Archive-Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 00:01:37 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 00:01:19 CST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009B21B8.4A8A9E25.349@wku.edu> Subject: MX-LIST Administrivia: Monthly Post Posting statistics for list MX-LIST during March 1997 Total number of posts: 49 Total number of posters: 26 Total number of subscribers: 294 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 WKU 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, 02 Apr 1997 14:15:16 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: Dan Wing Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: bad DATE header? Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 12:04:54 -0800 Message-ID: <3342BBE6.4D12@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: John Selph To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU John Selph wrote: > > Someone is claiming that the date header from our VMS machine is in a bad > format. > Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 07:30:32 CST6CDT5,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 > They're saying the CST6CDT5,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 stuff shouldn't be there, and > that it's causing their LISTSERV processor to fail. We're running VMS 7.0 > and MX 4.2. > I agree that it looks odd, but the machine is putting it there I didn't. > Is the bad format being caused by VMS or MX and what can I do about it? Looks very incorrect to me. I don't know what could be causing it. What are your timezone logicals (for your IP package, for MX, and for NETLIB)? -Dan Wing ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 14:18:04 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 14:17:33 EST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009B22F9.11D08482.26@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Re: bad DATE header? Dan Wing writes: > >John Selph wrote: >> >> Someone is claiming that the date header from our VMS machine is in a bad >> format. >> Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 07:30:32 CST6CDT5,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 >> They're saying the CST6CDT5,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 stuff shouldn't be there, and >> that it's causing their LISTSERV processor to fail. We're running VMS 7.0 >> and MX 4.2. >> I agree that it looks odd, but the machine is putting it there I didn't. >> Is the bad format being caused by VMS or MX and what can I do about it? > >Looks very incorrect to me. I don't know what could be causing it. >What are your timezone logicals (for your IP package, for MX, and for >NETLIB)? > That's the format of the new UCX timezone logical, I think. The easiest thing to do is to just define MX's own logical: $ define/system/exec mx_timezone "CST" Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 15:06:06 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: "Colin Briggs" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: Subject: Re: bad DATE header? Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 07:00:45 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <21010927202115@danks.com.au> We have had problems with using the abbreviations for our time zone (EST) so we now use the MX logical with +1000 (AEST Australian Eastern Standard Time) as the time zone. In Australia the Eastern coast uses "EST" as an abbreviation, unfortunately so does the east coast of the US and others. Some of the PC mail clients interpret the "EST" in the headers as the East Coast in the US which really throws the times out, using the numeric format avoids this. colin... -------------------------------------------------------------- Colin Briggs Internet: colin@danks.com.au John Danks & Son Pty Ltd Voice: 613 9264 5000 414-426 Lower Dandenong Rd Fax: 613 9264 5123 Braeside, Vic, 3195, Australia ---------- > From: Hunter Goatley > To: MX-List@MadGoat.COM > Subject: Re: bad DATE header? > Date: Thursday, 3 April 1997 05:17 > > Dan Wing writes: > > > >John Selph wrote: > >> > >> Someone is claiming that the date header from our VMS machine is in a bad > >> format. > >> Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 07:30:32 CST6CDT5,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 > >> They're saying the CST6CDT5,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 stuff shouldn't be there, and > >> that it's causing their LISTSERV processor to fail. We're running VMS 7.0 > >> and MX 4.2. > >> I agree that it looks odd, but the machine is putting it there I didn't. > >> Is the bad format being caused by VMS or MX and what can I do about it? > > > >Looks very incorrect to me. I don't know what could be causing it. > >What are your timezone logicals (for your IP package, for MX, and for > >NETLIB)? > > > That's the format of the new UCX timezone logical, I think. The > easiest thing to do is to just define MX's own logical: > > $ define/system/exec mx_timezone "CST" > > Hunter > ------ > Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com > http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 02:22:55 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 00:21:42 PST From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B234D.782673C8.55@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: Re: bad DATE header? > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 2-APR-1997 12:30:45.23 > Subj: Re: bad DATE header? > Dan Wing writes: > > > >John Selph wrote: > >> > >> Someone is claiming that the date header from our VMS machine is in a bad > >> format. > >> Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 07:30:32 CST6CDT5,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 > >> They're saying the CST6CDT5,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 stuff shouldn't be there, and > >> that it's causing their LISTSERV processor to fail. We're running VMS 7.0 > >> and MX 4.2. > >> I agree that it looks odd, but the machine is putting it there I didn't. > >> Is the bad format being caused by VMS or MX and what can I do about it? > > > >Looks very incorrect to me. I don't know what could be causing it. > >What are your timezone logicals (for your IP package, for MX, and for > >NETLIB)? > > > That's the format of the new UCX timezone logical, I think. The > easiest thing to do is to just define MX's own logical: > > $ define/system/exec mx_timezone "CST" > > Hunter > ------ > Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com > http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html I've seen similar errors quite often from mis-configured unix systems. It looks like the UCX code does not perform even a crude sanity check. -HWM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 14:18:38 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 14:10:51 CST From: iman@access.tkm.mb.ca Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@lists.wku.edu Message-ID: <009B23C1.4CBA0307.21@access.tkm.mb.ca> Subject: SMTP Crashing Greetings! I am using MX 042 on an Alpha Station 200, and have installed the MX_SMTP patch. Daily (sometimes more than once per day) MX_SMTP crashes. All I get from the log file is the time that it went down, and a status indicator of 1000000C. In the MX documentation, it is indicated that defining an MX_SMTP_DEBUG logical will give trace information. How exactly would I define the logical? I've tried various incarnations of def/log mx_smtp_debug, but am getting nowhere. Also, what is the address of the Listserv? Our station crashed numerous times (due to some faulty software), and we were down for quite some time. During this time, because mail was bouncing, I was removed from the list. Any help will be muchly appreciated. Darren Hutchings ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 14:29:15 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 14:28:45 EST From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009B23C3.CD23C7EC.7@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: SMTP Crashing iman@access.tkm.mb.ca writes: > >I am using MX 042 on an Alpha Station 200, and have installed the >MX_SMTP patch. Daily (sometimes more than once per day) MX_SMTP >crashes. All I get from the log file is the time that it went down, and >a status indicator of 1000000C. In the MX documentation, it is >indicated that defining an MX_SMTP_DEBUG logical will give trace >information. How exactly would I define the logical? I've tried >various incarnations of def/log mx_smtp_debug, but am getting nowhere. > As documented in the Management Guide, you define it: $ define/system/exec mx_smtp_debug true That'll create log files in MX_SMTP_DIR:. It might also help for you to run MX_SMTP interactively to try to get more stack dump information. >Also, what is the address of the Listserv? Our station crashed numerous >times (due to some faulty software), and we were down for quite some >time. During this time, because mail was bouncing, I was removed from >the list. > is the address for SUBSCRIBE MX-LIST and SIGNOFF MX-LIST commands. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 14:48:35 CST Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: Re: SMTP Crashing Message-ID: From: levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: 03 Apr 1997 20:43:35 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit CC: To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <3343EA3E.2B5C@alpha.tkm.mb.ca> "Darren B. Hutchings" writes: a status indicator of 1000000C. In the MX documentation, it is indicated that defining an MX_SMTP_DEBUG logical will give trace information. How exactly would I define the logical? I've tried various incarnations of def/log mx_smtp_debug, but am getting nowhere. *repress BOFH mode* In the docs that I have, in section 8.3, you find the following: The trace log file, by default, is created in the same directory used for the agent's main log file, with a filetype of .LOG. Trace output can be redirected by defining a system-wide ^^^^^^^^^^^ logical name. The logical names used for debugging are ^^^^^^^^^^^^ outlined in Table 8-1. Therefore, the correct definition is: $ DEFINE/SYSTEM MX_SMTP_DEBUG value I usually give the value YES -- 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, 08 Apr 1997 09:54:20 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Tue, 08 Apr 1997 09:54:07 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: s4r@ornl.gov CC: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009B278B.43AE1F39.5@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Any RTL delta-time bug problems in MX? (fwd) "Richard S. Shuford" writes: > >This message didn't pass mailing-list authentication. > You need to subscribe to the list (and then SET MX-LIST NOMAIL if you don't want to receive mail) in order to post to the list from NEWS. >Hunter, or other who know: > >Regarding this problem report: > >> A: The OpenVMS RTL Library (LIB$) time conversion routines have a >> documented restriction that limits delta-time arguments and return [...] >Is there any code in MadGoat MX that relies on this functionality? > No, MX is *NOT* affected by this limitation. (We *read* the documentation and knew about the documented limitation.) If MX is affected at your site, you have bigger problems than mail problems, because your network has been down for 27 years! 8-) I meant to mention this once before, but never did. Note that DECwindows is affected, so if you use DECwindows, you should install the patches. (This has nothing to do with MX, just an FYI.) Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 10:14:10 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 09:12:32 CDT From: iman@access.tkm.mb.ca Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@madgoat.com Message-ID: <009B2917.C94CAE87.21@access.tkm.mb.ca> Subject: SMTP Revisited Okay, I enabled logging, and here is what I get when SMTP crashes. This is the entirety of the log file: 9-APR-1997 19:06:16.28 Processing queue entry number 14 on node ALPHA 9-APR-1997 19:06:16.35 Recipient: <$BORDENGE@BrandonU.CA>, route=BrandonU.CA 9-APR-1997 19:06:16.35 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name BrandonU.CA The message in question is a bounce that was originally addressed to someone who is no longer a user on this system. The message itself is 42 blocks in size. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated. Darren Hutchings ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 10:14:18 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 09:12:32 CDT From: iman@access.tkm.mb.ca Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@madgoat.com Message-ID: <009B2917.C94CAE87.21@access.tkm.mb.ca> Subject: SMTP Revisited Okay, I enabled logging, and here is what I get when SMTP crashes. This is the entirety of the log file: 9-APR-1997 19:06:16.28 Processing queue entry number 14 on node ALPHA 9-APR-1997 19:06:16.35 Recipient: <$BORDENGE@BrandonU.CA>, route=BrandonU.CA 9-APR-1997 19:06:16.35 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name BrandonU.CA The message in question is a bounce that was originally addressed to someone who is no longer a user on this system. The message itself is 42 blocks in size. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated. Darren Hutchings ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 12 Apr 1997 13:29:25 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: dwing@cisco.com (Dan Wing) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Unknown Local User problems Date: Sat, 12 Apr 1997 11:26:29 -0700 Message-ID: To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <01bc466c$314be140$7f82fa8a@scp127.silsoe.cranfield.ac.uk>, p.coombs@cranfield.ac.uk wrote: > We are currently running e-mail through MX software, on a VAX with VMS 6.1 > as the operating system. Every now and then, after adding a new user, the > user is unable to receive any mail. This happens for local mail and > external mail. > > The message that is returned when trying to send to the new user is :- > > --> Error description: > Error-For: stajvf@siva.silsoe.cranfield.ac.uk > Error-Code: 2 > Error-Text: Error in (forward) delivery to user STAJVF > %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user STAJVF > > Error-End: 1 error detected > > The only way I can find of clearing the error so that the user can receive > mail, is to reboot the system. Obviously this is not a solution that we > would like to keep using, so would appreciate any suggestions or hints as > to what can be done to resolve this. Odd - I've never seen this behavior. You should be able to simply RESET (or maybe stop/restart) the MX Local agent. What version of MX are you running? Any contributed software you're running with it? I noticed the error says "error in (forward) delivery ...". What are you doing with VMSmail forwarding or MX aliasing with STAJVF? -Dan Wing ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 13 Apr 1997 11:25:36 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Sun, 13 Apr 1997 18:25:06 MET_DST From: Gerhard Landl Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009B2BC0.79E05393.3@indmath.uni-linz.ac.at> Subject: Problem communicating with UNIX-sendmail Hello All, I have some troubles setting up the mail system at an "external part" of our institute. Here at our institute we are running a VMS-cluster with MX V4.1 and everything works fine. The other half of the institute is running a mixed architecture LAN with UNIX and one VMS computer. One of the UNIX computers (due to "hostorical reasons" - it was the first one there) is set up to be the mail-hub of the LAN. It is connected to the rest of the university-network using a telephone-line, it gets all the LAN's mail using the UUCP protocol. The problem occurs in some cases when sending mail from the VMS-cluster to the external VMS-computer. Some - not all - mails keep coming back with a "remote protocol error". It seems as if UNIX rewrites the From-line in the header in such a way that MX won't accept it. If my interpretation is correct, which of the two did I get wrong? Is MX, not set up correctly, or is it really getting an invalid adress (i.e., the problem on side of the mail-hub)? A copy of the mail returned is attached below. I sent to KIMATH::SCHATZ, where KIMATH is one of our local machines. My collegue has a forwarding adress set, that redirects her mail to her computer. It's not so much a problem sending mail locally, I think we can work around that. But what about mail coming from outside? Many thanks, Gerhard ========================================================================= Gerhard Landl | Gerhard Landl Institut fuer Industriemathematik | Institute of Industrial Mathematics Johannes Kepler Universitaet | Johannes Kepler University 4040 Linz, Oesterreich | A-4040 LINZ, AUSTRIA | Tel. : +43-(0)732-2468/9225 | phone : +43-70-2468/9225 e-mail: LANDL@INDMATH.UNI-LINZ.AC.AT ========================================================================= ----- Transcript of session follows ----- While talking to dinoa2.imext.uni-linz.ac.at: >>> MAIL From: <<< 501 Invalid address: 554 schatz@dinoa2... Remote protocol error ----- Unsent message follows ----- Received: by zweigelt.imext.uni-linz.ac.at; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Nov96-1246PM) id AA19302; Fri, 11 Apr 1997 11:00:16 +0200 Received: from alijku04.edvz.uni-linz.ac.at (alijku04.edvz.uni-linz.ac.at [140.78.182.1]) by jupiter.planet.co.at (8.8.