulletin Source Code Get the BULLETIN source by sending the command: SEND ALL to bulletin@pfc.mit.edu. To contact the author of BULLETIN, Mark London, send mail to mrl@pfc.mit.edu -- Brian Tillman tillman_brian@si.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1993 12:37:18 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Any Easy Way to install listserv Message-ID: <1993Aug6.122845.4379@sparc4.ncu.edu.tw> From: Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 12:28:45 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hi. Someone can tell me any quick way to install listserver? My System is VMS 5.4 and the MX-mail 3.3 Thanks in advance. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1993 12:37:26 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Help! We got a big trouble!!!!!! Message-ID: <1993Aug6.115505.4024@sparc4.ncu.edu.tw> From: Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 11:55:05 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hi! all friends. Anyone know why I can't mail to internet accross MX version 3.3. The following is my question detailing describe. When I use an operator account to send mail by MX mail service, it will be success- ful. But If I am a general user. I couldn't send any mail( Notice: I can receivce mails from anywhere), to another account(include myself). What's the matter with that? Somebody help me.........:((( wolfy ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1993 13:31:35 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1993 12:28:55 MST From: "Louis B. Moore" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <009709DD.B74E6660.11580@tchden.org> Subject: RE: Help! We got a big trouble!!!!!! >Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Hi! all friends. > Anyone know why I can't mail to internet accross MX version 3.3. The > following is >my question detailing describe. > > When I use an operator account to send mail by MX mail service, it will be > success- >ful. But If I am a general user. I couldn't send any mail( Notice: I can > receivce mails >from anywhere), to another account(include myself). What's the matter with >that? >Somebody help me.........:((( > wolfy > This is your brain on *nix. Kind of scary isn't it. Moore.Louis@tchden.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1993 14:17:44 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1993 14:45:47 EDT From: "Brian Tillman" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: WKUVX1.BITNET!MX-list@esseye.si.com Message-ID: <009709F0.D64ED280.19545@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: Help! We got a big trouble!!!!!! Wolfy complains: Help! We got a big trouble!!!!!! It sure would help if you would tell us if there are any error messages that you see. My blue-sky guess would be that you don't have protection on MX_MAILSHR set correctly, but you don't give us any symptoms. Did you turn on debug logging? What is in the various log files? Come on, if you want help, be a little more specific. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1993 23:49:46 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: u432710@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Another question of VMS/bulletin Message-ID: <7AUG93.11195509@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw> Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1993 11:19:55 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hi! It is so strange. When I run bulletin, I could only select the folder on the remote host. But remote host can access my folder? Why? It is trouble me much ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1993 23:49:59 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: u432710@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: News problem on VMS/bulletin Message-ID: <7AUG93.11162553@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw> Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1993 11:16:25 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I can't use my news when I complete the bulletin installation. ps. my VMS OS is version 5.4, and I am runing MX, UCX TCP on it. If it need run on the DECNET only? ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1993 01:25:01 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: u432710@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: ANU-NEWS installation problem Message-ID: <7AUG93.13445249@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw> Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1993 13:44:52 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hi! How to install ANU-NEWS quickly? ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1993 01:25:09 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: u432710@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Installation of gopher on VMS question Message-ID: <7AUG93.13485501@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw> Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1993 13:48:55 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hi! When I unzip gopher.zip. I got a trouble message to list following gopher1/12/emacs/forms invalid argument Somebody tell why???...:( ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1993 06:17:08 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Sat, 7 Aug 93 11:10 GMT From: "UK TeX Archive Manager " Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-LIST%BITNET.WKUVX1@NSFNET-RELAY.AC.UK Subject: RE: ANU-NEWS installation problem For the past week or so, this list has been *full* of postings from u432710@tw.edu.ncu.twncu865 Like this one, dated Sat, 7 Aug 1993 13:44:52 GMT: > Hi! > How to install ANU-NEWS quickly? I'd just like to say one thing in reply: RRRRRR TTTTTTTTT FFFFFFFF MM MM R R T F M M M M R R T F M M M M RRRRRR T FFFFF M MM M R R T F M M R R T F M M R R T F M M (And once you've read enough of the ... manual, so that you know how to change your timezone, fix the latter: I'm writing this at 11:05GMT, which is apparently 2 hrs 40 mins before you wrote your query.) Brian {Hamilton Kelly} System Manager for the UK TeX Archive at Aston University (Of course, if you're really stuck, I'd be happy to fly out to Taiwan to help you with your installation, at normal *commercial* consultancy rates. You *really* must expect to have to pay for the level of hand-holding that you're demanding.) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1993 08:09:42 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: u432710@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Help! We got a big trouble!!!!!! Message-ID: <7AUG93.20284411@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw> Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1993 20:28:44 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET ] ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1993 08:09:53 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: u432710@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Help! We got a big trouble!!!!!! Message-ID: <7AUG93.20344987@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw> Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1993 20:34:49 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET My configuration is as following: "MX_ALIAS_HELPLIB" = "MX_DIR:MX_ALIAS_HELPLIB" "MX_DEVICE" = "DUA0:" "MX_DIR" = "MX_DEVICE:[MX]" "MX_DNSMTP_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[DNSMTP]" "MX_DOC" = "MX_ROOT:[DOC]" "MX_EXAMPLES_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[EXAMPLES]" "MX_EXE" = "MX_ROOT:[EXE]" "MX_FLQ_DIR" = "SYS$SYSDEVICE:[MX.QUEUE]" "MX_FLQ_NODE_NAME" = "NCU39S" "MX_FLQ_RECLAIM_WAIT" = "0 02:00:00" "MX_FLQ_SHR" = "MX_EXE:MX_FLQ_SHR" "MX_LOCAL_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[LOCAL]" "MX_MAILSHR" = "MX_EXE:MX_MAILSHR" "MX_MAILSHRP" = "MX_EXE:MX_MAILSHRP" "MX_MCP_HELPLIB" = "MX_DIR:MX_MCP_HELPLIB" "MX_MLF_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[MLF]" "MX_MLIST_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[MLF.MAILING_LISTS]" "MX_MSG" = "MX_EXE:MX_MSG" "MX_NODE_NAME" = "ncu39s.ncu.edu.tw" "MX_ROOT" = "MX_DEVICE:[MX.]" "MX_ROUTER_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[ROUTER]" "MX_SHR" = "MX_EXE:MX_SHR" "MX_SITE_DOM_EXPANSION" = "MX_EXE:DOMAIN_EXPANSION" "MX_SMTP_DIR" = "MX_ROOT:[SMTP]" "MX_VMSMAIL_LOCALHOST" = "@ncu39s.ncu.edu.tw" and my MX directory situation is listing following MX.DIR;1 (RWE,RWE,RE,RE) and its subdirectory as following ALPHA_EXE.DIR;1 (RWE,RWE,RE,RE) CONFIG.MCP;8 (RWED,RWED,RE,) CONTRIB.DIR;1 (RWE,RWE,RE,RE) DNSMTP.DIR;1 (RWE,RWE,RE,RE) DOC.DIR;1 (RWE,RWE,RE,RE) EXAMPLES.DIR;1 (RWE,RWE,RE,RE) EXE.DIR;1 (RWE,RWE,RE,RE) LOCAL.DIR;1 (RWE,RWE,RE,RE) MLF.DIR;1 (RWE,RWE,RE,RE) MLF_CONFIG.;1 (RWED,RWED,RE,) MLF_CONFIG.COM;3 (RWED,RWED,RE,RE) MLF_CONFIG.MCP;4 (RWED,RWED,RE,) MXALIAS_MAIN.HLP;3 (RWED,RWED,,RE) MXCONFIG.COM;3 (RWED,RWED,,RE) MX_ALIAS_HELPLIB.HLB;3 (RWED,RWED,,RE) MX_CONFIG.MXCFG;8 (RWED,RWED,RE,) MX_LOGICALS.DAT;3 (RWED,RWED,RWED,RE) MX_MCP_HELPLIB.HLB;3 (RWED,RWED,,RE) MX_STARTUP_INFO.DAT;3 (RWED,RWED,RWED,RE) QUEUE.DIR;1 (RWED,RWED,RW,RWE) ROUTER.DIR;1 (RWE,RWE,RE,RE) SMTP.DIR;1 (RWE,RWE,RE,RE) and My config.mcp is listing following ! MX_DEVICE:[MX]CONFIG.MCP;8 ! Created: 6-AUG-1993 19:22:15.49 by MXCONFIG ! DEFINE PATH "[140.115.1.102]" LOCAL DEFINE PATH "ncu39s" LOCAL DEFINE PATH "ncu39s.ncu.edu.tw" LOCAL DEFINE PATH *.UUCP SMTP/ROUTE="uunet.uu.net" DEFINE PATH *.BITNET SMTP/ROUTE="cunyvm.cuny.edu" ! NOTE: The next path definition should always be LAST. DEFINE PATH * SMTP ! ! Done with routing information. ! DEFINE ALIAS "Postmaster" "root@im.mgt.ncu.edu.tw" DEFINE ALIAS "POSTMAST" "root@im.mgt.ncu.edu.tw" ! for BITNET compatibility ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1993 08:56:31 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1993 00:34:57 -0700 From: "Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: rharwood@Data.Basix.COM Message-ID: <00970B0C.4F4760A0.2650@Data.Basix.COM> Subject: UCX Installation Instructions I've just completed installation of MX 3.3 at East.Pima.EDU, where they run UCX 2.? with VMS 5.5-?. Things now run pretty well, but I have some suggestions. The installation instructions say to do a UCX DISABLE SERVICE SMTP, which is indeed necessary... except I found on *rebooting* that the MX SMTP Server never started up. Other things one must do is STOP/QUE UCX_node_00, _01, etc. put a UCX DISABLE SERVICE SMTP in the SYSTARTUP*.COM, and the UCX SMTP Startup must be commented out of SYSTARTUP*.COM. The MX SMTP Server never starts on reboot unless these actions are done. Does this match with anyone else's experience, or did I miss something along the way? Ray ----- Ray Harwood | Data Basix | Adjunct Faculty, East Campus, Voice: (602)721-1988 | PO Box 18324 | Pima Community College FAX: (602)721-7240 | Tucson, AZ 85731 | Instructor in Ada and Pascal rharwood@Data.Basix.COM | Info@Data.Basix.COM | rharwood@east.pima.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1993 09:01:38 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Help! We got a big trouble!!!!!! Date: 8 Aug 1993 14:10:13 +0400 Message-ID: <242je5$sac@lpuds.oea.ihep.su> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET im811177 (im811177@imux122.ncu.edu.tw) wrote: : Hi! all friends. : Anyone know why I can't mail to internet accross MX version 3.3. The following is : my question detailing describe. : When I use an operator account to send mail by MX mail service, it will be success- : ful. But If I am a general user. I couldn't send any mail( Notice: I can receivce mails : from anywhere), to another account(include myself). What's the matter with that? What error message appears when you (as general user) try to send a message ? -- Igor Mandrichenko ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1993 09:06:26 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: u432710@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Help! We got a big trouble!!!!!! Message-ID: <8AUG93.18552723@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw> Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 18:55:27 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hi! Yes I had tried many many times ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1993 07:10:56 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: UCX Installation Instructions Date: 9 Aug 1993 15:12:18 +0400 Message-ID: <245bei$3q1@lpuds.oea.ihep.su> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988 (rharwood@Data.Basix.COM) wrote: : I've just completed installation of MX 3.3 at East.Pima.EDU, where they run UCX : 2.? with VMS 5.5-?. Things now run pretty well, but I have some suggestions. : The installation instructions say to do a UCX DISABLE SERVICE SMTP, which is : indeed necessary... except I found on *rebooting* that the MX SMTP Server never : started up. Other things one must do is STOP/QUE UCX_node_00, _01, etc. put : a UCX DISABLE SERVICE SMTP in the SYSTARTUP*.COM, and the UCX SMTP Startup must : be commented out of SYSTARTUP*.COM. The MX SMTP Server never starts on reboot : unless these actions are done. If you have included MX startup routine to your systartup procedure, MX SMTP Server starts, but crashes just when it tries to listen on SMTP port. That's because the port is already locked by UCX SMTP server. -- Igor Mandrichenko ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1993 08:55:35 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Problem of Bulletin Source Code Message-ID: <1993Aug9.082634.2060@dmc.com> Date: 9 Aug 93 08:26:34 EDT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Aug6.072903.2045@dmc.com>, munroe@dmc.com (Dick Munroe) writes: > Its available via anonymous FTP from dmc.com: > > Directory UUCP_PUBLIC:[VAX92B.BULLETIN.SRC] That should be: UUCP_PUBLIC:[000000.VAX92B.BULLETIN.SRC] I keep forgetting about the bug in Multinet's FTP server. My apologies. -- Dick Munroe Internet: munroe@dmc.com Doyle, Munroe Consultants, Inc. UUCP: ...uunet!thehulk!munroe 267 Cox St. Office: (508) 568-1618 Hudson, Ma. 01749 USA FAX: (508) 562-1133 GET CONNECTED!!! Send mail to info@dmc.com to find out about DMConnection. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1993 11:27:54 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1993 09:12:48 PDT From: "Mike Johnson, Harris/Farinon - (415) 594-3530" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: mcjohnson@wizard.farinon.harris.com Message-ID: <00970C1D.D10BB7A0.12184@wizard.farinon.harris.com> Subject: SMTP Agent - message codes (Update 1) **************************** This message is an update to my original message sent on August 4, 1993 regarding problems with sending mail to one system and a request for how to "decode" the message codes displayed in the debug log files. Specifics: MX 3.2, VMS 5.4-3, Multinet 3.2B **************************** Based on comments from several individuals, I tried the following experiment between several of our systems and the system we are having trouble communicating with. The experiment involved doing a TELNET to port 25 (SMTP) on each machine to view the message (if any) provided by that system. Two examples are below: ------------------------------------------------- WIZARD is our system: ------------------------------------------------- SYS_WIZ> TELNET /PORT=25 WIZARD Trying... Connected to WIZARD.FARINON.HARRIS.COM. 220 WIZARD.FARINON.HARRIS.COM MX V3.2 SMTP server ready at Fri, 06 Aug 1993 15:28:06 PDT Interrupt (Ctrl-Y by me) SYS_WIZ> ------------------------------------------------- PANDORA is the system we are having trouble with: ------------------------------------------------- SYS_WIZ> TELNET /PORT=25 PANDORA.SF.CA.US Trying... Connected to PANDORA.SF.CA.US. Connection closed by Foreign Host SYS_WIZ> --------------------- --------------------- The above is consistent with what the MX_STMP_DEBUG log file was showing. The system (PANDORA) is not sending a greeting message and the connection is then closed by the foreign host. We have tried sending messages to PANDORA from several SUN workstations and they are able to communicate with not problem. I am going to retrieve the RFC for SMTP to see if I can learn anything, but I do need some answers faster then that. --------------------- --------------------- My questions / requests are: 1) When connecting to the remote host, is it suppose to generate a greeting for the local host. 2) If no greeting is generated, how is the local host suppose to react. 