Archive-Date: Wed, 01 Jan 1997 00:01:51 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 01 Jan 1997 00:01:17 EST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009ADAFF.60108507.57@wku.edu> Subject: MX-LIST Administrivia: Monthly Post %DCL-W-SKPDAT, image data (records not beginning with "$") ignored %DCL-W-SKPDAT, image data (records not beginning with "$") ignored Last modified: 28-SEP-1995 13:33 (Updated digest info) Welcome to MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU, 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@LISTS.WKU.EDU: SUBSCRIBE MX-List-Digest "Your real name here" The MX-List archives are maintained at ARCHIVES@LISTS.WKU.EDU. To get a copy of any month's postings, send an e-mail message with the body SEND MX-List.yyyy-mm to ARCHIVES@LISTS.WKU.EDU, 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. MX itself is available via anonymous ftp from ftp.spc.edu in [.MX.MX041]. You can also get it via e-mail by sending the commands SEND MX and SEND FILESERV_TOOLS on separate lines in the body of a mail message to FILESERV@LISTS.WKU.EDU. To remove yourself from the mailing list, send the following command to MXserver@LISTS.WKU.EDU: 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 DIGEST - to switch to digest mode SET MX-List NODIGEST - to switch to non-digest mode 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, Sr. OpenVMS Systems Programmer goathunter@MadGoat.com Process Software P.O. Box 51745 Bowling Green, KY 42102-6745 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 01 Jan 1997 22:25:57 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 15:32:08 EST-10EST From: Daiajo Tibdixious MACS <"svs::svist070"@svs6pub.svh.unsw.EDU.AU> Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009ADC4A.945C2B40.1@svs6pub.svh.unsw.EDU.AU> Subject: MX V4.2 installation error I installed MX V4.2 today, all went okay except for this error at the very end: MX installation procedure complete. %VMSINSTAL-I-MOVEFILES, Files will now be moved to their target directories... %INSTALL-E-FAIL, failed to REPLACE entry for DISK$SVS6_DUA0:DNSMTP_SERVER.EXE -INSTALL-E-IMGTRACED, /TRACEBACK image cannot be a privileged, execute_only, or resident image Installation of MX V4.2 completed at 14:41 VMSINSTAL procedure done at 14:41 SVS6> eoj SYSTEM logged out at 2-JAN-1997 14:42:05.10 I pulled out the .OLB's and .OPT's and linked it manually with /NOtraceback, and it seems fine. The problem seems to be with KITINSTAL.COM $ MX_IMAGES = "MX_DNSMTP,DNSMTP_SERVER" should have a following line like $ MX_IMAGES = "MX_UUCP,MX_RMAIL" $ MX_TRACES = "TRACE,TRACE" Although I did not look at this in detail. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 15:29:32 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <32CBB85C.699BD79@tmc.naecker.com> Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 13:30:04 +0000 From: Brad Hughes Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mx-list@madgoat.com Subject: mx api Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Is there a API to MX available? ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 18:19:32 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 18:45:33 EST From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: brad@tmc.naecker.com, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009ADC65.99422EA0.4@garnet.nist.gov> Subject: RE: mx api > Is there a API to MX available? I like questions that are short and to the point, but sometimes this makes them ambiguous. To SEND mail through MX, use MX_ENTER. To RECEIVE mail through MX, use the VMS callable mail function library. To ROUTE mail through MX, use the SITE interface. - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 19:06:14 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <32CBE8E8.6BC6BABE@tmc.naecker.com> Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 16:57:12 +0000 From: Brad Hughes Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: mx api References: <009ADC65.99422EA0.4@garnet.nist.gov> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jonathan E. Hardis wrote: > > > Is there a API to MX available? > > I like questions that are short and to the point, but sometimes this makes > them ambiguous. > > To SEND mail through MX, use MX_ENTER. > Thank you. This is exactly what I needed. > To RECEIVE mail through MX, use the VMS callable mail function library. > > To ROUTE mail through MX, use the SITE interface. > > - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 10:30:58 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: "Robert H. McClanahan" To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 10:28:10 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: Off-Topic Question Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Pardon the off-topic question, but could someone point me to a mailing list for UCX (or DEC TCP/IP Services, depending on what day of the week this is), or more specifically UCX POP? Please reply directly to me to spare the list any more off-topic stuff. Thanks and Sorry, RHM +--+ Robert H. McClanahan, Mgr, Tech Info Systems, rmcclanahan@tis.aecc.com <[]>< Arkansas Electric Coop Corp, PO Box 194208, Little Rock, AR 72219-4208 USA "If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world." C.S. Lewis ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 11:21:59 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 17:07:16 BST From: John Powers Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: john.powers@blackwell.co.uk Message-ID: <009AE045.B280ED00.229@blackwell.co.uk> Subject: Callable MCP - or other workaround? I wish to find out the local headers inside a program. I could do it the long way via lib$spawning out a command to run mcp show local to a scratch file and read the information from the file, but that seems terribly long-winded. Is there a callable interface to MCP to get this, or any other simpler way of doing it? Is this information held in a file somewhere, that I could simply read? It must be held somewhere, for MCP to find out.. There must be a better way.. Any ideas anybody? TIA ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Powers - Blackwell's, Oxford - - "fee issuing thirty mails" (anag.) john.powers@blackwell.co.uk (Internet) Blackwells Booksellers - Visit our PSI%234284400179::TJGP (PSImail) home page: http://www.blackwell.co.uk/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 13:35:45 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 14:31:10 -0400 (EDT) From: "Steven Bryan 644.3921" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Off-Topic Question To: MX-List Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Robert, there may be a list for UCX but it can't have too large a following due to it's "DEC only" nature. I am trying to figure out the best POP3 config for our UCX cluster today. (I've avoided it for years but...) If you want to call and confer, we can be our own support group. Good luck. I can be reached at the sites below... I do have access to DEC's DSN electronic info connection, but it has virtually nothing about configuring POP3 in it. Anyone else know of any info sources out there? Steven Bryan Network Software Manager the State of Ohio Dept. of Administrative Services Ohio Data Network 1320 Arthur E. Adams Drive Columbus, Ohio 43221 614.644.3921 614.752.6108 (Fax) bryan@ohio.gov ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 18:03:14 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 12:52:41 EST From: "Brian Tillman, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: john.powers@blackwell.co.uk Message-ID: <009AE022.21E051A0.4@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: Callable MCP - or other workaround? John Powers (john.powers@blackwell.co.uk) writes: >I wish to find out the local headers inside a program. I could do >it the long way via lib$spawning out a command to run mcp show local >to a scratch file and read the information from the file, but that >seems terribly long-winded. Is there a callable interface to MCP to >get this, or any other simpler way of doing it? Is this information >held in a file somewhere, that I could simply read? It must be held >somewhere, for MCP to find out.. The headers are in the [MX.QUEUE.*]*.HDR_INFO files. Would a program that produces the following help? $ mcp queue show/all Entry# Status Size Source Agent Entry# Status Size ------ ------ ------- ------ ------- ------ ------ ------- 25 FINISH 868 SMTP $ mxheader 25 Received: from esseye.si.com by benzie (MX V4.2 VAX) with SMTP; Tue, 07 Jan 1997 12:42:08 EST Received: by esseye.si.com via rmail with stdio id for tillman@SWDEV.SI.COM; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 12:36:16 -0500 (EST) (Smail-3.2 199 6-Jul-4 #4 built 1996-Aug-27) Received: from axp1.wku.edu by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: ax p1.wku.edu [161.6.18.1]) id QQbxmk28576; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 12:38:18 -0500 (EST) Other: X-ListName: Message Exchange Discussion List Other: Warnings-To: <> Other: Errors-To: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 17:07:16 BST From: John Powers Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com cc: john.powers@blackwell.co.uk Message-ID: <009AE045.B280ED00.229@blackwell.co.uk> Subject: Callable MCP - or other workaround? If it would, let me know. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- Brian Tillman | Internet: tillman_brian@si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. | tillman@swdev.si.com 4141 Eastern Ave., MS239 | Hey, I said this stuff myself. Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 | My company has no part in it. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 02:42:54 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 09:36:15 EST From: "Mario Meyer, Phys.-Techn. Bundesanstalt" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: mmeyer@ChbRB.Berlin.PTB.De Message-ID: <009AE0CF.DB8049F0.11@ChbRB.Berlin.PTB.De> Subject: Re: Off-Topic Question (UCX POP infos) I don't remember if it was told on that list that UCX POP is an adaption of the IUPOP3 (free) Software. There is a mailing list for that product: To subscribe send a mail to majordomo@indiana.edu with a commando line in the body: subscribe iupop3-users Documentation and Sources are available from ftp.indiana.edu (/pub/vms/iupop3). Mario --,------------------------------------------------------.------------------ | Mario Meyer Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt | . , | ............. Institut Berlin Referat IB.TI | _QQ__ | : wide area : Abbestr. 2-12, D - 10587 Berlin | __( U, )__ | : networker : tel. (+49 30) 3481 472, fax. ... 490 | /// `---' \\\ | SMTP: MMeyer@Berlin.PTB.De, BITNET: MMeyer@PTBIB | /||\ /||\ --| X.400: S=Meyer; OU=IB-TI; O=PTB; P=PTB; A=d400; C=DE |------------------ `------------------------------------------------------' ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 06:01:56 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 12:02:00 BST From: John Powers Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: tillman@swdev.si.com CC: MX-List@MadGoat.com, john.powers@blackwell.co.uk Message-ID: <009AE0E4.37F7E800.4@blackwell.co.uk> Subject: RE: Callable MCP - or other workaround? Sorry my fault, I didn't make it clear what I am trying to get.. > >John Powers (john.powers@blackwell.co.uk) writes: > >>I wish to find out the local headers inside a program. I could do >>it the long way via lib$spawning out a command to run mcp show local >>to a scratch file and read the information from the file, but that >>seems terribly long-winded. Is there a callable interface to MCP to >>get this, or any other simpler way of doing it? Is this information >>held in a file somewhere, that I could simply read? It must be held >>somewhere, for MCP to find out.. > >The headers are in the [MX.QUEUE.