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA01400 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 1997 10:42:05 +0200 Received: from dino2.indmath.uni-linz.ac.at by alijku04.edvz.uni-linz.ac.at with SMTP id AA34092 (5.67c/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 11 Apr 1997 10:44:39 +0200 Received: by indmath.uni-linz.ac.at (MX V4.1 VAX) id 7; Fri, 11 Apr 1997 10:42:33 MET_DST Date: Fri, 11 Apr 1997 10:42:31 MET_DST From: "Dipl.-Ing.Dr. Landl Gerhard" <"kimst9::landl"@indmath.uni-linz.ac.at> To: SCHATZ@IMEXT.UNI-LINZ.AC.AT X-Vmsmail-To: KIMATH::SCHATZ X-Vmsmail-Cc: LANDL Message-Id: <009B29ED.85D04C28.7@indmath.uni-linz.ac.at> Subject: Nochmal Test ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Info Manager Institute of Industrial Mathematics University of Linz A-4040 Linz Austria E-Mail: infoman@indmath.uni-linz.ac.at WWW: http://www.indmath.uni-linz.ac.at/ Fax: +43-(0)732-2468-855 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 13 Apr 1997 11:47:24 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Sun, 13 Apr 1997 9:47:14 -0700 From: Madison@MadGoat.com (Matt Madison) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: infoman@indmath.uni-linz.ac.at Message-ID: <970413094714.2288c15a@Cisco.COM> Subject: RE: Problem communicating with UNIX-sendmail >The problem occurs in some cases when sending mail from the VMS-cluster to >the external VMS-computer. Some - not all - mails keep coming back with a >"remote protocol error". It seems as if UNIX rewrites the From-line in >the header in such a way that MX won't accept it. Yup. It's stripping the quotation marks off the local part of the address. Typical for sendmail, and no easy way to fix it. You can work around the problem, though, by adding a name_conversion module to MX that will rewrite the "node::user" that MX generates into a format that sendmail is better able to handle. Check out the DECNET_NAME_CONVERISON stuff in the MX CONTRIB area for an example. -Matt -- Matthew Madison | | madison@cisco.com Cisco Systems | 101 Cooper St. | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA | +1 408 457 5390 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 17:55:00 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: Re: Bad MAIL From Causing remote protocol errors Message-ID: From: levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: 14 Apr 1997 22:25:36 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <5itvn5$gon@noao.edu> merrill@stsci.edu (Clark Merrill) writes: Using MX 4.2 I am getting bounced mail with a remote protocol error message. I have included a copy of the bounce message. What is happenning is someones sendmail configuration is is mucking up the MAIL from line. Which means the manager on that node should correct the error. here is a Transcript of the error: ----- Transcript of session follows ----- .. while talking to liner.stsci.edu.: >>> MAIL From:<@@stsci.edu> <<< 501 Invalid address: <@@stsci.edu> 554 username@liner.stsci.edu... Remote protocol error What I want is to have MX do NO validation of the the MAIL From line. Clark, you're not thinking straight. A NULL value is valid, yes, as a measure to prevent mail loops when sending an error report back somewhere. An invalid address, on the other hand, is completelly useless, and will just create extra queue entries, possibly with a resulting mail loop if you're very unlucky. Just because other SMTP server implementations are sloppy (idiotic in my opinion) doesn't mean MX has to be. And that to allow/support a buggy sendmail setup. 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: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 06:29:58 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <199704161129.MAA05102@muttley.cen.hw.ac.uk> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: 8BIT SMTP MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:29:34 +0100 From: "David J. Morriss" I have received a number of complaints from users who are trying to mail certain UK sites which don't accept 8-bit SMTP. Here's an example of a rejection (names changed to protect the innocent): Error-For: a.person@somesite.ac.uk Error-Code: 2 Error-Text: %MX_SMTP-F-TRANSACTION_FAI, transaction failed -(Via somesite.ac.uk) -Transcript: -Rcvd: 220 com1.somesite.ac.uk PP Here - Pleased to meet you (Complaints/bugs to: postmaster@somesite.ac.uk) -Sent: HELO bonaly.hw.ac.uk -Rcvd: 250 com1.somesite.ac.uk: bonaly.hw.ac.uk looks good to me -Sent: MAIL FROM: -Rcvd: 250 OK -Sent: RCPT TO: -Rcvd: 250 Recipient OK. -Sent: DATA -Rcvd: 354 Enter Mail, end by a line with only '.' -Rcvd: 554 8BIT SMTP extension not supported -Sent: QUIT -Rcvd: 221 com1.somesite.ac.uk says goodbye to bonaly.hw.ac.uk at Tue Apr 15 17:08:53. Some experimentation shows that MX (quite reasonably) only uses 8-bit SMTP when the message contains 8-bit characters. It seems the choices are: 1. Avoid using 8-bit characters [not easy to control] 2. Encode such messages [messy] 3. Use another mailer which can generate Mime or Quoted-Printable [though it's a shame to have to turn users away from the VMS system] 4. Ask the rejecting sites to stop doing it [not likely] 5. Relay through more forgiving sites/servers which might convert it to something more acceptable [not easy for the users to type MX%"user%site@relay"] Any comments? -- David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 07:24:29 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 05:24:14 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B2DAE.E2B5E78A.20@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: 8BIT SMTP > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 16-APR-1997 04:50:35.34 > Subj: 8BIT SMTP > I have received a number of complaints from users who are trying to mail > certain UK sites which don't accept 8-bit SMTP. Here's an example of a > rejection (names changed to protect the innocent): > Oh, I think that we can all make a pretty good guess as to what site this is... > Error-For: a.person@somesite.ac.uk > Error-Code: 2 > Error-Text: %MX_SMTP-F-TRANSACTION_FAI, transaction failed > -(Via somesite.ac.uk) > -Transcript: > -Rcvd: 220 com1.somesite.ac.uk PP Here - Pleased to meet you (Complaints/bugs to: postmaster@somesite.ac.uk) > -Sent: HELO bonaly.hw.ac.uk > -Rcvd: 250 com1.somesite.ac.uk: bonaly.hw.ac.uk looks good to me > -Sent: MAIL FROM: > -Rcvd: 250 OK > -Sent: RCPT TO: > -Rcvd: 250 Recipient OK. > -Sent: DATA > -Rcvd: 354 Enter Mail, end by a line with only '.' > -Rcvd: 554 8BIT SMTP extension not supported > -Sent: QUIT > -Rcvd: 221 com1.somesite.ac.uk says goodbye to bonaly.hw.ac.uk at Tue Apr 15 17:08:53. > > Some experimentation shows that MX (quite reasonably) only uses 8-bit SMTP > when the message contains 8-bit characters. > > It seems the choices are: > > 1. Avoid using 8-bit characters [not easy to control] > > 2. Encode such messages [messy] > > 3. Use another mailer which can generate Mime or Quoted-Printable [though > it's a shame to have to turn users away from the VMS system] > > 4. Ask the rejecting sites to stop doing it [not likely] > > 5. Relay through more forgiving sites/servers which might convert it to > something more acceptable [not easy for the users to type > MX%"user%site@relay"] > I don't know if this will work, but it's worth a try: I use a mail transport called qmail on some of my unix hosts. ( http://www.qmail.org/ ) Now, our cluster here is so old that that CPU model number is in Roman numerals... Needless to say, it could take a few hours to make a first pass through a mailing list with several hundred members around the world. I reconfigured MX on the cluster to use the qmail unix host as it's SMTP gateway, and it made a first pass through the list in 12 minutes! I figure with that configuration, I had the best of both worlds: an intelligent email backend like MX and a screaming email SMTP frontend. > Any comments? > It's worth a try. And qmail does support 8Bit SMTP. > > -- > David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) > Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 > Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk > -HWM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 07:41:12 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 05:40:57 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B2DB1.38CC689A.37@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: 8BIT SMTP > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 16-APR-1997 04:50:35.34 > Subj: 8BIT SMTP > 4. Ask the rejecting sites to stop doing it [not likely] > I should have pointed this out in my previous message that if you are interested in using qmail as a fast mail relay for MX, there is one major caveat: one of the design criteria of qmail was to disallow by default wildcard forwarding to other domains, to prevent your host from being used as a SPAM drop site. There is a way to override this using one of it's several configuration files, and an environment variable that is (must be!) set by invoking the qmail SMTP daemon using tcpd, AKA TCP wrappers. I've never gotten this to work properly, so I came up with a one line patch to the qmail SMTP agent that bypasses this. Being that this list is about MX, not qmail, I won't post any more of the gory details here. Send me email and I'll tell you what to patch; if there is enough demand I'll put up a WEB page. > 5. Relay through more forgiving sites/servers which might convert it to > something more acceptable [not easy for the users to type > MX%"user%site@relay"] > > Any comments? > I'm still using qmail 0.96; 1.01 just came out. It still has a few rough edges, but for blasting email out to the net, it runs circles around anything else I've seen. > > -- > David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) > Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 > Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk > -HWM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:09:45 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:59:51 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: "Brian Tillman, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk Message-ID: <009B2DD5.63EFDE20.28@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: 8BIT SMTP David Morriss (D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk) writes: >3. Use another mailer which can generate Mime or Quoted-Printable [though > it's a shame to have to turn users away from the VMS system] MIME capability and VMS are not mutually exclusive, as this option seems to indicate that this is your belief. PMDF contains a MIME-compliant MUA, MX can BASE64-encode files, and the freeware mailer Pine is available for VMS. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- 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, 16 Apr 1997 09:16:36 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <199704161416.PAA05606@muttley.cen.hw.ac.uk> To: PASZTOR Miklos CC: MX-List@MadGoat.com Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com References: Subject: Re: 8BIT SMTP MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:16:18 +0100 From: "David J. Morriss" On Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:33:34 +0200 (MET DST) PASZTOR Miklos wrote: > Users could use PINE instead of VMS MAIL on the VMS system. PINE is > superior to VMS MAIL in a number of ways, it encodes 8 bit characters > QP among other things. Yes, that occurred to me after posting my message, so I installed PINE_3_91_BETA_11.ZIP (from ftp://ftp2.kcl.ac.uk/zip/) this morning, and it looks like an excellent solution for those who aren't scared by something that's not good old VMS Mail. > Besides, you can ask admin at somesite to rebuild PP so that it > accepts 8 bit characters in the body of the messages. PP DOES support > this, through a compile time option. Yes again. Actually _we_ run PP since it's the only straightforward (and/or cheap) way to gateway between X.400 and SMTP, though we'll probably stop running it once the X.400 users have joined the rest of us. Our server handles 8-bit and I can relay to "somesite" through it. However, I don't hold out much hope for sites such as this being prepared to change. -- David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:26:21 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: dwing@cisco.com (Dan Wing) Subject: Re: 8BIT SMTP Date: 16 Apr 1997 14:19:43 GMT Message-ID: <5j2n5v$uh$1@cronkite.cisco.com> Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <199704161129.MAA05102@muttley.cen.hw.ac.uk>, "David J. Morriss" writes: >It seems the choices are: > >1. Avoid using 8-bit characters [not easy to control] Right. >2. Encode such messages [messy] Yes, but (3) and (5) in your list will encode messages. MX could do it, too. >3. Use another mailer which can generate Mime or Quoted-Printable [though > it's a shame to have to turn users away from the VMS system] Or users could use a MIME-aware User Agents (such as Netscape, IE, Eudora, etc.) and use POP and SMTP to read/send their mail. >4. Ask the rejecting sites to stop doing it [not likely] They might have a reason for rejecting it. >5. Relay through more forgiving sites/servers which might convert it to > something more acceptable [not easy for the users to type > MX%"user%site@relay"] > >Any comments? You can do (5) automatically - simply set a PATH for the destination host through the host that will convert the message (if you have such a host at your disposal): MCP> DEFINE PATH host-that-doesnt-accept-8-bit SMTP/ROUTE=converter-relay ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:27:26 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <199704161425.PAA05655@muttley.cen.hw.ac.uk> To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com References: <009B2DAE.E2B5E78A.20@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: Re: 8BIT SMTP MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:25:50 +0100 From: "David J. Morriss" On Wed, 16 Apr 1997 05:24:14 PDT "Henry W. Miller" wrote: > I don't know if this will work, but it's worth a try: I use > a mail transport called qmail on some of my unix hosts. ( > http://www.qmail.org/ ) Now, our cluster here is so old that that CPU > model number is in Roman numerals... Needless to say, it could take > a few hours to make a first pass through a mailing list with several > hundred members around the world. I reconfigured MX on the cluster to > use the qmail unix host as it's SMTP gateway, and it made a first pass > through the list in 12 minutes! I figure with that configuration, I > had the best of both worlds: an intelligent email backend like MX and > a screaming email SMTP frontend. That's a thought. If I'd had my wits about me this morning I'd have considered doing something like this using our central mail hub. My only difficulty with such a scheme would be making the transition, and all those mailing list subscriptions that couldn't be removed because of the address change. -- David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:20:02 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 17:19:49 CET-DST From: "Rok Vidmar, NUK Ljubljana" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009B2E12.DA0B18B2.3@NUK.Uni-Lj.Si> Subject: Re: 8BIT SMTP > > I don't know if this will work, but it's worth a try: I use > > a mail transport called qmail on some of my unix hosts. ( > > http://www.qmail.org/ ) Now, our