Archive-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 10:57:45 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: Rewrite from address? Message-ID: <1993Dec16.090351.528@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 16 Dec 93 09:03:51 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <18563762@MVB.SAIC.COM>, Rick Sharpe writes: >Forgive me if this is a FAQ but is there a way to rewrite the from address >using MX. Some sites within my company use all-in-1 (the poor devils) and use >my machine as a gateway to Internet. The from addresses that get generated from >these users are bizarre (and unusable for the recipient). Thanks! MX can only (easily) change the to addresses; to change the From address you'd have to stuff the messages through a SITE agent which does the transformation -- this is quite easy to setup, mind you, and if you don't care much about performance (or if you setup a bunch of SITE agents [Hunter, it doesn't appear that MX allows multiple site agents -- why??]) you could write it all in DCL and maybe a small EDT script to do the substitutions. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 12:23:58 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 12:23:03 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <00977196.C487AC94.13@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Re: Rewrite from address? dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) writes: > >[Hunter, it doesn't appear that MX allows multiple site agents -- why??]) The only reason is that SITE isn't listed in the symbol MULTI_THINGS in MX_EXE:MX_START.COM. I've fixed that for the next release. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@ALPHA.WKU.EDU (or goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 12:57:50 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 12:54:35 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: mx-list@wkuvx1.wku.edu Message-ID: <0097719B.2C332C7A.7@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Ooops---you can't run multiple SITE agents OK, I take it back. I forgot that the second MX->SITE subprocess will get an error trying to set its process name, so you really are limited to only one SITE agent. I'll fix that in the next version. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@ALPHA.WKU.EDU (or goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 13:26:36 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 13:26:23 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: mx-list@wkuvx1.wku.edu Message-ID: <0097719F.9D1F35D8.5@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Third try OK, I looked at it, and tried multiple SITE agents. Here's the *real* scoop (for now 8-): o You can run multiple MX Site agents if you add SITE to MULTI_THINGS in MX_START.COM. o The second MX->SITE subprocess that's created does get an error setting the process name, but it's not a fatal error. The subprocess continues, but its process name is MXMAILER_1 (or _2, etc.), so it doesn't look pretty. I've had two of them running here without any problems that I've seen. Sorry for the ambiguity---this is what I get for trying to work from home. 8-( Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@ALPHA.WKU.EDU (or goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 14:01:38 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 14:57:46 EST From: Alan Simon Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009771AC.6122E720.7120@shrsys.hslc.org> Subject: RE: Third try > From: MX%"MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU" 16-DEC-1993 14:40:19.32 > Subj: Third try > OK, I looked at it, and tried multiple SITE agents. Here's the *real* > scoop (for now 8-): > > o You can run multiple MX Site agents if you add SITE to > MULTI_THINGS in MX_START.COM. > > o The second MX->SITE subprocess that's created does get an > error setting the process name, but it's not a fatal error. > The subprocess continues, but its process name is MXMAILER_1 > (or _2, etc.), so it doesn't look pretty. > > I've had two of them running here without any problems that I've seen. > > Sorry for the ambiguity---this is what I get for trying to work from > home. 8-( > > Hunter > ------ > Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University > goathunter@ALPHA.WKU.EDU (or goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET) I'm glad I didn't remove the second SITE process as soon as I read your earlier mail message. B-) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alan Simon simon@hslc.org Associate Director simon@shrsys.hslc.org Health Sciences Libraries Consortium VOICE: (215) 222-1532 3600 Market Street, Suite 550 FAX: (215) 222-0416 Philadelphia, PA 19104 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 15:15:28 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 16:01:54 EST From: "Brian Tillman" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: WKUVX1.WKU.EDU!MX-list@esseye.si.com Message-ID: <009771B5.5703DFC0.2285@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: Third try >OK, I looked at it, and tried multiple SITE agents. Here's the *real* >scoop (for now 8-): > > o You can run multiple MX Site agents if you add SITE to > MULTI_THINGS in MX_START.COM. > > o The second MX->SITE subprocess that's created does get an > error setting the process name, but it's not a fatal error. > The subprocess continues, but its process name is MXMAILER_1 > (or _2, etc.), so it doesn't look pretty. Thanks for the info, Hunter. Now, how do I write DEFINE PATH statements that will allow me to distinguish between the two site agents and allow one to do one form of address minging and allow the other to do a different form of munging? -- Brian tillman_brian@si.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 17:49:32 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: RE: Third try Message-ID: <1993Dec16.161956.536@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 16 Dec 93 16:19:56 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <18577884@MVB.SAIC.COM>, "Brian Tillman" writes: >Thanks for the info, Hunter. Now, how do I write DEFINE PATH statements that >will allow me to distinguish between the two site agents and allow one to do one >form of address minging and allow the other to do a different form of munging? As of MX V?.?, parameter P1 passed to SITE_DELIVER.COM contains the value of the /ROUTE qualifier (from the DEFINE PATH command) which can be used within a single SITE_DELIVER.COM file to determine which of the 'DEFINE PATH SITE's caused the SITE_DELIVER.COM to get activated. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 19:55:23 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: kevin@ins.infonet.net (Kevin Houle) Subject: Re: WANTED: E-mail Program Date: 17 Dec 1993 01:11:54 GMT Message-ID: <2er10q$vc@insosf1.infonet.net> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1993Dec13.140214.495@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu>, dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) writes: >Get DELIVER (available from several sources -- check VMS Software List, >available from fileserv@uh01.colorado.edu), which includes a sample script >to do this (and it only mails to each address once, which prevents mail >loops). It requires privileges to install, and requires changes to your >system startup files. Has DELIVER been ported to Alpha OpenVMS? -- Kevin Houle INFOnet Administrator kevin@ins.infonet.net ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 11:41:56 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: WANTED: E-mail Program Message-ID: <1993Dec17.101935.541@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 17 Dec 93 10:19:35 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <2er10q$vc@insosf1.infonet.net>, kevin@ins.infonet.net (Kevin Houle) writes: >Has DELIVER been ported to Alpha OpenVMS? I dunno - ask on vmsnet.mail.pmdf (be sure to ask about standalone (PD) DELIVER, not the DELIVER integrated with PMDF). -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 19:47:55 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 17:43:42 PST From: Pat Murphy - (415)329-4044 Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU CC: pmurphy@isdmnl.wr.usgs.gov Message-ID: <0097728C.BA00AD6A.14298@isdmnl.wr.usgs.gov> Subject: Decnet address syntax MX-info readers: I have just installed MX on a VAX 4000 formerly running Multinet's SMTP. Unix host users which gate to decnet through this host noted one little difference which would be nice to have so they don't have to change all their email distribution lists. Multinet's SMTP gates addesses from Unix mailers which look like {host}::{name}@domainname MX rejects them for the address syntax errors these addresses have. I have told them to use address of the form "{host}::{name}"@domainname and setup the appropriate rewrite rules for them so they can use {name}@host.dnet However, it would be nice if MX were more foregiving of this construct. I see where name_conversion.c will make VMS mail, which is gated through MX, replyable. That's nice, but would not be necessary if this format were allowed. I tried two partnered crazy rewrite rules which should leave "{host}::{name}"@domain addresses alone and add in the quotes around {host}::{name}@domainname This seemed to cause more problems and didn't solve anything. Any thoughts? Patrick W. Murphy, Ph.D. Computer Scientist US Geological Survey IP - pmurphy@isdmnl.usgs.gov. NSINET - isdmnl::pmurphy BITNET - pmurphy@usgsresv Ph: (415)329-4044 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 22:16:11 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 22:15:36 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009772B2.B601414F.11@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Decnet address syntax Pat Murphy - (415)329-4044 writes: > >MX rejects them for the address syntax errors these addresses have. >I have told them to use address of the form > > "{host}::{name}"@domainname > >and setup the appropriate rewrite rules for them so they can use > > {name}@host.dnet > >However, it would be nice if MX were more foregiving of this >construct. If MX allowed just host::user@domainname, it would be in violation of RFC822. The UNIX system should not be letting such messages out (if I read your problem description right). >I see where name_conversion.c will make VMS mail, which >is gated through MX, replyable. That's nice, but would not be >necessary if this format were allowed. > Even if MX allowed it, other sites wouldn't. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@ALPHA.WKU.EDU (or goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 07:04:45 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: igor@desert.ihep.su (Igor Mandrichenko) Subject: Re: Multiple instances of components Message-ID: <199312171057.AA11794@desert.ihep.su> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 17 Dec 93 13:57:35 +0300 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Tank you all who replied me about two running Routers. I have to try again. -- Igor. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 10:40:44 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 00:33:46 -0500 (EST) From: Jin Zhu Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU CC: jinzhu%BEPC2@SERV02.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU Message-ID: <0097738F.2DB715C0.9292@bepc2> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT help ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 13:26:33 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: sys_hjk@lissy1.lif.de (Hans-Joachim Koch) Subject: Re: Problems moving MX to other node - more details Message-ID: <4016@sunny.lif.de> Date: 17 Dec 93 20:35:23 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <2e9l0s$7pq@gap.cco.caltech.edu>, carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) writes: >Which means the problem is NOT on lissy1. >Complain to the postmaster of SUNNY.LIF.DE (LIF.DE) that his mailer's >improperly rewriting the From: address when his machine gateways mail from your >system. Thanks to Carl's hints! The problem is solved. It was the improper address rewrite in our gateway. Thanks a lot. Hans. -- Hans-Joachim Koch, Computer department of Lahmeyer International Lyoner Strasse 22, D-60528 Frankfurt, Germany Phone: +49 (69) 6677-642, Fax: +49 (69) 6677-388, Tx: 413478 li d ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 14:27:03 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 14:19:12 CST From: hunterl@uwwvax.uww.edu Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: mx-list@wkuvx1.wku.edu Message-ID: <009774CB.A7D75800.4763@uwwvax.uww.edu> Subject: MX tuning I have recently have run into a severe performance problem with MX. I followed with interest the discussion that was held recently, but the best solution to my problem seeemed to lie in decreasing the size of the 0-9 directories. Has anyone shared that experience and if so at what size should one become concerned? Lyle Hunter Computer Center University Wisconsin-Whitewater hunterl@uwwvax.uww.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 15:14:24 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: MX tuning Message-ID: <1993Dec20.134936.561@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 20 Dec 93 13:49:36 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <18677999@MVB.SAIC.COM>, hunterl@uwwvax.uww.edu writes: >I have recently have run into a severe performance problem with MX. >I followed with interest the discussion that was held recently, but >the best solution to my problem seeemed to lie in decreasing the size >of the 0-9 directories. Has anyone shared that experience and if so >at what size should one become concerned? What is the size of your [QUEUE]%.DIR files? If they are larger than 128, then VMS will refuse to cache them. If they are smaller, you probably don't "really" have a problem with them. Are you running Andy's MX_SHRINK often (nightly)? What, specifically, is "slow" about your MX configuration? -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 15:49:00 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: MX <-> MHS? Message-ID: <1993Dec20.161158.1@nebula> From: itsmgjd@nebula.syscon.hii.com Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: 20 Dec 93 16:11:58 -0700 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Folks, I am looking for a way to connect my MHS world with my SMTP world which is MX based. Has anyone looked into the feasibility of writing a site delivery agent that would support MHS <-> MX? Any and all suggestions are welcomed. Greg Donaldson +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Greg Donaldson, Senior Systems Analyst SYSCON Corporation | | GDonaldson@SYSCON.HII.COM 1000 Thomas Jefferson St. NW | | (202) 342-4123 Washington, DC 20007 | +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:21:53 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 20:17:18 EST From: kam@ycvax.york.cuny.edu Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009774FD.AEB2A440.23259@ycvax.york.cuny.edu> Subject: Re: SMTP of UCX and MX conflict > kam@ycvax.york.cuny.edu writes: > >The UNIX machine does not receive the incoming mail for some reason. We would >like it to receive mail. > >What I would like to do is to configure YCVAX locally ( using either MX or UCX) >as a forwarder. YCVAX has been named as forwarder for the UNIX machine >somewhere in the Internet nameserver. However, locally I have done nothing to >this effect. > >Hope it is not as vague as in my previous statement. > > You will need to at least have a PATH definition for the UNIX system > that specifies it should go SMTP. Turning on MX Router debugging (by > define/sys/exec mx_router_debug true) would then show you what MX > Router is doing with the mail. > Hunter Should I add a path in config.mcp like DEFINE PATH "sun1.york.cuny.edu" SMTP BTW the ip address of ycvax.york.cuny.edu is 198.61.16.1 the ip address of sun1.york.cuny.edu is 198.61.16.3 I am including the mail received from postmaster when I tried to send mail to sun1. Here is the mail: From: MX%"Postmaster@ycvax.york.cuny.edu" 20-DEC-1993 19:41:15.37 To: KAM CC: Subj: SMTP delivery error Return-Path: <> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:41:09 EST From: SMTP delivery agent To: Subject: SMTP delivery error Note: this message was generated automatically. A problem occurred during SMTP delivery of your message. Error occurred sending to the following user(s): (via sun1.york.cuny.edu): %MX_SMTP-F-TRANSACTION_FAI, transaction failed Transcript: Rcvd: 220 ycvax MX V3.3 VAX SMTP server ready at Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:41:07 EST Sent: HELO ycvax Rcvd: 250 Hello, ycvax 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 ycvax Service closing transmission channel ======================================================================== Message follows. Received: from ycvax by ycvax (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:41:03 EST Received: from ycvax by ycvax (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:40:59 EST Received: from ycvax by ycvax (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:40:53 EST Received: from ycvax by ycvax (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:40:48 EST Received: from ycvax by ycvax (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:40:44 EST Received: from ycvax by ycvax (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:40:39 EST Received: from ycvax by ycvax (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:40:35 EST Received: from ycvax by ycvax (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:40:30 EST Received: by ycvax.york.cuny.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) id 23236; Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:40:26 EST Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:40:25 EST From: kam@ycvax.york.cuny.edu To: kamrul@sun1.york.cuny.edu Message-ID: <009774F8.872A0B20.23236@ycvax.york.cuny.edu> Subject: ldsklfj This is from ycvax ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 21:38:31 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 21:38:29 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <00977509.059C2DB1.11@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Re: SMTP of UCX and MX conflict kam@ycvax.york.cuny.edu writes: > >Should I add a path in config.mcp like > >DEFINE PATH "sun1.york.cuny.edu" SMTP > Yes. >BTW the ip address of ycvax.york.cuny.edu is 198.61.16.1 > the ip address of sun1.york.cuny.edu is 198.61.16.3 > To be safe, you should also include DEFINE PATH lines for both of these using the numeric IP address: MCP> DEFINE PATH 198.61.16.1 LOCAL MCP> DEFINE PATH 198.61.16.3 SMTP >I am including the mail received from postmaster when I tried to send mail to >sun1. [...] > Rcvd: 220 ycvax MX V3.3 VAX SMTP server ready at Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:41:07 EST > Sent: HELO ycvax > Rcvd: 250 Hello, ycvax Adding the DEFINE PATH will keep MX from delivering it to itself. Also, as documented in the MX release notes (SYS$HELP:MX033.RELEASE_NOTES), you need to change your UCX configuration to list your fully-qualified domain name (FQDN) first; right now, you have YCVAX defined first, which is what UCX tells you to do. Info included below. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@ALPHA.WKU.EDU (or goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.3 VMS/ULTRIX Connection Notes If you are using DEC VMS/ULTRIX Connection (UCX) V1.2 through V2.0, you should review your UCX configuration to ensure that you are using your fully-qualified domain name (FQDN) as your primary local host name in your UCX host table. If you followed the UCX documentation when configuring UCX with UCX$CONFIG, it is highly likely that you did not specify your FQDN as your primary host name. If your abbreviated host name is listed as the primary in your UCX host table, then messages sent from the local system will go out with an unreplyable return address. To check your local host name, use the UCX utility: $ UCX UCX> SHOW HOST/LOCAL x.x.x.x ! use your IP address here To ensure that your FQDN is the primary host name for your address, use the UCX commands: UCX> SET NOHOST x.x.x.x ! use your IP address here UCX> SET HOST "full.qual.dom.name"/ADDR=x.x.x.x/ALIAS="abbrev" You will be asked for confirmation on the SET NOHOST command. Substitute your FQDN and IP address in the SET HOST command, and if you would still have your shortened host name in the host table, use the /ALIAS qualifier, as shown. Once you have updated your host table, you should review the file SYS$MANAGER:UCX$INET_SET_ INTERFACES.COM and replace all instances of your abbreviated host name with your FQDN. Note: Remember that UCX is case sensitive with regard to host names! ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 22:08:15 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 11:56:40 -0500 (CDT) From: dingj%BEPC3@SERV02.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: joe%BEPC3@SERV02.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU, mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU, system%BEPC3@SERV02.