*]*.HDR_INFO files. Would a program that >produces the following help? > >$ mcp queue show/all >Entry# Status Size Source Agent Entry# Status Size [..deletia..] >cc: john.powers@blackwell.co.uk >Message-ID: <009AE045.B280ED00.229@blackwell.co.uk> >Subject: Callable MCP - or other workaround? > >If it would, let me know. [..deletia..] That first sentence I wrote was not properly constructed.. >>I wish to find out the local headers inside a program. I am not interested in the *contents* of the headers, just the settings of the flags for local headers - i.e. the output I would get if I spawned out the command $ MCP SHOW LOCAL LOCAL agent settings: DECnet delivery retry interval: 0 00:30:00.00 Maximum number of retries: 96 Accounting disabled. Multiple VMS Mail From: addresses allowed. Local delivery errors are not CC'ed to local Postmaster. Delivery to MultiNet MM disallowed. Top headers: <----- This information REPLY_TO <----- here is what I Bottom headers: <----- want.. (none) <----- What I am trying to do is get my mail that goes through the home-brewed SITE interface program to match the stuff that is delivered locally, so that if I enter MCP> SET LOCAL /HEADER= MCP> reset,save, etc. exit. The site interface programs will keep in step with the local messages. Within the site program I need to look at the value that MCP has set for the local headers. I hope this is clearer, sorry about yesterday's garbled stuff - it had been a hard day! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Powers - Blackwell's, Oxford - - "fee issuing thirty mails" (anag.) john.powers@blackwell.co.uk (Internet) Blackwells Booksellers - Visit our PSI%234284400179::TJGP (PSImail) home page: http://www.blackwell.co.uk/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 09:43:14 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 10:41:08 EST From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: tillman@swdev.si.com, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009AE0D8.EC074C20.7@garnet.nist.gov> Subject: RE: Callable MCP - or other workaround? > Sorry my fault, I didn't make it clear what I am trying to get.. > $ MCP SHOW LOCAL > >LOCAL agent settings: > DECnet delivery retry interval: 0 00:30:00.00 > Maximum number of retries: 96 > Accounting disabled. > Multiple VMS Mail From: addresses allowed. > Local delivery errors are not CC'ed to local Postmaster. > Delivery to MultiNet MM disallowed. > Top headers: <----- This information > REPLY_TO <----- here is what I > Bottom headers: <----- want.. > (none) <----- There seems to be no great mystery here. What you want are the contents of the MX_CONFIG.MXCFG file. There are three obvious choices: 1) Reverse engineer it. 2) Look at the source code. 3) Adopt the discipline to always generate MX_CONFIG.MXCFG from a plain text file, such as CONFIG.MCP. - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 11:50:06 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: quoted-printable quirk... Message-ID: From: levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: 09 Jan 1997 17:25:54 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU I've now received several messages with the following headers: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm not sure weather this is legal or not (you tell me...), but I have noticed that MX does not autotranslate them as it does when the "Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1" header is present. This might be a bug in MX (if missing the Content-Type: header is legal) or i the senders mail program... -- R Levitte, Levitte Programming; Spannv. 38, I; S-161 43 Bromma; SWEDEN Tel: +46-8-26 52 47; Cel: +46-10-222 64 05; No fax right now PGP key fingerprint = A6 96 C0 34 3A 96 AA 6C B0 D5 9A DF D2 E9 9C 65 Check http://www.lp.se/~levitte for my public key. bastard@bofh.se ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 12:12:17 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 12:12:08 EST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: LEVITTE@LP.SE Message-ID: <009AE1AE.CC669EF3.5@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: quoted-printable quirk... levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) writes: > >I've now received several messages with the following headers: > > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > >I'm not sure weather this is legal or not (you tell me...), but I >have noticed that MX does not autotranslate them as it does when >the "Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1" header is present. > >This might be a bug in MX (if missing the Content-Type: header is >legal) or i the senders mail program... > I would think the latter. I'm pretty sure that Content-Type is required (which is why MX expects it). Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software Corporation (TCPware) http://www.wku.edu/www/madgoat/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 12:44:56 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 13:44:07 EST From: Jim Bender Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@madgoat.com Message-ID: <009AE1BB.A601E6AC.1740@bdsnet.com> Subject: Netscape 4.0 and MX Hi... We've noticed a problem developing with the latest Netscape offering. The emailer in Netscape 4.0 seems to insist on NOT sending the HELO command, whilst MX insists that it should. Who's bug is this? MX or Netscape? (I'm figuring it's Netscape...) BTW, the latest version of Sendmail doesn't seem to impose the HELO requirement that MX does.... Thanks for any insight! Regards, Jim Bender jbender@bdsnet.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 13:20:36 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 13:20:27 EST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: JBENDER@BDSNET.COM Message-ID: <009AE1B8.57B2E3E6.10@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Netscape 4.0 and MX Jim Bender writes: > >The emailer in Netscape 4.0 seems to insist on NOT sending the HELO >command, whilst MX insists that it should. > >Who's bug is this? MX or Netscape? (I'm figuring it's Netscape...) > It is Netscape's bug. The EHLO is used to tell the server you support extended SMTP options. If the server replies with an error, the client is *supposed* to issue HELO and go from there. Newer Netscapes don't do that. >BTW, the latest version of Sendmail doesn't seem to impose the HELO >requirement that MX does.... > It supports the ESMTP options. MX V4.3 will allow EHLO to be used, even though no ESMTP options are planned for V4.3. In fact, I've just updated the SMTP_SERVER.EXE and SMTP_SERVER.ALPHA_EXE files on FTP.WKU.EDU in [.MX.MX042.PATCH] to accept EHLO in addition to HELO. These images have run at WKU for a week now and appear to work just fine with newer versions of Netscape. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software Corporation (TCPware) http://www.wku.edu/www/madgoat/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 02:22:35 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: Re: Netscape 4.0 and MX Message-ID: From: levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: 12 Jan 1997 02:38:58 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <009AE1BB.A601E6AC.1740@bdsnet.com> Jim Bender writes: The emailer in Netscape 4.0 seems to insist on NOT sending the HELO command, whilst MX insists that it should. Who's bug is this? MX or Netscape? (I'm figuring it's Netscape...) You're figuring correctly. Here's what RFC821 has to say: The first command in a session must be the HELO command. The HELO command may be used later in a session as well. If the HELO command argument is not acceptable a 501 failure reply must be returned and the receiver-SMTP must stay in the same state. BTW, the latest version of Sendmail doesn't seem to impose the HELO requirement that MX does.... That's because Eric Allman is just too kind to stupid implementations. -- R Levitte, Levitte Programming; Spannv. 38, I; S-161 43 Bromma; SWEDEN Tel: +46-8-26 52 47; Cel: +46-10-222 64 05; No fax right now PGP key fingerprint = A6 96 C0 34 3A 96 AA 6C B0 D5 9A DF D2 E9 9C 65 Check http://www.lp.se/~levitte for my public key. bastard@bofh.se ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 02:22:39 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: Re: Netscape 4.0 and MX Message-ID: From: levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: 12 Jan 1997 02:41:25 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) writes: BTW, the latest version of Sendmail doesn't seem to impose the HELO requirement that MX does.... That's because Eric Allman is just too kind to stupid implementations. Stupid remark from me. I'm tired or something. Just forget I said that, please... -- R Levitte, Levitte Programming; Spannv. 38, I; S-161 43 Bromma; SWEDEN Tel: +46-8-26 52 47; Cel: +46-10-222 64 05; No fax right now PGP key fingerprint = A6 96 C0 34 3A 96 AA 6C B0 D5 9A DF D2 E9 9C 65 Check http://www.lp.se/~levitte for my public key. bastard@bofh.se ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 02:22:45 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: Getting rid of "anonymous bouncers" Message-ID: From: levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: 12 Jan 1997 06:36:45 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU There are times when I get very mysterious bounces on some mailing lists I manage. Apparently, there has been a great deal of address conversion, and backtracking to the address in the list is completelly impossible (I have two such cases right now). One way to deal with it is to probe the subscribers one by one, and remove those that bounce. This has the drawback of being quite an annoyance to the subscribers, who get a junk message to delete. Today, I found a message on the subject in the listmom-talk list [1], saying this: Yes, that's what Lyris does. Each message is tagged with several Lyris-specific headers, as in: X-Lyris-List: Astor Piazzolla Mailing List [astor] X-Lyris-MemberID: 147 X-Lyris-MessageID: 2876 X-Lyris-To: jbuckman@shelby.com X-Lyris-Type: list Then, when a message bounces, there's a good probability that the headers will be included, and identify the user who caused the bounce. That concept has some drawbacks still, like gateways that strip headers, but those are pretty rare today, but it's pretty interesting. I'd like to ask Hunter if it would be possible to add a similar feature to MLF? I think it would make life a lot easier on those list managers that are in the same situation as I am. ----- [1] A pretty interesting list, but pretty noisy (no, not a lot of garbage, but a log of messages!) at times. For more info, send "help" in the subject of a message to listmom-talk@skyweyr.com -- R Levitte, Levitte Programming; Spannv. 38, I; S-161 43 Bromma; SWEDEN Tel: +46-8-26 52 47; Cel: +46-10-222 64 05; No fax right now PGP key fingerprint = A6 96 C0 34 3A 96 AA 6C B0 D5 9A DF D2 E9 9C 65 Check http://www.lp.se/~levitte for my public key. bastard@bofh.se ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 10:33:38 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: dwing@tgv.com (Dan Wing) Subject: Re: Getting rid of "anonymous bouncers" Date: 13 Jan 1997 20:25:01 GMT Message-ID: <5be5mt$nq1@cronkite.cisco.com> Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article , levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) writes: >There are times when I get very mysterious bounces on some mailing lists >I manage. Apparently, there has been a great deal of address conversion, >and backtracking to the address in the list is completelly impossible >(I have two such cases right now). > >One way to deal with it is to probe the subscribers one by one, and remove >those that bounce. This has the drawback of being quite an annoyance to >the subscribers, who get a junk message to delete. > >Today, I found a message on the subject in the listmom-talk list [1], >saying this: > > Yes, that's what Lyris does. > > Each message is tagged with several Lyris-specific headers, as in: > X-Lyris-List: Astor Piazzolla Mailing List [astor] > X-Lyris-MemberID: 147 > X-Lyris-MessageID: 2876 > X-Lyris-To: jbuckman@shelby.com > X-Lyris-Type: list > > Then, when a message bounces, there's a good probability that the > headers will be included, and identify the user who caused the > bounce. > >That concept has some drawbacks still, like gateways that strip headers, >but those are pretty rare today, but it's pretty interesting. > >I'd like to ask Hunter if it would be possible to add a similar feature >to MLF? Adding such a feature to MLF would require creating a separate queue entry for each recipient. Such a feature could be added to the SMTP agents, though, which could detect it is a message that was expanded by MLF and should have some funky headers added to it. A better solution might be to actually make the RFC822 "To:" header be the recipient (instead of the name of the mailing list) but that could cause people's address filters to break (if they use address filters to get incoming mail into specific folders or locations). >I think it would make life a lot easier on those list managers >that are in the same situation as I am. > >----- >[1] A pretty interesting list, but pretty noisy (no, not a lot of garbage, > but a log of messages!) at times. For more info, send "help" in the > subject of a message to listmom-talk@skyweyr.com -Dan Wing dwing@cisco.com cisco Systems, Inc. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 09:34:40 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 10:29:39 EST From: Ron Villa Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU CC: villar@clpgh.org Message-ID: <009AE657.79E16980.69@clpgh.org> Subject: Mail list owner question We are using MX 4.1 on a VAX/VMS system. I had set up a list with an alias as an owner and the alias pointing to the actual person's e-mail address. In the list configuration, I have O:RWED set. However, when this person receives a subscription request from a user, formats it and sends it to the list, they get an error about insufficient privileges. It was my understanding that setting up Owner as I did was supposed to be enough to let them handle subscription requests. Do I additionally need to make them a system user to give them power to handle these requests? Thanks, Ron - Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 09:46:53 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 09:46:36 EST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: VILLAR@CLPGH.ORG Message-ID: <009AE651.7605C45B.13@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Mail list owner question Ron Villa writes: > >We are using MX 4.1 on a VAX/VMS system. I had set up a list with an alias as >an owner and the alias pointing to the actual person's e-mail address. In the >list configuration, I have O:RWED set. However, when this person receives a >subscription request from a user, formats it and sends it to the list, they >get an error about insufficient privileges. It was my understanding that >setting up Owner as I did was supposed to be enough to let them handle >subscription requests. Do I additionally need to make them a system user to >give them power to handle these requests? > No, but the case of the user portion of the e-mail address must match exactly. For example, if you were the owner, you'd have to be listed as "villar@CLPHG.ORG", not "VILLAR@CLPHG.ORG". Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software Corporation (TCPware) http://www.wku.edu/www/madgoat/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 13:26:40 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <199701151126.LAA27531@synergy.transbay.net> From: "John Buckman" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 11:26:47 +7 Subject: Re: Getting rid of > A better solution might be to actually make the RFC822 "To:" > header be the recipient (instead of the name of the mailing > list) but that could cause people's address filters to break > (if they use address filters to get incoming mail into specific > folders or locations). Hi, I'm one of the programmers for Lyris, so I thought I'd drop in on this thread. Initially, we made the To: be the recipient, for better error detection, and also so that the recipient knows what email address they are subscribed with (a common problem). But, we received a flood of hate mail about this, for the following reasons: * users were really confused about getting mail To: their personal address. They did not understand that it was list mail and thought that they were inadvertedly receiving someone else's mail. Thus, they would often reply to the list with messages like "why are you bothering me with this?". Not good. * many people on the list-managers list felt that rewriting To: was an absolutely evil thing to do, as the "user" headers (From: To:, etc) should never be touched. (I don't know what these people have to say about the common practice of rewriting To: to be the mailing list address) * a few other people felt that this was unethical, because it "fools" the user into thinking that they are receiving personal mail. * It's a non-standard way of doing things, and that's bad in and of itself. We have also toyed with the idea of making the To: be a combination listname/user address, as in: To: Rock Music Discussion but this is even more non-standard, so it's probably a bad idea. So, in the end, we went with: X-Lyris-MemberID: 147 X-Lyris-MessageID: 3136 X-Lyris-To: jbuckman@shelby.com You might be able to implement something like this for MLF. We've found that it does significantly increase the "detectability" of error mail. John john@shelby.com, Shelby Group Ltd., http://www.shelby.com/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 22:17:59 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: Re: Getting rid of "anonymous bouncers" Message-ID: From: levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: 17 Jan 1997 01:03:27 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <5be5mt$nq1@cronkite.cisco.com> dwing@tgv.com (Dan Wing) writes: > Each message is tagged with several Lyris-specific headers, as in: > X-Lyris-List: Astor Piazzolla Mailing List [astor] > X-Lyris-MemberID: 147 > X-Lyris-MessageID: 2876 > X-Lyris-To: jbuckman@shelby.com > X-Lyris-Type: list ... >I'd like to ask Hunter if it would be possible to add a similar feature >to MLF? Adding such a feature to MLF would require creating a separate queue entry for each recipient. Right you are. Sorry for not thinking of that. Such a feature could be added to the SMTP agents, though, which could detect it is a message that was expanded by MLF and should have some funky headers added to it. A better solution might be to actually make the RFC822 "To:" header be the recipient (instead of the name of the mailing list) but that could cause people's address filters to break (if they use address filters to get incoming mail into specific folders or locations). I'd dislike changing existing headers like that a lot. AND it would probably mean just as much work if not more than to add the "funky headers". -- R Levitte, Levitte Programming; Spannv. 38, I; S-161 43 Bromma; SWEDEN Tel: +46-8-26 52 47; Cel: +46-10-222 64 05; No fax right now PGP key fingerprint = A6 96 C0 34 3A 96 AA 6C B0 D5 9A DF D2 E9 9C 65 Check http://www.lp.se/~levitte for my public key. bastard@bofh.se ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 11:29:44 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: dwing@tgv.com (Dan Wing) Subject: Re: Getting rid of "anonymous bouncers" Date: 18 Jan 1997 17:01:48 GMT Message-ID: <5bqvls$qgd@cronkite.cisco.com> Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article , levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) writes: > Such a feature could be added to the SMTP > agents, though, which could detect it is a message that was expanded > by MLF and should have some funky headers added to it. A better > solution might be to actually make the RFC822 "To:" header be the > recipient (instead of the name of the mailing list) but that could > cause people's address filters to break (if they use address filters > to get incoming mail into specific folders or locations). > >I'd dislike changing existing headers like that a lot. AND it would >probably mean just as much work if not more than to add the "funky >headers". Yes, changing the "To:" headers is a bad idea. Slap whoever mentioned it. -Dan Wing dwing@cisco.com cisco Systems, Inc. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 17:47:01 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 15:46:00 -0800 From: Madison@MadGoat.com (Matt Madison) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@wku.edu Message-ID: <970118154600.2023d327@tgv.com> Subject: Anyone still using these? Is anyone still using Jnet or UUCP with MX? I'm working on some enhancements to MX, and it would it make it easier if I could drop support for these protocols. I have no access to them. Please e-mail or post your vote. Thanks, -Matt ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 18:20:24 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 19:19:20 EST From: Jim Bender Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AE8FC.F8170AD8.2572@bdsnet.com> Subject: RE: Anyone still using these? >Is anyone still using Jnet or UUCP with MX? I'm working on some enhancements >to MX, and it would it make it easier if I could drop support for these >protocols. I have no access to them. > >Please e-mail or post your vote. We still have some UUCP action going on... DECUS UUCP 2.0 interfaced with MX 4.2 >Thanks, >-Matt Jim Bender jbender@bdsnet.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 18:55:39 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: dunnett@mala.bc.ca (Malcolm Dunnett) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Anyone written an MX/Pegasus gateway? Date: 18 Jan 97 16:52:08 -0700 Message-ID: <1997Jan18.165208@malvm1.mala.bc.ca> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU I've been toying with the idea of writing a "SITE" delivery agent for MX which would deliver mail to Pegasus Mail users on a Netware server. It would use the callable Netware libraries included with TGV/Cisco Multiware to determine the users mailbox location and to effect the actual delivery of the messages. Before I spend a lot of time on this I'm wondering if anyone else has considered this and either a) produced code you'd be willing to donate or b) determined it's a waste of time trying. Any wise words on the subject much appreciated. -- ============================================================================= Malcolm Dunnett Malaspina University-College Email: dunnett@mala.bc.ca Computer Services Nanaimo, B.C. CANADA V9R 5S5 Tel: (250)755-8738 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 18:59:00 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 19:55:22 EST From: "Charles T. Smith, Jr." Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AE902.00FA5DF8.78@dragon.com> Subject: RE: Anyone still using these? > Is anyone still using Jnet or UUCP with MX? I'm working on some enhancements > to MX, and it would it make it easier if I could drop support for these > protocols. I have no access to them. UUCP support is critical to our operation. We have around 50 downstreams (and growing) that consider UUCP mission critical for their operations. They use a range of mail systems from cc:Mail's UUCP gateway, FSUUCP, Unix, etc. Please don't drop UUCP support. JNET, however, would not be a problem. -- Charles Smith VecNet, Inc. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:32:27 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: "Robert H. McClanahan" To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 22:21:50 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Anyone still using these? Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com On 18 Jan 97 at 15:46, Matt Madison wrote: > Is anyone still using Jnet or UUCP with MX? I'm working on some enhancements > to MX, and it would it make it easier if I could drop support for these > protocols. I have no access to them. > > Please e-mail or post your vote. > > Thanks, > -Matt > Matt, We still depend heavily on the MX/UUCP combination. RHM +--+ Robert H. McClanahan, Mgr, Tech Info Systems, rmcclanahan@tis.aecc.com <[]>< Arkansas Electric Coop Corp, PO Box 194208, Little Rock, AR 72219-4208 USA "If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world." C.S. Lewis ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:04:31 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:03:26 -0800 From: DWING@TGV.COM (Dan Wing) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: INFO-MULTINET@TGV.COM CC: WIPKE@SECS.UCSC.Edu, MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM Message-ID: <970120100326.20254a8f@tgv.com> Subject: Re: Can MX refuse email from an email address? On Info-MultiNet, wipke@SECS.UCSC.EDU (W. Todd Wipke) wrote: >Is it possible to have MX reject email from a given host or email address? >If anyone has code to do this I would be grateful to receive it. No, it can't. There should be some old MX-List mail about how to do this -- you can block an entire host by creating a black-hole route with MultiNet using something like: $ MULTINET SET/ROUTE/ADD=(DEST:source_host,GATE:ip) Where "ip" is an IP address on your local network which isn't being used. You can't use the reject-host feature of MultiNet's server-config utility because MX's mailer is multithreaded and isn't started via MultiNet's master server. Note the black-hole route will cause some connections to remain in SYN_RCVD which could cause a denial-of-service problem on your host. A better solution is to have a mailer which can block based on source email address, destination email address, and source IP address. I have an experimental MultiNet SMTP server which can block mail based on the above criteria, supports ESMTP (EHLO), and allows disabling VRFY/EXPN with a simple logical name. If anyone would like to test this experimental kit, please email me (dwing@tgv.com) directly. I've talked with both Hunter and Matt about some ideas for blocking mail with MX similar to what I've done with MultiNet's SMTP server. I know they've considered adding some of these features. I don't know Bliss well enough to do it myself. The mailing list mx-list@madgoat.com is probably the best place to ask about MX features. To subscribe, send mail to mx-list-request@madgoat.com with SUBSCRIBE in the body of your message. -Dan Wing dwing@tgv.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:16:59 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 09:23:31 EST-10EST From: Daiajo Tibdixious MACS <"svs::svist070"@svs6pub.svh.unsw.EDU.AU> Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@lists.wku.edu Message-ID: <009AEB05.3B80C660.3@svs6pub.svh.unsw.EDU.AU> Subject: ROUTER,SITE RMS-F-FLK Since I started work here (about 2 years) various MX processes have died with "file currently locked by another user". The log file gives no information about what file that might be. I don't want to enable debugging, as its been around 4 months since the last occurance, and I can't make it happen on demand. I'm hoping someone can shed light on this last occurance. SITE died at 21-JAN-1997 09:03:41.74 ROUTER died at 21-JAN-1997 09:03:48.56 I can only remember one process dying previously. I'm thinking that they either locked each other out, or both got locked out on the same file. Do they share any common files for update? This problem is a minor annoyance, rather than something upsetting. uVAX 3100 MX V4.2 VAX/VMS V6.2 UCX V4.1 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:53:02 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: dwing@tgv.com (Dan Wing) Subject: Re: Anyone written an MX/Pegasus gateway? Date: 20 Jan 1997 18:13:54 GMT Message-ID: <5c0cl2$a8h@cronkite.cisco.com> Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1997Jan18.165208@malvm1.mala.bc.ca>, dunnett@mala.bc.ca (Malcolm Dunnett) writes: > I've been toying with the idea of writing a "SITE" delivery agent >for MX which would deliver mail to Pegasus Mail users on a Netware >server. It would use the callable Netware libraries included with >TGV/Cisco Multiware to determine the users mailbox location and to effect the >actual delivery of the messages. > > Before I spend a lot of time on this I'm wondering if anyone else >has considered this and either a) produced code you'd be willing to >donate or b) determined it's a waste of time trying. > > Any wise words on the subject much appreciated. Why not get Chameleon or Mercury Mail on your Netware box instead (both of them make your Netware box understand SMTP [although the implementation of SMTP in Chameleon leaves something to be desired, but is usable if you route all its outgoing mail to any real SMTP server])? -Dan Wing dwing@cisco.com cisco Systems, Inc. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:53:07 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: dwing@tgv.com (Dan Wing) Subject: Re: Locals keep dying... Date: 20 Jan 1997 18:18:07 GMT Message-ID: <5c0csv$a8h@cronkite.cisco.com> Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1997Jan20.111247@cctr.umkc.edu>, mcdonald@cctr.umkc.edu (Gary Lee McDonald) writes: > Running OpenVMS V.6.2 and MX V4.1 Our Local processes have been all >disappearing this weekend. Anyone have a list of what to check for? I've >found and corrected several mis-forwards, but they keep dying. :-( Any help >*greatly* appreciated! > >ps accounting gives exit code (on at least some of the processes as 1C278014 > w/ no text. $ set message mx_msg $ write sys$output f$message(%x1C278014) %MX-F-AGENTALRDY, agent !AS already running -Dan Wing dwing@cisco.com cisco Systems, Inc. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 01:09:12 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 23:08:15 -0800 From: Madison@MadGoat.com (Matt Madison) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <970120230815.2025ad8a@tgv.com> Subject: Re: Anyone still using these? In article <970118154600.2023d327@tgv.com>, Matt Madison wrote: >Is anyone still using Jnet or UUCP with MX? I'm working on some enhancements >to MX, and it would it make it easier if I could drop support for these >protocols. I have no access to them. I'm kind of surprised that UUCP is still around, but the votes are in -- UUCP stays, Jnet goes. Thanks, -Matt -- Matthew Madison | | madison@cisco.com Cisco Systems | 101 Cooper St. | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA | +1 408 457 5390 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 09:04:30 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: Re: Anyone still using these? Message-ID: From: levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: 21 Jan 1997 14:50:12 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <970118154600.2023d327@tgv.com> Madison@MadGoat.com (Matt Madison) writes: Is anyone still using Jnet or UUCP with MX? I'm working on some enhancements to MX, and it would it make it easier if I could drop support for these protocols. I have no access to them. I'm going to start using UUCP to feed a couple of friends computer, which are off-line 99% of the time. -- R Levitte, Levitte Programming; Spannv. 38, I; S-161 43 Bromma; SWEDEN Tel: +46-8-26 52 47; Cel: +46-10-222 64 05; No fax right now PGP key fingerprint = A6 96 C0 34 3A 96 AA 6C B0 D5 9A DF D2 E9 9C 65 Check http://www.lp.se/~levitte for my public key. bastard@bofh.se ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 09:04:36 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: Re: Anyone still using these? Message-ID: From: levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: 21 Jan 1997 14:55:52 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <970120230815.2025ad8a@tgv.com> Madison@MadGoat.com (Matt Madison) writes: I'm kind of surprised that UUCP is still around, but the votes are in -- UUCP stays, Jnet goes. It's really not very surprising. As a matter of fact, we've seen a growth of the use of UUCP. UUCP happens to be a great transport for mail between systems with a phone line as only connection. SMTP realies a lot more on both sender and receiving host being online all the time. (speaking as an old ISP techie) -- R Levitte, Levitte Programming; Spannv. 38, I; S-161 43 Bromma; SWEDEN Tel: +46-8-26 52 47; Cel: +46-10-222 64 05; No fax right now PGP key fingerprint = A6 96 C0 34 3A 96 AA 6C B0 D5 9A DF D2 E9 9C 65 Check http://www.lp.se/~levitte for my public key. bastard@bofh.se ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 18:12:30 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 19:08 EST From: DEL@intranet.com (G. Del Merritt) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AEB56F6D5E1AB.3105@intranet.com> To: MX-List@madgoat.com Subject: Re: Anyone still using these? In-reply-to: Madison@MadGoat.com's message of Mon, 20 Jan 1997 23:08:15 -0800 >In article <970118154600.2023d327@tgv.com>, Matt Madison wrote: >>Is anyone still using Jnet or UUCP with MX? I'm working on some enhancements >>to MX, and it would it make it easier if I could drop support for these >>protocols. I have no access to them. > >I'm kind of surprised that UUCP is still around, but the votes are in -- >UUCP stays, Jnet goes. We _just_ punted our uucp connection, in fact. It was mighty handy. Unfortunately, the astute will notice that we have also punted MX. Not my choice, and a shame. -- Del Merritt del@IntraNet.com IntraNet, Inc., One Gateway Center #700, Newton, MA 02158 Voice: 617-527-7020; FAX: 617-527-1761 Just say no to Clipper. You may not add me to a commercial mailing list or send me commercial advertising without my consent. NERD PRIDE is a registered trademark of the MIT ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 08:53:06 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 09:51:45 EST From: Jeep - There's Only One Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AEBD2.573641F0.15@stsci.edu> Subject: Mailing lists not working after upgrading to MX 4.2 Hey Everyone, Yesterday I upgraded to MX 4.2 (from 3.3). Now the mailing lists are not working. Most functions work, but messages that are sent to the list are not forwarded. However MLF seems to think they are. Here's a sample log file: 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.29 Processing queue entry number 10 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.54 Checking local name: dba 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.54 This is a mailing list. 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.63 FORWARD_TO_LIST: Message is from: "Jeep - There's Onl y One" 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.64 CHECK_ACCESS: checking taylor@STSCI.EDU for access mas k=00000002 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.64 CHECK_ACCESS: Access granted under WORLD class. 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.67 FORWARD_TO_LIST: calling FORWARD_MESSAGE to do the gr unt work. 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.79 FORWARD_MESSAGE: Forwarding queue entry number=11 22-JAN-1997 09:47:45.06 FORWARD_MESSAGE: Forwarding to: hurt@STSCI.EDU 22-JAN-1997 09:47:45.06 FORWARD_MESSAGE: Forwarding to: shiao@STSCI.EDU 22-JAN-1997 09:47:45.07 FORWARD_MESSAGE: Forwarding to: nueslein@STSCI.EDU 22-JAN-1997 09:47:45.07 FORWARD_MESSAGE: Forwarding to: lezon@STSCI.EDU 22-JAN-1997 09:47:45.07 FORWARD_MESSAGE: Forwarding to: tseng@STSCI.EDU 22-JAN-1997 09:47:45.81 FORWARD_TO_LIST: archiving the message. 22-JAN-1997 09:47:46.44 All done with this entry. Noone is receiving these messages. Anyone have any ideas? MX is working otherwise, but something has to be configured wrong somewhere. Patrick taylor@stsci.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:36:17 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 08:34:41 PST From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009AEBC7.9387FE6A.29@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: Mailing lists not working after upgrading to MX 4.2 > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 22-JAN-1997 07:32:58.62 > Subj: Mailing lists not working after upgrading to MX 4.2 > Hey Everyone, > > Yesterday I upgraded to MX 4.2 (from 3.3). Now the mailing lists are not > working. Most functions work, but messages that are sent to the list are > not forwarded. However MLF seems to think they are. Here's a sample log > file: > I don't know if this will work or not, but it's worth a try: I believe that the format of the lists MAY have changed from 3.3 to 4.2. Why don't you try sending a SUBSCRIBE request to each of the lists? This MIGHT cause the lists to be written back out in the new format. MIGHT is the operative word. Good luck, -HWM > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.29 Processing queue entry number 10 > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.54 Checking local name: dba > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.54 This is a mailing list. > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.63 FORWARD_TO_LIST: Message is from: "Jeep - There's Onl > y One" > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.64 CHECK_ACCESS: checking taylor@STSCI.EDU for access mas > k=00000002 > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.64 CHECK_ACCESS: Access granted under WORLD class. > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.67 FORWARD_TO_LIST: calling FORWARD_MESSAGE to do the gr > unt work. > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:44.79 FORWARD_MESSAGE: Forwarding queue entry number=11 > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:45.06 FORWARD_MESSAGE: Forwarding to: hurt@STSCI.EDU > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:45.06 FORWARD_MESSAGE: Forwarding to: shiao@STSCI.EDU > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:45.07 FORWARD_MESSAGE: Forwarding to: nueslein@STSCI.EDU > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:45.07 FORWARD_MESSAGE: Forwarding to: lezon@STSCI.EDU > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:45.07 FORWARD_MESSAGE: Forwarding to: tseng@STSCI.EDU > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:45.81 FORWARD_TO_LIST: archiving the message. > 22-JAN-1997 09:47:46.44 All done with this entry. > > Noone is receiving these messages. Anyone have any ideas? MX is working > otherwise, but something has to be configured wrong somewhere. > > Patrick > taylor@stsci.