cluster here is so old that that CPU > > model number is in Roman numerals... Needless to say, it could take > > a few hours to make a first pass through a mailing list with several > > hundred members around the world. I reconfigured MX on the cluster to *********************************** > > use the qmail unix host as it's SMTP gateway, and it made a first pass ******************************************** > > through the list in 12 minutes! I figure with that configuration, I > > had the best of both worlds: an intelligent email backend like MX and > > a screaming email SMTP frontend. > > That's a thought. If I'd had my wits about me this morning I'd have > considered doing something like this using our central mail hub. My only > difficulty with such a scheme would be making the transition, and all those > mailing list subscriptions that couldn't be removed because of the address > change. ******* ****** There is *no* address change in this case! Simply replace PATH "*" SMTP with PATH "*" SMTP/ROUTE="your_SMTP_gateway". Regards, Rok Vidmar Internet: rok.vidmar@uni-lj.si National and University Library Phone: +386 61 125 4218 Turjaska 1, 1000 Ljubljana Fax: +386 61 125 5007 Slovenia ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 11:34:09 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <199704161630.RAA06179@muttley.cen.hw.ac.uk> To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com References: <009B2E12.DA0B18B2.3@NUK.Uni-Lj.Si> Subject: Re: 8BIT SMTP MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 17:30:18 +0100 From: "David J. Morriss" On Wed, 16 Apr 1997 17:19:49 CET-DST "Rok Vidmar, NUK Ljubljana" wrote: > > My only > > difficulty with such a scheme would be making the transition, and all those > > mailing list subscriptions that couldn't be removed because of the address > > change. ******* > ****** > > There is *no* address change in this case! Simply replace PATH "*" SMTP > with PATH "*" SMTP/ROUTE="your_SMTP_gateway". It seems to be a day for tangling myself in my misconceptions ;-) I had assumed that routing in this way would cause the "From" address to change so that mailing list engines wouldn't recognise the user as a valid subscriber when posting, etc. I obviously don't understand what routing means in this context - especially since, in the fullness of time we wanted to make the server doing the routing rewrite headers into the A.N.Other@hw.ac.uk format! After actually trying it rather than speculating, I find that all that changes is that there's another "Received:" header in the message. Off to read some RFCs or something.... -- David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 00:20:42 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 22:20:18 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B2E3C.D472B07A.7@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: Re: 8BIT SMTP > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 16-APR-1997 07:54:17.24 > Subj: Re: 8BIT SMTP David, > On Wed, 16 Apr 1997 05:24:14 PDT "Henry W. Miller" wrote: > > > I don't know if this will work, but it's worth a try: I use > > a mail transport called qmail on some of my unix hosts. ( > > http://www.qmail.org/ ) Now, our cluster here is so old that that CPU > > model number is in Roman numerals... Needless to say, it could take > > a few hours to make a first pass through a mailing list with several > > hundred members around the world. I reconfigured MX on the cluster to > > use the qmail unix host as it's SMTP gateway, and it made a first pass > > through the list in 12 minutes! I figure with that configuration, I > > had the best of both worlds: an intelligent email backend like MX and > > a screaming email SMTP frontend. > > That's a thought. If I'd had my wits about me this morning I'd have > considered doing something like this using our central mail hub. My only > difficulty with such a scheme would be making the transition, and all those > mailing list subscriptions that couldn't be removed because of the address > change. > No, you would not be changing any list addresses; you'd just be using qmail as the SMTP delivery agent as you'd set the SMTP router to your unix box running qmail. > -- > David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) > Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 > Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk > -HWM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 00:37:00 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 22:36:42 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B2E3F.1E9977EA.23@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: Re: 8BIT SMTP > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 16-APR-1997 09:57:28.20 > Subj: Re: 8BIT SMTP > On Wed, 16 Apr 1997 17:19:49 CET-DST "Rok Vidmar, NUK Ljubljana" wrote: > > > > My only > > > difficulty with such a scheme would be making the transition, and all those > > > mailing list subscriptions that couldn't be removed because of the address > > > change. ******* > > ****** > > > > There is *no* address change in this case! Simply replace PATH "*" SMTP > > with PATH "*" SMTP/ROUTE="your_SMTP_gateway". > > It seems to be a day for tangling myself in my misconceptions ;-) > > I had assumed that routing in this way would cause the "From" address to > change so that mailing list engines wouldn't recognise the user as a valid > subscriber when posting, etc. I obviously don't understand what routing means > in this context - especially since, in the fullness of time we wanted to make > the server doing the routing rewrite headers into the A.N.Other@hw.ac.uk > format! > In this context, "routing" refers to forcing some or all mail to use a particular email gateway; in the example I gave, I suggested forrcing MX to use a unix box running qmail to deliver email to the Internet. > After actually trying it rather than speculating, I find that all that > changes is that there's another "Received:" header in the message. Off to > read some RFCs or something.... > > -- > David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) > Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 > Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk > -HWM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 08:45:25 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <199704171345.OAA07842@muttley.cen.hw.ac.uk> To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: MX_TIMEZONE and MX_DIR:MX_LOGICALS.DAT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 14:45:03 +0100 From: "David J. Morriss" This is my week for nit-picking, and today's nit concerns MX_TIMEZONE. Firstly, I run MX_WATCHDOG. I also set MX_TIMEZONE at system startup time using the value of SYS$TIMEZONE_DIFFERENTIAL to get the GMT offset. Perhaps there are better ways of doing this. Occasionally, I find that MX_TIMEZONE is set incorrectly. I hadn't given it much attention, assuming that it was something I was doing wrong, I just corrected it manually. However, today I have found that whenever MX_WATCHDOG finds a missing process and calls SYS$STARTUP:MX_STARTUP.COM the logical is being changed. The reason for this is that the file MX_DIR:MX_LOGICALS.DAT contains the line: MX_TIMEZONE\/SYSTEM/EXEC\+0000 which causes the logical to be reset. How did this come to be? Presumably this was picked up during the installation, which would have been done on a system on which MX had just been shut down. I upgraded from 4.1 to 4.2 last year, which is presumably when it happened. On my VAXstation I installed 4.2 from scratch, and this didn't happen. Was this something I did wrong? Incidentally, this niggle became a much bigger problem when I enabled the LISTSERV interface this week. MX_WATCHDOG doesn't cater for this, so always determined it was necessary to run MX_STARTUP.COM on every cycle, resulting in an MX_TIMEZONE every five minutes :-( -- David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:36:43 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:36:37 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009B2E9B.4F0D1677.7@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: MX_TIMEZONE and MX_DIR:MX_LOGICALS.DAT "David J. Morriss" writes: > >The reason for this is that the file MX_DIR:MX_LOGICALS.DAT contains the line: > > MX_TIMEZONE\/SYSTEM/EXEC\+0000 > >which causes the logical to be reset. > [...] >Was this something I did wrong? > You or someone added that logical to MX_LOGICALS.DAT by hand. It's not normally in the file. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:54:03 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 17:53:41 -0700 (PDT) From: "Alberto Meregalli (DIF)" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: MX_TIMEZONE and MX_DIR:MX_LOGICALS.DAT Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 17 Apr 1997, Hunter Goatley wrote: > "David J. Morriss" writes: > > > >The reason for this is that the file MX_DIR:MX_LOGICALS.DAT contains the line: > > > > MX_TIMEZONE\/SYSTEM/EXEC\+0000 > > > >which causes the logical to be reset. > > > [...] > >Was this something I did wrong? > > > You or someone added that logical to MX_LOGICALS.DAT by hand. It's > not normally in the file. I saw something similar when an upgrade of MX added the current value of MX_TIMEZONE to the mx_logicals.dat file. When the next daylight time change came into effect, that fixed definition effectively overrode at startup the correct value. I don't know what the installation does if the logical isn't defined. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alberto Meregalli, DIF tel. +39 2 2125 249 CESI, Centro Elettrotecnico Sperimentale Italiano fax +39 2 2125 520 Via Rubattino, 54 - I 20134 Milano E-mail: meregalli@cesi.it ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 11:13:28 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <199704171613.RAA08216@muttley.cen.hw.ac.uk> To: MX-List@MadGoat.COM Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com References: <009B2E9B.4F0D1677.7@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Re: MX_TIMEZONE and MX_DIR:MX_LOGICALS.DAT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 17:13:18 +0100 From: "David J. Morriss" On Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:36:37 EDT Hunter Goatley wrote: > You or someone added that logical to MX_LOGICALS.DAT by hand. It's not > normally in the file. I really don't think that this is the case. I just tried an experiment: - on my handy VAXstation I closed down MX (MCP SHUT) - the MX_TIMEZONE logical had previously been set to "+0100 (BST)" - the file MX_LOGICALS.DAT did not contain any reference to MX_TIMEZONE - I reinstalled MX042 - the file MX_LOGICALS.DAT now contains MX_TIMEZONE\/SYSTEM/EXEC\+0100 (BST) - the file MX_LOGICALS.OLD (presumably the original file) does not contain such a line I am presuming that something in the installation is garnering MX_* logicals and adding them to MX_LOGICALS.DAT. Dave -- David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 11:25:10 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <199704171624.RAA08260@muttley.cen.hw.ac.uk> To: MX-List@MadGoat.COM Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: MX_TIMEZONE and MX_DIR:MX_LOGICALS.DAT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 17:24:53 +0100 From: "David J. Morriss" Sorry to labour the point, but I just did what I should have done at the outset - looked at KITINSTAL.COM in MX042.A, and here is what I found: $ WRITE MX_LOGI "MX_MCP_HELPLIB\/SYSTEM\MX_DIR:MX_MCP_HELPLIB" $ WRITE MX_LOGI "MX_ALIAS_HELPLIB\/SYSTEM\MX_DIR:MX_ALIAS_HELPLIB" $! $ MX_DEF_MX_TIMEZONE = F$TRNLNM("MX_TIMEZONE") $ IF "''MX_DEF_MX_TIMEZONE'" .NES. "" THEN - WRITE MX_LOGI "MX_TIMEZONE\/SYSTEM/EXEC\",MX_DEF_MX_TIMEZONE MX_LOGI is of course the new MX_LOGICALS.DAT file. Dave -- David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:15:46 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:15:38 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009B2EB9.E7FB490E.10@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Re: MX_TIMEZONE and MX_DIR:MX_LOGICALS.DAT "David J. Morriss" writes: > >Sorry to labour the point, but I just did what I should have done at the >outset - looked at KITINSTAL.COM in MX042.A, and here is what I found: > You're right; my apologies. That was added to V4.2, I think, and I had forgotten that it was there. Sorry. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 05:23:20 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.19970418112142.640ffd12@agate.actfs.co.uk> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 11:21:42 +0100 To: mx-list@wkuvx1.wku.edu From: John Rourke Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Recipient becomes sender MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" One of my users is experiencing a problem sending some (but not all) mail to other members of our organisation. The problem is that the mail which is sent appears to be FROM the recipient rather than the SENDER. When I turned on debugging there appears to be multiple From: lines. The first one is correct but a later one contains two From: entries, the first incorrect and the second correct. Where is this line coming from? The mail is sent from Eudora Light to an Alpha running MX 4.2 and UCX Any ideas anyone. John Rourke 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.16 Processing queue entry number 24 on node AGATE 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.25 Recipient: , route=GATEWAY 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.25 Recipient: , route=GATEWAY 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.25 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name GATEWAY 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.29 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 00000001 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.35 SMTP_SEND: Attempting to start session with GATEWAY [193.117.200.2] 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.36 SMTP_SEND: Connected 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.85 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 220 gateway.actfs.co.uk MX V4.2 VAX SMTP server ready at Fri, 18 Apr 1997 10:51:25 BST 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.90 SMTP_SEND: Sent: HELO agate.actfs.co.uk 18-APR-1997 10:51:28.88 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Verification failed for agate.actfs.co.uk 18-APR-1997 10:51:28.88 SMTP_SEND: Sent: MAIL FROM: 18-APR-1997 10:51:31.42 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 MAIL command accepted. 18-APR-1997 10:51:31.42 SMTP_SEND: Sent: RCPT TO: 18-APR-1997 10:51:31.46 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) 18-APR-1997 10:51:31.46 SMTP_SEND: Sent: RCPT TO: 18-APR-1997 10:51:31.48 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) 18-APR-1997 10:51:31.49 SMTP_SEND: Sent: DATA 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 354 Start mail input; end with . 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Received: from leonie_blain.actfs.co.uk ([97.23.0.9]) by agate.actfs.co.uk (MX 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: V4.2 AXP) with SMTP; Fri, 18 Apr 1997 10:51:23 BST 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970418105615.a02f2470@POPSERVE.ACTFS.CO.UK> 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: X-Sender: whoever@POPSERVE.ACTFS.CO.UK 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: MIME-Version: 1.0 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: To: john.doe@ACTFS.CO.UK Could the next line be causing a problem? If so, where is it coming from? The mail is FROM whoever NOT john.doe and whoever. 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: From: john.doe@ACTFS.CO.UK, Who Ever 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Subject: Blah Blah Blah 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: YET ANOTHER TEST 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.31 SMTP_SEND: Sent: . : : : 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.31 SMTP_SEND: will wait 00:11:00.00 for reply. 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.37 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Message received and queued. 