3) Using the above output can anyone give me a clue what could be wrong with the local (WIZARD) or remote (PANDORA) systems. NOTE: I have provided this information to PANDORA's system admin also to give them a chance to ask another group for assistance (more mines at work). Thanks for any help. Mike ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael Johnson Harris Corp./Farinon Div. 1691 Bayport Ave., San Carlos, CA 94070-5307 (Voice) 415 594-3530 (FAX) 415 594-3777 (Internet) mcjohnson@wizard.farinon.harris.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1993 13:09:20 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: SMTP Agent - message codes (Update 1) Message-ID: <1993Aug9.170515.25598@colorado.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1993 17:05:15 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <00970C1D.D10BB7A0.12184@wizard.farinon.harris.com>, "Mike Johnson, Harris/Farinon - (415) 594-3530" writes: >SYS_WIZ> TELNET /PORT=25 WIZARD >Trying... Connected to WIZARD.FARINON.HARRIS.COM. > >220 WIZARD.FARINON.HARRIS.COM MX V3.2 SMTP server ready at Fri, 06 Aug 1993 > 15:28:06 PDT > > Interrupt (Ctrl-Y by me) (It is "gentler" to just type QUIT and press RETURN -- this is the RFC821 standard for terminating a session with a remote node.) >------------------------------------------------- >PANDORA is the system we are having trouble with: >------------------------------------------------- > >SYS_WIZ> TELNET /PORT=25 PANDORA.SF.CA.US >Trying... Connected to PANDORA.SF.CA.US. I tried connecting to this system (Monday, 9 Aug at 10:51am Mountain Time), and it worked just fine -- it greeted me with a "220 pandora.sf.ca.us Server SMTP (Complaints/bugs to: postmaster)". I didn't do any testing beyond entering a QUIT command, though. >We have tried sending messages to PANDORA from several SUN workstations >and they are able to communicate with not problem. > >1) When connecting to the remote host, is it suppose to generate a > greeting for the local host. Yes. >2) If no greeting is generated, how is the local host suppose to react. If no greeting is seen, there is a protocol violation; how the local host reacts is entirely up to the local host. Section 4.3 of RFC821: - 4.3. SEQUENCING OF COMMANDS AND REPLIES - - The communication between the sender and receiver is intended to - be an alternating dialogue, controlled by the sender. As such, - the sender issues a command and the receiver responds with a - reply. The sender must wait for this response before sending - further commands. - - One important reply is the connection greeting. Normally, a - receiver will send a 220 "Service ready" reply when the connection - is completed. The sender should wait for this greeting message - before sending any commands. >3) Using the above output can anyone give me a clue what could be wrong > with the local (WIZARD) or remote (PANDORA) systems. At the time I performed the testing, it appears that both nodes are functioning properly. At the time you performed your testing, it looks like the SMTP server at PANDORA wasn't running (didn't get started when the system rebooted, crashed, or didn't have any available incoming links). >NOTE: I have provided this information to PANDORA's system admin also > to give them a chance to ask another group for assistance > (more mines at work). Something I don't think has been mentioned is that Pandora might not have an available incoming SMTP link -- the postmaster of Pandora should check to see how many incoming links are configured. -dan -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1993 13:54:57 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: SMTP Agent - message codes (Update 1) Message-ID: <1993Aug9.182028.11660@news.arc.nasa.gov> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1993 18:20:28 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <00970C1D.D10BB7A0.12184@wizard.farinon.harris.com>, "Mike Johnson, Harris/Farinon - (415) 594-3530" writes: >------------------------------------------------- >PANDORA is the system we are having trouble with: >------------------------------------------------- > >SYS_WIZ> TELNET /PORT=25 PANDORA.SF.CA.US >Trying... Connected to PANDORA.SF.CA.US. > > > >Connection closed by Foreign Host >SYS_WIZ> [...] >2) If no greeting is generated, how is the local host suppose to react. In this case, the local host has nothing to react to. Note that the connection was closed by the remote host. >3) Using the above output can anyone give me a clue what could be wrong > with the local (WIZARD) or remote (PANDORA) systems. The remote side closed the connection for some reason. Perhaps it was just too busy (although in that case, the connection should just have been refused). Perhaps that system tried to do an address->hostname lookup on your address, which failed, and refused to talk to you because of that. (It's not supposed to do that, but it might.) -Matt -- Matthew Madison | madison@tgv.com | +1 408 427 4366 TGV, Inc. | 603 Mission Street | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 08:10:02 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: How to turn on MX-DEBUGING Message-ID: <1993Aug11.031359.25784@sparc4.ncu.edu.tw> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 03:13:59 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hello.. Does someone can tell me how to trun on the MX-DEBUG. The document said to define a system logical name??? I don't understand it. Can you help me.? Thanks in advance...... ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 08:44:03 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 08:13:24 CST From: Howard Meadows Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970DA7.D9CE8940.16223@vaxa.weeg.uiowa.edu> Subject: Away on a VACATION I am current out of the office on vacation. I expect to return on August 16, 1993. You should receive this notice only once even if you send me multiple messages during my vacation time. ALL messages will be will be delivered, and I will read them when I get back. Thanks, Howard ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 08:50:46 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 09:16:43 EDT From: "Joseph R. Mountain, NRaD Code 312" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List%WKUVX1.BITNET@trout.nosc.mil Message-ID: <00970DB0.B23C23C0.996@DCF.NOSC.MIL> Subject: RE: How to turn on MX-DEBUGING To turn on debugging type the following: $DEFINE/SYSTEM/EXEC MX_SMTP_DEBUG TRUE if you want SMTP debugging turned on. use the list provided in the manual Joe Mountain Systems Engineer NRaD Code 312 Warminster, PA 18974 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 08:51:13 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 15:41:49 MEZ ( +0200) From: Peter Kobe Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970DE6.7E4CA360.17422@pib1.physik.uni-bonn.de> Subject: RE: How to turn on MX-DEBUGING Here you are: $ define/system mx_jnet_debug "true" $ define/system mx_local_debug "true" $ define/system mx_mlf_debug "true" $ define/system mx_uucp_rmail_debug "true" $ define/system mx_router_debug "true" $ define/system mx_flq_debug "true" $ define/system mx_smtp_debug "true" $ define/system mx_smtp_server_debug "true" $ define/system mx_site_debug "true" $ define/system mx_vmsmail_in_debug "true" ===================================================================== Peter Kobe Internet: Peter.Kobe@uni-bonn.de Physikalisches Institut HEPNET: 13562::SYSTEM Universitaet Bonn Tel: (49) 228 73 3222 D 53 Bonn FAX: (49) 228 73 7869 Nussallee 12 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 08:51:41 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 06:25:43 PDT From: "Mike Johnson, Harris/Farinon - (415) 594-3530" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970D98.CE5E84C0.12414@wizard.farinon.harris.com> Subject: RE: How to turn on MX-DEBUGING Message "Message-ID: <1993Aug11.031359.25784@sparc4.ncu.edu.tw>" writes: > Hello.. > Does someone can tell me how to trun on the MX-DEBUG. > The document said to define a system logical name??? > I don't understand it. Can you help me.? > Thanks in advance...... One way to do the above is to use the following command format from a privileged account (i.e. SYSTEM): DEFINE /SYSTEM Example for setting the SMTP Agent Debug: DEFINE /SYSTEM SMTP_LOG_DEBUG YES The above will create a system logical with a value of "YES". Once defined the SMTP Agent will start creating log files for each message sent and received in the directory MX_SMTP_DIR:. To turn off debugging (log file generation), use the following command format from a privileged account: DEASSIGN /SYSTEM Example: DEASSIGN /SYSTEM SMTP_LOG_DEBUG Beaware that the logical will be automatically removed on a system re-boot. Good luck. Mike ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 10:19:07 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 10:47:28 EDT From: "Brian Tillman" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: WKUVX1.BITNET!MX-list@esseye.si.com Message-ID: <00970DBD.5F45D0A0.22209@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: How to turn on MX-DEBUGING Here's how I do it: I have two command procedures, MX_DEBUG_ENABLE.COM and MX_DEBUG_DISABLE.COM. Each takes one parameter - a comma-separated list of the agents for which debug should be started or stopped or the keyword ALL. To use them, I enter SYSMAN, SET my ENVIRONMENT for the nodes in my cluster where the various agents execute, and use DO to run the appropriate command procedure, specifying which agents. Here is a sample: $ mcr sysman %SYSMAN-I-TIMEVAL, timeout value is 00:00:45.00 SYSMAN> set env/nod=barry %SYSMAN-I-ENV, current command environment: Individual nodes: BARRY Username TILLMAN will be used on nonlocal nodes SYSMAN> do @[.com]mx_debug_enable router,local %SYSMAN-I-OUTPUT, command execution on node BARRY SYSMAN> do @[.com]mx_debug_disable router,local %SYSMAN-I-OUTPUT, command execution on node BARRY SYSMAN> exit Here is MX_DEBUG_ENABLE.COM $!----Cut Here $ set noon $ if p1 .nes. "" $ then $! $ p1 = f$edit( p1, "upcase" ) $ if p1 .eqs. "ALL" then p1 = "LOCAL,ROUTER,SMTP,SMTP_SERVER" $ set proc/priv=sysnam $ agent_no = 0 $! $ loop: $ agent = f$element( agent_no, ",", p1 ) $ if agent .eqs. "," then goto done $ define/system mx_'agent'_debug true $ agent_no = agent_no + 1 $ goto loop $! $ done: $ set proc/priv=nosysnam $! $ else $! $ write sys$output "No agent specified." $! $ endif $ exit $!---Cut here Here is MX_DEBUG_DISABLE.COM $!---Cut here $ set noon $ if p1 .nes. "" $ then $! $ p1 = f$edit( p1, "upcase" ) $ if p1 .eqs. "ALL" then p1 = "LOCAL,ROUTER,SMTP,SMTP_SERVER" $ set proc/priv=sysnam $ agent_no = 0 $! $ loop: $ agent = f$element( agent_no, ",", p1 ) $ if agent .eqs. "," then goto done $ deassign/system mx_'agent'_debug $ agent_no = agent_no + 1 $ goto loop $! $ done: $ set proc/priv=nosysnam $! $ else $! $ write sys$output "No agent specified." $! $ endif $ exit $!---Cut here Notice that there is no spelling check to guarantee you spelled the agent names correctly, but we're all smart enough to do that, aren't we? Besides, even if an agent name were misspelled, it would matter. All that would happen is that a useless logical name would appear and remain around until the next reboot. Note: you must have the ability to set the SYSNAM privilege in order to define the debug logicals. The procedures set and clear the privilege with no checking on your ability to do so. These are simple-minded procedures that work fine for my situation. You may find they need altering (or ignoring) for yours. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- 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: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 10:33:06 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: oxendine@pembvax1.pembroke.edu Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Help with MX rewriting BITNET addresses Date: 11 Aug 93 10:51:37 EDT Message-ID: <1993Aug11.105137.1@pembvax1.pembroke.edu> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET After upgrading to MX 3.3 it seems to be scrambling my BITNET return address. For instance, if I receive mail from NCSUVM.BITNET whichs also has and internet address of NCSUVM.CC.NCSU.EDU, MX rewrites the return address and NCSUVM.C.BITNET which also gets inserted into the VMSmail from address. Of course this is not a legal address and replies to this message will bounce. Anyone know why MX is doing this? I amd enclosing the Jnet interface trace log and my config.mcp. ==MX_JNET_LOG================================================================= 11-AUG-1993 10:02:35.29 Processing incoming message, entry number 13472 11-AUG-1993 10:02:35.56 Dest user=MAILER, File type code=2, first line is: HELO NCSUVM.CC.NCSU.EDU 11-AUG-1993 10:02:35.56 This is a BSMTP file. 11-AUG-1993 10:02:35.56 BSMTP_IN: Processing incoming BSMTP file from MAILER at NCSUVM... 11-AUG-1993 10:02:35.87 BSMTP_IN: send: 220 PEMBVAX1.BITNET MX MX V3.3 VAX SMTP server ready at Wed, 11 Aug 1993 10:02:35 EDT 11-AUG-1993 10:02:35.88 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: HELO ncsuvm.cc.ncsu.edu 11-AUG-1993 10:02:35.88 BSMTP_IN: send: 250 Hello, ncsuvm.cc.ncsu.edu 11-AUG-1993 10:02:35.88 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: TICK 2992 11-AUG-1993 10:02:35.88 BSMTP_IN: send: 250 OK 11-AUG-1993 10:02:35.88 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: MAIL FROM: 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.00 BSMTP_IN: send: 250 MAIL command accepted. 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.01 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: RCPT TO: 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.02 BSMTP_IN: send: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.02 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: DATA 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.50 BSMTP_IN: send: 354 Start mail input; end with . 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.50 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: Received: from NCSUVM.CC.NCSU.EDU by ncsuvm.cc.ncsu.edu (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.50 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: with BSMTP id 2992; Wed, 11 Aug 93 09:55:40 EDT 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.50 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 09:55: 40 -0400 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.51 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: From: BITNET list server at NCSUVM (1.7f) 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.51 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: Subject: Output of your job "OXENDINE" 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.51 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: To: OXENDINE@PEMBVAX1.BITNET 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.51 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.64 BSMTP_IN: rewrote BITNET list server at NCSUVM (1.7f) as BITNET list server at NCSUVM (1.7f) <--- This is where the bad rewrite occurs. 11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.65 BSMTP_IN: rewrote OXENDINE@PEMBVAX1.BITNET as OXENDINE@pembvax1.pembroke.edu 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.21 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: > test 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.34 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: Unknown command - "TEST". Try HELP. 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.34 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.34 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: Summary of resource utilization 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.34 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: ------------------------------- 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.35 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: CPU time: 0.009 sec Device I/O: 2 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.35 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: Overhead CPU: 0.011 sec Paging I/O: 0 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.35 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: CPU model: 4381 DASD model: 3380 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.35 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: . 