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 17:41:56 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 10:48:04 EST-10EST From: Daiajo Tibdixious MACS <"svs::svist070"@svs6pub.svh.unsw.EDU.AU> Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AECA3.6015B220.13@svs6pub.svh.unsw.EDU.AU> Subject: RE: Mailing lists not working after upgrading to MX 4.2 Wed, 22 Jan 1997 08:34:41 "Henry W. Miller" >> Yesterday I upgraded to MX 4.2 (from 3.3). Now the mailing lists are not >> working. Most functions work, but messages that are sent to the list are >believe that the format of the lists MAY have changed from 3.3 to 4.2. The install guide says to shutdown everything and do a full configure, this will update the format. However I doubt that this is the problem - the old format is compatible, just has less functionality and may be slower. From the log, it looks like MX is working, I'd check the users - can you send mail to them not via MX? ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 08:39:32 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 08:38:17 CST From: Andy Rupf Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM Message-ID: <009AEC91.3EB35F59.42@CCTR.UMKC.EDU> Subject: Smtp server slaughter I'm currently reading the archive thread on the wholesale slaughter of Smtp_server procs due to excessive header length. We are running MX 4.1 on OpenVMS 6.1 (yeah I know but I dont make the rules here). Our servers are currently getting hosed about as fast as I can restart them. My question...you folks mention this getting fixed in the "next version of MX". Which leads to the obvious question... "Which version was the next version when y'all discussed this?" Is 4.2 the magic number or is it a still pending version? Thanks! Andy Rupf RANDREW@CCTR.UMKC.EDU Programmer/Analyst ----- University of Missouri-Kansas City Life is an uncertified flight mode. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 09:31:46 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 09:31:36 EST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: RANDREW@CCTR.UMKC.EDU Message-ID: <009AEC98.B1611373.38@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Smtp server slaughter Andy Rupf writes: > >Our servers are currently getting hosed about as fast as I >can restart them. > >My question...you folks mention this getting fixed in the >"next version of MX". Which leads to the obvious question... > >"Which version was the next version when y'all discussed this?" > >Is 4.2 the magic number or is it a still pending version? > There is a patch available for MX V4.2 in ftp.wku.edu in [.MX.MX042.PATCHES]. Pick up the appropriate SMTP_SERVER.*EXE file. I think that that version of the MX SMTP Server will work with V4.1, but I haven't tried it. The fix will be included in MX V4.3 as well. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software Corporation (TCPware) http://www.wku.edu/www/madgoat/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 10:57:08 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 10:55:58 CST From: Andy Rupf Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM Message-ID: <009AECA4.7A249027.64@CCTR.UMKC.EDU> Subject: smtp death and tcpdump Hey folks, I'm trying to do the TCPDUMP method of finding the offending party laying seige to my smtp server procs. But I'm not seeing anything that looks obvious. I'm new to TCPDUMP. Anyone know what sorts of stuff I'm looking for here? Andy Rupf RANDREW@CCTR.UMKC.EDU Programmer/Analyst ----- University of Missouri-Kansas City Life is an uncertified flight mode. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 11:19:41 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970123112110.0086d250@Bible.acu.edu> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 11:21:12 -0600 To: mx-list@wku.edu From: Tom Dolan Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Digest access violation MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MX people, I am trying to implement the digest found in [contrib] - When I run mx_deliver_digests.com under my system account I get an access violation error (see below). I have added the SYSTEM account as an MX system user (per prior advice given here.) Any hints to get by this error? Thanks! Tom Dolan Error: $@mx_deliver_digests $ Renaming .INPUT files to *.PROCESS.... $ %RENAME-I-RENAMED, MX_ROOT:[SITE]UGANDANET-DIGEST.INPUT;1 renamed to MX_ROOT:[SITE]UGANDANET-DIGEST.PROCESS;3 $ Processing the .PROCESS files now.... $ Digest name to process is UGANDANET.... $ %SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO, access violation, reason mask=00, virtual address=00000000, PC =000581F0, PSL=03C00004 [dump that followed deleted] Tom Dolan Dolan@Bible.acu.edu 915.674.3706 202 Bible Building Systems Manager ACU Box 29454 College of Biblical and Family Studies Abilene, TX 79699 Abilene Christian University FAX 915.674.3776 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 11:38:34 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 11:38:22 EST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AECAA.66D1D79F.4@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Digest access violation Tom Dolan writes: > >MX people, > >I am trying to implement the digest found in [contrib] - > >When I run mx_deliver_digests.com under my system account I get an >access violation error (see below). I have added the SYSTEM >account as an MX system user (per prior advice given here.) > You don't say what version of MX you're running, but I'd recommend you pick up the current MX DIGEST software at ftp.wku.edu in [.MX.CONTRIB]MX-DIGEST.ZIP. It fixes a number of access violation-type problems and has been in use at WKU for more than a year without an access violation. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software Corporation (TCPware) http://www.wku.edu/www/madgoat/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 13:23:36 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970123132507.00848170@Bible.acu.edu> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 13:25:12 -0600 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: Tom Dolan Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: Digest access violation MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >You don't say what version of MX you're running, but I'd recommend you >pick up the current MX DIGEST software at ftp.wku.edu in >[.MX.CONTRIB]MX-DIGEST.ZIP. It fixes a number of access >violation-type problems and has been in use at WKU for more than a >year without an access violation. OK - I'm running MX 4.2 on VAX/VMS 6.1 - picked up the latest MX-Digest.zip from ftp.wku.edu - it gave me a file not found error on the build (see below). Any idea on that error? (I don't build/link and install new stuff much - been a couple of years!) Thanks! Error: MX-DIGEST> $@mx-digest-build Compiling MX_DIGEST.... Compiling MX_MAKE_DIGEST.... #include %CC-E-OPENIN, error opening //sys/types as input #include -RMS-F-SYN, file specification syntax error At line number 88 in MX_ROOT:MX_MAKE_DIGEST.C ;2. #include %CC-F-FILENOTFOUND, Include file could not be opened. At line number 88 in MX_ROOT:MX_MAKE_DIGEST.C ;2. #include %CC-I-NOBJECT, No object file produced. At line number 88 in MX_ROOT:MX_MAKE_DIGEST.C ;2. Tom Dolan Dolan@Bible.acu.edu 915.674.3706 202 Bible Building Systems Manager ACU Box 29454 College of Biblical and Family Studies Abilene, TX 79699 Abilene Christian University FAX 915.674.3776 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:05:02 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:02:38 EST From: udcstaff@udc.edu Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AECD7.B35A3BC0.1@udc.edu> Subject: Re: JNET support >Is anyone still using Jnet or UUCP with MX? I'm working on some enhancements >to MX, and it would it make it easier if I could drop support for these >protocols. I have no access to them. > >Please e-mail or post your vote. Yes, we are still using JNET on our VAX with MX. In fact, we are about to switch over to a situation where our IBM mainframe will depend on us for external Email through our JNET connection with our VAX. So please keep some support for JNET. I could use some advice about how to use our VAX as a mail gateway from the Internet with MX and JNET. For financial reasons, we are unable to add TCP/IP to our IBM mainframe. (In the past 4 years our budget has been slashed from $78 million to $36 million. This year we are being told to cut $18.8 million from our budget, which will RIF a few hundred faculty and staff, but that's a long sob story.) After having only BITNET for years through a connection from our administrative IBM mainframe we recently added SMTP to our VAX side and seem to receive Internet Email without any trouble as "User@UDC.EDU"; I have our DNS point all such messages to our primary node "UDCVAX.UDC.EDU". We are still receiving BITNET email through the IBM side of the shop from Host UDCVM.BITNET which is connected through George Washington University. Unfortunately, GWU is about to shut down their BITNET connection. This will leave our IBM users without any external Email capabilities. What we are trying to do is to use the JNET software and MX JNET agent to route mail to and from our IBM system, acting as a mail gateway. We are not trying to route BITNET traffic over the Internet, when we lose the BITNET connection to GWU, I will change the path mappings so that UDCVM.BITNET goes to JNET and the remaining *.BITNET goes to the CUNY gateway. I've experimented with VMS mail forwarding to re-send Email to our IBM system. I've experimented by setting up IBM user "FRANK" with a VMS mail forwarding address of: MX%"FRANK@UDCVM.BITNET". Note that I have not created an account for FRANK on the VAX. MX routes the incoming mail over to our IBM system and FRANK is happy to get the message, but the return address on the message is "FRANK@UDCVAX.BITNET", or to be more complete, this is how it appears on the IBM CMS MAIL screen when I sent a message from one of our VAX workstations (CCVAXA.UDC.EDU) to address mx%"frank@udc.edu": X-Delivery-Notice: SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender. Received: from UDCVAX.BITNET (MXMAILER) by UDC.DOMAIN.EDU (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7865; Wed, 22 Jan 97 18:18:42 EST Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 18:16:52 EST Resent-From: frank@UDCVAX.BITNET Resent-To: frank@UDCVM.BITNET Received: from CCVAXA.udc.edu by udcvax (MX V4.2 VAX) with SMTP; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 18:16:51 EST Received: by ccvaxa.udc.edu (MX V4.2 VAX) id 1; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 19:15:42 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 Sender: charlie@UDCVAX.BITNET Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 19:15:41 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: Charlie Test Reply-To: charlie@UDCVAX.BITNET To: frank@UDCVAX.BITNET CC: charlie@UDCVAX.BITNET File: charlie MAIL CC: charlie@UDCVAX.BITNET Message-ID: <009AEC21.1F4C21C0.1@ccvaxa.udc.edu> Subject: Test The IBM user cannot REPLY to this mail. While this isn't perfect, it is much better than the results I was getting when I tried using a forwarding address with the PROFS% protocol -which caused the LOCAL agent to barf and dump the messages out as .TMP files in the MX_ROOT:[LOCAL] directory! Can