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.37 SMTP_SEND: Sent: QUIT 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.38 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 221 gateway.actfs.co.uk Service closing transmission channel 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.41 Recipient status=00000001 for 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.41 Recipient status=00000001 for 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.44 Entry now completely processed, no retries needed. 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.47 *** End of processing pass *** ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 05:53:37 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 03:52:13 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B2F34.5D4D998A.10@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: Recipient becomes sender > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 18-APR-1997 03:43:45.14 > Subj: Recipient becomes sender John, > One of my users is experiencing a problem sending some (but not all) mail > to other members of our organisation. > > The problem is that the mail which is sent appears to be FROM the recipient > rather than the SENDER. > > When I turned on debugging there appears to be multiple From: lines. The > first one is correct but a later one contains two From: entries, the first > incorrect and the second correct. Where is this line coming from? > > The mail is sent from Eudora Light to an Alpha running MX 4.2 and UCX > > Any ideas anyone. > > John Rourke > > 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.16 Processing queue entry number 24 on node AGATE > 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.25 Recipient: , route=GATEWAY > 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.25 Recipient: , route=GATEWAY > 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.25 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name GATEWAY > 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.29 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 00000001 > 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.35 SMTP_SEND: Attempting to start session with > GATEWAY [193.117.200.2] > 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.36 SMTP_SEND: Connected > 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.85 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 220 gateway.actfs.co.uk MX V4.2 > VAX SMTP server ready at Fri, 18 Apr 1997 10:51:25 BST > 18-APR-1997 10:51:25.90 SMTP_SEND: Sent: HELO agate.actfs.co.uk > 18-APR-1997 10:51:28.88 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Verification failed for > agate.actfs.co.uk > 18-APR-1997 10:51:28.88 SMTP_SEND: Sent: MAIL FROM: > 18-APR-1997 10:51:31.42 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 MAIL command accepted. > 18-APR-1997 10:51:31.42 SMTP_SEND: Sent: RCPT TO: > 18-APR-1997 10:51:31.46 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Recipient okay (at least in > form) > 18-APR-1997 10:51:31.46 SMTP_SEND: Sent: RCPT TO: > 18-APR-1997 10:51:31.48 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Recipient okay (at least in > form) > 18-APR-1997 10:51:31.49 SMTP_SEND: Sent: DATA > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 354 Start mail input; end with > . > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Received: from > leonie_blain.actfs.co.uk ([97.23.0.9]) by agate.actfs.co.uk (MX > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: V4.2 AXP) with SMTP; > Fri, 18 Apr 1997 10:51:23 BST > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Message-ID: > <1.5.4.16.19970418105615.a02f2470@POPSERVE.ACTFS.CO.UK> > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: X-Sender: > whoever@POPSERVE.ACTFS.CO.UK > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light > Version 1.5.4 (16) > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: MIME-Version: 1.0 > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="us-ascii" > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: To: john.doe@ACTFS.CO.UK > > Could the next line be causing a problem? If so, where is it coming from? > The mail is FROM whoever NOT john.doe and whoever. > This from line is in the email header as sent to MX from Eudora. You'd have to check the configuration on the PC to see why it is generating this. What type of system is the user having problems sending mail to? -HWM > > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: From: john.doe@ACTFS.CO.UK, Who > Ever > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Subject: Blah Blah Blah > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: YET ANOTHER TEST > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.30 SMTP_SEND: Sent: > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.31 SMTP_SEND: Sent: . > : > : > : > 18-APR-1997 10:51:32.31 SMTP_SEND: will wait 00:11:00.00 for reply. > 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.37 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Message received and queued. > 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.37 SMTP_SEND: Sent: QUIT > 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.38 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 221 gateway.actfs.co.uk Service > closing transmission channel > 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.41 Recipient status=00000001 for > 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.41 Recipient status=00000001 for > 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.44 Entry now completely processed, no retries needed. > 18-APR-1997 10:51:33.47 *** End of processing pass *** > > > ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 06:04:45 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.19970418120331.6557f9e2@agate.actfs.co.uk> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 12:03:31 +0100 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: John Rourke Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: Recipient becomes sender MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" We have lots of users using Eudora but this is the only one who seems to be having a problem. The mail from Eudora is sent to an Alpha running MX 4.2 and then on to VMS mail to be retrieved by the PC client via POP3. The clients are Eudora Light and MS Exchange. The recipients in this case are using MS Exchange but the log attached in the original message shows that the problem is there as soon as the mail is received by MX. > > This from line is in the email header as sent to MX from Eudora. >You'd have to check the configuration on the PC to see why it is >generating this. > > What type of system is the user having problems sending mail to? > >-HWM > ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 06:50:21 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 06:50:16 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: JOHN.ROURKE@ACTFS.CO.UK Message-ID: <009B2F4D.3C4E1B26.7@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Recipient becomes sender John Rourke writes: > >We have lots of users using Eudora but this is the only one who seems to be >having a problem. The mail from Eudora is sent to an Alpha running MX 4.2 >and then on to VMS mail to be retrieved by the PC client via POP3. The >clients are Eudora Light and MS Exchange. The recipients in this case are >using MS Exchange but the log attached in the original message shows that >the problem is there as soon as the mail is received by MX. > Exactly---which means that it's coming in that way from the PC. As Henry suggested, you should check that user's Eudora configuration to see what's happening. You could also enable MX SMTP Server debugging to see the contents of the message as the message comes in from the PC.... Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 07:37:59 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <199704181237.NAA09415@muttley.cen.hw.ac.uk> To: MX-List@MadGoat.COM Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com References: <009B2EB9.E7FB490E.10@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Re: MX_TIMEZONE and MX_DIR:MX_LOGICALS.DAT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 13:37:49 +0100 From: "David J. Morriss" On Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:15:38 EDT Hunter Goatley wrote: > You're right; my apologies. That was added to V4.2, I think, and I > had forgotten that it was there. Sorry. I'm just glad to find the source of the "gremlins". A note describing this in the Installation Guide would be nice, and/or an installation prompt confirming that this is what is required, perhaps. Dave -- David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 11:44:17 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 9:44:08 -0700 From: Matt Madison Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.COM Message-ID: <970418094408.228fa866@Cisco.COM> Subject: Re: MX_TIMEZONE and MX_DIR:MX_LOGICALS.DAT >> You're right; my apologies. That was added to V4.2, I think, and I >> had forgotten that it was there. Sorry. > >I'm just glad to find the source of the "gremlins". > >A note describing this in the Installation Guide would be nice, and/or an >installation prompt confirming that this is what is required, perhaps. A future version of MX will simply take the timezone information from the SYS$TIMEZONE_DIFFERENTIAL logical name that is already defined on VMS V6.x and later systems, eliminating the need for MX_TIMEZONE altogether for most folks. -Matt -- Matthew Madison | | madison@cisco.com Cisco Systems | 101 Cooper St. | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA | +1 408 457 5390 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 22:30:34 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 21:59:46 CST6CDT5,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: Sue Rosselet Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM Message-ID: <009B2FCC.4ABF0068.1@BSUWEB.Bemidji.MSUS.edu> Subject: SMTP_SERVER Problem Folks, We're running MX 4.2 on a cluster of MicroVAX 3100's. Upgraded MX about a year ago and everything has been running smoothly until late yesterday. The SMTP_SERVER on both the main server node of the cluster and one of the satellite nodes keeps dying. The rest of the satellite nodes are unaffected. I have MX_Watchdog running every 15 minutes and it seems to have to restart the SMTP_SERVER about every 30 minutes. Router, Local, MLF, Agents, etc.. all stay running on all nodes. I've been keeping close tabs on the SMTP_SERVER on the cluster's server node (Beaver). Over about a 15 minute time frame, it connected and connected and connected and died... PID Node Process name Status Agent type -------- ------ --------------- ------------------ ------------ 20202AA4 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 1 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) -------- ------ --------------- ------------------ ------------ 20202AA4 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 2 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) -------- ------ --------------- ------------------ ------------ 20202AA4 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 4 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) Checking the .LOG file... SMTP_SERVER_BEAVER.LOG 18-APR-1997 08:53:37.44: MX SMTP Server (pid 20202AA4) starting 18-APR-1997 09:08:28.96: MX SMTP Server (pid 20202AA4) exiting, status = 10248074 Can anyone tell me what this status code means? I checked the thread limit... "MX_SMTP_SERVER_THREADS" = "8" I restarted it...and again observed over about a 15 minute time frame: 20202C53 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 1 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) ---- 20202C53 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 2 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) ---- 20202C53 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 1 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) ---- 20202C53 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Idle SMTP server (over TCP/IP) ---- 20202C53 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 1 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) ---- 20202C53 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Idle SMTP server (over TCP/IP) Then it died again... SMTP_SERVER_BEAVER.LOG 18-APR-1997 09:44:21.74: MX SMTP Server (pid 20202C53) starting 18-APR-1997 10:09:10.92: MX SMTP Server (pid 20202C53) exiting, status = 10248074 Only once during any of this did I notice a "connect" for any of the other nodes: At 10:04:28 21400D39 BSUWEB MX SMTP Server Connected 1 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) And it went back to IDLE (did not die) by 10:04:58 This is what I expected to see; connect and go back to Idle very quickly. BEAVER stays "connected" for an extremely long time. It seems to connect almost immediately after it's started, seldom drops back to Idle, and then die quickly after it does that. When Beaver's SMTP_SERVER dies, I thought the SMTP_SERVER on one of the others nodes would get used, but apparently it doesn't. No mail comes in over TCP/IP when the SMTP_SERVER on Beaver is out. I've checked .LOG files and version numbers, checked quotas, checked logicals, read documentation, nothing appears to have changed. I'm stumped...can anyone offer a suggestion?? The one recent change to the system was to apply the ECO for VAXLIBR06_070 to address the delta-time restriction. o The OpenVMS operating system has a documented delta-time restriction that may cause a serious error in some applications and OpenVMS components beginning on or around 19-MAY-1997. DIGITAL has corrected this potential problem and has provided ECOs (Engineering Change Orders) that remove the delta-time limit. This was done last Saturday, the entire cluster was rebooted. MX has been working fine since; it is still working fine on most of the cluster except for the SMTP_SERVER dying on the server node. Thanks, _____________________________________ /\ Sue Rosselet \ \_| Dept. of Math & Computer Science | | Bemidji State University | | 1500 Birchmont Dr. NE | | Bemidji, MN 56601 | | 218-755-2842 FAX: 218-755-2822 | | system@cslab.bemidji.msus.edu | | _________________________________|__ \_/___________________________________/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 22:55:02 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 22:54:56 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: SYSTEM@BSUWEB.BEMIDJI.MSUS.EDU Message-ID: <009B2FD3.FF8F862B.3@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: SMTP_SERVER Problem Sue Rosselet writes: > >We're running MX 4.2 on a cluster of MicroVAX 3100's. Upgraded MX about >a year ago and everything has been running smoothly until late >yesterday. The SMTP_SERVER on both the main server node of the cluster >and one of the satellite nodes keeps dying. >Checking the .LOG file... >SMTP_SERVER_BEAVER.LOG >18-APR-1997 08:53:37.44: MX SMTP Server (pid 20202AA4) starting >18-APR-1997 09:08:28.96: MX SMTP Server (pid 20202AA4) exiting, >status = 10248074 > >Can anyone tell me what this status code means? > $ write sys$output f$message(%x10248074) %STR-F-STRTOOLON, string is too long (greater than 65535) $ This problem is solved by the new SMTP_SERVER.EXE image available on ftp.madgoat.com in [.MX.MX042.PATCH]. While you're there, you should also grab the new MX_LOCAL executable too. (The problem is caused by an incoming spam mail message that has a To: or CC: line longer than 64K bytes, which MX wasn't originally designed to handle (since that's the maximum string length supported by string descriptors in VMS).) Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 23:09:34 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 21:09:13 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B2FC5.3B15446C.11@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: SMTP_SERVER Problem > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 18-APR-1997 20:43:03.61 > Subj: SMTP_SERVER Problem Sue, Have you upgraded to the selected 4.2A components that Hunter released last December? -HWM > Folks, > > We're running MX 4.2 on a cluster of MicroVAX 3100's. Upgraded MX about > a year ago and everything has been running smoothly until late > yesterday. The SMTP_SERVER on both the main server node of the cluster > and one of the satellite nodes keeps dying. The rest of the satellite > nodes are unaffected. I have MX_Watchdog running every 15 minutes and it > seems to have to restart the SMTP_SERVER about every 30 minutes. > Router, Local, MLF, Agents, etc.. all stay running on all nodes. > > I've been keeping close tabs on the SMTP_SERVER on the cluster's server > node (Beaver). Over about a 15 minute time frame, it connected and > connected and connected and died... > > PID Node Process name Status Agent type > -------- ------ --------------- ------------------ ------------ > 20202AA4 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 1 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) > -------- ------ --------------- ------------------ ------------ > 20202AA4 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 2 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) > -------- ------ --------------- ------------------ ------------ > 20202AA4 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 4 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) > > Checking the .LOG file... > SMTP_SERVER_BEAVER.LOG > 18-APR-1997 08:53:37.44: MX SMTP Server (pid 20202AA4) starting > 18-APR-1997 09:08:28.96: MX SMTP Server (pid 20202AA4) exiting, > status = 10248074 > > Can anyone tell me what this status code means? > > I checked the thread limit... > "MX_SMTP_SERVER_THREADS" = "8" > > I restarted it...and again observed over about a 15 minute time frame: > > 20202C53 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 1 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) > ---- > 20202C53 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 2 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) > ---- > 20202C53 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 1 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) > ---- > 20202C53 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Idle SMTP server (over TCP/IP) > ---- > 20202C53 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Connected 1 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) > ---- > 20202C53 BEAVER MX SMTP Server Idle SMTP server (over TCP/IP) > > Then it died again... > SMTP_SERVER_BEAVER.LOG > 18-APR-1997 09:44:21.74: MX SMTP Server (pid 20202C53) starting > 18-APR-1997 10:09:10.92: MX SMTP Server (pid 20202C53) exiting, > status = 10248074 > > Only once during any of this did I notice a "connect" for any of the > other nodes: > At 10:04:28 > 21400D39 BSUWEB MX SMTP Server Connected 1 SMTP server (over TCP/IP) > And it went back to IDLE (did not die) by 10:04:58 > > This is what I expected to see; connect and go back to Idle very > quickly. BEAVER stays "connected" for an extremely long time. It seems > to connect almost immediately after it's started, seldom drops back to > Idle, and then die quickly after it does that. > > When Beaver's SMTP_SERVER dies, I thought the SMTP_SERVER on one of the > others nodes would get used, but apparently it doesn't. No mail comes > in over TCP/IP when the SMTP_SERVER on Beaver is out. > > I've checked .LOG files and version numbers, checked quotas, checked > logicals, read documentation, nothing appears to have changed. > I'm stumped...can anyone offer a suggestion?? > > The one recent change to the system was to apply the ECO for > VAXLIBR06_070 to address the delta-time restriction. > o The OpenVMS operating system has a documented delta-time > restriction that may cause a serious error in some applications > and OpenVMS components beginning on or around 19-MAY-1997. > DIGITAL has corrected this potential problem and has provided > ECOs (Engineering Change Orders) that remove the delta-time > limit. > > This was done last Saturday, the entire cluster was rebooted. > MX has been working fine since; it is still working fine on most of the > cluster except for the SMTP_SERVER dying on the server node. > > Thanks, > _____________________________________ > /\ Sue Rosselet \ > \_| Dept. of Math & Computer Science | > | Bemidji State University | > | 1500 Birchmont Dr. NE | > | Bemidji, MN 56601 | > | 218-755-2842 FAX: 218-755-2822 | > | system@cslab.bemidji.msus.edu | > | _________________________________|__ > \_/___________________________________/ > > ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 03:40:03 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.19970421093827.64d70560@agate.actfs.co.uk> Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 09:38:27 +0100 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: John Rourke Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: Recipient becomes sender MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I can't see anything unusual or incorrect in the Eudora setup. I've now upgraded Eudora in the hope that the problem will go away. At 06:50 18/04/97 EDT, you wrote: >John Rourke writes: >> >>We have lots of users using Eudora but this is the only one who seems to be >>having a problem. The mail from Eudora is sent to an Alpha running MX 4.2 >>and then on to VMS mail to be retrieved by the PC client via POP3. The >>clients are Eudora Light and MS Exchange. The recipients in this case are >>using MS Exchange but the log attached in the original message shows that >>the problem is there as soon as the mail is received by MX. >> >Exactly---which means that it's coming in that way from the PC. As >Henry suggested, you should check that user's Eudora configuration to >see what's happening. You could also enable MX SMTP Server debugging >to see the contents of the message as the message comes in from the PC.... > >Hunter >------ >Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com > http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html > ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 04:00:18 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: welchb@woods.uml.edu (Brendan Welch, W1LPG) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: ? about REFEED Date: 19 Apr 97 14:26:30 -0500 Message-ID: <1997Apr19.142630.1@aspen> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU I am trying to use the REFEED program (in [.CONTRIB]) upon some lost messages. The basic problem is that although everything says to me that refeed has correctly identified the file it wants to work on, it suddenly says that the file is not there. I have editted MX_REFEED1.COM slightly, to make it more specific and controlled. I have also run it with SET VER (not shown here). And, I have even compiled and linked MX_REFEED.C with debugging on (shown partially, below). =============== output from running mx_refeed1 ============== Joblog> @mx_refeed1 HDR_FILE = "$127$DIA230:[MX.QUEUE-SAV.0]10.HDR_INFO;3" $127$DIA230:[MX.QUEUE-SAV.0]10.HDR_INFO;3 [ Process / All / Skip / Quit ] ?: p Attempting to process $127$DIA230:[MX.QUEUE-SAV.0]10.HDR_INFO;3 >>>>>>> %RMS-E-FNF, file not found <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< HDR_FILE = "$127$DIA230:[MX.QUEUE-SAV.0]1000.HDR_INFO;1" $127$DIA230:[MX.QUEUE-SAV.0]1000.HDR_INFO;1 [ Process / All / Skip / Quit ] ?: q To prove that it is there: Joblog> dir dia230:[mx.queue-sav.0]10.* /siz Directory $127$DIA230:[MX.QUEUE-SAV.0] 10.HDR_INFO;3 1 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< 10.HDR_INFO;2 1 10.HDR_INFO;1 0 10.MSG_TEXT;2 1 10.MSG_TEXT;1 0 10.SRC_INFO;3 1 and other files exist (e.g. 1000.hdr_info ) which have only version 1, which give the same response. ========================================================================== When I change things to run with the debugger version, the error occurs at line 6590 of mx_refeed.c, merely reconfirming my diagnosis: 6578 1 /* open input file (.hdr_info) */ 6579 1 6580 1 infab = cc$rms_fab; 6581 1 infab.fab$l_fna = (char *) &INPUT_NAME; 6582 1 infab.fab$b_fns = sizeof (INPUT_NAME) -1; 6583 1 6584 1 innam = cc$rms_nam; 6585 1 innam.nam$l_rsa = hdr_spec; 6586 1 innam.nam$b_rss = NAM$C_MAXRSS; 6587 1 infab.fab$l_nam = &innam; 6588 1 6589 1 stat = sys$open ( &infab ); 6590 1 if (!(stat & 1)) err_exit(stat); ---------------------- Is my trouble due to a basic lack of understanding of C, of RMS, or of DCL? ================= mx_refeed1.com (my version, one of many) ============ $!********************************************************************** $! $! MX-REFEED1.COM $! $! Refeed saved messages in the MX queue $! Kalma'r Zolta'n $! MTA SZTAKI/ASZI $! Budapest, Hungary $! kalmar@hugbox.sztaki.hu $!********************************************************************** $ $ set noon $ $! $ define/nolog mx_refeed_workdir scratch$disk: !LOCAL $! so don't run this job near 5am, when scratch$disk disappears $ $ input_dir = "dia230:[mx.queue-sav.%]" !LOCAL $ mx_send = "$mx_exe:mx_site_in" $ delete := delete/log $ opt = "" $ $next_file: $ $ hdr_file = f$search("''input_dir'*.hdr_info;0") $sho sym hdr_file $ if hdr_file .eqs. "" then goto terminate $ $ seq_nb = f$parse (hdr_file,,,"NAME") $ $ if f$extract(0,1,opt) .eqs. "A" then goto process $ inquire opt "''hdr_file' [ Process / All / Skip / Quit ] ?" $ if f$extract(0,1,opt) .eqs. "S" then goto next_file $ if f$extract(0,1,opt) .eqs. "Q" then goto terminate $ $process: $ define/nolog mx_refeed_hdrfile 'hdr_file' $ wr sys$output "Attempting to process ''hdr_file'" $ run dia240:[mx042.contrib.refeed]mx_refeed.exe.1 !because ;2 has $! debugging turned on $ $ if f$extract(6, 4, $status) .nes. "0001" then goto next_file $ $ what_exact = f$parse("mx_refeed_workdir:''seq_nb'.txt") $ whom_exact = f$parse("mx_refeed_workdir:''seq_nb'.to") $ repl_addr = "" $sho sym what_exact $sho sym whom_exact $! $ mx_send 'what_exact' 'whom_exact' "''repl_addr'" $ delete 'what_exact','whom_exact' $ $ goto next_file $ $terminate: $ exit -- Brendan Welch, system analyst, UMass/Lowell, W1LPG, welchb@woods.uml.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 05:15:35 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 03:15:14 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B318A.B25D6AD8.1@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: ? about REFEED > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 21-APR-1997 02:31:47.29 > Subj: ? about REFEED Brendan, > I am trying to use the REFEED program (in [.CONTRIB]) upon > some lost messages. > > The basic problem is that although everything says to me > that refeed has correctly identified the file it wants to work on, > it suddenly says that the file is not there. > > I have editted MX_REFEED1.COM slightly, to make it more specific > and controlled. I have also run it with SET VER (not shown here). And, > I have even compiled and linked MX_REFEED.C with debugging on (shown > partially, below). > I ran into this problem a few weeks ago after my queue file got smashed when the CI port threw a tantrum. As I recall, there were some problems with the RMS declarations and the logical name declarations that the program uses. There were also some problems with pointer arithmetic that would cause the program to ACCVIO when it go to the point of actually processing a message. I've put my modifed source code for the program up for ANONYMOUS FTP access: ftp://sacusr.mp.usbr.gov/mx/refeed/ This is not the be-all end-all of recovery procedures, it just works good enough to get the job done. Caveat: unless you write a program or procedure to scan the saved message and correctly set the "From" address of the message as it's being pumped into the SITE interface, you will end up with the reconstituted messages having a returned address of: "" This was the way the original package worked. I chose instead to add an envelope the way that the MultiNet SMTP symbiont and server would do and then printed those jobs to the MULTINET_SMTP queue. Good luck, -HWM > =============== output from running mx_refeed1 ============== > Joblog> @mx_refeed1 > HDR_FILE = "$127$DIA230:[MX.QUEUE-SAV.0]10.HDR_INFO;3" > $127$DIA230:[MX.QUEUE-SAV.0]10.HDR_INFO;3 [ Process / All / Skip / Quit ] ?: p > > Attempting to process $127$DIA230:[MX.QUEUE-SAV.0]10.HDR_INFO;3 > >>>>>>> %RMS-E-FNF, file not found <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > HDR_FILE = "$127$DIA230:[MX.QUEUE-SAV.0]1000.HDR_INFO;1" > $127$DIA230:[MX.QUEUE-SAV.0]1000.HDR_INFO;1 [ Process / All / Skip / Quit ] ?: > q > > > To prove that it is there: > Joblog> dir dia230:[mx.queue-sav.0]10.* /siz > > Directory $127$DIA230:[MX.QUEUE-SAV.0] > > 10.HDR_INFO;3 1 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > 10.HDR_INFO;2 1 > 10.HDR_INFO;1 0 > 10.MSG_TEXT;2 1 > 10.MSG_TEXT;1 0 > 10.SRC_INFO;3 1 > > and other files exist (e.g. 1000.hdr_info ) which have only version 1, > which give the same response. > ========================================================================== > When I change things to run with the debugger version, the error occurs > at line 6590 of mx_refeed.c, merely reconfirming my diagnosis: > > 6578 1 /* open input file (.hdr_info) */ > 6579 1 > 6580 1 infab = cc$rms_fab; > 6581 1 infab.fab$l_fna = (char *) &INPUT_NAME; > 6582 1 infab.fab$b_fns = sizeof (INPUT_NAME) -1; > 6583 1 > 6584 1 innam = cc$rms_nam; > 6585 1 innam.nam$l_rsa = hdr_spec; > 6586 1 innam.nam$b_rss = NAM$C_MAXRSS; > 6587 1 infab.fab$l_nam = &innam; > 6588 1 > 6589 1 stat = sys$open ( &infab ); > 6590 1 if (!(stat & 1)) err_exit(stat); > > ---------------------- > Is my trouble due to a basic lack of understanding of C, of RMS, or of DCL? > > ================= mx_refeed1.com (my version, one of many) ============ > $!********************************************************************** > $! > $! MX-REFEED1.COM > $! > $! Refeed saved messages in the MX queue > $! Kalma'r Zolta'n > $! MTA SZTAKI/ASZI > $! Budapest, Hungary > $! kalmar@hugbox.sztaki.hu > $!********************************************************************** > $ > $ set noon > $ > $! > $ define/nolog mx_refeed_workdir scratch$disk: !LOCAL > $! so don't run this job near 5am, when scratch$disk disappears > $ > $ input_dir = "dia230:[mx.queue-sav.%]" !LOCAL > $ mx_send = "$mx_exe:mx_site_in" > $ delete := delete/log > $ opt = "" > $ > $next_file: > $ > $ hdr_file = f$search("''input_dir'*.hdr_info;0") > $sho sym hdr_file > $ if hdr_file .eqs. "" then goto terminate > $ > $ seq_nb = f$parse (hdr_file,,,"NAME") > $ > $ if f$extract(0,1,opt) .eqs. "A" then goto process > $ inquire opt "''hdr_file' [ Process / All / Skip / Quit ] ?" > $ if f$extract(0,1,opt) .eqs. "S" then goto next_file > $ if f$extract(0,1,opt) .eqs. "Q" then goto terminate > $ > $process: > $ define/nolog mx_refeed_hdrfile 'hdr_file' > $ wr sys$output "Attempting to process ''hdr_file'" > $ run dia240:[mx042.contrib.refeed]mx_refeed.exe.1 !because ;2 has > $! debugging turned on > $ > $ if f$extract(6, 4, $status) .nes. "0001" then goto next_file > $ > $ what_exact = f$parse("mx_refeed_workdir:''seq_nb'.txt") > $ whom_exact = f$parse("mx_refeed_workdir:''seq_nb'.to") > $ repl_addr = "" > $sho sym what_exact > $sho sym whom_exact > $! > $ mx_send 'what_exact' 'whom_exact' "''repl_addr'" > $ delete 'what_exact','whom_exact' > $ > $ goto next_file > $ > $terminate: > $ exit > -- > Brendan Welch, system analyst, UMass/Lowell, W1LPG, welchb@woods.uml.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 09:42:05 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 10:42:00 -0400 From: WILLIAM@euler.tam.cornell.edu Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@LISTS.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <970421104200.206012d8@euler.tam.cornell.edu> Subject: MX SMTP Nameservice Problem Path: euler.tam.cornell.edu!fractl.tam.cornell.edu!WILLIAM Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx Subject: Name Service For MX's SMTP Problem ? Message-ID: <1997Apr17.224358.22@euler.tam.cornell.edu> From: william@fractl.tam.cornell.edu Date: 17 Apr 97 22:43:57 +5 Reply-To: william@fractl.tam.cornell.edu Organization: Chaos Lines: 25 Hello Perhaps I missed somthing during my install and configuration. My SMTP mail is not going out do to a name service error. I turned on the error log and here is what that contains. 