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.46 BSMTP_IN: send: 250 Message received and queued. 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.47 BSMTP_IN: rcvd: QUIT 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.47 BSMTP_IN: send: 221 PEMBVAX1.BITNET Closing transmission channel 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.47 BSMTP_IN: BSMTP replies disabled; no transcript sent. 11-AUG-1993 10:02:37.73 BSMTP_IN: Finished. ==CONFIG.MCP================================================================== ! MX_DEVICE:[MX]CONFIG.MCP;25 ! Created: 18-MAY-1992 14:54:03.03 by MXCONFIG ! Modified: 18-MAY-1992 by TLO to include additional routes ! DEFINE PATH "pembvax1.pembroke.edu" LOCAL DEFINE PATH "papa.pembroke.edu" LOCAL DEFINE PATH "pembvax1" LOCAL DEFINE PATH "[152.21.1.1]" LOCAL DEFINE PATH "pembvax1.BITNET" LOCAL DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{user}%granpa@pembvax1.pembroke.edu>" "<""granpa::{user}""@pembvax1.pembroke.edu>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{user}%granpa@pembvax1.bitnet>" "<""granpa::{user}""@pembvax1.pembroke.edu>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE "<{user}%granpa@pembvax1>" "<""granpa::{user}""@pembvax1.pembroke.edu>" DEFINE PATH "nat.pembroke.edu" smtp/route="charon.pembroke.edu" DEFINE PATH "nat" smtp/route="charon.pembroke.edu" DEFINE PATH *.BITNET Jnet DEFINE PATH *.UUCP SMTP/ROUTE="uunet.uu.net" DEFINE PATH *.* SMTP DEFINE PATH * Jnet ! Remove the following to follow INTERBIT gateway rules SET JNET/LENIENT SET SMTP/DEFAULT_ROUTER=rock.concert.net ! NOTE: The next path definition should always be LAST. ! ! Done with routing information. ! =============================================================================== Terry Oxendine | Pembroke State University | Email: oxendine@pembvax1.pembroke.edu Systems Admin/Prog | Voice: 919-521-6260 University Computing and | Facsimile: 919-521-6649 Information Services | Pembroke, NC 28372 ============================================================================= ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 10:51:36 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 11:15:13 EDT From: "Brian Tillman" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: WKUVX1.BITNET!MX-list@esseye.si.com Message-ID: <00970DC1.40092760.22240@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: How to turn on MX-DEBUGING Mike Johnson, Harris/Farinon (mcjohnson@wizard.farinon.harris.com) writes: >One way to do the above is to use the following command format from a >privileged account (i.e. SYSTEM): > > DEFINE /SYSTEM > > >Example for setting the SMTP Agent Debug: > > DEFINE /SYSTEM SMTP_LOG_DEBUG YES > > The above will create a system logical with a value of "YES". Once > defined the SMTP Agent will start creating log files for each message > sent and received in the directory MX_SMTP_DIR:. > > >To turn off debugging (log file generation), use the following command format >from a privileged account: > > DEASSIGN /SYSTEM > >Example: > > DEASSIGN /SYSTEM SMTP_LOG_DEBUG > > >Beaware that the logical will be automatically removed on a system re-boot. Perhaps this logical name was valid once a long time ago (Hunter can tell), but with any modern version of MX, the debug logicals are of the form MX_agent-name_DEBUG. What version are you running anyway, Mike? -- Brian Tillman ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 11:16:45 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 09:11:26 PDT From: "Mike Johnson, Harris/Farinon - (415) 594-3530" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: mcjohnson@wizard.farinon.harris.com Message-ID: <00970DAF.F4F2CDA0.12442@wizard.farinon.harris.com> Subject: RE: How to turn on MX-DEBUGING Comment on reply from Mike Johnson: > Perhaps this logical name was valid once a long time ago (Hunter can tell), > > but > with any modern version of MX, the debug logicals are of the form > MX_agent-name_DEBUG. > What version are you running anyway, Mike? ------------------------------- My error. Brian's comment is correct. Thats what I get for answering a question at 6:10 am. I having been working with another programs debugging methods recently and I blended the two together. Sorry for the error. Mike ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 15:21:41 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: problems with MLF Date: 11 Aug 1993 19:53:55 GMT Message-ID: <24bioj$5ii@samba.oit.unc.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I'm all of a sudden having trouble with the mailing list processor, not allowing me (as list owner) to add people to a mailing list. It was working earlier this week, and isn't now. I've done nothing intentional to my MX setup, and I don't even *think* I've done anything unintentional. Here's a bunch of data, anyone have any ideas? ============================== Operating system and version... ============================== VMS 5.4-3 MX 3.3 UCX 1.3, although I can't see how it matters for this... ============================== List Definition: ============================== $ mcp sho list vmsgopher-l Mailing lists: Name: VMSGopher-L Owner: "sherman@TRLN.LIB.UNC.EDU" Reply-to: List, NOSender Archive: MX_ROOT:[MLF.FILE_SERVERS.ARCHIVES.VMSGOPHER-L] Add message: MX_ROOT:[MLF.MAILING_LISTS]VMS_GOPHER_ADD.TXT Description: Gopher for VMS implementation and testing Errors-to: postmaster@trln.lib.unc.edu Strip header: Received Private list: No Protection: (SYSTEM:RWED,OWNER:RWED,GROUP:RWED,WORLD:W) I have been adding people manually to the list. ============================= MX_MLF_LOG.LOG from attempted add and review ============================= 11-AUG-1993 15:30:27.20 Processing queue entry number 7918 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.21 Checking local name: vmsgopher-l-request 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.21 This is a list control address. 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.36 LIST_CTRL_REQ: Message is from: sherman@trln.lib.unc.edu 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.75 LIST_CTRL_REQ: command is: add/nonotify pcolar@trln.lib.unc.edu "Dave Pcolar" 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.75 CHECK_ACCESS: checking sherman@trln.lib.unc.edu for access mask=00000010 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.76 CHECK_ACCESS: Found address on subscriber list. 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.76 CHECK_ACCESS: Found address on owner list. 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.76 CHECK_ACCESS: -- access granted under OWNER class. 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.77 LIST_CTRL_REQ: command is: review 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.78 CHECK_ACCESS: checking sherman@trln.lib.unc.edu for access mask=00000001 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.80 CHECK_ACCESS: Found address on subscriber list. 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.80 CHECK_ACCESS: -- access granted under GROUP class. 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.80 CHECK_ACCESS: checking sherman@trln.lib.unc.edu for access mask=00000010 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.82 CHECK_ACCESS: Found address on subscriber list. 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.82 CHECK_ACCESS: Found address on owner list. 11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.82 CHECK_ACCESS: -- access granted under OWNER class. 11-AUG-1993 15:30:29.00 MLIST_REVIEW: Sending review to: "Dennis R. Sherman" 11-AUG-1993 15:30:30.94 MLIST_REVIEW: Sent. 11-AUG-1993 15:30:31.03 All done with this entry. ============================= Notice that although we see the command string, and lots of CHECK_ACCESS, an ADD command never happens, unlike when I removed the same user from the list (having cooperative co-workers is *so* convenient)... Also, the same effect happens if I do *not* include a review command in the mail message. ============================= MX_MLF_LOG.LOG from remove and review ============================= 11-AUG-1993 15:28:44.96 Processing queue entry number 7913 11-AUG-1993 15:28:45.67 Checking local name: vmsgopher-l-request 11-AUG-1993 15:28:45.67 This is a list control address. 11-AUG-1993 15:28:45.73 LIST_CTRL_REQ: Message is from: sherman@trln.lib.unc.edu 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.36 LIST_CTRL_REQ: command is: remove/nonotify pcolar@trln.lib.unc.edu 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.36 CHECK_ACCESS: checking sherman@trln.lib.unc.edu for access mask=00000010 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.37 CHECK_ACCESS: Found address on subscriber list. 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.37 CHECK_ACCESS: Found address on owner list. 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.37 CHECK_ACCESS: -- access granted under OWNER class. 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.39 MLIST_REMOVE: Removing pcolar@TRLN.LIB.UNC.EDU from list. 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.39 MLIST_REMOVE: successfully removed. 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.39 LIST_CTRL_REQ: command is: review 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.40 CHECK_ACCESS: checking sherman@trln.lib.unc.edu for access mask=00000001 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.40 CHECK_ACCESS: Found address on subscriber list. 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.40 CHECK_ACCESS: -- access granted under GROUP class. 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.41 CHECK_ACCESS: checking sherman@trln.lib.unc.edu for access mask=00000010 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.41 CHECK_ACCESS: Found address on subscriber list. 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.41 CHECK_ACCESS: Found address on owner list. 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.41 CHECK_ACCESS: -- access granted under OWNER class. 11-AUG-1993 15:28:46.98 MLIST_REVIEW: Sending review to: "Dennis R. Sherman" 11-AUG-1993 15:28:48.80 MLIST_REVIEW: Sent. 11-AUG-1993 15:28:51.38 All done with this entry. ============================= where we see MLIST_REMOVE. So any ideas what has happened, and how to fix it? -- Dennis R. Sherman Triangle Research Libraries Network dennis_sherman@unc.edu Univ. of North Carolina - Chapel Hill ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 21:12:04 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 19:11:56 PST From: "David Scott Cunningham, TRIUMF, 604 222-1047" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970E03.D875D240.2350@erich.triumf.ca> Subject: receipt acknowlegment Hello, Sorry if this one's already been discussed on this list, but, although I know the MX3.3 User's guide says there is no form of receipt acknowlegement, I'd like to know if maybe there's some sneeky logical name which can be defined to broadcast a message to a user when there mail goes into a FIN state. If there's not, I think it would be a good thing to have. Dave ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 23:02:09 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: receipt acknowlegment Message-ID: <1993Aug12.032505.22901@colorado.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 03:25:05 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <00970E03.D875D240.2350@erich.triumf.ca>, "David Scott Cunningham, TRIUMF, 604 222-1047" writes: >Sorry if this one's already been discussed on this list, but, although >I know the MX3.3 User's guide says there is no form of receipt acknowlegement, >I'd like to know if maybe there's some sneeky logical name which can be defined >to broadcast a message to a user when there mail goes into a FIN state. The MAILQUEUE.EXE program (in MX_EXE) will show a non-privileged user their mail jobs that haven't been sent yet -- sortof like a "MCP> SHOW QUEUE/USER=user" command. If you have SYSPRV enabled when you run MAILQUEUE.EXE, you see everyone's mail that hasn't been processed. In-Progress messages aren't displayed at all by MAILQUEUE.EXE. By default, the MX startup installs MAILQUEUE.EXE with the necessary privileges so non-privileged users can use it. MAILQUEUE.EXE is mentioned in one of the MX documentation files.... -d -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 23:33:10 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 23:30:44 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970E27.FFD97813.15299@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Help with MX rewriting BITNET addresses oxendine@pembvax1.pembroke.edu writes: > >After upgrading to MX 3.3 it seems to be scrambling my BITNET return address. >For instance, if I receive mail from NCSUVM.BITNET whichs also has and internet >address of NCSUVM.CC.NCSU.EDU, MX rewrites the return address and >NCSUVM.C.BITNET which also gets inserted into the VMSmail from address. Of >course this is not a legal address and replies to this message will bounce. >Anyone know why MX is doing this? I amd enclosing the Jnet interface trace log >and my config.mcp. > I haven't looked at the code yet to see if I can figure out why, but I did notice that NCSUVM.C is 8 characters, which is the maximum size for a BITNET node name. I'll try to check this out this week. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 11:14:38 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: FAQ please Date: 12 Aug 1993 23:14 SST Message-ID: <12AUG199323140619@vms2.iscs.nus.sg> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Could someone mail me the FAQ for this newsgroup and information on mx archives of articles, guides etc ...? Thanks a lot Paul leebp@iscs.nus.sg ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 12:45:19 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: FAQ please Message-ID: <1993Aug12.165243.23456@colorado.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 16:52:43 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <12AUG199323140619@vms2.iscs.nus.sg>, leebp@vms2.iscs.nus.sg (LEE BOON PENG) writes: > Could someone mail me the FAQ for this newsgroup and information >on mx archives of articles, guides etc ...? I don't believe their is a FAQ. However, the MX_ROOT:[CONTRIB] directory does contain some FAQ's and answers; if you'd like me to Email you the contents of MX V3.3's [CONTRIB] directory, let me know (by personal Email). MX is available via anonymous FTP from ftp.spc.edu, and via mail from fileserv@wkuvx1.bitnet. Sources are available from the same sites, as well. Archives of MX-List (vmsnet.mail.mx) are available via anonymous FTP from ftp.spc.edu, or from archives@wkuvx1.bitnet. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 15:16:58 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 15:13:36 CDT From: "E. Sezonov" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970EAB.B7906880.11106@mdacc.mda.uth.tmc.edu> signoff mx-list ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 20:38:45 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 20:38:28 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: sherman@trln.lib.unc.edu Message-ID: <00970ED9.19A72C4D.15577@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: problems with MLF writes: > >I'm all of a sudden having trouble with the mailing list processor, >not allowing me (as list owner) to add people to a mailing list. It >was working earlier this week, and isn't now. I've done nothing >intentional to my MX setup, and I don't even *think* I've done >anything unintentional. > I found the problem: >11-AUG-1993 15:30:28.75 LIST_CTRL_REQ: command is: add/nonotify > pcolar@trln.lib.unc.edu "Dave Pcolar" Your ADD command is not valid. The personal name comes *before* the address, which should be surrounded by angle brackets: ADD/NONOTIFY "Dave Pcolar" Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 21:37:56 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 21:37:34 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: oxendine@pembvax1.pembroke.edu Message-ID: <00970EE1.5B47B070.15599@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Help with MX rewriting BITNET addresses oxendine@pembvax1.pembroke.edu writes: > >After upgrading to MX 3.3 it seems to be scrambling my BITNET return address. >For instance, if I receive mail from NCSUVM.BITNET whichs also has and internet >address of NCSUVM.CC.NCSU.EDU, MX rewrites the return address and >NCSUVM.C.BITNET which also gets inserted into the VMSmail from address. Of >course this is not a legal address and replies to this message will bounce. >Anyone know why MX is doing this? I amd enclosing the Jnet interface trace log >and my config.mcp. > I haven't been able to verify *exactly* what's going wrong, but here's what it looks like is happening: >11-AUG-1993 10:02:36.64 BSMTP_IN: rewrote BITNET list server at NCSUVM (1.7f) > as BITNET list server at NCSUVM (1.7f) > <--- This is where the bad rewrite occurs. MX is parsing the address and coming up with NCSUVM.CC.NCSU.EDU as the node name. It then tries to get BITNET info for that node. At one point, the code converts the address to NCSUVM.C---at this point, it's *expecting* to have a BITNET node name, when in fact it has an Internet node name. Now, this should not cause a problem, because MX calls Jnet for node info, passing it the bad address. As far as I can tell, Jnet's routine is not returning an error for the invalid node name, so MX thinks it has real info for a real node and returns that to the code that tacks on the .BITNET. Voila---bad host name. This is going to take more research. I see what appears to be causing the problem, but I don't see how we get there. 8-( Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1993 09:35:48 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1993 09:35:26 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00970F45.A45EB489.15956@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: "MX rewriting BITNET addresses" semi-solved Terry figured out what was causing the problem with MX rewriting NCSUVM.CC.NCSU.EDU to NCSUVM.C.BITNET. He was using a default route with Jnet V3.6. When MX called Jnet to get the node info, Jnet had no route information at all, so it returned success (which I guess makes sense). Using full Jnet routes solves the problem for MX V3.3. For MX V3.4, I'll correct the code so that it at least verifies that the name is syntactically correct as a BITNET node name. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1993 15:25:59 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1993 09:39:37 EDT From: kenm@adhe.arknet.edu Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0097126A.E35F0E40.1067@adhe.arknet.edu> Subject: Automatic response ? Arkansas Department of Higher Education I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M Date: 08-17-1993 08:48am GMT From: KEN MCCOY KENM Dept: Information Services Tel No: 501-324-9300 FAX 501-324-9308 TO: Remote Addressee ( _mx-list@wkuvx1.bitnet ) Subject: Automatic response ? Under MX 3.3 is it possible to have MX automatically generate and return a mail receipt to the sender of a message. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1993 19:16:36 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1993 18:30:20 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <009712B5.0789A0F6.17565@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Automatic response ? kenm@adhe.arknet.edu writes: > > Under MX 3.3 is it possible to have MX automatically generate > and return a mail receipt to the sender of a message. > No, it's not. It is on the wish list, but that's the only place is it, currently. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1993 19:17:43 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1993 16:12:04 EDT From: kenm@adhe.arknet.edu Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <009712A1.B6588C00.1075@adhe.arknet.edu> Subject: auto response Arkansas Department of Higher Education I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M Date: 08-17-1993 04:11pm GMT From: KEN MCCOY KENM Dept: Information Services Tel No: 501-324-9300 FAX 501-324-9308 TO: Remote Addressee ( _mx-list@wkuvx1.bitnet ) Subject: auto response Under MX 3.3 is it possible to have MX automatically generate and return a mail receipt to the sender of a message. Thanks, Ken McCoy ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1993 15:29:36 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Automatic response ? Message-ID: <1993Aug18.144201.2102@dmc.com> From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 18 Aug 93 14:42:01 EDT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <0097126A.E35F0E40.1067@adhe.arknet.edu>, kenm@adhe.arknet.edu writes: > Under MX 3.3 is it possible to have MX automatically generate > and return a mail receipt to the sender of a message. Get a copy of deliver and roll your own. Send: SEND DELIVER QUIT to vmsnet-sources-serv@dmc.com or via FTP: machine: dmc.com directory: uucp_public:[000000.pub.vmsnet.sources.deliver] file: *.* -- Dick Munroe Internet: munroe@dmc.com Doyle, Munroe Consultants, Inc. UUCP: ...uunet!thehulk!munroe 267 Cox St. Office: (508) 568-1618 Hudson, Ma. 01749 USA FAX: (508) 562-1133 GET CONNECTED!!! Send mail to info@dmc.com to find out about DMConnection. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1993 22:21:58 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Upcoming NETLIB changes Message-ID: <1993Aug18.232614.25045@news.arc.nasa.gov> From: Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1993 23:26:14 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hi all, Since MX uses the NETLIB package to interface with the various TCP/IP packages, I thought I'd post this here to get some feedback. I will be making some changes to NETLIB in the not-too-distant future. One of the changes I intend to make is to support the use of NETLIB to write servers that can be "forked" off of an "inetd" type of master server. Now that UCX finally has such a thing, I thought forked server support would make NETLIB a little easier to use. However, doing so means dropping support for versions of UCX prior to 2.0. Is anyone out there still using UCX 1.3? How about 1.2? At the same time, and just to simplify things, I thought I would also drop support for CMU-Tek TCP/IP V6.4, and just support V6.5 or later. If you would object to NETLIB (and thus MX) dropping support for UCX 1.2, UCX 1.3, or CMU-Tek 6.4 in the next 3-6 months, please let me know. Thanks, -Matt -- Matthew Madison | madison@tgv.com | +1 408 457 5200 TGV, Inc. | 101 Cooper Street | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1993 09:54:16 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: To: MX-List@RPIECSVX.BITNET From: "Eric R. Rountree" Date: 19 Aug 1993 8:33:06 ADT Subject: SUBSCRIBE Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET SUBSCRIBE ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1993 09:49:44 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1993 11:35:04 +0300 From: syseng@BHUOB00.BITNET Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00971732.0292FC60.658@bhuob00> Subject: DECnet MX node Dear networker, I am using MX V3.3, with Jnet V3.6 on VAX/8550 under OpenVMS V5.5-2. I connected another VAX/780 through DECnet, I installed MX V3.3 on it but I couldn't use a different address to that node as it is a DECnet node only, I defined a DECnet object with proxy, DNSMTP_SRV account, I tried to use the DECnet domain address and rewrite rules but no response. So I am using the same VAX/8550 address and setting forward addresses to VAX/780 through VMS Mail. Can any one tell me what is the complete configuration for MX DECnet node ? Thanks in advance. Nader Nasry ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1993 09:50:38 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Upcoming NETLIB changes Message-ID: <009715F6.9E965270@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> From: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1993 04:57:25 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Aug18.232614.25045@news.arc.nasa.gov>, madison@tgv.com (Matt Madison) writes: >Hi all, > >Since MX uses the NETLIB package to interface with the various TCP/IP >packages, I thought I'd post this here to get some feedback. > >I will be making some changes to NETLIB in the not-too-distant future. >One of the changes I intend to make is to support the use of NETLIB >to write servers that can be "forked" off of an "inetd" type of master >server. Now that UCX finally has such a thing, I thought forked server >support would make NETLIB a little easier to use. However, doing so >means dropping support for versions of UCX prior to 2.0. Is anyone out >there still using UCX 1.3? How about 1.2? > >At the same time, and just to simplify things, I thought I would also >drop support for CMU-Tek TCP/IP V6.4, and just support V6.5 or later. > >If you would object to NETLIB (and thus MX) dropping support for UCX 1.2, >UCX 1.3, or CMU-Tek 6.4 in the next 3-6 months, please let me know. > >Thanks, >-Matt >-- >Matthew Madison | madison@tgv.com | +1 408 457 5200 >TGV, Inc. | 101 Cooper Street | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA Matt, I see no problem in dropping support for CMU 6.4. I believe most of the customer base has migrated to 6.5 or 6.6. -HWM ---------- Henry W. Miller Assistant Systems and Network Manager U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Mid Pacific Region 2800 Cottage Way MP1130 Sacramento, CA 95825 (916) 978-5108 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1993 16:26:19 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: itopsjc@meteor.syscon.hii.com Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Making the transition from MultiNet SMTP to MX Message-ID: <1993Aug23.164044.23@meteor> Date: 23 Aug 93 16:40:44 -0700 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET We've just recently switched Internet mail handlers from SMTP, provided with MultiNet, to the freeware package, MX. Our users are used to sending mail out over the Internet using SMTP. Does anyone have any recommendations on how we can make the transition easier for them? As a temporary solution, I've copied MX_EXE:MX_MAILSHR.EXE to SYS$LIBRARY:SMTP_MAILSHR.EXE and INSTALLed it /OPEN/SHARED/HEADER_RES. This appears to work okay for our purposes, but is there a better way? Also, where are MX_MAILSHR and SMTP_MAILSHR normally kept? Neither are in SYS$LIBRARY, where MAIL appears to be looking. Of course, there's no documentation on foreign mail transports, so I can't just look it up... Thanks in advance to all who respond. -- Steve Coile SYSCON Corporation SCOILE@SYSCON.HII.COM 1000 Thomas Jefferson St., NW (202) 342-4096 Washington, DC 20007 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1993 18:39:34 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1993 18:38:25 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: itopsjc@meteor.syscon.hii.com Message-ID: <0097176D.26B42ED5.20199@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Making the transition from MultiNet SMTP to MX itopsjc@meteor.syscon.hii.com writes: > >As a temporary solution, I've copied MX_EXE:MX_MAILSHR.EXE to >SYS$LIBRARY:SMTP_MAILSHR.EXE and INSTALLed it /OPEN/SHARED/HEADER_RES. This >appears to work okay for our purposes, but is there a better way? > Define the logical MAIL$PROTOCOL_SMTP to point to MX: $ define/system/exec mail$protocol_smtp mx_mailshr >Also, where are MX_MAILSHR and SMTP_MAILSHR normally kept? Neither are in >SYS$LIBRARY, where MAIL appears to be looking. Of course, there's no >documentation on foreign mail transports, so I can't just look it up... > MX_MAILSHR.EXE is in MX_EXE:, along with all of MX's executables. A logical MX_MAILSHR points to that file. MultiNet's SMTP_MAILSHR lives in MULTINET:; again, a logical is used to point to it. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1993 18:43:04 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1993 18:42:17 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0097176D.B175E26B.20201@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: DECnet MX node syseng@BHUOB00.BITNET writes: > > I am using MX V3.3, with Jnet V3.6 on VAX/8550 under OpenVMS V5.5-2. > I connected another VAX/780 through DECnet, I installed MX V3.3 > on it but I couldn't use a different address to that node as it is > a DECnet node only, I defined a DECnet object with proxy, > DNSMTP_SRV account, I tried to use the DECnet domain address and > rewrite rules but no response. So I am using the same VAX/8550 > address and setting forward addresses to VAX/780 through VMS Mail. > > Can any one tell me what is the complete configuration for > MX DECnet node ? > Following the instructions in the MX installation guide, section 3.8.1, should be all you need to do. What's failing? Is the Router not handing messages to the DNSMTP agent? Try defining MX_ROUTER_DEBUG to see where they're going. Is the remote login failing? Try enabling LOGFAIL alarms and check OPCOM logs. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 02:29:39 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1993 21:00:30 -0700 From: "Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: rharwood@Data.Basix.COM Message-ID: <00971781.003FA4A0.4251@Data.Basix.COM> Subject: Alpha/digital pager support? There's a thread on vmsnet.sysmgt about being able to send messages to Alpha/digital pagers (NOT, as one person put it, a DIGITAL machine running Alpha code, but those beepers that have text capability). The response to one inquiry was "PMDF does it". Is this something MX can easily do? Are there other (public-domain) solutions to this problem? Ray ----- Ray Harwood | Data Basix | Adjunct Faculty, East Campus, Voice: (602)721-1988 | PO Box 18324 | Pima Community College FAX: (602)721-7240 | Tucson, AZ 85731 | Instructor in Ada and Pascal rharwood@Data.Basix.COM | Info@Data.Basix.COM | rharwood@east.pima.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 02:52:15 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Making the transition from MultiNet SMTP to MX Message-ID: <1993Aug23.223719.16798@colorado.edu> From: Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1993 22:37:19 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Aug23.164044.23@meteor>, itopsjc@meteor.syscon.hii.com writes: >We've just recently switched Internet mail handlers from SMTP, provided with >MultiNet, to the freeware package, MX. Our users are used to sending mail out >over the Internet using SMTP. Does anyone have any recommendations on how we >can make the transition easier for them? > >As a temporary solution, I've copied MX_EXE:MX_MAILSHR.EXE to >SYS$LIBRARY:SMTP_MAILSHR.EXE and INSTALLed it /OPEN/SHARED/HEADER_RES. This >appears to work okay for our purposes, but is there a better way? From MX_DOC:MGMT_GUIDE.TXT: 5.1.1 VMS MAIL Protocol Prefix MX by default uses the foreign protocol prefix MX% when interfacing with VMS Mail. You can define alternate foreign protocol prefixes for use with MX, to provide a migration path for users from other mail systems to MX. MX will correctly handle the following prefixes: SMTP%, WINS%, IN%, JNET%, IHMF%, VN%, ST%, INET%, and UUCP%.