anyone offer a suggestion as to how I should modify the configuration to write the correct return address ("charlie@ccvaxa.udc.edu"). I've looked at the rewrite rules, but it is not apparent to me how this might help. It also occured to me that we could omitt the various "RESEND" headers, but that doesn't seem to directly affect the REPLY header. I have also considered using the MX Alias feature, but the documentation suggests that this is not appropriate for a large number (a couple of hundred) users. I'm also digging through the JNET manual to see if the return address is set from there. Thanks in advance for any suggestions. -Rob Jones. Here are our configuration params: Configuration file: MX_DEVICE:[SYS0.MX]MX_CONFIG.MXCFG;21 MX version id is: MX V4.2 VAX Address-rewriting rules: Rewrite "<@{stuff}:{user}@{host}.UUCP>" => "<@{stuff}:{user}@{host}.UUCP>" Rewrite "<{user}@{host}.UUCP>" => "<{user}%{host}@uunet.uu.net>" Rewrite "<{folder}@BULLETIN>" => "<{folder}@BULLETIN>" Domain-to-path mappings: Domain="[205.128.144.10]", Path=Local Domain="udcvax.udc.edu", Path=Local Domain="UDCVAX.BITNET", Path=Local Domain="BULLETIN", Path=Site Domain="UDC.EDU", Path=Local Domain="UDCVAX", Path=Local Domain="*.BITNET", Path=Jnet Domain="*", Path=SMTP SMTP agent settings: Retry interval: 0 00:30:00.00 Maximum number of retries: 96 Number of DNS failure retries: 12 Accounting: enabled Default router: (none) LOCAL agent settings: DECnet delivery retry interval: 0 00:30:00.00 Maximum number of retries: 96 Accounting enabled. Multiple VMS Mail From: addresses allowed. Local delivery errors are not CC'ed to local Postmaster. Delivery to MultiNet MM disallowed. Top headers: FROM,SENDER,TO,RESENT_TO,CC,RESENT_CC,BCC,RESENT_BCC,MESSAGE_ID, RESENT_MESSAGE_ID,IN_REPLY_TO,REFERENCES,KEYWORDS,SUBJECT, ENCRYPTED,DATE,REPLY_TO,RECEIVED,RESENT_REPLY_TO,RESENT_FROM, RESENT_SENDER,RESENT_DATE,RETURN_PATH,OTHER Bottom headers: (none) ROUTER agent settings: Automatic percent-hack handling: enabled Sender header for outgoing VMS Mail messages: included if necessary JNET agent settings: Automatic percent-hack handling: enabled BSMTP replies: disabled Accounting: enabled Lenient about gatewaying mail: yes Primary mailer username: MXMAILER DECnet_SMTP agent settings: Retry interval: 0 00:30:00.00 Maximum number of retries: 96 Accounting disabled. SITE agent settings: Retry interval: 0 00:05:00.00 Maximum number of retries: 96 X25_SMTP agent settings: Retry interval: 0 00:30:00.00 Maximum number of retries: 96 Accounting disabled. Robert J. Jones Academic Coordinator 202-274-5973 Computer Center rjones@udc.edu University of the District of Columbia ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:17:03 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970123161833.00842780@Bible.acu.edu> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:18:35 -0600 To: mx-list@wku.edu From: Tom Dolan Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Success with mx-digest!! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MX-People, I got the mx-digest.zip files to compile/link and to run without any errors - the access violation problem is solved. Thanks!!! Now the problem is digest delivers the messages to list@Bible.acu.edu instead of list-digest@Bible.acu.edu - so I've got to figure that one out. Also I don't understand if I have to populate list-digest@Bible.acu.edu with addresses or will the system automatically send it to subscribers with the /digest modifier in list@Bible.acu.edu? Do I need a list-digest@Bible.acu.edu? I'd rather not have a list-digest@bible.acu.edu at all - just the /digest modifier on addresses in list@bible.acu.edu Thanks again! Tom Dolan Dolan@Bible.acu.edu 915.674.3706 202 Bible Building Systems Manager ACU Box 29454 College of Biblical and Family Studies Abilene, TX 79699 Abilene Christian University FAX 915.674.3776 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:36:03 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:35:00 CST From: metze@vmetze.mrl.uiuc.edu Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: metze@vmetze.mrl.uiuc.edu Message-ID: <009AECD3.D7019B3A.16@vmetze.mrl.uiuc.edu> Subject: Re: JNET support From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 23-JAN-1997 16:21:37.94 To: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" CC: Subj: Re: JNET support Return-Path: Received: from axp1.wku.edu by vmetze.mrl.uiuc.edu (MX V4.2 AXP) with SMTP; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:21:30 CST X-ListName: Message Exchange Discussion List Warnings-To: <> Errors-To: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:02:38 EST From: udcstaff@udc.edu Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AECD7.B35A3BC0.1@udc.edu> Subject: Re: JNET support >Is anyone still using Jnet or UUCP with MX? I'm working on some enhancements >to MX, and it would it make it easier if I could drop support for these >protocols. I have no access to them. > >Please e-mail or post your vote. Rarely have I ever removed anything with so little consequences as terminating our bitnet node. So many machines are on bitnet these days that it really doesn't seem to matter. We seem to get everywhere we need to go by using internet addresses, and bitnet gateways. I seldom see a bitnet gateway used on anything these days, either... So, I haven't used jnet here for many years. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:17:17 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 18:15:08 EST From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: udcstaff@udc.edu, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009AECE1.D490D7E0.6@garnet.nist.gov> Subject: Re: JNET support > Yes, we are still using JNET on our VAX with MX. In fact, we are about to > switch over to a situation where our IBM mainframe will depend on us for > external Email through our JNET connection with our VAX. So please keep > some support for JNET. > > I could use some advice about how to use our VAX as a mail gateway from > the Internet with MX and JNET. For financial reasons, we are unable to add > TCP/IP to our IBM mainframe. (In the past 4 years our budget has been > slashed from $78 million to $36 million. This year we are being told to > cut $18.8 million from our budget, which will RIF a few hundred faculty > and staff, but that's a long sob story.) Howdy, neighbor... First of all, get used to the idea that addresses of the form "UDCVM.BITNET" are going away. If the IBM users are to continue to have e-mail, their address must change. Okay. Suppose that you have two hosts: udcvax.udc.edu, and udcvm.udc.edu. Suppose that only the VAX is on the Internet. That means that there's an "A" (address) record in the DNS for udcvax.udc.edu. You start getting mail to udcvm by defining an "MX" record in the DNS for udcvm.udc.edu, telling mailers to actually send that mail to udcvax.udc.edu, also. In the MX (the mailer, not the DNS record) configuration on the VAX, you have different PATH statements for mail that might come in addressed for either udcvm.udc.edu or udcvax.udc.edu. You tell the VAX that the latter is for LOCAL deliver. However, you tell the VAX that the former should be ROUTEed through JNET to ... UDCVM. Life becomes more complicated if you want to continue having addresses of the form "User@UDC.EDU". Does this refer to the VAX, the IBM, or both? If it's only one machine, it's simple. You have a PATH statement that says that such mail should either be delivered LOCALly, or ROUTEed to UDCVM. However, if you want this format to service both machines, you need an additional piece of software to sort out which message gets forwarded to which machine. With a little thought, and programming, you can use the MX SITE interface for this purpose. Each incoming message could be checked against a list of users on each machine. Since I am unfamiliar with the issues, I cannot address the remaining one: how to configure udcvm and/or udcvax so that outgoing mail has an internet- style return address (user@udcvm.udc.edu) rather than a Bitnet style one (udcvm.bitnet). - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 20:38:39 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: Lee Boon Peng Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <199701240237.KAA04481@sunA.iscs.nus.sg> Subject: Re: JNET support To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:37:25 +0800 (GMT-8) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > >Is anyone still using Jnet or UUCP with MX? I'm working on some enhancements > >to MX, and it would it make it easier if I could drop support for these > >protocols. I have no access to them. > > > >Please e-mail or post your vote. My University dropped it a year ago. IMHO, feel free to drop Jnet. I think there's little point for the authors to support it if few are using it. Their time is better spent on something else. The authors may want to consider keeping UUCP since there's a bigger pool of users. OTOH, Dropping it is fine with me too. If anyone needs UUCP, he might as well plug his Vax to a PC running Unix since Unix does UUCP pretty well. A UUCP-gateway on PC ranges from cheap to free. Thanks Paul ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:17:21 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970124101432.007a0670@Bible.acu.edu> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:14:34 -0600 To: mx-list@wku.edu From: Tom Dolan Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: mx-digest problem MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MX People, I'm trying to implement MX-digest (for the first time), MX4.2 on VMS6.1 using the most recent mx-digest.zip from ftp.wku.edu The problem is in mailing the files - mx_digest_deliver.com is mailing the files to list-DIGEST, but I'm getting an error saying: Error in delivery to mailing list list: access denied; send subscription requests to list-Request@BIBLE.ACU.EDU (See full error below) Why is it delivering the message to list when it should go to list-DIGEST? There is no alias defined - I can't figure out what's going on. Also I still don't understand the DIGEST support in MX4.2 - what are the specifics of how the support works? Error: Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 09:59:57 CST From: Mailing list & file server To: Subject: Mailing list or file server error Note: this message was generated automatically. The following error(s) occurred during local delivery of your message. Error in delivery to mailing list UGANDANET: access denied; send subscription requests to UGANDANET-Request@BIBLE.ACU.EDU ------------------------------ Rejected message ------------------------------ Received: by BIBLE.ACU.EDU (MX V4.2 VAX) id 467; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 09:59:48 CST Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 09:59:45 CST From: system@BIBLE.ACU.EDU To: ugandanet-digest@BIBLE.ACU.EDU Message-ID: <009AED65.CAADAB20.467@BIBLE.ACU.EDU> Tom Dolan Dolan@Bible.acu.edu 915.674.3706 202 Bible Building Systems Manager ACU Box 29454 College of Biblical and Family Studies Abilene, TX 79699 Abilene Christian University FAX 915.674.3776 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:47:41 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 11:48:59 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: "Mark Seagroves, Dir of Academic Computing" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: seagrove@cncacc.cn.edu Message-ID: <009AED75.0D1050A8.53@cncacc.cn.edu> Subject: Can I allow only a subset of a list to post? Is there anyway to allow only a subset of users on a list to post to that list? We are a college with about 2300 user accounts including students & faculty. I have a list called "everybody" with all students, faculty & staff on it. I would like for faculty & staff to be able to post but NOT students. Is there anyway to do this? I don't see anything about setting a list(s) moderated. Will MX do this? We're running MX 4.2 on an Alpha. Any suggestions are most appreciated. Mark Seagroves Dir, Academic Computing Carson-Newman College Jefferson City, TN seagrove@cncacc.cn.