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.07 Processing queue entry number 10 on node FRACTL 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.36 Recipient: , route=MILL.TAM.CORNELL.EDU 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.37 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name MILL.TAM.CORNELL.EDU 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.41 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 00000001 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.45 SMTP_SEND: Failed, sts=00000870 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.45 SMTP send failed, sts=0C278024, sts2=00000870 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.45 Recipient status=0C278024 for 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.96 1 rcpts need retry, next try 17-APR-1997 10:16:07.96 17-APR-1997 09:46:08.02 *** End of processing pass *** This is running on OpenVMS 6.2 (VAX) & Multinet 4.0b for the TCPIP. Thanks for your help. ======================================================================= ___Bill william@fractl.tam.cornell.edu wth1@Cornell.edu ======================================================================= ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 10:08:03 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 10:07:56 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: WILLIAM@EULER.TAM.CORNELL.EDU Message-ID: <009B31C4.59119FA3.5@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: MX SMTP Nameservice Problem WILLIAM@euler.tam.cornell.edu writes: > >Perhaps I missed somthing during my install and configuration. My SMTP >mail is not going out do to a name service error. I turned on the error >log and here is what that contains. > >17-APR-1997 09:46:07.07 Processing queue entry number 10 on node FRACTL >17-APR-1997 09:46:07.36 Recipient: , route=MILL.TAM.CORNELL.EDU >17-APR-1997 09:46:07.37 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name MILL.TAM.CORNELL.EDU >17-APR-1997 09:46:07.41 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 00000001 >17-APR-1997 09:46:07.45 SMTP_SEND: Failed, sts=00000870 Which is "%SYSTEM-W-ENDOFFILE, end of file"---you're DNS server is returning an error to MX. The solution is, most likely, that you need to install the latest NETLIB, V2.0J, which is not included in the MX V4.2 kits. You can find it on ftp.madgoat.com in [.MADGOAT] as NETLIB020.ZIP: ftp://ftp.madgoat.com/madgoat/netlib020.zip That version corrects a NETLIB bug exercised by more recent versions of Multinet. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 10:23:49 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 08:23:34 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B31B5.C46E4CA8.10@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: MX SMTP Nameservice Problem > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 21-APR-1997 08:14:10.37 > Subj: MX SMTP Nameservice Problem Bill, > Path: euler.tam.cornell.edu!fractl.tam.cornell.edu!WILLIAM > Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx > Subject: Name Service For MX's SMTP Problem ? > Message-ID: <1997Apr17.224358.22@euler.tam.cornell.edu> > From: william@fractl.tam.cornell.edu > Date: 17 Apr 97 22:43:57 +5 > Reply-To: william@fractl.tam.cornell.edu > Organization: Chaos > Lines: 25 > > Hello > > > Perhaps I missed somthing during my install and configuration. My SMTP > mail is not going out do to a name service error. I turned on the error > log and here is what that contains. > What version of MX and NETLIB are you running? -HWM > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.07 Processing queue entry number 10 on node FRACTL > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.36 Recipient: , route=MILL.TAM.CORNELL.EDU > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.37 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name MILL.TAM.CORNELL.EDU > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.41 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 00000001 > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.45 SMTP_SEND: Failed, sts=00000870 > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.45 SMTP send failed, sts=0C278024, sts2=00000870 > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.45 Recipient status=0C278024 for > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.96 1 rcpts need retry, next try 17-APR-1997 10:16:07.96 > 17-APR-1997 09:46:08.02 *** End of processing pass *** > > This is running on OpenVMS 6.2 (VAX) & Multinet 4.0b for the TCPIP. > > Thanks for your help. > > ======================================================================= > ___Bill william@fractl.tam.cornell.edu > wth1@Cornell.edu > ======================================================================= ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 12:04:59 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk (Ian Miller) Subject: rewrite rule for psimail addresses Date: 22 Apr 1997 15:23:58 GMT Message-ID: Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU I have mail arriving over PSImail (x.25 extension to vmsmail) onto a vax running MX. The resultant return address as seen by a user reading their mail using Eudora/IUPOP3 looks like 'PSI%dte::user'@softel.co.uk I would like to rewrite this to user@dte.psi I already have a rewrite rule to take addresses like this ending in .psi and make them "PSI%dte::USER"@softel which is then treated as a local address, given to VMSmail thence to PSImail and out it goes. Here are the rewrite rules I have now. Rewrite "<{user}@{psiadr}.psi>" => "<""PSI%{psiadr}::{user}""@softel>" Rewrite "<{user}@{node}.{psiadr}.psi>" => "<""PSI%{psiadr}::{node}::{user}""@softel Is this possible ? I have tried various things but can't get it to work. -- **************************************************************************** Ian Miller "The time has come",the walrus said Teletext Dept.,Softel "to speak of many things". Tel: +44 118 9842151 from "Through the looking glass" Ian.Miller@softel.co.uk by Lewis Carrol. PSImail: 243273400398::IAN Disclaimer - I said this stuff myself. My employer had nothing to do with it. ***************************************************************************** ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 14:57:05 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: dwing@cisco.com (Dan Wing) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Name Service For MX's Smtp Problem ? Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 12:56:36 -0700 Message-ID: To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1997Apr21.095350.24@euler.tam.cornell.edu>, william@fractl.tam.cornell.edu says... > Perhaps I missed somthing during my install and configuration. My SMTP > mail is not going out do to a name service error. I turned on the error > log and here is what that contains. > > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.07 Processing queue entry number 10 on node FRACTL > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.36 Recipient: , route=MILL.TAM.CORNELL.EDU > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.37 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name MILL.TAM.CORNELL.EDU > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.41 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 00000001 > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.45 SMTP_SEND: Failed, sts=00000870 > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.45 SMTP send failed, sts=0C278024, sts2=00000870 > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.45 Recipient status=0C278024 for > 17-APR-1997 09:46:07.96 1 rcpts need retry, next try 17-APR-1997 10:16:07.96 > 17-APR-1997 09:46:08.02 *** End of processing pass *** > > This is running on OpenVMS 6.2 (VAX) & Multinet 4.0b for the TCPIP. Be sure you're running NETLIB version 2.0I (?) or higher. I can't recall the exact version now. Basically if you get the newest from public.tgv.cisco.com in [.madison.netlib] you should be all set. Version is displayable via: $ ANALYZE/IMAGE/INTERACTIVE NETLIB_SHR and should be on the third or fourth screen. -Dan Wing ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 22:58:31 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 23:58:21 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <199704230358.XAA16188@loki.atcon.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: mx-list@madgoat.com From: jetman@ATCON.COM (David Crowell) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Salvage aliases, rewrite, etc from mx031 mx_config? Is it possible to salvage the contents of an old 3.1 mx_config without re-installing mx031? We recently upgraded from mx031 to mx042. Somehow (don't ask :) ) the process of writing out the old configuration to a text file was skipped. I still have a copy of the old mx_config.mxcfg. If I have to tell our 1600+ users that internet mail is going to be down for ANOTHER day, I'm going to be looking for a new job, so any help would be appreciated tremendously. Thanks.. ..dc ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 23:55:47 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 21:55:31 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B32F0.5CCE2898.15@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: Salvage aliases, rewrite, etc from mx031 mx_config? > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 22-APR-1997 21:11:23.13 > Subj: Salvage aliases, rewrite, etc from mx031 mx_config? Hi, > Is it possible to salvage the contents of an old 3.1 mx_config without > re-installing mx031? > > We recently upgraded from mx031 to mx042. Somehow (don't ask :) ) > the process of writing out the old configuration to a text file > was skipped. I still have a copy of the old mx_config.mxcfg. > > If I have to tell our 1600+ users that internet mail is going to be > down for ANOTHER day, I'm going to be looking for a new job, so any > help would be appreciated tremendously. > > Thanks.. > ..dc > I just checked all of my systems, and the earlist version that I have available is 4.1. You should be able to pull the 3.1 MCP.EXE from your backup and use that to read your old config file. Maybe you got lucky and did not purge files when you upgraded? Good luck, -HWM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 06:51:15 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 07:51:06 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <199704231151.HAA00667@loki.atcon.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: jetman@ATCON.COM (David Crowell) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: Salvage aliases, rewrite, etc from mx031 mx_config? >> Is it possible to salvage the contents of an old 3.1 mx_config without >> re-installing mx031? > > I just checked all of my systems, and the earlist version that >I have available is 4.1. You should be able to pull the 3.1 MCP.EXE >from your backup and use that to read your old config file. Maybe you >got lucky and did not purge files when you upgraded? Thanks for the reply.. I made a backup of the old [MX031] directory on another volume, so everything is there. But when I copy everything back to the way it was before the upgrade (or as close as I can figure out how to get it, with the old MX_CONFIG sitting there waiting to be read), the 3.1 MCP won't run now that 4.2 has been installed. MCP/FILE=.. starts to run but crashes after the first command at the MCP> prompt, no matter what the command is. (I did make sure that MCP:== was pointed to the right .exe.) Any other suggests? ..dc ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 07:23:04 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 05:22:46 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B332E.D7AB1088.29@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: Salvage aliases, rewrite, etc from mx031 mx_config? > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 23-APR-1997 05:07:09.50 > Subj: RE: Salvage aliases, rewrite, etc from mx031 mx_config? > >> Is it possible to salvage the contents of an old 3.1 mx_config without > >> re-installing mx031? > > > > I just checked all of my systems, and the earlist version that > >I have available is 4.1. You should be able to pull the 3.1 MCP.EXE > >from your backup and use that to read your old config file. Maybe you > >got lucky and did not purge files when you upgraded? > > Thanks for the reply.. > > I made a backup of the old [MX031] directory on another volume, so everything > is there. But when I copy everything back to the way it was before the > upgrade (or as close as I can figure out how to get it, with the old MX_CONFIG > sitting there waiting to be read), the 3.1 MCP won't run now that 4.2 has > been installed. MCP/FILE=.. starts to run but crashes after the first > command at the MCP> prompt, no matter what the command is. (I did make sure > that > MCP:== was pointed to the right .exe.) > Ack, MCP is linked against the other MX shareable images. So, what you'd have to do is to modify the startup for the 3.1 MX to point to where you have the 3.1 directory tree now stored, shutdown the 4.2 MX, startup the 3.1 MX, then dump your config file to ASCII, shutdown the 3.1 MX and then restart your 4.2 MX, reloading your old configuration data. It's really not as bad as it sounds... Good luck, > Any other suggests? > ..dc > -HWM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 07:25:28 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 14:24:49 CET-DST From: "Rok Vidmar, NUK Ljubljana" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009B337A.90A941B8.18@NUK.Uni-Lj.Si> Subject: RE: Salvage aliases, rewrite, etc from mx031 mx_config? > I made a backup of the old [MX031] directory on another volume, so everything > is there. But when I copy everything back to the way it was before the > upgrade (or as close as I can figure out how to get it, with the old MX_CONFIG > sitting there waiting to be read), the 3.1 MCP won't run now that 4.2 has > been installed. MCP/FILE=.. starts to run but crashes after the first > command at the MCP> prompt, no matter what the command is. (I did make sure > that > MCP:== was pointed to the right .exe.) > > Any other suggests? Yap. Define at least MX_DEVICE and MX_DIR as job logicals to point to the directory on the other volume. Regards, Rok Vidmar Internet: rok.vidmar@uni-lj.si National and University Library Phone: +386 61 125 4218 Turjaska 1, 1000 Ljubljana Fax: +386 61 125 5007 Slovenia ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 16:08:55 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: The From line ? Message-ID: <1997Apr23.161840.27@euler.tam.cornell.edu> From: william@fractl.tam.cornell.edu Date: 23 Apr 97 16:18:40 +5 Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Hello I have a program written using the callable VMSMail routines. Its funcition is to forward mail to another address while leaving the mail on the VMS system. Basic Structure: Incoming mail is sent to the users mail file. The process checks the newmail count every 10 min to see if newmail has been received. If a new message(s) has arrived I extract the sender from the VMSMail From line. Using mail$message_get with mail$_message_from as an argument I get the senders address from the from line. The message is then resent I use the mail$send_add_attribute to change the from address to the address of the origional sender which I got above. (Yes I have the necessary privs to do this). However it seems when I try this that the messages hangs in the MX queue so I have a couple of questions. 1. Where does mx look for the senders address in terms of local mail. Does it simply accept the from line or does it get the name from the process directly ? 