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU Message-ID: <00977580.E8EE3CE0.1951@bepc3> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 01:44:26 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 17:59:01 +0200 From: Esra ESEN Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: mx-list@wkuvx1.wku.edu Message-ID: <0097728E.DE04FB60.15844@trboun.bitnet> Subject: An address problem.. Hi, Can anybody help me? There is a problem following message. From: MX%"uz@micmac" 13-DEC-1993 12:00:41.53 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ MX%"uz@micmac....." ? This is a Internet addres but as a Bitnet addres and there isn't MX%"uz@micmac.BITNET" Mx sent it I don't understand, how? Thanx. Esra ESEN ----------------------original message----------------------------- From: MX%"uz@micmac" 13-DEC-1993 12:00:41.53 To: DALFES CC: Subj: Return-Path: Received: from URIACC.URI.EDU (MAILER) by TRBOUN (MX V3.3 VAX) with BSMTP; Sun, 12 Dec 1993 11:51:17 +0200 X-Delivery-Notice: SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender. Received: from URIACC (SMTP) by URIACC.URI.EDU (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 2008; Thu, 09 Dec 93 18:46:26 EST Received: from micmac.gso.uri.EDU by URIACC.URI.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Thu, 09 Dec 93 18:46:23 EST Received: by micmac.gso.uri.EDU (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA25241; Thu, 9 Dec 93 18:46:58 EST Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 18:46:58 EST From: Message-ID: <9312092346.AA25241@micmac.gso.uri.EDU> To: dalfes%TRBOUN.bitnet@URIACC.BITNET, aydin@rcf.rsmas.miami.edu, emre@ufcc.ufl.edu, altinbb@chip.cba.ufl.edu, ori602579575@emunix.mich.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 03:50:27 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: An address problem.. Message-ID: <1993Dec21.020336.566@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 21 Dec 93 02:03:36 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <18698278@MVB.SAIC.COM>, Esra ESEN writes: >Hi, > >Can anybody help me? There is a problem following message. > >From: MX%"uz@micmac" 13-DEC-1993 12:00:41.53 > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > MX%"uz@micmac....." ? >This is a Internet addres but as a Bitnet addres and there isn't > MX%"uz@micmac.BITNET" >Mx sent it I don't understand, how? Are you saying that MX *was* able to send mail to the address uz@micmac? I'm really surprised that it worked; it shouldn't have. The problem is with some mailer between micmac.bitnet and your site; some mailer determined there was a problem, and inserted an X-Delivery-Notice header (see the 3rd header from the top); Hunter, please correct me, but I don't believe MX is inserting this X-Delivery-Notice header (I believe all of MX's X-* headers look like "X-MX-*"). >Return-Path: >Received: from URIACC.URI.EDU (MAILER) by TRBOUN (MX V3.3 VAX) with BSMTP; Sun, > 12 Dec 1993 11:51:17 +0200 >X-Delivery-Notice: SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender. >Received: from URIACC (SMTP) by URIACC.URI.EDU (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP > id 2008; Thu, 09 Dec 93 18:46:26 EST >Received: from micmac.gso.uri.EDU by URIACC.URI.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with > TCP; Thu, 09 Dec 93 18:46:23 EST >Received: by micmac.gso.uri.EDU (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA25241; Thu, 9 Dec 93 > 18:46:58 EST >Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 18:46:58 EST >From: >Message-ID: <9312092346.AA25241@micmac.gso.uri.EDU> >To: dalfes%TRBOUN.bitnet@URIACC.BITNET, aydin@rcf.rsmas.miami.edu, > emre@ufcc.ufl.edu, altinbb@chip.cba.ufl.edu, > ori602579575@emunix.mich.edu I see, though, from the top Received: header, that you're running JNET on your VAX, so I'll defer to someone that knows JNET to really provide you with an answer to your question. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 06:22:09 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) Subject: Re: An address problem.. Date: 21 Dec 1993 11:41:29 GMT Message-ID: <2f6nd9$sd6@gap.cco.caltech.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1993Dec21.020336.566@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu>, dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) writes: =In article <18698278@MVB.SAIC.COM>, Esra ESEN writes: =>Hi, => =>Can anybody help me? There is a problem following message. => =>From: MX%"uz@micmac" 13-DEC-1993 12:00:41.53 => ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ => MX%"uz@micmac....." ? =>This is a Internet addres but as a Bitnet addres and there isn't => MX%"uz@micmac.BITNET" =>Mx sent it I don't understand, how? = =Are you saying that MX *was* able to send mail to the address uz@micmac? =I'm really surprised that it worked; it shouldn't have. It would appear that he's complaining that MX delivered the message with the above From: address, which is, of course, unrepliable in general. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 09:08:52 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 15:36:41 -0500 (CDT) From: dingj%BEPC3@SERV02.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: joe%BEPC3@SERV02.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU, mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU, system%BEPC3@SERV02.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU Message-ID: <0097759F.A5030F00.2023@bepc3> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 09:09:00 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 16:59:16 -0500 (CDT) From: dingj%BEPC3@SERV02.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: system@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU, mx-list@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU, system%BEPC3@SERV02.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU Message-ID: <009775AB.2EE18CA0.2088@bepc3> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 18:11:21 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: gulli@vedur.is (Gunnlaugur Kristjansson) Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: MX SMTP delivery broken under Multinet V3.3-BETA ??? Message-ID: <1993Dec21.230316.213@vedur.is> Date: 21 Dec 93 23:03:16 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Hi. I am having problems with SMTP delivery on Multinet V3.3-BETA. I have been trying to debug it but can't see anything wrong except that some messages don't get through and everything is very slow. I am running MX v3.3 (not MM) and the error I get is: Last error: %SYSTEM-W-NOMSG, Message number 00008100 I have tried to reinstall MX but the problem seems to be the same. Any ideas? Best regards, gulli -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gunnlaugur Kristjansson Email......: gulli@vedur.is Systems Analyst PSImail....: 274011724200::gulli Data Processing Division DECUS mail.: EDCHUB::KRISTJANSSON Icelandic Meteorological Office COMPUSERVE.: 72461,2160 Bustadavegi 9 Telephone..: +354 1 600600 IS150 Reykjavik Telefax....: +354 1 28121 Iceland. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 18:39:59 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) Subject: Re: MX SMTP delivery broken under Multinet V3.3-BETA ??? Date: 21 Dec 1993 23:50:12 GMT Message-ID: <2f823l$n1o@gap.cco.caltech.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1993Dec21.230316.213@vedur.is>, gulli@vedur.is (Gunnlaugur Kristjansson) writes: =Hi. = =I am having problems with SMTP delivery on Multinet V3.3-BETA. =I have been trying to debug it but can't see anything wrong except =that some messages don't get through and everything is very slow. =I am running MX v3.3 (not MM) and the error I get is: = = Last error: %SYSTEM-W-NOMSG, Message number 00008100 = = =I have tried to reinstall MX but the problem seems to be the same. =Any ideas? Have you tried enabling logging of SMTP sessions? $ DEFINE/SYS/EXEC MX_SMTP_DEBUG TRUE then try sending an SMTP message and look at the contents of MX_SMTP_DIR:MX_SMTP_LOG.LOG. That should give you some additional information. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 19:15:43 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: gulli@vedur.is (Gunnlaugur Kristjansson) Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: MX SMTP delivery broken under Multinet V3.3-BETA ??? Message-ID: <1993Dec22.000550.215@vedur.is> Date: 22 Dec 93 00:05:50 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1993Dec21.230316.213@vedur.is>, gulli@vedur.is (Gunnlaugur Kristjansson) writes: > Hi. > > I am having problems with SMTP delivery on Multinet V3.3-BETA. > I have been trying to debug it but can't see anything wrong except > that some messages don't get through and everything is very slow. > I am running MX v3.3 (not MM) and the error I get is: > > Last error: %SYSTEM-W-NOMSG, Message number 00008100 > > > I have tried to reinstall MX but the problem seems to be the same. > Any ideas? > Hi again. I would like to add to this the contents of one of the log files that MX-SMTP writes out. (I did define/system MX_SMTP_DEBUG TRUE) It's still a puzzle to me :-( gulli -- 21-DEC-1993 18:10:45.56 Processing queue entry number 13855 on node HAGL 21-DEC-1993 18:10:46.35 Recipient: , route=isgate.is 21-DEC-1993 18:10:46.35 Recipient: , route=isgate.is 21-DEC-1993 18:10:46.35 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name isgate.is 21-DEC-1993 18:10:46.51 SMTP_SEND: Attempting to start session with isgate.is. [130.208.165.63] 21-DEC-1993 18:10:46.67 SMTP_SEND: Connected 21-DEC-1993 18:10:46.97 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 220 isgate.is Sendmail 5.65c/ISnet/14-10-91 ready at Tue Dec 21 18:10:46 1993 21-DEC-1993 18:10:47.03 SMTP_SEND: Sent: HELO hagl.vedur.is 21-DEC-1993 18:10:47.24 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Hello hagl.vedur.is, pleased to meet you 21-DEC-1993 18:10:47.24 SMTP_SEND: Sent: MAIL FROM: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:47.58 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 ... Sender ok 21-DEC-1993 18:10:47.58 SMTP_SEND: Sent: RCPT TO: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:47.79 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 ... Recipient ok 21-DEC-1993 18:10:47.80 SMTP_SEND: Sent: RCPT TO: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.01 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 ... Recipient ok 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.34 SMTP_SEND: Sent: DATA 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.62 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 354 Enter mail, end with "." on a line by itself 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.62 SMTP_SEND: Sent: X-ListName: "Buoy quality control." 