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 11:38:23 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 11:38:10 EST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: DOLAN@BIBLE.ACU.EDU Message-ID: <009AED73.89B4450D.1@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: mx-digest problem Tom Dolan writes: > >Why is it delivering the message to list when it should go to >list-DIGEST? There is no alias defined - I can't figure out what's >going on. > Try enabling MX_ROUTER_DEBUG and MX_MLF_DEBUG and check the log files to see what they're doing. >Also I still don't understand the DIGEST support in MX4.2 - what >are the specifics of how the support works? > The support is really non-existent in MX V4.2---you create two separate lists and let MX_DELIVER_DIGEST.COM mail the digest to the -digest list. I think enabling debugging should point out what's going on. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software Corporation (TCPware) http://www.wku.edu/www/madgoat/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 11:56:21 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970124115302.00858590@Bible.acu.edu> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 11:53:09 -0600 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: Tom Dolan Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: mx-digest problem MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >>Also I still don't understand the DIGEST support in MX4.2 - what >>are the specifics of how the support works? >> >The support is really non-existent in MX V4.2---you create two >separate lists and let MX_DELIVER_DIGEST.COM mail the digest to the >-digest list. What does the /digest modifier do? for example I have an entry in list@Bible.acu.edu (not the -digest list) that says: dolan@BIBLE.ACU.EDU (NOCASE, DIGEST) Does the DIGEST modifier do anything? Tom Dolan Dolan@Bible.acu.edu 915.674.3706 202 Bible Building Systems Manager ACU Box 29454 College of Biblical and Family Studies Abilene, TX 79699 Abilene Christian University FAX 915.674.3776 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:33:31 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:33:20 EST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AED7B.3EE01B08.3@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: mx-digest problem Tom Dolan writes: > >What does the /digest modifier do? for example I have an entry in >list@Bible.acu.edu (not the -digest list) that says: > >dolan@BIBLE.ACU.EDU (NOCASE, DIGEST) > >Does the DIGEST modifier do anything? > Ooops. I'm getting my MX versions mixed up. Yes, MX V4.2 did add support for the /DIGEST qualifier on DEFINE LIST, eliminating the need for maintaining two separate lists. I thought that was something I did for V4.3. Your problem, then, most likely is that the account from which the digest is mailed does not have WRITE access to that list. If someone besides the list owner or a system user sends mail to the -digest address, it is automatically converted to a normal post and is sent to all non-digest subscribers. This is done so mail sent to XXX-digest will really be sent to "XXX" and all subscribers, eventually. So the solution is to make sure the account that runs MX_DELIVER_DIGESTS.COM is listed as the list owner or as a system user. Sorry for the misinformation the first time around. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software Corporation (TCPware) http://www.wku.edu/www/madgoat/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:37:27 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:37:15 EST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AED7B.CAD53D78.6@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Can I allow only a subset of a list to post? "Mark Seagroves, Dir of Academic Computing" writes: > >Is there anyway to allow only a subset of users on a list to post to that >list? We are a college with about 2300 user accounts including students >& faculty. I have a list called "everybody" with all students, faculty >& staff on it. I would like for faculty & staff to be able to post but >NOT students. Is there anyway to do this? > >I don't see anything about setting a list(s) moderated. Will MX do >this? We're running MX 4.2 on an Alpha. > No, but you can use MX Site to fake list moderation. Jonathan Hardis has described this numerous times in the past on this list. Unfortunately, the MX-List archives aren't currently searchable via the WWW, but you can pick up MX-LIST.1995-05 from ftp.wku.edu in [.LISTS.MX-LIST] for Jonathan's pseudo-moderated list solution. ftp://ftp.wku.edu/lists/mx-list/mx-list.1995-05 I hope to have the archives searchable again soon. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software Corporation (TCPware) http://www.wku.edu/www/madgoat/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 13:07:36 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 14:06:13 EST From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: seagrove@cncacc.cn.edu, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009AED88.38D10A80.1@garnet.nist.gov> Subject: RE: Can I allow only a subset of a list to post? > Is there anyway to allow only a subset of users on a list to post to that > list? We are a college with about 2300 user accounts including students > & faculty. I have a list called "everybody" with all students, faculty > & staff on it. I would like for faculty & staff to be able to post but > NOT students. Is there anyway to do this? Consider having two lists, one for faculty and staff, one for students. Configure the faculty and staff list so that all members of that list (only) can post to it. Have as a member as that list the student list. Configure the student list so that no members of that list can post to it (or, by implication, to the faculty and staff list). By the way, any student with a modicum of intellegence can figure out that she can still still post to the list by using a PC-based mailer and configuring the mailer using a faculty name. This is not meant to be a secure solution to the problem. - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 13:16:36 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 14:11:40 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: Scott McNeilly Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AED88.FBA571E0.103@fred.bridgew.edu> Subject: RE: Can I allow only a subset of a list to post? >From: "Mark Seagroves, Dir of Academic Computing" >Is there anyway to allow only a subset of users on a list to post to that >list? We are a college with about 2300 user accounts including students >& faculty. I have a list called "everybody" with all students, faculty >& staff on it. I would like for faculty & staff to be able to post but >NOT students. Is there anyway to do this? I don't know whether this will work or not, but take a look at the /ACCESS qualifier. It would not be pretty, but I think that if you create an ACCESS entry for each staff and faculty member, but none for students, it may do what you wish. We used this approach for a slightly different problem here. (See page 3-6 of the Mailing List Guide.) You would also have to change the /PROTECTIONs. Another approach might be to have two lists, one for faculty and staff and the other for students. The first could contain the address of the second or and address which forwards messages to the second (student) list. The first list should be a private list. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Mc Neilly email: smcneilly@bridgew.edu Assistant Director Phone: 508-697-1236 Information Services FAX: 508-697-1774 Bridgewater State College Bridgewater, MA 02325 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:20:59 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:22:16 -0500 From: Ted Corning Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <9701260422.AA06522@trantor.cc.umb.edu> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Subject: SMTP_SERVER dying, but not for the STRTOOLONG reason Hi, Over the past day, I've had my SMTP_SERVER processes dying. The debug file shows that it always dies on the same message. The server dies with status 1000000C, %SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO, access violation. The log starts with: 25-JAN-1997 22:03:49.45 STM[13]: Receive "HELO .Widener.EDU" 25-JAN-1997 22:03:49.73 STM[13]: Send "250 Name lookup failed for .Widener.EDU" And the last line in the log file is the empty line after the message header: 25-JAN-1997 22:03:54.02 STM[13]: Receive "Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII" 25-JAN-1997 22:03:54.02 STM[13]: Receive "" I suspect it has something to do with the fact that the HELO doesn't have a FQDN. Any ideas? Specifics: VMS 6.2, VAX 8800 or 6410 CISCO MultiNet V4.0 Rev A-X, VAX 8800, OpenVMS VAX V6.2 Netlib 2.0J MX 4.2, with patched SMTP_SERVER and MX_LOCAL Thanks. Ted -- Ted Corning UMass/Boston Computing Services kismet@trantor.cc.umb.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:59:47 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:59:35 EST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: KISMET@TRANTOR.CC.UMB.EDU Message-ID: <009AEEA4.478D3EEB.1@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: SMTP_SERVER dying, but not for the STRTOOLONG reason Ted Corning writes: > > Over the past day, I've had my SMTP_SERVER processes dying. The debug file >shows that it always dies on the same message. The server dies with status >1000000C, %SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO, access violation. > > The log starts with: >25-JAN-1997 22:03:49.45 STM[13]: Receive "HELO .Widener.EDU" >25-JAN-1997 22:03:49.73 STM[13]: Send "250 Name lookup failed for .Widener.EDU" > You're not the only one. Someone else has reported the same problem, and he to is receiving mail from ".Widener.EDU". > And the last line in the log file is the empty line after the message >header: >25-JAN-1997 22:03:54.02 STM[13]: Receive "Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII" >25-JAN-1997 22:03:54.02 STM[13]: Receive "" > > I suspect it has something to do with the fact that the HELO doesn't have a >FQDN. Any ideas? > Yes, it does appear to have something to do with that, though I can't figure out what. I'm not sure what ".Widener.EDU" is sending after the null line; I can't reproduce it here by doing an SMTP session by hand, which I think means they must be sending something really funky after the "". > Specifics: VMS 6.2, VAX 8800 or 6410 > CISCO MultiNet V4.0 Rev A-X, VAX 8800, OpenVMS VAX V6.2 The other site is running TCPware, so it's not a TCP/IP-specific problem. The server dies on the call to NET_ADDR_TO_NAME: NET_GET_INFO (CTX [CTX_L_TCPCTX], REMADR); IF NOT NET_ADDR_TO_NAME (CTX [CTX_L_TCPCTX], .REMADR, STR2) My guess is that the NET_GET_INFO is returning junk in REMADR and NET_ADDR_TO_NAME is accvioing on the junk? Matt? Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software Corporation (TCPware) http://www.wku.edu/www/madgoat/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:07:35 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: dwing@tgv.com (Dan Wing) Subject: Re: JNET support Date: 23 Jan 1997 22:32:06 GMT Message-ID: <5c8ot6$e4j@cronkite.cisco.com> Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <009AECD7.B35A3BC0.1@udc.edu>, udcstaff@udc.edu writes: >After having only BITNET for years through a connection from our administrative >IBM mainframe we recently added SMTP to our VAX side and seem to receive >Internet Email without any trouble as "User@UDC.EDU"; I have our DNS point all >such messages to our primary node "UDCVAX.UDC.EDU". We are still receiving >BITNET email through the IBM side of the shop from Host UDCVM.BITNET which is >connected through George Washington University. Unfortunately, GWU is about to >shut down their BITNET connection. This will leave our IBM users without any >external Email capabilities. What we are trying to do is to use the JNET >software and MX JNET agent to route mail to and from our IBM system, acting as >a mail gateway. We are not trying to route BITNET traffic over the Internet, >when we lose the BITNET connection to GWU, I will change the path mappings so >that UDCVM.BITNET goes to JNET and the remaining *.BITNET goes to the CUNY >gateway. > >I've experimented with VMS mail forwarding to re-send Email to our IBM system. >I've experimented by setting up IBM user "FRANK" with a VMS mail forwarding >address of: MX%"FRANK@UDCVM.BITNET". Note that I have not created an account >for FRANK on the VAX. MX routes the incoming mail over to our IBM system >and FRANK is happy to get the message, but the return address on the message >is "FRANK@UDCVAX.BITNET", or to be more complete, this is how it appears on >the IBM CMS MAIL screen when I sent a message from one of our VAX workstations >(CCVAXA.UDC.EDU) to address mx%"frank@udc.edu": > >X-Delivery-Notice: SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender. >Received: from UDCVAX.BITNET (MXMAILER) by UDC.DOMAIN.EDU (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) > with BSMTP id 7865; Wed, 22 Jan 97 18:18:42 EST >Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 18:16:52 EST >Resent-From: frank@UDCVAX.BITNET >Resent-To: frank@UDCVM.BITNET >Received: from CCVAXA.udc.edu by udcvax (MX V4.2 VAX) with SMTP; Wed, 22 Jan > 1997 18:16:51 EST >Received: by ccvaxa.udc.edu (MX V4.2 VAX) id 1; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 19:15:42 > EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 >Sender: charlie@UDCVAX.BITNET >Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 19:15:41 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 >From: Charlie Test >Reply-To: charlie@UDCVAX.BITNET >To: frank@UDCVAX.BITNET >CC: charlie@UDCVAX.BITNET > File: charlie MAIL >CC: charlie@UDCVAX.BITNET >Message-ID: <009AEC21.1F4C21C0.1@ccvaxa.udc.edu> >Subject: Test > >The IBM user cannot REPLY to this mail. While this isn't perfect, it is much >better than the results I was getting when I tried using a forwarding address >with the PROFS% protocol -which caused the LOCAL agent to barf and dump the >messages out as .TMP files in the MX_ROOT:[LOCAL] directory! > >Can anyone offer a suggestion as to how I should modify the configuration to >write the correct return address ("charlie@ccvaxa.udc.edu"). I've looked at >the rewrite rules, but it is not apparent to me how this might help. It also >occured to me that we could omitt the various "RESEND" headers, but that >doesn't seem to directly affect the REPLY header. I have also considered >using the MX Alias feature, but the documentation suggests that this is not >appropriate for a large number (a couple of hundred) users. I'm also digging >through the JNET manual to see if the return address is set from there. This might do the trick: Setup a fake domain for the folks stuck on that IBM system. Let's call it profs.udc.edu. Setup your DNS so there's an MX record for profs.udc.edu pointing to udcvax.UDC.Edu. Then add a path like: MCP> DEFINE PATH PROFS.UDC.EDU JNET which should do it. Making hundreds of VMSmail forward entries is even worse than hundreds of MX alias entires. -Dan Wing dwing@cisco.com cisco Systems, Inc. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 08:14:30 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 09:10:51 -0500 From: Joe Macewicz Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@madgoat.com Message-ID: <009AF083.9F6B4753.166@usnews.com> Subject: Local process dies Whenever a user gets a message form a particular list my MX-Local process dies. When I had them send a message to me and the regular subscriber, I got the message and the local process died on the regular subscriber However, in the to field in my VMSMAIL it had the regular subscriber's address. The exit status is 1C278034 write sys$output f$message(%x1C278034) %MX-F-MEMALLOC, error allocating memory from zone !AS Entry: 52, Origin: [SMTP] Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 2035 bytes Created: 28-JAN-1997 08:03:46.76, expires 27-FEB-1997 08:03:46.76 Last modified 28-JAN-1997 08:57:22.19 LOCAL entry #85, status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 2034 bytes Created: 28-JAN-1997 08:16:37.72, expires 27-FEB-1997 08:03:46.76 Last modified 28-JAN-1997 08:57:22.10 Recipient #1: JMacewicz, Route=usnews.com Recipient #2: sthomas, Route=usnews.com The message Header. [from usnews.com by dino.usnews.com (MX V4.2 AXP) with SMTP; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 08:03:47 -0500 ofrom mds.prwire.com ([204.48.26.67]) by net.usnews.com with ESMTP id <62209-1>; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 08:05:17 -0500 d(from root@localhost) by mds.prwire.com id IAA07545 for pr001; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 08:06:05 -0500 (EST) Tue, 28 Jan 1997 08:06:05 -0500 mds@mds.prwire.com &<199701281306.IAA07545@mds.prwire.com> #mds@mds.prwire.com, news@prwire.com Errors-To: mds@mds.prwire.com  X-JID: 268145   9Leland's Auction House to Hold Collectibles Appraisal Day MY VMSMAIL message header From: SMTP%"mds@mds.prwire.com",SMTP%"news@prwire.com" To: SMTP%"sthomas@usnews.com" CC: Subj: Leland's Auction House to Hold Collectibles Appraisal Day Any ideas what would cause this? Thanks Joe Macewicz ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 09:05:13 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 09:04:58 EST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AF082.CC79FF79.7@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Local process dies Joe Macewicz writes: > >Whenever a user gets a message form a particular list my MX-Local process >dies. When I had them send a message to me and the regular subscriber, >I got the message and the local process died on the regular subscriber >However, in the to field in my VMSMAIL it had the regular subscriber's >address. > >The exit status is 1C278034 > >write sys$output f$message(%x1C278034) >%MX-F-MEMALLOC, error allocating memory from zone !AS > Does this person have a forwarding address defined in VMS Mail? Could there be a loop? Off-hand, I can't think of what could cause this (besides the obvious lack of memory, but that's probably not what's going on). Try running MX_LOCAL.EXE interactively and e-mail me the stack dump that's printed---that should help pinpoint the problem. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software Corporation (TCPware) http://www.wku.edu/www/madgoat/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 10:10:42 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970128160323.5967df5a@agate.actfs.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:03:23 +0000 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: John Rourke Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: MX and Microsoft Exchange I am running MX4.2 with UCX 4.1. Mail from MS Exchange & Eudora is handled by MX. Mail is served to MS Exchange & Eudora clients using the UCX POP3 server. I have a problem with mail containing lines greater than 255 characters. (I have installed the MX patches). When mail from a Eudora client contains these long lines it is delivered ok. When mail from an MS Exchange client contains these long lines the characters from position 256 - 512 are missing. Then another 255 characters are displayed etc. If the mail is delivered to a system running UCX's SMTP & the UCX POP3 server (rather than MX & UCX POP3) the message is delivered ok (apart from the fact that a line break is inserted after 512 chars). I also noticed that when received by MX the mail contains the line X-MX-Comment: QUOTED-PRINTABLE message automatically decoded Mails which don't contain long lines don't contain this line. Enabling MX_SMTP_DEBUG shows that MX SMTP receives the complete message. Where are the characters being lost? John Rourke ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 10:18:11 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970128161034.5967e43c@agate.actfs.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:10:34 +0000 To: mx-list@madgoat.com From: John Rourke Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: MX & MS Exchange (again) I forgot to mention in my earlier post... If I compose a message containing long lines & send it using Eudora, via the same routes, the received message is fine. John Rourke ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:17:52 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:50:46 EST From: "Brian Tillman, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: John.Rourke@actfs.co.uk Message-ID: <009AF152.5D37EEC0.5@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: MX and Microsoft Exchange John Rourke (John.Rourke@actfs.co.uk) writes: >I have a problem with mail containing lines greater than 255 characters. (I >have installed the MX patches). > >When mail from a Eudora client contains these long lines it is delivered ok. > >When mail from an MS Exchange client contains these long lines the >characters from position 256 - 512 are missing. Then another 255 characters >are displayed etc. This happens because VMS Mail can't handle text lines longer than 255 characters (and it really should have to - the RFCs state lines should be shorter). Both Eudora and MS Exchange autowrap lines, but Eudora (like DECwindows Mail), inserts end-of-line marks automatically when it wraps. Exchange doesn't. Thus, while the lines _look_ OK on your screen, Each paragraph is really sent out as one long line. VMS Mail truncates them when they're received. The solution is to ask the Exchange people to press every now and then. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- Brian Tillman | Internet: tillman_brian@si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. | tillman@swdev.si.com 4141 Eastern Ave., MS239 | Hey, I said this stuff myself. Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 | My company has no part in it. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 10:59:22 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 10:58:45 CST From: Andy Rupf Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AF2EE.30FD629D.1633@CCTR.UMKC.EDU> Subject: Reply is broken Here is an eiree thing. We have headers turned down but not quite off. Has anyone seen anything like this before? #7 31-JAN-1997 08:43:45.87 NEWMAIL From: IN%"INFO-CSTP@CSTP.UMKC.EDU",IN%"lhsin@CSTP.UMKC.EDU" To: IN%"info-cstp@CSTP.UMKC.EDU" CC: Subj: the directory [truncated for brevity] MAIL> reply To: IN%"INFO-CSTP@CSTP.UMKC.EDU"",IN%""lhsin@CSTP.UMKC.EDU" %MAIL-E-USERSPEC, invalid user specification '",IN%""lhsin@CSTP.UMKC.EDU"' This is happening on all our lists (at least) that include two addresses on the TO: line (with reply_to=(sender,list) for instance) Andy Rupf RANDREW@CCTR.UMKC.EDU Programmer/Analyst ----- University of Missouri-Kansas City Life is an uncertified flight mode. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:20:36 EST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 12:19:10 EST From: Robert Byer Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009AF2F9.6D1098B2.103@mail.all-net.net> Subject: Problems with MX v4.2 SMTP And Wollongong TCP/IP v5.2 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Here's my problem.... I have a VAX 6000-340, VMS v5.5-2HW, Wollongong's TCP/IP v5.2. I am currently running MX v4.1 and when I tried to upgrade to version 4.2 everything installs correctly and starts correctly, but when I try to send e-mail to the InterNet the messages just sit in the SMTP queue and do nothing. I'm only using the mail list and SMTP parts of MX and the mailing list works great for local addresses. I've turned on all the error logging and so far it dosen't tell me much. Anyone have any possible answers to this (besides getting a new TCP/IP package) as I want to dump v4.1 as soon as possible. +------------------------+--------------------------------------------+ | Robert Alan Byer | A-Com Computing, Inc. | | Vice-President | 115 W. Washington Street, Suite 1165 | | A-Com Computing, Inc. | Indianapolis, IN 46204 | | Work: (317)673-4204 | http:\\www.all-net.net\ | +------------------------+-----+--------------------------------------+ | byer@mail.all-net.net | I don't want to take over the world, | | http://www.all-net.net/~byer | just my own little part of it. | +------------------------------+--------------------------------------+ | Send an E-mail request to obtain my PGP key. | +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMvHitaVSqzlBVJbBAQHMlgf/ZeS/V++WXOVNrlUd5Jk6AfPQd3QotPDS qWhJW1rGNE3dw9kTWbKPMp99wThloZH7sjn5VUZ0q6NE3A0YdAZhMglJr4uweli0 BK+Jlt9o10hrgyQFdfF4AoxN4jtrZoTZ3xMIzfDoOv/Oo9cHYFZLrCgPz+kv4ksJ htG4wh8T7uv/rUbsci5H7mAwf5MWxzvlGg5zZyWIYlz7q5kuhQYhY6e93haggd4T tVIvzI2avSi2Mq496CzkKay8+8TegmmFJ5y//1x1C3aRep98e5XbF3TY+zElfMSF 3TqlQLTtAZ7VXD9d43yv7UXdtLfjbkSfUyxK0/LcmNVq+mRG3vrt9w== =1hP0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----