[1] To set up one of these alternate prefixes in VMS Mail, define the logical name MAIL$PROTOCOL_prefix: $ DEFINE/SYSTEM/EXEC MAIL$PROTOCOL_prefix MX_MAILSHR where prefix is one of the above-mentioned prefixes, without the trailing percent sign. Note that incoming mail from MX will always bear the MX% prefix. If you wish to use another prefix for incoming mail, you can define the logical name MX_ PROTOCOL_PREFIX: $ DEFINE/SYSTEM/EXEC MX_PROTOCOL_PREFIX prefix% where prefix is one of the above-mentioned prefixes, with the trailing percent sign. The default prefix MX% is the recommended prefix. ________________ [1] You should not re-direct the UUCP% prefix to MX if you are using MX with UUCP. Doing so will prevent messages from being delivered to UUCP from MX, since MX uses the UUCP_MAILSHR interface (the same as UUCP% does). If you want, you could add the logicals to MX's startup by carefully editing MX_ROOT:[000000]MX_LOGICALS.DAT. Personally, I'd leave incoming mail so MX% is used, if for nothing more than to gently remind people that things have changed. >Also, where are MX_MAILSHR and SMTP_MAILSHR normally kept? Neither are in >SYS$LIBRARY, where MAIL appears to be looking. Of course, there's no >documentation on foreign mail transports, so I can't just look it up... $ SHOW LOGICAL/FULL MX_MAILSHR "MX_MAILSHR" [exec] = "MX_EXE:MX_MAILSHR" (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE) In the absence of a logical, Mail will look in SYS$SHARE (SYS$LIBRARY). [followups to vmsnet.mail.mx.] -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 06:45:10 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 06:44:20 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <009717D2.8FD56351.20276@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Alpha/digital pager support? "Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" writes: > >There's a thread on vmsnet.sysmgt about being able to send messages to >Alpha/digital pagers (NOT, as one person put it, a DIGITAL machine running >Alpha code, but those beepers that have text capability). The response to one >inquiry was "PMDF does it". Is this something MX can easily do? Are there >other (public-domain) solutions to this problem? > As far as MX goes, if you had a program to do the dialing, etc., then MX's SITE interface could be used to implement such a thing. But MX does not specifically include that capability. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 09:55:04 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 14:44 GMT From: "UK TeX Archive Manager " Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-LIST%BITNET.WKUVX1@NSFNET-RELAY.AC.UK Subject: Control over RFC-822 headers: what's possible? What *exactly* can one arrange to insert amongst the RFC-822 headers of SMTP mail sent by MX? I ask because, although CBS_Mailshr generates very few headers itself, and allows me no control whatsoever over them, nor any capability for adding other ones, the alternative Janet_Mailshr *does* allow me to add any header lines I want to: but I can't fool with the Date, From and To lines. Currently, I am reliant upon CBS_Mailshr and/or Janet_Mailshr for handling Colour Book traffic (specifically Grey_Book Mail), which is presently a requirement for Janet sites. My home-grown mailing list server relies upon an admixture of Deliver_Mailshr, some DCL command procedures, and Janet_Mailshr to handle the explosion of lists (with, in some cases, facilities not provided by MLF). However, it now looks as though there may be a rapid demise of Grey-Book Mail (DEC have announced that it will not be supported after October, despite having earlier given an assurance that they would provide support until the transition to OSI standards had been achieved: moreover, they have taken money from hundreds of UK sites for more than three years for ``support'', never done anything about fixing the errors, promised to provide a new release of the software [which the developers have actually had ready for release for over two years], not delivered [and now say that they never will]. The UK community [or at least some of them] are seriously thinking of suing DEC for a flagrant breach of contract, for obtaining monies under false pretences.) So I may end up supporting all mailing through TCP/IP protocols (quite frankly, not before time:-). However, there's some neat rewriting of message headers that I'd like to continue to generate, so I'd like flexible control over the headers: the MX manuals don't appear to suggest that there is any such capability, except whatever deterministic algorithms have been wired into the MLF system. Talking of generating particular RFC-822 headers, would it be possible for MX to generate an In-Reply-To automatically; this assumes, of course, that a foreign mail protocol knows that it's been invoked through DECmail's REPLY command in preference to SEND --- does it? Brian {Hamilton Kelly} (BH29) System Manager for the (VMS) UK TeX Archive at Aston University ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 12:22:43 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 10:16:48 -0700 From: "Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: rharwood@Data.Basix.COM Message-ID: <009717F0.3E189F60.4304@Data.Basix.COM> Subject: RE: Control over RFC-822 headers: what's possible? > What *exactly* can one arrange to insert amongst the RFC-822 headers of SMTP > mail sent by MX? I ask because, although CBS_Mailshr generates very few > headers itself, and allows me no control whatsoever over them, nor any > capability for adding other ones, the alternative Janet_Mailshr *does* allow me > to add any header lines I want to: but I can't fool with the Date, From and To > lines. I too am interested in something along this line. For example, the ability to put an Organization: line, and others allowed by the RFC. (I have received EMail from someone with an "X-Fruit-of-the-Day: Bananas" header before, but I'm looking for more utilitarian purposes!) Obviously, an un-privileged user should not be able to generate bogus From: headers nor insert Received-From: headers, for example. But the capability must exist, since MLFAKE can do it. Hunter will probably point out [and rightfully so!] that it can be done, if someone will just write the code for it. ;)} My question is more like "can it be done already or with very minor effort?" Regards, Ray ----- Ray Harwood | Data Basix | Adjunct Faculty, East Campus, Voice: (602)721-1988 | PO Box 18324 | Pima Community College FAX: (602)721-7240 | Tucson, AZ 85731 | Instructor in Ada and Pascal rharwood@Data.Basix.COM | Info@Data.Basix.COM | rharwood@east.pima.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 12:38:51 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: RE: Alpha/digital pager support? Message-ID: <1993Aug24.164844.21133@colorado.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 16:48:44 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <009717D2.8FD56351.20276@WKUVX1.BITNET>, "Hunter Goatley, WKU" writes: >"Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" writes: >> >>There's a thread on vmsnet.sysmgt about being able to send messages to >>Alpha/digital pagers (NOT, as one person put it, a DIGITAL machine running >>Alpha code, but those beepers that have text capability). The response to one >>inquiry was "PMDF does it". Is this something MX can easily do? Are there >>other (public-domain) solutions to this problem? >> >As far as MX goes, if you had a program to do the dialing, etc., then >MX's SITE interface could be used to implement such a thing. But MX >does not specifically include that capability. You can also get DELIVER (written by Ned Freed of Innosoft (makers of PMDF)) via anonymous FTP to INNOSOFT.COM in the [.DELIVER] directory; DELIVER is also available elsewhere. This free utility allows any arbitrary .COM file to be executed when mail is received by a certain username. This allows you to setup something so mail sent to the user PAGER (which has mail forwarded for DELIVER%PAGER) will execute a .COM file called PAGER.COM which parses the Email message and executs some sortof .EXE which dials the appropriate phone number and talks with the paging company's computer. The advantage of using this method over using MX's SITE agent is you won't slow down delivery of other MX mail (every message going through MX would go through the SITE agent -- no big deal if your SITE agent quickly decides it isn't interested in that mail message). The disadvantage is you have to install DELIVER (which requires installing MAIL and MAIL_SERVER with elevated privileges). DELIVER also allows you to setup vacation-like programs (to inform people you're not going to answer Email). [end of DELIVER sales-pitch.] -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 13:17:11 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 13:15:51 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00971809.417F7142.20560@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Control over RFC-822 headers: what's possible? "Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" writes: > >> What *exactly* can one arrange to insert amongst the RFC-822 headers of SMTP >> mail sent by MX? I ask because, although CBS_Mailshr generates very few >> headers itself, and allows me no control whatsoever over them, nor any >> capability for adding other ones, the alternative Janet_Mailshr *does* allow > me >> to add any header lines I want to: but I can't fool with the Date, From and To >> lines. > >I too am interested in something along this line. For example, the ability to >put an Organization: line, and others allowed by the RFC. (I have received >EMail from someone with an "X-Fruit-of-the-Day: Bananas" header before, but I'm >looking for more utilitarian purposes!) > >Obviously, an un-privileged user should not be able to generate bogus From: >headers nor insert Received-From: headers, for example. But the capability >must exist, since MLFAKE can do it. > >Hunter will probably point out [and rightfully so!] that it can be done, if >someone will just write the code for it. ;)} My question is more like "can it >be done already or with very minor effort?" > I was going to do this in MX V3.3, but you can't do wildcard searches on logical names. I was planning to search for something like MX-X-* and insert whatever it found. I gave it up due to lack of time when getting MX V3.3 ready to go. That ability will be in MX V3.4, though I don't have a time frame for that yet. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 13:21:25 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 13:20:39 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00971809.ED4ECC89.20568@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Alpha/digital pager support? writes: > >You can also get DELIVER (written by Ned Freed of Innosoft (makers of >PMDF)) via anonymous FTP to INNOSOFT.COM in the [.DELIVER] directory; [...] >The advantage of using this method over using MX's SITE agent is you won't >slow down delivery of other MX mail (every message going through MX would >go through the SITE agent -- no big deal if your SITE agent quickly decides >it isn't interested in that mail message). ???? The only messages that would go to SITE are those that match the defined PATH for SITE. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 14:23:41 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 19:14 GMT From: "UK TeX Archive Manager " Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-LIST%BITNET.WKUVX1@NSFNET-RELAY.AC.UK Subject: RE: Control over RFC-822 headers: what's possible? In message <00971809.417F7142.20560@WKUVX1.BITNET> dated Tue, 24 Aug 1993 13:15:51 CST, "Hunter Goatley, WKU" wrote: > I was going to do this in MX V3.3, but you can't do wildcard searches > on logical names. I was planning to search for something like MX-X-* > and insert whatever it found. I gave it up due to lack of time when > getting MX V3.3 ready to go. That ability will be in MX V3.4, though > I don't have a time frame for that yet. Well, it's under consideration, which is the important thing :-) But I'm afraid I wasn't just thinking of X-something headers; there's some others defined in the standard that I'd like to set myself. As Dan Wing pointed out, certain headers shouldn't be capable of being changed by an unprivileged user (From, etc). On the other hand, I'd like for certain trusted, but unprivileged users (in particular, I'm thinking of my LIST_SERVER account) to be able to fake things like those too. So I reckon what's needed there is a rights list identifier that can be granted as necessary by system management. To save yourself all the hassle of trying to translate logical names with wildcards in them (!), how about adopting the approach of Janet_Mailshr? That uses a number of logicals to control operation. In particular, the logical MAIL$FLAGS (OK, OK, this dates back to the dim and distant days before DEC told us not to put dollars in our non-DEC logicals:-) is a multi-valued logical name (as I prefer to call, especially in non-file oriented applications, those logicals that DEC call search lists). The values are taken from a list of keywords: if a particular keyword is present it results in the corresponding header line being generated --- the content of the header line is determined here by the code of Janet_Mailshr. Here's an extract from the description of MAIL$FLAGS: MAIL$FLAGS may now translate to a list of strings, rather than a numeric value: currently acceptable strings, and their meaning, are shewn below. DEBUG display internal control blocks in receipt of ECHO display simulated POST or real TRANSFER command OPTIONS take RFC-822 options from file or SYS$COMMAND: INFORM exactly as in POST /INFORM or TRANSFER /INFORM TRACE display internal control blocks in real-time PMDF expand PMDF-style escape sequences (\s, \d & \\) PSS use TRANSFER rather than POST for all messages SENDER insert RFC-822 'Sender: ' field REPLY-TO insert RFC-822 'Reply-to: ' field MESSAGE-ID insert RFC-822 'Message-id: ' field ACKNOWLEDGE-TO insert RFC-822 'Acknowledge-to: ' field MAILER insert RFC-822 'Mailer: ' field ORIGINALLY-TO insert RFC-822 'Originally-to: ' field ORIGINALLY-FROM insert RFC-822 'Originally-from: ' field ACTUALLY-TO insert RFC-822 'Actually-to: ' field (It should be noted that the last three of these are not specified in RFC-822 and are therefore "Extension fields", subject to pre-emption. Originally-To is roughly analogous to the X-VMS-To: line. Originally-From allowed us in the UK to achieve the effect of having a From and Resent-From for the mailing list expander: the mailer itself *insists* upon inserting the latter's identity for the From header, whereas we'd have preferred to reatin the original From and insert Resent-From for the relay --- Originally-From at least allowed us to promulgate the identity of the original poster. [All lists insert a suitable Reply-To, to get the proper VMSmail From header]. Finally, Actually-To allowed recipients to see their own names because of the funny relay-based routing used with Janet sometimes obscured this in the To header!) Note that not all of the MAIL$FLAGS result in the insertion of RFC-822 headers; some merely control Janet_Mailshr's behaviour (e.g., whether it understands `\d' to stand for `"', a la PMDF), or provide debugging information. The Reply-To inserted if the REPLY-TO string is present contains the VMSmail personal name, per se; that's why my personal name also includes my e-mail address enclosed in diamond brackets. You'll see from the headers on this that plain common-or-garden CBS_Mailshr uses the personal name in the From header, but enclosed in quotes, and then adds on its own assessment of the e-mail address, also enclosed in diamond brackets. (This actually upsets some mailers, such as the UUPC freeware that runs on PCs, because they can't correctly parse the quoted string, and end up grabbing part of the diamond-bracketed expression inside, and part outside. Ho hum!) The other facility is to place additional RFC-822 header lines into a file; define the logical MAIL$RFC_OPTIONS to point to this file, and then fire up Janet_Mailshr with the keyword OPTIONS amongst the MAIL$FLAGS. (Actually, if OPTIONS is present, J-M firstly looks for MAIL$_OPTIONS; it does this because of the implicit relaying that is provided wherein, say, mail to EARN%"someone@somesite" gets sent firstly to whatever is defined as MAIL$EARN_GATEWAY [uk.ac.earn-relay], obviously dependent upon MAIL$PROTOCOL_EARN being also defined as JANET_MAILSHR. Only if a domain specific options file isn't found does it use MAIL$RFC_OPTIONS. If neither file is found, the options are prompted for interactively. Yeuchh!) The SEND_TELEGRAPH interface provided by DEC's CBS insists upon inserting the Date, From and To headers, but anything else one wants (in particular, Reply-To) can be inserted using the OPTIONS facility. Now if, with some future implementation of MX, privileged users could override the other three too, that would be even better; although I wouldn't want to have to construct a syntactically-correct RFC-822 Date or Resent-Date manually --- if I'm retaining the original, I'd like some way of generating the Resent-Date automatically, thank you :-))) Anyway, I hope this provides you with food for thought: there is, after all, more than one way of skinning a cat! Brian {Hamilton Kelly} (BH29) System Manager for the (VMS) UK TeX Archive at Aston University ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 15:12:07 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Control over RFC-822 headers: what's possible? Message-ID: <1993Aug24.191855.25258@colorado.edu> From: Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 19:18:55 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <15086322@MVB.SAIC.COM>, "UK TeX Archive Manager " writes: >What *exactly* can one arrange to insert amongst the RFC-822 headers of SMTP >mail sent by MX? I ask because, although CBS_Mailshr generates very few >headers itself, and allows me no control whatsoever over them, nor any >capability for adding other ones, the alternative Janet_Mailshr *does* allow me >to add any header lines I want to: but I can't fool with the Date, From and To >lines. The rewriting that is built into MX allows you to rewrite every recipient (but not source) address using pattern-matching; see the Management Guide (MX_DOC:MGMT_GUIDE.TXT) for more information. The SITE agent of MX allows you to intercept every message going through MX; you should be able to do any sortof tweaking you need. See the MX programmer guide (MX_DOC:PROG_GUIDE.TXT) for examples and documentation. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 16:13:49 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: Control over RFC-822 headers: what's possible? Message-ID: <199308241931.AA22673@desert.ihep.su> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 23:31:34 +0400 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET UK TeX Archive Manager (system@uk.ac.texSYSTEM@TEX.AC.UK) wrote: : What *exactly* can one arrange to insert amongst the RFC-822 headers of SMTP : mail sent by MX? I ask because, although CBS_Mailshr generates very few : headers itself, and allows me no control whatsoever over them, nor any : capability for adding other ones, the alternative Janet_Mailshr *does* allow me : to add any header lines I want to: but I can't fool with the Date, From and To : lines. A privileged user may use MX_SITE_IN program to send a message with arbitrary headers. The program gets three parameters: $MX_SITE_IN msg-file addr-file [sender] "msg-file" is file with the message in RFC822 format. "addr-file" - file with line-by-line list of recipient adrresses enclosed in angle brackets. optional "sender" is again enclosed into angle brackets sender address. Also you may try to install the program with privileges. See also MX_DOC:PROG_GUIDE.TXT. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 17:07:26 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 24 Aug 1993 18:03:27 -0400 (EDT) From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Control over RFC-822 headers: what's possible? To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: SYSTEM@TEX.AC.UK, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <00971831.6EB30840.20818@garnet.nist.gov> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT > What *exactly* can one arrange to insert amongst the RFC-822 headers of > SMTP mail sent by MX? > I too am interested in something along this line. For example, the > ability to put an Organization: line, and others allowed by the RFC. (I > have received EMail from someone with an "X-Fruit-of-the-Day: Bananas" > header before, but I'm looking for more utilitarian purposes!) If you define a path to SITE, rather than to SMTP (or to some other delivery agent), you can have a Command File run programs (such as the standard EDT editor) to modify your EMail message -- including headers -- anyway you want to. As an example of the kind of things you can do, here's an example out of my MX_DEVICE:[MX.EXE]SITE_DELIVER.COM file: $! $! Modify contents of msg-file (P3) to change "Reply-To:" to <> $! $ DEFINE/USER_MODE SYS$OUTPUT NL: $ SEARCH 'P2' "X-ListName:" $ IF ($SEVERITY .EQ. 3) THEN GOTO NOT_FROM_MAILING_LIST $ DEFINE/USER_MODE SYS$OUTPUT NL: $ EDIT/EDT/COMMAND=MX_ROOT:[SITE]CHANGE_P2_LIST.DAT 'P2' $ GOTO FINISH_P2 $ NOT_FROM_MAILING_LIST: $ DEFINE/USER_MODE SYS$OUTPUT NL: $ SEARCH 'P2' "Reply-To:" $ IF ($SEVERITY .EQ. 3) THEN GOTO NO_REPLY_TO $ DEFINE/USER_MODE SYS$OUTPUT NL: $ EDIT/EDT/COMMAND=MX_ROOT:[SITE]CHANGE_P2_NOLIST.DAT 'P2' $ GOTO FINISH_P2 $ NO_REPLY_TO: $ DEFINE/USER_MODE SYS$OUTPUT NL: $ EDIT/EDT/COMMAND=MX_ROOT:[SITE]CHANGE_P2_NOREPLY.DAT 'P2' $ FINISH_P2: $ NEW_P2 = F$PARSE(";2",P2) $! $! Send processed file on its way $! $ MX_ENTER := $MX_EXE:MX_SITE_IN $ MX_ENTER 'NEW_P2' 'P3' "" $ DELETE 'NEW_P2' $ EXIT 1 where MX_ROOT:[SITE]CHANGE_P2_LIST.DAT contains: REPLACE "Reply-To: ";Reply-To: <> INSERT END; FIND 1 COPY "X-ListName:" to END EXIT where MX_ROOT:[SITE]CHANGE_P2_NOLIST.DAT contains: FIND "Reply-To: " DELETE . INSERT .;Reply-To: <> EXIT where MX_ROOT:[SITE]CHANGE_P2_NOREPLY.DAT contains: EXIT It is also possible to generate editor commands on the fly: $ OPEN/WRITE CMDFILE SCRATCH_DIR:EDITORCMD.DAT $ Substi = "SUBSTITUTE/SomeFixedString/" + SomeSymbol + "/ 1 THRU 100" $ WRITE CMDFILE Substi $ WRITE CMDFILE "EXIT" $ CLOSE CMDFILE $ EDIT/EDT/COMMAND=SCRATCH_DIR:EDITORCMD.DAT filename.ext $ DELETE SCRATCH_DIR:EDITORCMD.DAT; I'm sure the experts will know better ways to do these things; but with a few such tricks you can hack most anything you need. If efficiency matters, you can write your own programs to process the text. - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 18:40:35 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Control over RFC-822 headers: what's possible? Message-ID: <1993Aug24.215921.1221@colorado.edu> From: Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 21:59:21 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <009717F0.3E189F60.4304@Data.Basix.COM>, "Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" writes: >Hunter will probably point out [and rightfully so!] that it can be done, if >someone will just write the code for it. ;)} My question is more like "can it >be done already or with very minor effort?" The SITE agent seems to allow a .COM file to be spawned (per message), so it would "seem" that you could write a DCL haque to do it. It'd be simple. Simply inefficient, but simple. Hunter or Matt: would/could that work? -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 19:01:09 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Alpha/digital pager support? Message-ID: <1993Aug24.230754.4474@colorado.edu> From: Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 23:07:54 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <00971809.ED4ECC89.20568@WKUVX1.BITNET>, "Hunter Goatley, WKU" writes: >???? The only messages that would go to SITE are those that match the >defined PATH for SITE. Ok, so I'm an idiot sometimes... Just sometimes (quit laughing out there). -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 21:33:38 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: RE: Control over RFC-822 headers: what's possible? Message-ID: <1993Aug25.014033.10686@colorado.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 01:40:33 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET [long, please-redeem-me post] In article <15092457@MVB.SAIC.COM>, "UK TeX Archive Manager " writes: >Well, it's under consideration, which is the important thing :-) > >But I'm afraid I wasn't just thinking of X-something headers; there's some >others defined in the standard that I'd like to set myself. As Dan Wing >pointed out, certain headers shouldn't be capable of being changed by an >unprivileged user (From, etc). On the other hand, I'd like for certain >trusted, but unprivileged users (in particular, I'm thinking of my LIST_SERVER >account) to be able to fake things like those too. So I reckon what's needed >there is a rights list identifier that can be granted as necessary by system >management. [...] Many mailers, notably PMDF (and I think Multinet) on the VAX platform allow a non-privileged user to specify the From: address; if this is done, PMDF inserts a Sender: header to indicate the real sender of the message. This has some useful applications such as in the oft-mentioned-but-doesn't- happen-much case of a secretary sending a message for his boss. >In particular, the logical MAIL$FLAGS (OK, OK, this dates back to the dim and >distant days before DEC told us not to put dollars in our non-DEC logicals:-) >is a multi-valued logical name (as I prefer to call, especially in non-file >oriented applications, those logicals that DEC call search lists). The values >are taken from a list of keywords: if a particular keyword is present it >results in the corresponding header line being generated --- the content of the >header line is determined here by the code of Janet_Mailshr. [...] According to HELP, the equivalence-name has a limit of 255 characters, which really doesn't sound like enough to cover "everything" for everyone... Personally, I'd go for something like: MX_ADDITIONAL_HEADER_1 MX_ADDITIONAL_HEADER_2 MX_ADDITIONAL_HEADER_3 which could replace any MX-defined header if they are defined executive mode, and, if a user wants to, they can specify any X- header, with some (supervisor mode) logicals like: MX_X_HEADER_1 MX_X_HEADER_2 MX_X_HEADER_3 as soon as the logical name translation failed, you'd be done (sortof like the HLP$LIBRARY_nn logical). ... at least that's MY two cents, even if it ain't worth two cents. The idea of using an identifier to allow certain users to specify "privileged" stuff is interesting, though, but read on: There is a doubly-undocumented feature of MX (still works in MX version V3.3). Digital doesn't document SEND/FOREIGN/TYPE=n, and the MX documentation only mentions it in the V3.2 release notes: From the MX V3.2 release notes: 11 MX_MAILSHR now includes the ability to resend SMTP files using the VMS Mail command SEND/FOREIGN/TYPE=1. The user must have the privilege LOG_IO enabled. When a file is mailed in this manner, the lines in the file before the first blank line are considered to be SMTP headers that are merged with the SMTP headers generated by MX_MAILSHR. The header lines in the file take precedence over the MX-generated headers. The new message includes a new ``Sender:'' line indicating that the message had been resent. This feature is currently undocumented other than this description. This feature can be helpful to mailing list owners who want to post a message to a list on behalf of another user. The easiest way to forward such a file is to use EXTRACT/NOHEADER to extract a message to a text file, then use SEND/FOREIGN/TYPE=1 to forward that file to the mailing list. Thanks to Guillaume Gege. You "might" be able to make a copy of MX_MAILSHR, install that copy with LOG_IO, and get this to work for a user that doesn't have LOG_IO privilege (but that depends on how the code checks for LOG_IO), and then put an appropriate ACL on the installed MX_MAILSHR image. ----- ALSO, *kludgy* DCL code that lets you add any header is attached. I changed my path look like: $ MCP SHOW PATH Domain-to-path mappings: Domain="*.HEADER", Path=Site, Route="HEADER" Domain="uh01.Colorado.EDU", Path=Local Domain="uh01", Path=Local ... and mail sent to dwing@uh01.colorado.edu.header gets the new headers. Ugly, but could be prettied up with some work -- it could slow down your message handling a lot, though, because all of this is in DCL.... -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ----- $! SITE_DELIVER.COM $! $! P1 = ROUTE (host name or value of /ROUTE qualifier from DEFINE PATH) $! P2 = file containing entire message (including RFC822 headers) $! P3 = file containing recipient's address $! P4 = originator's address $! $ $ ON WARNING THEN GOTO ERROR $ $! add the 'useful' headers; these end up going between some Received: $! headers -- it would be better to loop through the headers (and insert $! the 'useful' headers immediately prior to the first blank line), but, $! boy would that be slow -- also have to worry about DCL's handling of $! long lines (might be good to just give up trying to add headers if you $! get an error). $ TEMPFILE = "MX_ROOT:[SITE]MX_SITE_" + F$GETJPI(0,"PID") + ".TMP" $ CREATE 'TEMPFILE' Fruit-of-the-day: blue mango Organization: Society of lousy DCL coders X-Useful-Header-1: Life is better with X-Useful headers $ APPEND 'P2' 'TEMPFILE' $ $type 'p2' $ $! strip off the ".HEADER" trailing portion of the address so we don't $! have to see it again. $ OPEN/READ MX_SITE_FILE 'P3' $ READ MX_SITE_FILE RECORD $ CLOSE MX_SITE_FILE $ $ OPEN/WRITE MX_SITE_FILE 'F$PARSE(";",P3)' ! create new version $ WRITE MX_SITE_FILE RECORD - ".HEADER>" - ".header>" + ">" $ CLOSE MX_SITE_FILE $ $! for debugging $ WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "Old desintation address: ", RECORD $ WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "New destination address: ", RECORD - ".HEADER>" - ".header>" + ">" $ $! and stick it back into MX's queue $! note that our quoting of P4 a few lines down from here will cause $! problems if P4 itself contains quotes (like quoted DECnet addresses) $ MX_ENTER = "$MX_EXE:MX_SITE_IN" $ SET noON $ MX_ENTER 'TEMPFILE' 'F$PARSE(";",P3)' "''P4'" $ STATUS = $STATUS $ $ DELETE 'TEMPFILE';,'P3' $ $ EXIT STATUS $ $ERROR: $ EXIT %X02C ! %SYSTEM-F-ABORT, abort ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 22:25:59 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 22:25:06 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00971855.FC5CE967.20836@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Control over RFC-822 headers: what's possible? writes: > >[long, please-redeem-me post] > 8-) >Personally, I'd go for something like: > > MX_ADDITIONAL_HEADER_1 > MX_ADDITIONAL_HEADER_2 > MX_ADDITIONAL_HEADER_3 > Something along those lines is the only thing I've come up with so far using logicals. I've also thought about adding a command in MCP to define additional headers---possibly real (valid as per RFCs) headers, and let users define their own X- headers using: > MX_X_HEADER_1 > MX_X_HEADER_2 > MX_X_HEADER_3 [...] >... at least that's MY two cents, even if it ain't worth two cents. The idea I'd say it's at least worth that. 8-) >of using an identifier to allow certain users to specify "privileged" >stuff is interesting, though, but read on: > The real problem with most stuff like this is: how do you specify them? Logicals is about the only way, since MX depends on VMS Mail. Unless I add more MX commands like /SIGNATURE, which is doable, though I'm not sure how practical. Comments? >You "might" be able to make a copy of MX_MAILSHR, install that copy with >LOG_IO, and get this to work for a user that doesn't have LOG_IO privilege >(but that depends on how the code checks for LOG_IO), and then put an >appropriate ACL on the installed MX_MAILSHR image. > That should work---MX calls $SETPRV to get the privileges enabled. That'll be process privs + image privs. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 08:25:54 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Use MX-mail Message-ID: From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 11:36:26 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET If the general users want to use MX-MAIL. Then what privileges should he have? Or what kind of protection should MX-Mail directory set? Can you help me? ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 08:26:08 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 11:56:24 +0300 From: syseng@BHUOB00.BITNET Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <009718C7.5287D060.1582@bhuob00> Subject: MX Decnet node Dear Mr. Hunter Thanks for your reply, regarding the MX DECnet node configuration, The problem is that no registered address for the DECnet node. I mean that DECnet node sends messages to the other node which is a BITNET node and the BITNET node sends these messages to the destination address, but the messages couldn't return or replied. I expect the MX Router convert the DECnet address to a recognized address related to the registered BITNET node, for example, consider BHUOB00 as a bitnet node connected to ISA as DECnet node if I send a message from ISA to WKUVX1. What is the 'From :' address will be ? Could it be MX%"isa::syseng@bhuob00.bitnet" instead of MX%"syseng@isa.decnet" ? and How ? I hope I couild explain my idea, looking forward to your reply. Thanks in advance. Nader Nasry ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 08:35:16 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: Control over RFC-822 headers: what's possible? Message-ID: <199308251134.AA25241@desert.ihep.su> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 25 Aug 93 15:34:36 +0400 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hunter Goatley, WKU (goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET) wrote: : I was going to do this in MX V3.3, but you can't do wildcard searches : on logical names. I was planning to search for something like MX-X-* : and insert whatever it found. I gave it up due to lack of time when : getting MX V3.3 ready to go. That ability will be in MX V3.4, though : I don't have a time frame for that yet. What about the following approach : To enter arbitrary headres in the message user writes in the message body something like /HEADERS Newsgroups: comp.os.vms Return-receipt-to: me@here /END-OF-HEADERS Just like control of signature placement. Or even without "/end-of-headres" - blank line may be considered as terminator. Or even without "/headers" - if the message begins with something like in syntax to RFC822 header, then MX treats all the following upto blank line as set of headers. This approach may be usefull when message is been forwarded. -- Igor Mandrichenko. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 10:00:32 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 09:59:15 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <009718B6.F4C1AD67.21015@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: MX Decnet node syseng@BHUOB00.BITNET writes: > > What is the 'From :' address will be ? > Could it be MX%"isa::syseng@bhuob00.bitnet" instead of > MX%"syseng@isa.decnet" ? and How ? > I hope I couild explain my idea, looking forward to your reply. > The easiest thing to do would be to use an address like the following on ISA: To: node::mx%"user@domain" That would result in a return address like: MX%"'isa::syseng'@BHUB00.BITNET" BTW, you have something misconfigured because I'm getting bounced like the following: From: Local delivery agent Error-Text: Error in delivery to user UOB%"syseng@isa" %MAIL-E-ERRACTRNS, error activating transport UOB %LIB-E-ACTIMAGE, error activating image $1$DUA0:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.][SYSLIB]UOB_MAILSHR.EXE; -RMS-E-FNF, file not found -NONAME-W-NORMAL, normal successful completion Assuming this makes it to you.... Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 11:10:57 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Use MX-mail Message-ID: <25AUG93.16250919@enh.nist.gov> From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 21:25:09 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In a previous article, DINO@IMNV110 (3\4:6W) wrote: > If the general users want to use MX-MAIL. Then what privileges should > he have? Or what kind of protection should MX-Mail directory set? If you do a normal MX installation (using VMSINSTAL), no special privileges are required by any user to use it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 12:11:46 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 25 Aug 93 17:06 GMT From: "UK TeX Archive Manager " Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-LIST Subject: RE: Control over RFC-822 headers: what's possible? In message <1993Aug25.014033.10686@colorado.edu> dated Wed, 25 Aug 1993 01:40:33 GMT dwing wrote: > In article <15092457@MVB.SAIC.COM>, "UK TeX Archive Manager > " writes: > > >In particular, the logical MAIL$FLAGS (OK, OK, this dates back to the dim and > >distant days before DEC told us not to put dollars in our non-DEC logicals:-) > >is a multi-valued logical name (as I prefer to call, especially in non-file > >oriented applications, those logicals that DEC call search lists). The values > >are taken from a list of keywords: if a particular keyword is present it > >results in the corresponding header line being generated --- the content of the > >header line is determined here by the code of Janet_Mailshr. > [...] > > According to HELP, the equivalence-name has a limit of 255 characters, > which really doesn't sound like enough to cover "everything" for everyone... Whoa there! You didn't properly read my description (OK, it was long, and probably very boring. But there is *some* entropy:-) 1) MAIL$FLAGS doesn't contain the additional headers themselves; just an indication that some particular header shall be generated automatically. 2) Each such keyword is a *separate* equivalence name --- *each* equivalence name can be up to 255 characters. Here's a long logical that I've just (laboriously:-) defined: $ show logical long_logical "LONG_LOGICAL" = "This is a fairly long equivalence string" (LNM$PROCESS_TABLE) = "This is another equivalent string, even longer than the first" = "Here is yet another. This lot must be around 160 or so altogether" = "So if we add on another few equivalences, the total will easily" = "exceed the 255 character limit." = "Therefore, this final string ought to break the camel's back!" Taken altogether, those equivalence strings total 322 bytes. I guess there is some limit to the number of equivalence strings that one logical may specify; the DCL help doesn't appear to mention it. Thinking even more about it, if the logical (MX_EXTRA_HEADERS, say) doesn't need to include those sort of control flags that J-M put in MAIL$FLAGS, the equivalence strings could indeed just each be a single header line. Even more powerfully, one might have things such that, if the name of an official RFC-822 header was listed amongst these strings *without* a following colon, MX would automatically provide the appropriate text (and the colon). So one might say: DEFINE MX_EXTRA_HEADERS "From: Joe who isn't really ",- "Date: ''extracted_date_in_DCL_symbol'",- "RESENT-DATE","IN-REPLY-TO",- "Errors-To: <>" How's that grab you, bearing in mind that $TRNLNM can have tell one the number of equivalent strings present? > There is a doubly-undocumented feature of MX (still works in MX version > V3.3). Digital doesn't document SEND/FOREIGN/TYPE=n, and the MX > documentation only mentions it in the V3.2 release notes: Wow! Now that sounds really interesting. How about making it that the user has to possess a particular right identifier, rather than LOG_IO privilege (I'm assuming that it's MX that want's the indication of privilege, rather than some artefact of the ..._MAILSHR interface)? Talking of SEND/FOREIGN; does anyone happen to know whether the newer version of DELIVER_MAILSHR (the one that works through the FOLDER program) is any happier with foreign mail than the older one, which keels over whilst creating the intermediate file? Brian {Hamilton Kelly} (BH29) System Manager for the (VMS) UK TeX Archive at Aston University ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 12:38:38 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <930824202157> Date: Wed, 25 AUG 93 19:25 GMT From: rok.vidmar@uni-lj.si Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Alpha/digital pager support? To: MX-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Dan Wing writes: > [...] > > The advantage of using this method over using MX's SITE agent is you won't > slow down delivery of other MX mail (every message going through MX would > go through the SITE agent -- no big deal if your SITE agent quickly decides > it isn't interested in that mail message). The disadvantage is you have to > install DELIVER (which requires installing MAIL and MAIL_SERVER with elevated > privileges). > > [...] Not every message going through MX has to go trhough the SITE agent: just those explicitely routed to SITE. So no advantage at all. In fact, from Dan's description of DELIVER I believe there is no functional difference beetwen the two. I see no reason there should be any performance difference too. Regards, Rok Vidmar inet: rok.vidmar@uni-lj.si UCC, University of Ljubljana x.400: S=vidmar;G=rok;O=uni-lj;P=ac;A=mail;C=si Kardeljeva pl. 17 phone: +38 61 186439 61000 Ljubljana fax: +38 61 186358 Slovenia ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 19:31:56 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Path command in MLF? Message-ID: <1993Aug25.191945.2133@dmc.com> From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 25 Aug 93 19:19:45 EDT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET This has come up before but I don't remember the resolution. Is there any plan to put a PATH command into MLF for 3.4??? Dick -- Dick Munroe Internet: munroe@dmc.com Doyle, Munroe Consultants, Inc. UUCP: ...uunet!thehulk!munroe 267 Cox St. Office: (508) 568-1618 Hudson, Ma. 01749 USA FAX: (508) 562-1133 GET CONNECTED!!! Send mail to info@dmc.com to find out about DMConnection. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 20:10:31 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: Control over RFC-822 headers: what's possible? Message-ID: <1993Aug26.002804.27580@colorado.edu> From: Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 00:28:04 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <15118119@MVB.SAIC.COM>, "UK TeX Archive Manager " writes: >DEFINE MX_EXTRA_HEADERS "From: Joe who isn't really ",- > "Date: ''extracted_date_in_DCL_symbol'",- > "RESENT-DATE","IN-REPLY-TO",- > "Errors-To: <>" > >How's that grab you, bearing in mind that $TRNLNM can have tell one the number >of equivalent strings present? There's the 1024 character limit that you'll bump into. Using the same idea, though, you can use: MX_EXTRA_HEADERS_1 MX_EXTRA_HEADERS_2 MX_EXTRA_HEADERS_3 and never worry about running into problems with too-long logical names or too-long DCL lines. >Wow! Now that sounds really interesting. How about making it that the user >has to possess a particular right identifier, rather than LOG_IO privilege (I'm >assuming that it's MX that want's the indication of privilege, rather than some >artefact of the ..._MAILSHR interface)? MAILSHR is looking for the privilege. If you want a user to be able to use MAIL/FOREIGN/TYPE=1, then try this from a privileged account: $ COPY MX_EXE:MAILSHR.EXE MX_EXE:MAILSHR_HEADERS.EXE $ INSTALL MX_EXE:MAILSHR_HEADERS.EXE/PRIVILEGE=LOG_IO $ DEFINE/SYSTEM/EXECUTIVE MX_HEADERS_MAILSHR MX_EXE:MAILSHR_HEADERS $ MCR AUTHORIZE GRANT/ID MODIFY_MX_HEADERS username EXIT $ Then, the non-privileged "username" user could: $ MAIL/FOREIGN/TYPE=1 filename MX_HEADERS%"""user@host""" ^^^^^^^^^^ this causes activation of the file we installed (above) with the LOG_IO privilege. >Talking of SEND/FOREIGN; does anyone happen to know whether the newer version >of DELIVER_MAILSHR (the one that works through the FOLDER program) is any >happier with foreign mail than the older one, which keels over whilst creating >the intermediate file? I would "assume" that it could handle it better than before, only because PMDF does /FOREIGN, so their public version of DELIVER might be able to handle it.... Newest version is probably available via anonymous FTP directly from innosoft.com. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 21:50:08 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: Path command in MLF? Message-ID: <1993Aug26.011557.29377@colorado.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 01:15:57 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Aug25.191945.2133@dmc.com>, munroe@dmc.com (Dick Munroe) writes: >This has come up before but I don't remember the resolution. > >Is there any plan to put a PATH command into MLF for 3.4??? Well, there's an ADDRESS command, which might do what you want: ADDRESS provides the user with the ability to specify a valid RFC822-compliant e-mail address to which any FileServ output is to be sent. Normally, any files requested from FileServ are sent to the address in the ``Reply-To:'' or ``From:'' lines in the message headers. However, addresses are sometimes corrupted by gateways through which the message passes, resulting in an invalid return address. File server users can use the ADDRESS command to provide a valid alternate to the ``From:'' address. -dan -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 21:54:05 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 21:53:16 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0097191A.B41F10B5.21515@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Path command in MLF? writes: > >This has come up before but I don't remember the resolution. > >Is there any plan to put a PATH command into MLF for 3.4??? > V3.3 includes an ADDRESS command for the fileserv processor: ADDRESS SEND xxxx The list processor does not, and probably never will, support ADDRESS because of the security implications (signing people onto lists that shouldn't be there, etc.). Yes, SMTP is not secure, but ADDRESS makes it too easy. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 01:37:36 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Can receive mail?? Message-ID: <1993Aug26.062618.25728@sparc4.ncu.edu.tw> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 06:26:18 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET HI.. Now I receive a problem. I can't receive mail from others. But when I see the log files in [mx.local], it appear as follow: 26-AUG-1993 13:39:44.17 Processing queue entry number 66 26-AUG-1993 13:39:44.57 Checking local name: GUEST 26-AUG-1993 13:39:44.70 LOCAL_USER: User GUEST definitely local. 26-AUG-1993 ........... This is a regular delivery. .....(time)........... DELIVER: mime_base64_fdl = 0 ...................... DELIVER: fdlstr = "" ...................... DELIVER: Using MX%"system@ncu39s.ncu.edu.tw" as VMS MAIL From address. ...................... DELIVER: Using "system to guest" as subject. ...................... DELIVER: Delivering to GUEST ...................... DELIVER: Status=00000001 from MAIL$ routines ...................... All done with this entry. It seem that system thinks it has delivered this letter.. But the ppl GUESt don't receive this letter? I don't know what is the problem? ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 01:57:50 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 26 Aug 1993 09:25:17 +0300 From: UFUK@TRTETM.BITNET Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <01H272TYZ4PU8Y504M@TRTETM.BITNET> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT please sign-off me from mx-list ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 06:21:56 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 13:15 +0100 From: Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Problem with XSMTP To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <01H27AVIM7OWCDRP6L@KUB.NL> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT I have just installed MX V3.3 for the first time. I can send local messages with the MX prefix, but I have problems when I try to send messages through XSMTP to MX%"SURF280@KUB.NL". The messages remain in the queuefile, where the SMTP agent tries to send them (and gets a message SYSTEM-F-IVADDR). I do not understand why the XSMTP agent does not send them, since I have defined: DEFINE PATH KUB.NL X25_SMTP/ROUTE=KUB and even DEFINE PATH * X25_SMTP/ROUTE=KUB KUB has been entered in the PSI$DTE_TABLE. The trace from the router shows: 26-AUG-1993 12:39:38.12 %PROCESS, Processing entry number 39 26-AUG-1993 12:39:38.21 %PROCESS, Status from READ_INFO was 00000001 26-AUG-1993 12:39:38.21 %PROCESS, Message originated in VMS Mail. 26-AUG-1993 12:39:38.22 %PROCESS, will run domain expander on envelope addr. 26-AUG-1993 12:39:38.22 %PROCESS, Processing address: 26-AUG-1993 12:39:38.24 %PROCESS, ... address now reads: 26-AUG-1993 12:39:38.25 %PROCESS, will run domain expander on message headers. 26-AUG-1993 12:39:38.98 %PROCESS, Finished VMSmail-origin preprocessing. 26-AUG-1993 12:39:38.98 %PROCESS, Recipient #0: 26-AUG-1993 12:39:38.99 %REWRITE, No rewrite rules matched 26-AUG-1993 12:39:39.01 %FINDPATH, Site-spec expand on KUB.NL err=00000134 26-AUG-1993 12:39:39.02 %FINDPATH, domain name KUB.NL matched path pattern * 26-AUG-1993 12:39:39.02 %PROCESS, Rewrote as - next hop KUB.NL, path 2 26-AUG-1993 12:39:39.06 %PROCESS, Adding to SMTP path: . 