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.63 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Warnings-To: <> 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.63 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Errors-To: gulli@vedur.is 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.64 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Sender: gulli@vedur.is 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.64 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Received: from vedur.is by hagl.vedur.is (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Tue, 21 Dec 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.64 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 1993 11:23:56 GMT 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.65 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Received: from isgate.is by vedur.is (4.1/smail2.5/27-06-89); Tue, 21 Dec 93 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.65 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 11:22:35 GMT 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.71 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Received: from eldborg.rhi.hi.is by isgate.is (5.65c/ISnet/14-10-91); Tue, 21 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.77 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Dec 1993 11:22:34 GMT 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.78 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Received: from hekla.rhi.hi.is by eldborg.rhi.hi.is (5.65c/RHI/10-11-93); Tue, 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.78 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 21 Dec 1993 11:22:33 GMT 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.78 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Received: by hekla.rhi.hi.is (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/client-1.3) id AA21200; Tue, 21 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.82 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Dec 1993 11:22:32 GMT 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.82 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 11:22:32 GMT 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.83 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Message-ID: <9312211122.AA21200@hekla.rhi.hi.is> 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.84 SMTP_SEND: Sent: To: buoy-qc@vedur.is 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.85 SMTP_SEND: Sent: From: ECMWF.OPS@rhi.hi.is 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.87 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Reply-To: buoy-qc@vedur.is 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.87 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Subject: ECMWF buoy stats (wind) 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.87 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.88 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Posted: Thu, Dec 16, 1993 5:08 AM EST Msg: KGJD-6019-4429 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.88 SMTP_SEND: Sent: From: ECMWF.OPS 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.88 SMTP_SEND: Sent: To: buoy.qc 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.89 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Subj: ECMWF buoy stats (wind) 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.89 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.89 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.90 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.90 SMTP_SEND: Sent: BUOY MONITORING STATISTICS 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.90 SMTP_SEND: Sent: MONITORING CENTRE : ECMWF 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.91 SMTP_SEND: Sent: ELEMENT MONITORED : WIND (DEGREES AND M/S) 21-DEC-1993 18:10:48.91 SMTP_SEND: Sent: AREA : GLOBAL 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.02 SMTP_SEND: Sent: PERIOD : 15 NOV - 15 DEC 1993 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.05 SMTP_SEND: Sent: STANDARD OF COMPARISON: FIRST-GUESS FIELD 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.05 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.08 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.10 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 97 IN DRIFTER CODE, 213 IN SHIP CODE 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.10 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.10 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.13 SMTP_SEND: Sent: (* DENOTES OBSERVATIONS IN SHIP CODE) 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.13 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.16 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.16 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.17 SMTP_SEND: Sent: IDENT LAT LONG NOBS NGROSS BIASF BIASD STDF STDD RMSVEC 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.17 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.18 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 13531 33.6 -19.2 9 0 -0.4 -2 1.3 16 2.1 21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.18 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 13533 32.1 -28.0 8 0 -0.7 8 0.9 24 3.0 A lot of similar lines deleted... 21-DEC-1993 18:18:22.10 SMTP_SEND: Sent: * 62129 53.1 2.2 741 0 1.4 9 1.9 14 3.9 21-DEC-1993 18:18:22.10 SMTP_SEND: Sent: * 62130 53.0 1.7 53 0 0.6 4 2.4 20 3.9 21-DEC-1993 18:18:22.11 SMTP_SEND: Sent: * 62131 58.1 0.1 89 1 0.7 -1 2.3 16 3.6 21-DEC-1993 18:19:25.52 SMTP_SEND: Sent: * 62132 56.5 2.1 72 0 1.0 1 1.9 13 3.0 21-DEC-1993 18:19:25.72 SMTP send failed, sts=0C27804A, sts2=00008100 21-DEC-1993 18:19:25.72 Recipient status=0C27804A for 21-DEC-1993 18:19:25.72 Recipient status=0C27804A for 21-DEC-1993 18:19:27.94 2 rcpts need retry, next try 21-DEC-1993 18:49:27.94 21-DEC-1993 18:19:28.07 *** End of processing pass *** ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 20:50:52 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: SITE agents and binary files Message-ID: <1993Dec21.211900.1@nebula> From: itsmgjd@nebula.syscon.hii.com (Gregory J. Donaldson, SYSCON) Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: 21 Dec 93 21:19:00 -0700 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Folks, In my attempt to link MX to MHS I have run into an issue that maybe someone has got some ideas about. I have looked into the MX support for SEND/FOR and what I get at the SITE agent end. What I get is a binary file in Base64 format. For the file to be usable by me I will need to be able to encode and decode at this point. When moving a file from MX to MHS I will need to decode it back into a binary file so that I can ship it to MHS as an attachment. When moving a file from MHS to MX I will need to transfer the file to the VAX and then encode it before handing it off to SITE_IN. I looked at the MX source code and have found the routines. The encode routine is part of the MAILSHR routine and the decode routine is part of the LOCAL routine. The decode routine looks pretty easy to call to decode a file for me but the encode routine is rather wirted into MAIL and MX. Has anyone faced a similar situation writing SITE routines? If so, would you be willing to share with me how you solved it. If not, but you have any ideas send them my way. I don't have access to a Bliss compiler so I may end up having to code my own routines anyway. Any and all ideas appreciated. If and when I get anywhere I will post my results if anyone is interested. Greg Donaldson ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 21:16:25 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: MX SMTP delivery broken under Multinet V3.3-BETA ??? Message-ID: <1993Dec21.192313.583@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 21 Dec 93 19:23:13 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1993Dec22.000550.215@vedur.is>, gulli@vedur.is (Gunnlaugur Kristjansson) writes: >21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.18 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 13531 33.6 -19.2 9 0 -0.4 -2 1.3 16 2.1 >21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.18 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 13533 32.1 -28.0 8 0 -0.7 8 0.9 24 3.0 > >A lot of similar lines deleted... > >21-DEC-1993 18:18:22.10 SMTP_SEND: Sent: * 62129 53.1 2.2 741 0 1.4 9 1.9 14 3.9 >21-DEC-1993 18:18:22.10 SMTP_SEND: Sent: * 62130 53.0 1.7 53 0 0.6 4 2.4 20 3.9 >21-DEC-1993 18:18:22.11 SMTP_SEND: Sent: * 62131 58.1 0.1 89 1 0.7 -1 2.3 16 3.6 >21-DEC-1993 18:19:25.52 SMTP_SEND: Sent: * 62132 56.5 2.1 72 0 1.0 1 1.9 13 3.0 >21-DEC-1993 18:19:25.72 SMTP send failed, sts=0C27804A, sts2=00008100 >21-DEC-1993 18:19:25.72 Recipient status=0C27804A for >21-DEC-1993 18:19:25.72 Recipient status=0C27804A for >21-DEC-1993 18:19:27.94 2 rcpts need retry, next try 21-DEC-1993 18:49:27.94 >21-DEC-1993 18:19:28.07 *** End of processing pass *** Error 0C27804A translates to: %MX-E-NOCOMPLETE, message transmission could not be completed How much data are you trying to send the remote system? I noticed the transmissions began at about 18:10:49, and continued for a long time (8 minutes?) and then there were a couple of lines close together, and then about three seconds elapsed between two transmissions, and then you got the "SMTP send failed" line...... I would try enabling MultiNet's outgoing SMTP -- do this by hand (to prevent the incoming SMTP agent from starting up). Then you should be able to send the message to SMTP%"user@host" and see if MultiNet can get it through -- if it does make it, then the problem is with MX. Right now, it appears to me (especially after sending 8 minutes worth of data) you might be filling up the destination system's spool area and it can't handle it very well... Just a guess, though... -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 21:42:25 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: SITE agents and binary files Message-ID: <1993Dec21.195511.585@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 21 Dec 93 19:55:11 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1993Dec21.211900.1@nebula>, itsmgjd@nebula.syscon.hii.com (Gregory J. Donaldson, SYSCON) writes: > In my attempt to link MX to MHS I have run into > an issue that maybe someone has got some ideas about. I > have looked into the MX support for SEND/FOR and what I > get at the SITE agent end. What I get is a binary file in Base64 > format. For the file to be usable by me I will need to be able to > encode and decode at this point. MultiNet includes a "$ MULTINET DECODE" command which might be useful; however, it sounds like you have to go both directions.... Can MHS handle binary files, though? -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 05:01:16 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) Subject: Re: MX SMTP delivery broken under Multinet V3.3-BETA ??? Date: 22 Dec 1993 10:01:17 GMT Message-ID: <2f95td$6fh@gap.cco.caltech.edu> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1993Dec22.000550.215@vedur.is>, gulli@vedur.is (Gunnlaugur Kristjansson) writes: =21-DEC-1993 18:19:25.72 SMTP send failed, sts=0C27804A, sts2=00008100 Status 0C27804A is: %MX-E-NOCOMPLETE, message transmission could not be completed I can't, on a system running VMS v5.4-2 and Multinet, find a message definition for status 00008100. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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, 22 Dec 1993 06:10:58 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: gulli@vedur.is (Gunnlaugur Kristjansson) Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: MX SMTP delivery broken under Multinet V3.3-BETA ??? Message-ID: <1993Dec22.112554.216@vedur.is> Date: 22 Dec 93 11:25:54 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1993Dec21.192313.583@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu>, dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) writes: > In article <1993Dec22.000550.215@vedur.is>, gulli@vedur.is (Gunnlaugur Kristjansson) writes: >>21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.18 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 13531 33.6 -19.2 9 0 -0.4 -2 1.3 16 2.1 >>21-DEC-1993 18:10:49.18 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 13533 32.1 -28.0 8 0 -0.7 8 0.9 24 3.0 >> >>A lot of similar lines deleted... >> >>21-DEC-1993 18:18:22.10 SMTP_SEND: Sent: * 62129 53.1 2.2 741 0 1.4 9 1.9 14 3.9 >>21-DEC-1993 18:18:22.10 SMTP_SEND: Sent: * 62130 53.0 1.7 53 0 0.6 4 2.4 20 3.9 >>21-DEC-1993 18:18:22.11 SMTP_SEND: Sent: * 62131 58.1 0.1 89 1 0.7 -1 2.3 16 3.6 >>21-DEC-1993 18:19:25.52 SMTP_SEND: Sent: * 62132 56.5 2.1 72 0 1.0 1 1.9 13 3.0 >>21-DEC-1993 18:19:25.72 SMTP send failed, sts=0C27804A, sts2=00008100 >>21-DEC-1993 18:19:25.72 Recipient status=0C27804A for >>21-DEC-1993 18:19:25.72 Recipient status=0C27804A for >>21-DEC-1993 18:19:27.94 2 rcpts need retry, next try 21-DEC-1993 18:49:27.94 >>21-DEC-1993 18:19:28.07 *** End of processing pass *** > > Error 0C27804A translates to: > > %MX-E-NOCOMPLETE, message transmission could not be completed > > How much data are you trying to send the remote system? I noticed the > transmissions began at about 18:10:49, and continued for a long time (8 > minutes?) and then there were a couple of lines close together, and then > about three seconds elapsed between two transmissions, and then you got the > "SMTP send failed" line...... > > I would try enabling MultiNet's outgoing SMTP -- do this by hand (to > prevent the incoming SMTP agent from starting up). Then you should be able > to send the message to SMTP%"user@host" and see if MultiNet can get it > through -- if it does make it, then the problem is with MX. Right now, it > appears to me (especially after sending 8 minutes worth of data) you might > be filling up the destination system's spool area and it can't handle it > very well... Just a guess, though... > A little bit more info. I talked to the system admin on the destination system and it it seems that it is my node that is closing the connection. His log file says something like "Unexpected closure of connection from node hagl.vedur.is" (not exact wording but it does not say much more). The problem started with the next message that was sent AFTER I installed Multinet v3.3-BETA. Multinet came up about 15-dec-1993 22:38 and the first message that is not going out is at 16-dec-1993 00:07. Since then all long messages get in trouble. Sometimes they get through. And the size of the messages is 80-100KB. I have been sending such messages every day for about 2 years now, so I do not think it is a size problem. The only part that has changed recently is Multinet. I have not tried to enable Multinet's SMTP yet and test that. Is there a way to control the routing of messages as can be done in MX? I route all messages that are not local through a node called isgate.is. It's that node that hagl.vedur.is is talking to and failing. > -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver > dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org Best regards, gulli -- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 10:33:51 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: MX SMTP delivery broken under Multinet V3.3-BETA ??? Message-ID: <1993Dec22.090501.586@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 22 Dec 93 09:05:01 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1993Dec22.112554.216@vedur.is>, gulli@vedur.is (Gunnlaugur Kristjansson) writes: >I have not tried to enable Multinet's SMTP yet and test that. Is >there a way to control the routing of messages as can be done in MX? >I route all messages that are not local through a node called >isgate.is. It's that node that hagl.vedur.is is talking to and failing. No; I was only recommending enabling MultiNet's outgoing SMTP for testing so you could either duplicate the prblem (demonstrating a problem with MultiNet, so you could call the TGV guys and tell them about it) or you could fail to duplicate the problem, in which case you would have found a problem with MX and MultiNet V3.3-beta. Please note, though, that MX doesn't directly talk to MultiNet (or any other TCP/IP package) -- MX talks to NETLIB which interfaces with your underlying TCP/IP package. So if there is an interoperability problem, it will effect MX, NEWSRDR, and probably any other software that uses NETLIB to interface with the underlying TCP/IP package. I'm betting, though, that the problem is something within MultiNet, and not NETLIB (or MX). My main feeling the problem is likely with MultiNet is that you're running a beta-test version of MultiNet V3.3. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 10:47:07 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: gulli@vedur.is (Gunnlaugur Kristjansson) Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: MX SMTP delivery broken under Multinet V3.3-BETA ??? Message-ID: <1993Dec22.153914.217@vedur.is> Date: 22 Dec 93 15:39:14 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU The story continues... > I route all messages that are not local through a node called > isgate.is. It's that node that hagl.vedur.is is talking to and failing. Now I tried to use a local node as route and it worked perfectly. So, here is the layout. VMS/MULTINET/MX SUN SPARC/2 ------------- --------------- hagl.vedur.is ragnar.vedur.is ------------- --------------- ! ! --------------------------------------------------------- ! ------------- PC-ROUTE ------------- / \ / ------------ PC-ROUTE ------------ ! ----------------------------------------------------------- ! ! ---------- ------------------ CISCO isgate.is ---------- ------------------ / SUN SPARC/2 \ Out to the rest of the Internet. If MX is set up in such a way that it uses isgate.is as route path "*" SMTP /route="isgate.is" then large messages don't get through. If a local machine such as ragnar.vedur.is is used as route path "*" SMTP /route="ragnar.vedur.is" then the messages get through. ragnar.vedur.is uses isgate.is as route so the messages always go via isgate.is in the end. Now no messages are waiting wherever I look. So isgate.is is doing its job. The only thing that changed in the begining was that I installed Multinet v3.3-BETA on hagl.vedur.is. Then the troubles started. With changing the route the problem is not solved, just put aside for the time being. I havesome log files which could be of interest if needed, but there are no messages that indicate what is going on. Just about the only conclusion I can get from reading the log files is that SMTP decided that this had been going on long enough and just quits. Best regards, gulli -- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 11:32:11 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: MX SMTP delivery broken under Multinet V3.3-BETA ??? Message-ID: <1993Dec22.095926.588@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 22 Dec 93 09:59:25 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1993Dec22.153914.217@vedur.is>, gulli@vedur.is (Gunnlaugur Kristjansson) writes: >If MX is set up in such a way that it uses isgate.is as route > >path "*" SMTP /route="isgate.is" > >then large messages don't get through. If a local machine such as >ragnar.vedur.is is used as route > >path "*" SMTP /route="ragnar.vedur.is" > >then the messages get through. ragnar.vedur.is uses isgate.is as route >so the messages always go via isgate.is in the end. Now no messages are >waiting wherever I look. So isgate.is is doing its job. Well, if when you're using isgate.is for all your mail, it (or some interaction between your node and isgate.is) causes the SMTP to fail, I wouldn't say "isgate.is is doing its job" -- it may be, but it also may be having some sortof weird problem; maybe MultiNet V3.3-beta isn't waiting long enought for a TCP acknowledgement...?? >The only thing that changed in the begining was that I installed >Multinet v3.3-BETA on hagl.vedur.is. Then the troubles started. >With changing the route the problem is not solved, just put aside >for the time being. Are isgate.is and ragnar.vedur.is running the same version of Sendmail, with similar configurations and the same amount of space on their spool areas? >I havesome log files which could be of interest if needed, but there are no >messages that indicate what is going on. Just about the only conclusion >I can get from reading the log files is that SMTP decided that this had been >going on long enough and just quits. Again, I'd encourage you to send one of those big mail messages to and and see if one of them fails -- try this with both MX and using MultiNet's outgoing SMTP agent. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 11:50:17 CDT Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 12:44:29 EST From: kam@ycvax.york.cuny.edu Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: Mx-List@wkuvx1.wku.edu Message-ID: <00977650.C1099140.23993@ycvax.york.cuny.edu> Subject: Thanks to all I am taking the opportunity to thank all of you who had been so kind and helping when we poor fellows needed it; even if it means wate of bandwidth. Specially to Hunter who goes out of his way to help people. Happy Holidays Kamrul Ahsan Academic Computing and Ed. Tech York College, CUNY New York ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 06:44:13 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: craa79@ccsun.strath.ac.uk ( Bruce Rodger) Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: Address rewriting Date: 23 Dec 1993 12:05:19 GMT Message-ID: <2fc1hv$eov@loch2.cc.strath.ac.uk> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU A few days ago I posted a message asking for hints on rewriting addresses of the form mx%site::user to user@site, as a transition aid... I got several replies... Brian Hamilton Kelly pointed out a number of inaccuracies in my original post - but as most of the UK CBS users know, he dislikes the CBS package even more than I do :-) Carl came up with a rewrite rule which almost does the job, but still requires quotes.... Jamie Jones @ hicom pointed out that uk addresses have traditionally been in big-endian order - we drive on the other side of the road as well :-) This is not really a problem - and in my original posting I didn't refer to it - because we intend to route all outgoing mail via a PP gateway, which is order-tolerant. The JNT (or whatever they're called these days - the UK academic networking authority) has recently issued guidelines saying that from 1st January, we should quote mail addresses in little-endian (internet-style) order, and that mail hubs should be order tolerant. At least this way we'll all quote email addresses in the same form, although the underlying protocols will still treat things differently.... I intend to try using Carl's rewrite rules, with that patch to VMS mail which lets you omit the MX% and the quotes. I'll report back on that one once I've tried it, but have other priorities at the moment - the office Christmas party starts in a few minutes :-) Thanks to all who replied, Bruce. -- R.B. Rodger |R.B.Rodger@strath.ac.uk Computer Centre | Strathclyde Univ | +44 (0)41 552 4400 x3460 Glasgow G4 0LN, Scotland. | Fax 553 4100 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 04:08:40 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: MX and Pathway Message-ID: <1993Dec24.191820.1@mlnaxp.mln.com> From: henderson@mlnaxp.mln.com Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: 24 Dec 93 19:18:20 PST To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Hello, I'd like to get in touch with people who successfully installed Hunter Goatley's MX package under Pathway. Thanks! -- Javier Henderson | Okay now... henderson@mlnaxp.mln.com | Hand over all the chocolate and nobody gets hurt. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1993 23:05:11 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1993 23:02:03 CST From: Kenny Kon Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: mx-list@wkuvx1.wku.edu Message-ID: <00977A94.DB32D840.20040@bible.acu.edu> Subject: messages in queue w/o a route Date sent: 27-DEC-1993 22:59:46 Below is a list of entries left in the queue. Notice that these messages do not have a route after the recipient. Can anyone offer a suggestion on how these were created. Everything seems to be running well on the system so I would assume that it had to be error in the sending. Thank you in advance for any suggestions. >Entry: 14617, Origin: [code=0] > Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 0 bytes > Created: 10-DEC-1993 20:27:59.13, expires 9-JAN-1994 20:27:59.13 > Last modified 10-DEC-1993 20:27:59.13 > Recipient #1: <72722.1320@compuserve.com> > >Entry: 15607, Origin: [Local] > Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 0 bytes > Created: 13-DEC-1993 00:01:32.38, expires 12-JAN-1994 00:01:32.38 > Last modified 13-DEC-1993 00:01:32.38 > Recipient #1: > >Entry: 17495, Origin: [Local] > Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 0 bytes > Created: 16-DEC-1993 08:24:28.54, expires 15-JAN-1994 08:24:28.54 > Last modified 16-DEC-1993 08:24:28.54 > Recipient #1: > >Entry: 19513, Origin: [Local] > Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 0 bytes > Created: 22-DEC-1993 10:39:02.96, expires 21-JAN-1994 10:39:02.96 > Last modified 22-DEC-1993 10:39:02.96 > Recipient #1: > >Entry: 19923, Origin: [Local] > Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 0 bytes > Created: 25-DEC-1993 17:45:24.10, expires 24-JAN-1994 17:45:24.10 > Last modified 25-DEC-1993 17:45:24.10 > Recipient #1: > Kenny ----- Kenny Kon, Assistant to Systems Manager Missions Dept., College of Biblical Studies, Abilene Christian University E-Mail: kenny.kon@BIBLE.ACU.EDU (or kkon@ACUVAX.ACU.EDU) Snail Mail: ACU Box 7725, Abilene TX 79699 Bell Mail: (915)674-3708 (work), (915)672-4915 (home) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 03:35:32 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: messages in queue w/o a route Message-ID: <1993Dec28.015005.605@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 28 Dec 93 01:50:04 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <18819935@MVB.SAIC.COM>, Kenny Kon writes: >Date sent: 27-DEC-1993 22:59:46 > >Below is a list of entries left in the queue. Notice that these messages >do not have a route after the recipient. Can anyone offer a suggestion on >how these were created. Everything seems to be running well on the system >so I would assume that it had to be error in the sending. Thank you in >advance for any suggestions. > >>Entry: 14617, Origin: [code=0] >> Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 0 bytes >> Created: 10-DEC-1993 20:27:59.13, expires 9-JAN-1994 20:27:59.13 >> Last modified 10-DEC-1993 20:27:59.13 >> Recipient #1: <72722.1320@compuserve.com> All of these are "size: 0 bytes", and were most likely created by someone doing a Ctrl-C (or Ctrl-Y) after entering the VMSmail "To:" address. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 03:35:42 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: MX and Pathway Message-ID: <1993Dec28.015545.606@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 28 Dec 93 01:55:44 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1993Dec24.191820.1@mlnaxp.mln.com>, henderson@mlnaxp.mln.com writes: >I'd like to get in touch with people who successfully installed Hunter >Goatley's MX package under Pathway. To communicate with the underlying TCP/IP package, MX uses "NETLIB". NETLIB performs all the necessary calls to the TCP/IP package and insulates the application from having to deal with it. NETLIB doesn't work with Pathway because of a few differences in Wollongong's implementation of UCX emulation (at least, that is my understanding). Matt Madison, author and maintainer of NETLIB, hasn't been able to get assistance from Wollongong to resolve the issues (again, this is my understanding of what's going on). You might want to contact Matt directly and see what information he needs from Wollongong, and then you (being a paying Wollongong customer) could contact Wollongong and get the necessary information, or perhaps have Wollongong communicate directly with Matt. .... Matt has gotten assistance from other TCP/IP vendors, even those he doesn't work for .... Matt's address is . Note, however, that maintaining NETLIB isn't his primary job responsibility, but he has been doing a great job of keeping it up-to-date, especially with some of the AXP software released by some TCP/IP vendors. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 21:50:48 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 19:46:36 PST From: Pat Murphy - (415)329-4044 Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU CC: pmurphy@isdmnl.wr.usgs.gov Message-ID: <00977B42.B7AEFC74.20984@isdmnl.wr.usgs.gov> Subject: addresses with no domain name MX list readers: Having just converted from Multinet's SMTP to MX, it was reported by some of our POP3 clients, which were accustomed to using the MX host for the SMTP server, that they were having problems with RCPT TO addresses with no domain name. Users have become accustomed to doing this for the convenience. I was surprised to learn than POP3 clients such as Eudora did not fully qualify the address before sending it. Testing showed that MX refused these addresses with a nuisance 501 address syntax error, while Multinet's SMTP was more forgiving of the the syntax. I acknowledge that this is invalid syntax. As a patch, I tried to DEFINE PATH "" LOCAL, hoping that this would solve the problem, but it did not, most likely because the syntax processing happens before the PATH routing occurs. Any ideas? Patrick W. Murphy, Ph.D. Computer Scientist US Geological Survey IP - pmurphy@isdmnl.usgs.gov. NSINET - isdmnl::pmurphy BITNET - pmurphy@usgsresv Ph: (415)329-4044 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 23:06:22 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 20:54:51 PST From: Bill Pedersen Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU CC: pedersen@kpy.com Message-ID: <00977B4C.40680980.2440@kpy.com> Subject: RE: addresses with no domain name >> Having just converted from Multinet's SMTP to MX, it was reported by >> some of our POP3 clients, which were accustomed to using the MX host >> for the SMTP server, that they were having problems with RCPT TO >> addresses with no domain name. Users have become accustomed to doing >> this for the convenience. I was surprised to learn than POP3 clients >> such as Eudora did not fully qualify the address before sending it. >> Testing showed that MX refused these addresses with a nuisance 501 >> address syntax error, while Multinet's SMTP was more forgiving of >> the the syntax. I acknowledge that this is invalid syntax. As a >> patch, I tried to DEFINE PATH "" LOCAL, hoping that this would solve >> the problem, but it did not, most likely because the syntax >> processing happens before the PATH routing occurs. Any ideas? >> >> Patrick W. Murphy, Ph.D. Pat: Did you mean: DEFINE PATH "" LOCAL or DEFINE PATH "*" LOCAL This would seem to me to be more appropriate. __________________________________________________________________________ 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, 28 Dec 1993 23:14:11 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: addresses with no domain name Message-ID: <1993Dec28.212700.610@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 28 Dec 93 21:27:00 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <18838441@MVB.SAIC.COM>, Pat Murphy - (415)329-4044 writes: [...] >I was surprised to learn than POP3 clients >such as Eudora did not fully qualify the address before sending it. >Testing showed that MX refused these addresses with a nuisance 501 >address syntax error, while Multinet's SMTP was more forgiving of >the the syntax. I acknowledge that this is invalid syntax. As a >patch, I tried to DEFINE PATH "" LOCAL, hoping that this would solve >the problem, but it did not, most likely because the syntax >processing happens before the PATH routing occurs. Any ideas? What prevents you from fixing the real problem (invalid headers being spit out by Eudora)? Too many clients? I also don't fully understand the problem, I think; MX doesn't implement a POP3 server -- MultiNet is probably still doing performing as the POP server to your clients, and perhaps it isn't giving MX a FQDN???? (I'm not familiar with how sending mail through a POP server works, or with the innards of Eudora. Can you tell??) -d -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 10:01:43 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 10:54:01 EST From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU CC: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <00977BC1.7BD0DFE0.1367@garnet.nist.gov> Subject: Re: addresses with no domain name > (I'm not familiar with how sending mail through a POP server works, or with > the innards of Eudora. Can you tell??) You don't send mail through POP, you only retreive it. A POP client, such as Eudora, sends mail using SMTP, either directly to the recipient, or to a friendly host nearby that will route it (i.e., store and forward). What appears to be happening is that the MX host is being used as the mail router, that Eudora isn't using a FQDN, and that MX isn't accepting the mail on that initial hop. If the problem is that Dr. Murphy's users are trying to reply to mail that arrives without FQDNs, then we know who to tell him to %^*( at. On the other hand, if the abbreviated addresses are meant to be local, then the solution is in the proper configuration of the domain name resolver (at the TCP/IP driver level), which might be able to attempt name resolution with default suffixes. - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 10:05:46 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: RE: addresses with no domain name Message-ID: <1993Dec29.084410.611@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 29 Dec 93 08:44:09 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <18839292@MVB.SAIC.COM>, Bill Pedersen writes: >Did you mean: > > DEFINE PATH "" LOCAL > >or > > DEFINE PATH "*" LOCAL > >This would seem to me to be more appropriate. Defining * as Local would cause all Internet mail to be delivered locally by MX. For example, this would cause mail addressed to dwing@xyzzy.com to be delivered to your local node, which is incorrect -- you'd want that delivered to xyzzy.com. If the problem is invalid Envelope addresses (the MAIL FROM: and RCPT TO: addresses), nothing you do with MX's DEFINE PATH is going to change how they work -- the PATHs control decisions made by the router (the MX Router process on your system), but the Envelope addresses are being processed (and rejected) by the MX SMTP Server process, which handles incoming SMTP connections. $ TELNET/PORT=25 LOCALHOST Trying... Connected to LOCALHOST.COLORADO.EDU. HELO LOCAL 220 buckie.hsc.colorado.edu MX V3.3 VAX SMTP server ready at Wed, 29 250 Name lookup failed for LOCAL MAIL FROM: 501 Invalid address: MAIL FROM: 250 MAIL command accepted. RCPT TO: 501 Syntax error in address RCPT TO: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) QUIT -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 11:09:43 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: addresses with no domain name Message-ID: <1993Dec29.092327.612@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 29 Dec 93 09:23:26 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <18845253@MVB.SAIC.COM>, "Jonathan E. Hardis" writes: >On the >other hand, if the abbreviated addresses are meant to be local, then the >solution is in the proper configuration of the domain name resolver (at the >TCP/IP driver level), which might be able to attempt name resolution with >default suffixes. If this is the case, some simple rewrites with MX could get around the problem if the BIND server isn't doing what is expected (or needed). Hopefully the original poster could enlighten us a bit more about where, exactly, MX is complaining about the address. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 12:46:37 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 12:40:16 EDT From: "Michael McIntyre, 508-371-1935" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <00977BD0.5351E8C0.6740@mcinc.com> Subject: MXAlias/send locking problem Hi, I just encountered an interesting error which I've not seen discussed recently. When you are running MXalias, and from the same account send mail to an alias which you have just looked at, the alias does not get translated. The particulars: MX Version 3.3 VMS Version 5.5 Mail Transport MX% MX_VMS_SHOW_ADDRESS true Session 1: 1: $ mxalias 1: MXalias> show olen 1: MX Alias Description 1: ------------ ----------- 1: OLEN Digital Technical Consulting Center Session 2: 2: $ mail 2: MAIL> send 2: To: olen 2: MX rewrote OLEN as 2: Subj: Session 1: 1: MXalias> exit 1: $ Session 2: 2: $ mail 2: MAIL> send 2: To: olen 2: MX rewrote alias OLEN as 2: Subj: Michael McIntyre McIntyre Consulting, Inc. Tel: 508-371-1935 msm@mcinc.com 336 Baker Ave. Concord, MA 01742 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 13:45:35 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: MXAlias/send locking problem Message-ID: <1993Dec29.121504.617@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 29 Dec 93 12:15:04 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <18848907@MVB.SAIC.COM>, "Michael McIntyre, 508-371-1935" writes: >When you are running MXalias, and from the same account send mail to an >alias which you have just looked at, the alias does not get translated. Because MXALIAS needs to close the file before another process can read it; if MXALIAS closed and opened the file each time you changed data in the file, it would use more I/O than necessary to get around this one side- effect you found. Looking at the source for MXALIAS, it appears it isn't performing an explicit flush of the RMS buffers when it writes; this could be done with less overhead than doing a close/open, I suppose.... -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 14:54:04 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 14:49:50 CST From: "George D. Greenwade" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU CC: pmurphy@isdmnl.usgs.gov Message-ID: <00977BE2.6D1495C0.22606@SHSU.edu> Subject: RE: addresses with no domain name On Tue, 28 Dec 1993 19:46:36 PST, Pat Murphy - (415)329-4044 reported: > Having just converted from Multinet's SMTP to MX, it was reported by some > of our POP3 clients, which were accustomed to using the MX host for the > SMTP server, that they were having problems with RCPT TO addresses with no > domain name. Users have become accustomed to doing this for the > convenience. I was surprised to learn than POP3 clients such as Eudora did > not fully qualify the address before sending it. Testing showed that MX > refused these addresses with a nuisance 501 address syntax error, while > Multinet's SMTP was more forgiving of the the syntax. I acknowledge that > this is invalid syntax. As a patch, I tried to DEFINE PATH "" LOCAL, > hoping that this would solve the problem, but it did not, most likely > because the syntax processing happens before the PATH routing occurs. Any > ideas? Since it's apparently before the PATH sequence (and I admittedly know what the acronym POP stands for, but nothing else) and I assume that this is more or less a local problem, have you tried using the undocumented SET TRANSPORT MX% at the MAIL> prompt level in an affected account? Purely a guess on this, but if you can get MX to think that it is dealing with a properly-formatted MX%-prefixed FQDN for mail handling, maybe you can get away with something undocumented within the undocumented feature? Regards, George %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% George D. Greenwade, Ph.D. Bitnet: BED_GDG@SHSU Department of Economics and Business Analysis THEnet: SHSU::BED_GDG College of Business Administration Voice: (409) 294-1266 P. O. Box 2118 FAX: (409) 294-3612 Sam Houston State University Internet: bed_gdg@SHSU.edu Huntsville, TX 77341 bed_gdg%SHSU.decnet@relay.the.net %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 16:41:47 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 16:41:44 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <00977BF2.0EDF7A73.1@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Re: MXAlias/send locking problem dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) writes: > >In article <18848907@MVB.SAIC.COM>, "Michael McIntyre, 508-371-1935" writes: > >>When you are running MXalias, and from the same account send mail to an >>alias which you have just looked at, the alias does not get translated. > >Because MXALIAS needs to close the file before another process can read >it; if MXALIAS closed and opened the file each time you changed data in the >file, it would use more I/O than necessary to get around this one side- >effect you found. > >Looking at the source for MXALIAS, it appears it isn't performing an >explicit flush of the RMS buffers when it writes; this could be done with >less overhead than doing a close/open, I suppose.... > Actually, the code does a specific $RELEASE to unlock the record, but something else is wrong. In any case, that's the problem---when MXALIAS is looking at an entry, MX_MAILSHR gets a "record locked" error. I intend to fix that for MX V3.4. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@ALPHA.WKU.EDU (or goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 16:43:39 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 16:43:37 CST From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <00977BF2.522FF7BC.3@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Re: MX and Pathway dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) writes: > >In article <1993Dec24.191820.1@mlnaxp.mln.com>, henderson@mlnaxp.mln.com writes: >>I'd like to get in touch with people who successfully installed Hunter >>Goatley's MX package under Pathway. > >To communicate with the underlying TCP/IP package, MX uses "NETLIB". >NETLIB performs all the necessary calls to the TCP/IP package and insulates >the application from having to deal with it. > >NETLIB doesn't work with Pathway because of a few differences in >Wollongong's implementation of UCX emulation (at least, that is my >understanding). Matt Madison, author and maintainer of NETLIB, hasn't been >able to get assistance from Wollongong to resolve the issues (again, this >is my understanding of what's going on). > Wollongong has told me more than once that they're willing to help, but then they never follow through with it. >You might want to contact Matt directly and see what information he needs >from Wollongong, and then you (being a paying Wollongong customer) could >contact Wollongong and get the necessary information, or perhaps have >Wollongong communicate directly with Matt. > This is premature, but work is progressing on NETLIB and Wollongong. Eric LaFranchi, author of PACKASM, is working with Matt to try to get it done. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@ALPHA.WKU.EDU (or goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 17:57:43 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: larry@eco.twg.com (Larry Henry) Subject: Re: MX and Pathway Date: 29 Dec 1993 23:06:01 GMT Message-ID: <2ft2gp$j3@scoop.eco.twg.com> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1993Dec28.015545.606@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu>, dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) writes: |>In article <1993Dec24.191820.1@mlnaxp.mln.com>, henderson@mlnaxp.mln.com writes: |>>I'd like to get in touch with people who successfully installed Hunter |>>Goatley's MX package under Pathway. |> |>To communicate with the underlying TCP/IP package, MX uses "NETLIB". |>NETLIB performs all the necessary calls to the TCP/IP package and insulates |>the application from having to deal with it. |> |>NETLIB doesn't work with Pathway because of a few differences in |>Wollongong's implementation of UCX emulation (at least, that is my |>understanding). Matt Madison, author and maintainer of NETLIB, hasn't been |>able to get assistance from Wollongong to resolve the issues (again, this |>is my understanding of what's going on). |> |>You might want to contact Matt directly and see what information he needs |>from Wollongong, and then you (being a paying Wollongong customer) could |>contact Wollongong and get the necessary information, or perhaps have |>Wollongong communicate directly with Matt. |> |>.... Matt has gotten assistance from other TCP/IP vendors, even those |>he doesn't work for .... |> |>Matt's address is . Note, however, that maintaining |>NETLIB isn't his primary job responsibility, but he has been doing a great |>job of keeping it up-to-date, especially with some of the AXP software |>released by some TCP/IP vendors. |> Dan, Thank you for you information concerning the potential problem with NETLIB. I have talked to Matt concerning NETLIB and its interaction with PathWay... BTW, you are correct. Matt is very quick in his responsivness with respect to the NETLIB package, whilst I was composing this response I sent a message to him which he responded to before I finished. From what Matt said it seems that their was an issue. He was able to resolve the issue without our help. From what Matt tells me the NETLIB package primarily uses the INET QIO interface to communicate with PathWay. The two exceptions are gethostbyaddr() and gethostbyname(). Given this is the case, if one were to install NETLIB on an AXP machine and not compile it with the proper DEC C compiler switches to prevent prefixing, then NETLIB would attempt to use the UCX emulation for those two routines rather than our own copies. But, in any case those routines should function properly as long as the ACP has been started to resolve names. If you have other issues that you know of concerning our product please don't hesistate to air them here, it may be that others have already solved them or we have them addressed in the new release that is about to be shipped. -Larry. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 13:52:03 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU From: hruska@bmcwest.com (Paul Hruska) Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Sample CONFIG.MCP files? Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 11:32:51 Message-ID: To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Hello all, I am trying to get MX up and running on our cluster and have a few questions. First let me express what I "think" is goin on: + MX is an SMTP delivery mechanisim for a VAX system (standalone/cluster). (we have a cluster (DSSI & LAVC) of 3 VAXes) + It is designed to replace whatever SMTP package one might already be using. (we are currently using TGV's Multinet on one node) + MX is capable of performing SMTP over DECnet in a clustered environment. + The actions of each node can be configured as desired) If any of my assumptions are incorrect please let me know. Also if these questions are answered in a FAQ somewhere please direct me to it. A brief layout of our cluster might help here. (I'm sorry but I think in pictures) +---------(cluster) DUCKS ----------+ | | | +-HEWEY-+ +-DEWEY-+ +-LEWEY-+ | | | | | | | | | | +-------+ +-------+ +-------+ | | \__decnet__/\_______/ \__________internet | | +-----------------------------------+ In this picture: + Lewey is the node that has TGV Multinet, and is our means of accessing the Internet. + Hewey and Dewey will hand mail message to Lewey via DECnet-SMTP for proper delivery. Following the installation directions (which were mostly clear) I installed MX on our cluster which produced a CONFIG.MCP file. In sifting through the documentation I can't come up with a clear idea of which nodes should be running what detached process, and which nodes should be considered routers. Basically, I'm certian I screwed up the answers I gave to MXCONFIG. I want to have our whole cluster set up as an alias "corporate" so that a 'generic' mail item will at least get in the door. The relevant parts of my shameful CONFIG.MCP follow: DEFINE PATH "corporate.bmcwest.com" LOCAL DEFINE PATH "corporate" LOCAL DEFINE PATH "dewey.DNET" LOCAL DEFINE PATH "lewey.DNET" LOCAL DEFINE PATH "LEWEY" DECNET_SMTP/ROUTE=LEWEY DEFINE PATH "dewwy" DECNET_SMTP/ROUTE=dewey DEFINE PATH "hewey" DECNET_SMTP/ROUTE=hewey DEFINE PATH * SMTP DEFINE ALIAS "Postmaster" "hruska@corporate" If anyone has a similar configuration and would be kind enough to send me a copy of their config and startup files I would appreciate it. Many Thanks, Paul ====================================================================== Paul Hruska | Phone: (208) 387-4384 BMC West Corporation | Fax: (208) 387-4367 1475 Tyrell Ln | Internet: Hruska@BMCWest.Com Boise, ID 83707 | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Truth is like a diamond. You cannot fully appreciate it's beauty from only one facet. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 14:58:07 CST Sender: list-mgr@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: Sample CONFIG.MCP files? Message-ID: <1993Dec30.130209.628@buckie.hsc.colorado.edu> From: dwing@uh01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing) Date: 30 Dec 93 13:02:08 MDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article , hruska@bmcwest.com (Paul Hruska) writes: >First let me express what I "think" is goin on: > + MX is an SMTP delivery mechanisim for a VAX system (standalone/cluster). > (we have a cluster (DSSI & LAVC) of 3 VAXes) Right. MX will work on VAX/VMS (OpenVMS VAX) and AXP/VMS (OpenVMS AXP). > + It is designed to replace whatever SMTP package one might already be using. > (we are currently using TGV's Multinet on one node) Right. > + MX is capable of performing SMTP over DECnet in a clustered environment. SMTP-over-DECnet is usually used in a non-clustered environment; if all mail is devlierable by any node you don't need to use SMTP-over-DECnet. > + The actions of each node can be configured as desired) Depending on what you want each node to do 'differently', you may need to have separate MX configuration files for each node. >If any of my assumptions are incorrect please let me know. Also if these >questions are answered in a FAQ somewhere please direct me to it. > >A brief layout of our cluster might help here. > (I'm sorry but I think in pictures) > > +---------(cluster) DUCKS ----------+ > | | > | +-HEWEY-+ +-DEWEY-+ +-LEWEY-+ | > | | | | | | | | > | +-------+ +-------+ +-------+ | > | \__decnet__/\_______/ \__________internet > | | > +-----------------------------------+ > >In this picture: > + Lewey is the node that has TGV Multinet, and is our means of accessing the > Internet. > + Hewey and Dewey will hand mail message to Lewey via DECnet-SMTP for proper > delivery. Are you sharing a common SYSUAF and VMSMAIL_PROFILE.DATA file between all the nodes in the cluster? If you are, you don't need to use SMTP-over- DECnet at all. In fact, if you're only looking to allow users on the node that doesn't have TCP/IP to send and receive Internet Email, I believe you can, under your MultiNet license, simply have those users use the datafiles belonging to LEWEY:: to act as their mail node for Internet mail. >Following the installation directions (which were mostly clear) What wasn't clear? The maintainer of MX (Hunter Goatley) is always looking to make the product better and easier to use. >I installed MX >on our cluster which produced a CONFIG.MCP file. In sifting through the >documentation I can't come up with a clear idea of which nodes should be >running what detached process, and which nodes should be considered routers. The only thing that matters is that your node with TCP/IP runs all the TCP/IP-based garbage. Specifically, it should be running the Router, outgoing SMTP agents, and incoming SMTP ("SMTP Server"). You also need to run at least one Local agent, but that can be run on any node in the cluster, or all nodes, or just one node, or the left two, or the right two, or the middle two (did I get 'em all?). >Basically, I'm certian I screwed up the answers I gave to MXCONFIG. I want to >have our whole cluster set up as an alias "corporate" so that a 'generic' mail >item will at least get in the door. The relevant parts of my shameful >CONFIG.MCP follow: > > DEFINE PATH "corporate.bmcwest.com" LOCAL > DEFINE PATH "corporate" LOCAL > DEFINE PATH "dewey.DNET" LOCAL > DEFINE PATH "lewey.DNET" LOCAL > DEFINE PATH "LEWEY" DECNET_SMTP/ROUTE=LEWEY > DEFINE PATH "dewwy" DECNET_SMTP/ROUTE=dewey > DEFINE PATH "hewey" DECNET_SMTP/ROUTE=hewey > DEFINE PATH * SMTP Are you trying to get your From: addresses to all be user@CORPORATE.BMCWEST.COM, or are you trying for user@node.CORPORATE. BMCWEST.COM, or are you trying for something different? > DEFINE ALIAS "Postmaster" "hruska@corporate" Be sure to fully-qualify your ALIAS address, just to be sure you won't have problems with it. >If anyone has a similar configuration and would be kind enough to send me a >copy of their config and startup files I would appreciate it. I have a VAXcluster with common SYSUAF and VMSMAIL_PROFILE.DATA files, and all mail sent by all nodes has a return address of uh01.colorado.edu. I don't run SMTP-over-DECnet between the VAXcluster nodes (all disks are mounted to all nodes, so any node can do a "local" delivery to any user). The relevent portion of my PATHs look something like: DEFINE PATH "uh01.Colorado.EDU" Local DEFINE PATH "uh01" Local DEFINE PATH "buckie.HSC.Colorado.EDU" Local DEFINE PATH "buckie" Local DEFINE PATH "[140.226.4.12]" Local DEFINE PATH "*" SMTP If you *do* need to run SMTP-over-DECnet (because of separate SYSUAFs, or all disks aren't mounted cluster-wide), please repost or Email me directly and I'll walk you through what you need to setup. -Dan Wing, Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing@eisner.decus.org