2. What might be causing a message with a changed from line to hang. Thanks ======================================================================= ___Bill william@fractl.tam.cornell.edu wth1@Cornell.edu ======================================================================= ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 20:51:39 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: dwing@cisco.com (Dan Wing) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Rejecting addresses Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 18:51:43 -0700 Message-ID: To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <5jloog$3ir$1@hecate.umd.edu>, feck@fre.fsu.umd.edu says... > Is there anyway that you can reject mail from a site or an address? Not (yet) with MX. With any mailer you can reject an entire site, by creating a black-hole route to that site. Let's say you want to block, oh, um, 205.199.212.0 (you can see who that is with WHOIS). With MultiNet you could do: $ MULTINET SET/ROUTE/ADD=(DEST:205.199.212,GATE:blah) where "blah" is some IP address on your local network that isn't used. UCX, TCPware, and Pathway can all have routes like that created. This does cause your TCP kernel to get unhappy and can block all incoming mail to your SMTP port if the sending site is aggresive (the failure will look exactly like a TCP SYN attack). Better yet, block that network at your router with access lists. Some spammers are using IP addresses from all over, relaying through other's mailers (using AOLs mailer has been pretty popular), and doing other tricks that make blocking based on source IP address or domain name less useful than you would like. However, our blocks based on domain name, username@hostname, and IP address have blocked well over 230 pieces of spam from April 2 through today (April 23). -Dan Wing ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 06:44:07 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.19970424124219.81171e98@agate.actfs.co.uk> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:42:19 +0100 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: John Rourke Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: Recipient becomes sender MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I have now enabled logging on the PC, MX_SMTP_DEBUG and MX_SMTP_SERVER_DEBUG. The logs are attached below. It seems to me that the PC sends correct FROM: info which is received ok by the SMTP server, but when the data is then handled by MX_SMTP the FROM: data is incorrect. Logs follow: Logfile from PC 64:0.17 Rcvd: "220 agate.actfs.co.uk MX V4.2 AXP SMTP server ready at Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:57:21 BST\r\n" 32:0.17 Sent: "HELO leonie_blain.actfs.co.uk\r\n" 64:0.18 Rcvd: "250 Name lookup failed for leonie_blain.actfs.co.uk\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "RSET\r\n" 64:0.18 Rcvd: "250 Okay.\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "MAIL FROM:\r\n" 64:0.18 Rcvd: "250 MAIL command accepted.\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "RCPT TO:\r\n" 64:0.18 Rcvd: "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "RCPT TO:\r\n" 64:0.18 Rcvd: "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "RCPT TO:\r\n" 64:0.18 Rcvd: "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "RCPT TO:\r\n" 64:0.18 Rcvd: "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "RCPT TO:\r\n" 64:0.18 Rcvd: "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "RCPT TO:\r\n" 64:0.18 Rcvd: "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "RCPT TO:\r\n" 64:0.18 Rcvd: "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "DATA\r\n" 64:0.18 Rcvd: "354 Start mail input; end with .\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "Message-Id: " 32:0.18 Sent: "<" 32:0.18 Sent: "3.0.1" 32:0.18 Sent: "." 32:0.18 Sent: "16" 32:0.18 Sent: "." 32:0.18 Sent: "19970424120221" 32:0.18 Sent: "." 32:0.18 Sent: "839fdeea" 32:0.18 Sent: "@POPSERVE.ACTFS.CO.UK" 32:0.18 Sent: ">" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "X-Sender: JONES_L@POPSERVE.ACTFS.CO.UK\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (16)" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:02:21" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "To:" 32:0.18 Sent: " " 32:0.18 Sent: "JOHN.FRY@ACTFS.CO.UK," 32:0.18 Sent: "," 32:0.18 Sent: "judi.witton@actfs.co.uk," 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: " " 32:0.18 Sent: "," 32:0.18 Sent: "," 32:0.18 Sent: "scott.hughes," 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: " " 32:0.18 Sent: "john.rourke" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "From:" 32:0.18 Sent: " " 32:0.18 Sent: "Leonie Jones " 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "Subject:" 32:0.18 Sent: " " 32:0.18 Sent: "Team Meeting" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "Mime-Version:" 32:0.18 Sent: " " 32:0.18 Sent: "1.0" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "Due to holidays and PEPS etc. I have been a bit lazy about organising a" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "Team Meeting. Is next Thursday morning convenient?\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "Regards\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "Leonie" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "Work:\tACT Financial Systems Ltd\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\tThe Cloisters\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\t12 George Road\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\tEdgbaston\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\tBirmingham\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\tB15 1NP\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\tEngland\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "Tel:\t+(0044) (0)121 455 6111 (switchboard)\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\t+(0044) (0)121 623 5176 (direct)\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: "Fax:\t+(0044) (0)121 623 5013 (direct)" 32:0.18 Sent: "\r\n" 32:0.18 Sent: ".\r\n" 64:0.19 Rcvd: "250 Message received and queued.\r\n" 32:0.19 Sent: "QUIT\r\n" 64:0.19 Rcvd: "221 agate.actfs.co.uk Service closing transmission channel\r\n" SMTP_SERVER log 24-APR-1997 11:57:21.67 STM[1]: Send "220 agate.actfs.co.uk MX V4.2 AXP SMTP server ready at Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:57:21 BST" 24-APR-1997 11:57:21.70 STM[1]: Receive "HELO leonie_blain.actfs.co.uk" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.01 STM[1]: Send "250 Name lookup failed for leonie_blain.actfs.co.uk" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.03 STM[1]: Receive "RSET" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.03 STM[1]: Send "250 Okay." 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.04 STM[1]: Receive "MAIL FROM:" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.15 STM[1]: Send "250 MAIL command accepted." 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.16 STM[1]: Receive "RCPT TO:" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.16 STM[1]: Send "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.17 STM[1]: Receive "RCPT TO:" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.17 STM[1]: Send "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.18 STM[1]: Receive "RCPT TO:" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.18 STM[1]: Send "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.18 STM[1]: Receive "RCPT TO:" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.19 STM[1]: Send "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.19 STM[1]: Receive "RCPT TO:" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.20 STM[1]: Send "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.20 STM[1]: Receive "RCPT TO:" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.20 STM[1]: Send "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.21 STM[1]: Receive "RCPT TO:" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.21 STM[1]: Send "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.22 STM[1]: Receive "DATA" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.36 STM[1]: Send "354 Start mail input; end with ." 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive "Message-Id: <3.0.1.16.19970424120221.839fdeea@POPSERVE.ACTFS.CO.UK>" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive "X-Sender: JONES_L@POPSERVE.ACTFS.CO.UK" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive "X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (16)" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive "Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:02:21" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive "To: JOHN.FRY@ACTFS.CO.UK,,judi.witton@actfs.co.uk," 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive " ,,scott.hughes," 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive " john.rourke" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive "From: Leonie Jones " 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive "Subject: Team Meeting" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive "Mime-Version: 1.0" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive "Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive "" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.85 STM[1]: Receive "Due to holidays and PEPS etc. I have been a bit lazy about organising a" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive "Team Meeting. Is next Thursday morning convenient?" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive "" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive "Regards" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive "" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive "Leonie" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive "" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive "" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive "" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive "Work: ACT Financial Systems Ltd" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive " The Cloisters" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive " 12 George Road" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive " Edgbaston" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive " Birmingham" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive " B15 1NP" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive " England" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.89 STM[1]: Receive "" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.90 STM[1]: Receive "Tel: +(0044) (0)121 455 6111 (switchboard)" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.90 STM[1]: Receive " +(0044) (0)121 623 5176 (direct)" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.90 STM[1]: Receive "" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.90 STM[1]: Receive "Fax: +(0044) (0)121 623 5013 (direct)" 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.90 STM[1]: Receive "." 24-APR-1997 11:57:22.98 STM[1]: Send "250 Message received and queued." 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.01 STM[1]: Receive "QUIT" 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.01 STM[1]: Send "221 agate.actfs.co.uk Service closing transmission channel" 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.01 STM[1]: Receive "QUIT" MX_SMTP log 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.54 Processing queue entry number 24 on node AGATE 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.65 Recipient: , route=GATEWAY 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.65 Recipient: , route=GATEWAY 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.65 Recipient: , route=GATEWAY 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.65 Recipient: , route=GATEWAY 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.65 Recipient: , route=GATEWAY 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.65 Recipient: , route=GATEWAY 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.65 Recipient: , route=GATEWAY 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.65 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name GATEWAY 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.69 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 00000001 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.75 SMTP_SEND: Attempting to start session with GATEWAY [193.117.200.2] 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.76 SMTP_SEND: Connected 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.84 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 220 gateway.actfs.co.uk MX V4.2 VAX SMTP server ready at Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:57:23 BST 24-APR-1997 11:57:23.87 SMTP_SEND: Sent: HELO agate.actfs.co.uk 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.10 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Verification failed for agate.actfs.co.uk 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.10 SMTP_SEND: Sent: MAIL FROM: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.34 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 MAIL command accepted. 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.34 SMTP_SEND: Sent: RCPT TO: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.36 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.36 SMTP_SEND: Sent: RCPT TO: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.38 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.38 SMTP_SEND: Sent: RCPT TO: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.41 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.41 SMTP_SEND: Sent: RCPT TO: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.43 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.43 SMTP_SEND: Sent: RCPT TO: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.45 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.45 SMTP_SEND: Sent: RCPT TO: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.48 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.48 SMTP_SEND: Sent: RCPT TO: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.50 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.50 SMTP_SEND: Sent: DATA 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.91 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 354 Start mail input; end with . 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.91 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Received: from leonie_blain.actfs.co.uk ([97.23.0.9]) by agate.actfs.co.uk (MX 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.91 SMTP_SEND: Sent: V4.2 AXP) with SMTP; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:57:22 BST 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.91 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.19970424120221.839fdeea@POPSERVE.ACTFS.CO.UK> 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.91 SMTP_SEND: Sent: X-Sender: JONES_L@POPSERVE.ACTFS.CO.UK 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.91 SMTP_SEND: Sent: X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (16) 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.91 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:02:21 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: To: JOHN.FRY@ACTFS.CO.UK, , 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: judi.witton@actfs.co.uk, , 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: From: JOHN.FRY@ACTFS.CO.UK, , 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: judi.witton@actfs.co.uk, , 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: , Leonie Jones 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Subject: Team Meeting 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: MIME-Version: 1.0 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Due to holidays and PEPS etc. I have been a bit lazy about organising a 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Team Meeting. Is next Thursday morning convenient? 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Regards 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Leonie 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.93 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.93 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.94 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.94 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Work: ACT Financial Systems Ltd 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.94 SMTP_SEND: Sent: The Cloisters 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.94 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 12 George Road 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.94 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Edgbaston 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.94 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Birmingham 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.94 SMTP_SEND: Sent: B15 1NP 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.94 SMTP_SEND: Sent: England 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.94 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.94 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Tel: +(0044) (0)121 455 6111 (switchboard) 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.94 SMTP_SEND: Sent: +(0044) (0)121 623 5176 (direct) 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.94 SMTP_SEND: Sent: 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.94 SMTP_SEND: Sent: Fax: +(0044) (0)121 623 5013 (direct) 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.96 SMTP_SEND: Sent: . 24-APR-1997 11:57:24.96 SMTP_SEND: will wait 00:13:30.00 for reply. 24-APR-1997 11:57:26.62 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 250 Message received and queued. 