26-AUG-1993 12:39:39.34 %PROCESS, Path SMTP gets 1 rcpts, entry number 40 Output from show path is: Domain-to-path mappings: Domain="CBSC.NL", Path=Local Domain="KUB.NL", Path=X25_SMTP, Route="KUB" Domain="*", Path=X25_SMTP, Route="KUB" Why is there error 00000134 in the trace, and matched KUB.NL pattern *? Why is the message added to the SMTP path? The XSMTP process has been configured correctly. Thanks for any comments Gerrit Stegehuis Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures P.O. Box 273 Email: SURF280@KUB.NL NL-3740 AG Baarn Tel.: 31-2154-81223 Fax: 31-2154-16142 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 08:40:56 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 15:33 +0100 From: Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Please ignore "Problem with XSMTP" To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <01H27FOAWU74CDRPSD@KUB.NL> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Please ignore my question about XSMTP. There had been a problem with global sections during insatllation of NETLIB_CMU_SHR.EXE. I assumed this had nothing to do with XSMTP, just with SMTP. But after increasinf the number of global sections and rebooting, the message was accepted by X25_SMTP. Sorry to have bothered you. Gerrit Stegehuis Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures P.O. Box 273 Email: SURF280@KUB.NL NL-3740 AG Baarn Tel.: 31-2154-81223 Fax: 31-2154-16142 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 12:55:41 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: robert@cpvax.cpses.tu.com Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: LISTSERV address checks case sensitive? Message-ID: <1993Aug26.101313.485@cpvax.cpses.tu.com> Date: 26 Aug 93 10:13:12 CST To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Could the username checking in MX 3.3 be case sensitive? I had the following failure today. 16:24:32.42 Processing queue entry number 26970 16:24:32.77 Checking local name: arc 16:24:32.77 This is a mailing list. 16:24:32.98 FORWARD_TO_LIST: Message is from: "ROBERT PINELLI," 16:24:32.99 CHECK_ACCESS: checking UA4M616@EPRI.EPRI.COM for access mask=00000002 16:24:32.99 CHECK_ACCESS: Access check failed. Requested access denied. 16:24:32.99 FORWARD_TO_LIST: Har, har: access denied. 16:24:34.63 All done with this entry. (note case) was a member of the list. The list protection is (SYSTEM:RWED,OWNER:RWED,GROUP:RWD,WORLD), but it looks like the user wasn't found on the list. Is this a known problem? -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Eden 817-897-0491 Glen Rose, TX Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station robert@cpvax.cpses.tu.com ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ politicese for a nuke plant ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 13:15:00 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 13:14:07 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0097199B.585C0243.21909@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: LISTSERV address checks case sensitive? robert@cpvax.cpses.tu.com writes: > >Could the username checking in MX 3.3 be case sensitive? I had the >following failure today. > [....] > (note case) was a member of the list. > >The list protection is (SYSTEM:RWED,OWNER:RWED,GROUP:RWD,WORLD), but it >looks like the user wasn't found on the list. Is this a known problem? > It's not a problem, it's a design feature. One can argue whether or not it's a good one, but my point is that MX does treat left-hand sides of addresses in a case-sensitive matter. This is also documented in the MLF guide, I'm pretty sure. Problem addresses like that can be ADDed /NOCASE to prevent that, but you can't currently set up a whole list as case-insensitive. That's planned for a coming version of MX. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 17:10:58 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: robert@cpvax.cpses.tu.com Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: LISTSERV address checks case sensitive? Message-ID: <1993Aug26.163033.486@cpvax.cpses.tu.com> Date: 26 Aug 93 16:30:32 CST To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!1 Hunter and Ray are right.... RTFM!!!! Boy do I feel stupid... from the docs: Note: The mailing list processor is case sensitive when matching the username portion of addresses. Be correct case. MX, by default, converts all usernames to lower case for local users, so you should generally use lower case when specifying local list managers' addresses. thanks guys... Robert ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1993 11:06:37 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: MAILSHR Patch Broke w/ VMS 5.2-2 Message-ID: <1993Aug27.102430.1786@ualr.edu> From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 27 Aug 93 10:24:30 -0600 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET The patch to the MAILSHR.EXE executable which precludes the need to enclose every internet address with MX%"..." has broke with VMS version 5.2-2 (it worked up until this version). Is a new patch available, is anyone working on one, or is there another solution now? Or, am I just going to have to live with the MX%"..." syntax? Thanks in advance, Ron ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ron Pacheco \pa-chek'-oh\ | HARDING UNIVERSITY Searcy, Arkansas pacheco@acs.harding.edu | Dept. of Mathematics & Computer Science ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1993 11:09:44 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1993 11:08:52 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00971A53.038909EC.22327@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: MAILSHR Patch Broke w/ VMS 5.2-2 writes: > >The patch to the MAILSHR.EXE executable which precludes the need to >enclose every internet address with MX%"..." has broke with VMS version >5.2-2 (it worked up until this version). > >Is a new patch available, is anyone working on one, or is there another >solution now? Or, am I just going to have to live with the MX%"..." >syntax? > A patch that includes the correct offsets for all the recent versions of VMS is available on ftp.spc.edu in [.MX.CONTRIB]MX_MAILSHR_PATCH.ZIP. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (or goathunter%wkuvx1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1993 17:48:17 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: Re: MAILSHR Patch Broke w/ VMS 5.2-2 Message-ID: <1993Aug27.174841.17153@colorado.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1993 17:48:41 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1993Aug27.102430.1786@ualr.edu>, PACHECO@acs.harding.edu (Captain Ron) writes: >The patch to the MAILSHR.EXE executable which precludes the need to >enclose every internet address with MX%"..." has broke with VMS version >5.2-2 (it worked up until this version). > >Is a new patch available, is anyone working on one, or is there another >solution now? Or, am I just going to have to live with the MX%"..." >syntax? Captain Ron, The file [.MX.CONTRIB]MX_MAILSHR_PATCH.ZIP, available via anonymous FTP from ftp.spc.edu, is the most up-to-date, and work with VMS V5.5-2 and V6.0. I believe that the version included with the MX V3.3 distribution works with VMS V5.5-2. -dan -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1993 03:24:40 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1993 11:18:56 +0300 From: syseng@BHUOB00.BITNET Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00971B1D.960C5060.1698@bhuob00> Subject: CMU/IP MX Mailer Dear Networker, Can any one tell me about any site using MX Mailer over SMTP with CMU OpenVMS/IP ? Thanks in advance. Nader Nasry ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1993 09:04:12 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1993 16:01:05 +0200 From: system@oetv02.tvlbg.ac.at Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <00971B45.002C36A0.8983@oetv02.tvlbg.ac.at> Subject: RE: CMU/IP MX Mailer I run MX together with CMU-openVMS-IP using the following transport: SMTP, UUCP, VMS No greater problems --- good luck Egon Niederacher niederacher@oetv02.tvlbg.ac.at System and Network management phone/fax +43 5572 20336-82/83 Technikum Vorarlberg, Hoechster strasse 73, 6850 Dornbirn, Austria Disclaimer : I speak for myself - not my company or someone else ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1993 13:54:18 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: amartineau@nccr.ccr.hydro.qc.ca Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Mail from pathworks to MX going nowhere Message-ID: Keywords: MX pathworks Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1993 18:02:51 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I run UCX. Due to some UCX-SMTP files growing out of control some times, I tried to change to MX 3.3. My users use MAIL from Pathworks MAIL on PCs. There was no problem in sending to SMTP%"...". I installed MX, disabled the SMTP service in UCX. It works, in and out, from VMSmail in an interactive DCL session. Nothing happens, I mean nothing, from a PC-Pathworks. I enabled the debugs, nothing is written there. MCP QUE SHOW shows nothing. Sending is to MX%"...". On another VAX, I have MX 3.1 with CMU, the same thing works OK. Where to look ? Alain Martineau amartineau@nccr.ccr.hydro.qc.ca ( I put UCX-SMTP back ) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1993 14:10:39 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1993 12:01:53 -0700 From: "Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List%WKUVX1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU CC: rharwood@Data.Basix.COM Message-ID: <00971B23.96156960.4882@Data.Basix.COM> Subject: RE: Mail from pathworks to MX going nowhere > I run UCX. Due to some UCX-SMTP files growing out of control > some times, I tried to change to MX 3.3. My users use MAIL > from Pathworks MAIL on PCs. There was no problem in sending to > SMTP%"...". I installed MX, disabled the SMTP service in UCX. > It works, in and out, from VMSmail in an interactive DCL session. I had the same UCX "disk-sucking" problem, too. MX will fix that, I promise. > Nothing happens, I mean nothing, from a PC-Pathworks. I enabled > the debugs, nothing is written there. MCP QUE SHOW shows nothing. > Sending is to MX%"...". We too have Pathworks, with no difficulty sending EMail that I'm aware of. I'm sure that sending to a user whose mail is FORWARDED to MX%"..." works, but I can't verify anyone has specifically used the MX%"..." on the "To:" prompt. I'll check that out soon. Check this, however: SHOW LOG MAIL$PROTOCOL_SMTP, and be sure it does NOT point to UCX_MAILSHR (or whatever UCX called it). I had problems everywhere until I specifically put a "DEASSIGN /SYS/EXEC MAIL$PROTOCOL_SMTP" in the SYSTARTUP file. Ray ----- Ray Harwood | Data Basix | Adjunct Faculty, East Campus, Voice: (602)721-1988 | PO Box 18324 | Pima Community College FAX: (602)721-7240 | Tucson, AZ 85731 | Instructor in Ada and Pascal rharwood@Data.Basix.COM | Info@Data.Basix.COM | rharwood@east.pima.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1993 16:12:53 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: Subject: RE: Mail from pathworks to MX going nowhere Date: 28 Aug 1993 20:58:18 GMT Message-ID: <25ogta$f0@fitz.TC.Cornell.EDU> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <00971B23.96156960.4882@Data.Basix.COM>, "Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" writes: >> I run UCX. Due to some UCX-SMTP files growing out of control >> some times, I tried to change to MX 3.3. My users use MAIL >> from Pathworks MAIL on PCs. There was no problem in sending to >> SMTP%"...". I installed MX, disabled the SMTP service in UCX. >> It works, in and out, from VMSmail in an interactive DCL session. > >I had the same UCX "disk-sucking" problem, too. MX will fix that, I promise. > >> Nothing happens, I mean nothing, from a PC-Pathworks. I enabled >> the debugs, nothing is written there. MCP QUE SHOW shows nothing. >> Sending is to MX%"...". > >We too have Pathworks, with no difficulty sending EMail that I'm aware of. I'm >sure that sending to a user whose mail is FORWARDED to MX%"..." works, but I >can't verify anyone has specifically used the MX%"..." on the "To:" prompt. >I'll check that out soon. > We have done this, and I can verify that it works for us. steve --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Thompson, System Mangler Internet: thompson@cheme.cornell.edu School of Chemical Engineering Bitnet: thompson@crnlchme Olin Hall, Cornell University Phone: (607) 255 5573 Ithaca NY 14853 FAX: (607) 255 9166 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1993 20:25:51 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET From: martineau@AUTOMATISMES.CCR.HYDRO.QC.CA Subject: RE: Mail from pathworks to MX going nowhere Message-ID: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1993 00:58:24 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <00971B23.96156960.4882@Data.Basix.COM>, "Ray Harwood -- Data Basix: (602)721-1988" writes: >> I run UCX. Due to some UCX-SMTP files growing out of control >> some times, I tried to change to MX 3.3. My users use MAIL >> from Pathworks MAIL on PCs. There was no problem in sending to >> SMTP%"...". I installed MX, disabled the SMTP service in UCX. >> It works, in and out, from VMSmail in an interactive DCL session. > >I had the same UCX "disk-sucking" problem, too. MX will fix that, I promise. > >> Nothing happens, I mean nothing, from a PC-Pathworks. I enabled >> the debugs, nothing is written there. MCP QUE SHOW shows nothing. >> Sending is to MX%"...". > >We too have Pathworks, with no difficulty sending EMail that I'm aware of. I'm >sure that sending to a user whose mail is FORWARDED to MX%"..." works, but I >can't verify anyone has specifically used the MX%"..." on the "To:" prompt. >I'll check that out soon. > >Check this, however: SHOW LOG MAIL$PROTOCOL_SMTP, and be sure it does NOT >point to UCX_MAILSHR (or whatever UCX called it). I had problems everywhere >until I specifically put a "DEASSIGN /SYS/EXEC MAIL$PROTOCOL_SMTP" ... I disabled UCX SMTP by running UCX$SMTP_SHUTDOWN which does not deassign MAIL$PROTOCOL_SMTP, however I did DEFINE /SYS/EXEC MAIL$PROTOCOL_SMTP MX_SHR(approximate spelling) so that users could still send to SMTP%. What baffles me is that an interactive user under VMSMAIL can send to SMTP% and MX% and not a Pathworks-mail user. I get no error message, but no message is sent. Doing a MCP QUEU SHOW immediately after shows an empty queue, no log file receives anything. Alain Martineau amartineau@nccr.ccr.hydro.qc.ca (still using UCX SMTP and keeping an eye on my free blocks ) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1993 14:32:04 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1993 12:02:29 PDT From: Bill Pedersen Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List%WKUVX1.bitnet@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU CC: pedersen@kpy.com Message-ID: <00971BEC.D5ECB240.22621@kpy.com> Subject: RE: CMU/IP MX Mailer >> Can any one tell me about any site using MX Mailer over SMTP >> with CMU OpenVMS/IP ? >> >> Thanks in advance. >> Nader Nasry We use MX with CMU/IP to send mail to our Sun and PC ethernet nodes. __________________________________________________________________________ Bill Pedersen | KPY Network Partners (KPY Corporation) | 1037 North Fair Oaks Avneue, Sunnyvale, CA 94089-2101 | 1-408-734-2564 1-800-458-8930 FAX:1-408-734-2940 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1993 19:06:29 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1993 19:05:21 -0500 From: fredrick@calvin.pca.state.mn.us Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <9309010005.AA15630@calvin.pca.state.mn.us> To: MX-List%wkuvx1.bitnet@Ukcc.uky.edu Subject: Problem with MX SMTP and CMU-TEK V6.6-5A I am having a problem with MX V3.3 and CMU-TEK/ip V 6.6-5A. The MX SMTP process starts but immediately exits. The system worked with CMU/TEK V 6.6-5. Any ideas? ********************************************************************** * Bryan Fredrick Minnesota Pollution Control Agency * * Computer Services Office 520 Lafayette Road N. * * +1 612 296 9371 Voice St. Paul, MN 55155 * * +1 612 297 1456 Fax fredrick@spock.pca.state.mn.us * **********************************************************************