24-APR-1997 11:57:26.62 SMTP_SEND: Sent: QUIT 24-APR-1997 11:57:26.63 SMTP_SEND: Rcvd: 221 gateway.actfs.co.uk Service closing transmission channel 24-APR-1997 11:57:26.66 Recipient status=00000001 for 24-APR-1997 11:57:26.66 Recipient status=00000001 for 24-APR-1997 11:57:26.66 Recipient status=00000001 for 24-APR-1997 11:57:26.67 Recipient status=00000001 for 24-APR-1997 11:57:26.67 Recipient status=00000001 for 24-APR-1997 11:57:26.67 Recipient status=00000001 for 24-APR-1997 11:57:26.67 Recipient status=00000001 for 24-APR-1997 11:57:26.76 Entry now completely processed, no retries needed. 24-APR-1997 11:57:26.79 *** End of processing pass *** At 06:50 18/04/97 EDT, you wrote: >John Rourke writes: >> >>We have lots of users using Eudora but this is the only one who seems to be >>having a problem. The mail from Eudora is sent to an Alpha running MX 4.2 >>and then on to VMS mail to be retrieved by the PC client via POP3. The >>clients are Eudora Light and MS Exchange. The recipients in this case are >>using MS Exchange but the log attached in the original message shows that >>the problem is there as soon as the mail is received by MX. >> >Exactly---which means that it's coming in that way from the PC. As >Henry suggested, you should check that user's Eudora configuration to >see what's happening. You could also enable MX SMTP Server debugging >to see the contents of the message as the message comes in from the PC.... > >Hunter >------ >Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com > http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- >Received: from gateway.actfs.co.uk ([97.25.10.11]) by agate.actfs.co.uk (MX > V4.2 AXP) with SMTP; Fri, 18 Apr 1997 12:54:04 BST >Received: from axp1.wku.edu by gateway.actfs.co.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) with SMTP; > Fri, 18 Apr 1997 12:53:59 BST > > ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 06:49:27 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <199704241148.MAA18780@muttley.cen.hw.ac.uk> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Handling mail to DisMail'ed accounts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:48:49 +0100 From: "David J. Morriss" Traditionally we've set up OpenVMS accounts for undergraduates en masse at the start of the Academic year, at which point we create them as "dormant". What that means is that they have only a tiny quota, have a standard LOGIN.COM (which runs a "wake up" program when they login), and have the "Restricted" and "DisMail" flags set. The quota is set up, the flags are removed, and various other things happen when they log in for the first time. However, if accounts in the "dormant" state receive mail it's bounced with "No such local user", which is misleading. There are various local solutions to this (partially self-inflicted) situation, of course, but I was wondering if: (a) this message could be modified to reflect the state of "non acceptance" that the account is in, or (b) there's any way to intercept such failures and send out our own message (short of removing the DisMail flags from them all and setting forwarding addresses to deliver via MX-Site, or something like that). -- David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 07:42:18 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 07:42:12 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009B340B.7C834AEE.11@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Recipient becomes sender John Rourke writes: > >I have now enabled logging on the PC, MX_SMTP_DEBUG and MX_SMTP_SERVER_DEBUG. > >The logs are attached below. > >It seems to me that the PC sends correct FROM: info which is received ok by >the SMTP server, but when the data is then handled by MX_SMTP the FROM: >data is incorrect. > Strange. Unless someone else sees anything I'm missing, could you try enabling MX_ROUTER_DEBUG to see what it's doing with the message? Very strange.... Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 08:07:58 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.19970424140542.6467e4b0@agate.actfs.co.uk> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 14:05:42 +0100 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: John Rourke Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: Recipient becomes sender MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MX_ROUTER log 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.06 %PROCESS, Processing entry number 5 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.13 %PROCESS, Status from READ_INFO was 00000001 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.14 %PROCESS, ... Header rewrite of JOHN.FRY@ACTFS.CO.UK failed 00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.14 %PROCESS, ... Header rewrite of failed 00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.14 %PROCESS, ... Header rewrite of judi.witton@actfs.co.uk failed 00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.14 %PROCESS, ... Header rewrite of failed 00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.14 %PROCESS, ... Header rewrite of failed 00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.14 %PROCESS, ... Header rewrite of Leonie Jones failed 00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.28 %PROCESS, Recipient #0: 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.28 %PROCESS, Recipient #1: 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.28 %PROCESS, Recipient #2: 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.28 %PROCESS, Recipient #3: 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.28 %PROCESS, Recipient #4: 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.28 %PROCESS, Recipient #5: 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.28 %PROCESS, Recipient #6: 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.28 %REWRITE, No rewrite rules matched 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.28 %REWRITE, Site-spec rewrite on err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.28 %FINDPATH, Site-spec expand on ACTFS.CO.UK err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.28 %FINDPATH, domain name ACTFS.CO.UK matched path pattern * 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.28 %PROCESS, Rewrote as - next hop GATEWAY, path 2 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %REWRITE, No rewrite rules matched 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %REWRITE, Site-spec rewrite on err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %FINDPATH, Site-spec expand on ACTFS.CO.UK err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %FINDPATH, domain name ACTFS.CO.UK matched path pattern * 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %PROCESS, Rewrote as - next hop GATEWAY, path 2 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %REWRITE, No rewrite rules matched 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %REWRITE, Site-spec rewrite on err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %FINDPATH, Site-spec expand on actfs.co.uk err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %FINDPATH, domain name ACTFS.CO.UK matched path pattern * 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %PROCESS, Rewrote as - next hop GATEWAY, path 2 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %REWRITE, No rewrite rules matched 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %REWRITE, Site-spec rewrite on err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %FINDPATH, Site-spec expand on ACTFS.CO.UK err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %FINDPATH, domain name ACTFS.CO.UK matched path pattern * 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %PROCESS, Rewrote as - next hop GATEWAY, path 2 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %REWRITE, No rewrite rules matched 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %REWRITE, Site-spec rewrite on err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %FINDPATH, Site-spec expand on ACTFS.CO.UK err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %FINDPATH, domain name ACTFS.CO.UK matched path pattern * 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %PROCESS, Rewrote as - next hop GATEWAY, path 2 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %REWRITE, No rewrite rules matched 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %REWRITE, Site-spec rewrite on err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %FINDPATH, Site-spec expand on actfs.co.uk err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %FINDPATH, domain name ACTFS.CO.UK matched path pattern * 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.29 %PROCESS, Rewrote as - next hop GATEWAY, path 2 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.30 %REWRITE, No rewrite rules matched 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.30 %REWRITE, Site-spec rewrite on err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.30 %FINDPATH, Site-spec expand on actfs.co.uk err=00000000 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.30 %FINDPATH, domain name ACTFS.CO.UK matched path pattern * 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.30 %PROCESS, Rewrote as - next hop GATEWAY, path 2 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.35 %PROCESS, Adding to SMTP path: . 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.35 %PROCESS, Adding to SMTP path: . 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.35 %PROCESS, Adding to SMTP path: . 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.35 %PROCESS, Adding to SMTP path: . 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.35 %PROCESS, Adding to SMTP path: . 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.35 %PROCESS, Adding to SMTP path: . 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.35 %PROCESS, Adding to SMTP path: . 24-APR-1997 13:53:14.53 %PROCESS, Path SMTP gets 7 rcpts, entry number 6 At 07:42 24/04/97 EDT, you wrote: >John Rourke writes: >> >>I have now enabled logging on the PC, MX_SMTP_DEBUG and MX_SMTP_SERVER_DEBUG. >> >>The logs are attached below. >> >>It seems to me that the PC sends correct FROM: info which is received ok by >>the SMTP server, but when the data is then handled by MX_SMTP the FROM: >>data is incorrect. >> >Strange. Unless someone else sees anything I'm missing, could you try >enabling MX_ROUTER_DEBUG to see what it's doing with the message? > >Very strange.... > >Hunter >------ >Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com > http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- >Received: from gateway.actfs.co.uk ([97.25.10.11]) by agate.actfs.co.uk (MX > V4.2 AXP) with SMTP; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 13:40:00 BST >Received: from axp1.wku.edu by gateway.actfs.co.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) with SMTP; > Thu, 24 Apr 1997 13:39:55 BST > > ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 08:31:55 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 06:31:37 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B3401.A0748D28.7@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: Recipient becomes sender > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 24-APR-1997 05:55:59.09 > Subj: RE: Recipient becomes sender > John Rourke writes: > > > >I have now enabled logging on the PC, MX_SMTP_DEBUG and MX_SMTP_SERVER_DEBUG. > > > >The logs are attached below. > > > >It seems to me that the PC sends correct FROM: info which is received ok by > >the SMTP server, but when the data is then handled by MX_SMTP the FROM: > >data is incorrect. > > > Strange. Unless someone else sees anything I'm missing, could you try > enabling MX_ROUTER_DEBUG to see what it's doing with the message? > Well, I see a possible cause-and-effect in the logs; as the mail is coming from Eudora to MX, MX complains that it cannot validate the remote host address, then Eudora sends an RSET and continues with the transaction. (We also see a similar error when MX is sending the message to the gateway, but without the RSET). It's almost as if it's overwriting it's internal buffer with the RCPT TO data over the MAIL FROM data. It'll take a little doing, but I can probably rig up a test here later. But I have a feeling that if you fix your DNS problems so that host addresses can be validated, this may fix your problem. > Very strange.... > > Hunter > ------ > Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com > http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html -HWM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 09:27:58 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 09:27:46 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: JOHN.ROURKE@ACTFS.CO.UK Message-ID: <009B341A.3B967AB5.1@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Recipient becomes sender John Rourke writes: > >It seems to me that the PC sends correct FROM: info which is received ok by >the SMTP server, but when the data is then handled by MX_SMTP the FROM: >data is incorrect. > OK, I remember now. There *is* a bug in MX V4.2 that's causing this. This problem has already been corrected in the upcoming new MX release. (More details to follow soon on the new release!) The problem is with the To: line received from the PC. It is syntactically invalid: >24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive "To: >JOHN.FRY@ACTFS.CO.UK,,judi.witton@actfs.co.uk," >24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive " >,,scott.hughes," >24-APR-1997 11:57:22.60 STM[1]: Receive " john.rourke" "scott.hughes" and "john.rourke" are not RFC822-compliant addresses, because they're missing "@host". When MX parses that list, it sees the error and returns it. But a bug in the parsing routine leaves the To: queue partially filled. That same queue is reused as a queue of From: addresses. Because it still has entries left over from the failed To: parse, those addresses end up on the From: line. >24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: To: JOHN.FRY@ACTFS.CO.UK, >, >24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: judi.witton@actfs.co.uk, >, >24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: >24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: From: JOHN.FRY@ACTFS.CO.UK, >, >24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: judi.witton@actfs.co.uk, >, >24-APR-1997 11:57:24.92 SMTP_SEND: Sent: >, Leonie Jones Note that the two addresses that aren't RFC822-compliant don't show up here. As I said, this problem has been fixed in the upcoming release of MX: >X-MX-Warning: Warning -- Invalid "To" header. >To:JOHN.FRY@ACTFS.CO.UK,,judi.witton@actfs.co.uk,I.GARBETT@ACTFS.CO.UK>,,scott.hughes,john.rourke Technically, though, it is still caused by the PC sending bad data to MX. ;-) Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 09:30:52 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 09:30:45 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009B341A.A65577FF.18@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Handling mail to DisMail'ed accounts "David J. Morriss" writes: > >However, if accounts in the "dormant" state receive mail it's bounced with >"No such local user", which is misleading. > Yes, it is. >There are various local solutions to this (partially self-inflicted) >situation, of course, but I was wondering if: > >(a) this message could be modified to reflect the state of "non acceptance" >that the account is in, or > I'll look into that for the next release of MX. >(b) there's any way to intercept such failures and send out our own message >(short of removing the DisMail flags from them all and setting forwarding >addresses to deliver via MX-Site, or something like that). > No, not without changing the source code for MX itself. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 14:24:55 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: welchb@woods.uml.edu (Brendan Welch, W1LPG) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Embarrassingly simple question Date: 24 Apr 97 15:12:38 -0500 Message-ID: <1997Apr24.151238.1@aspen> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Why does the following message appear on our system? It _apparently_ has no author or recipient at this location? (I think the fact that it is AOL is not essential; but that presumably is the cause of the timeout.) -- Entry: 32, Origin: [SMTP] Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 11737 bytes Created: 24-APR-1997 14:06:14.20, expires 24-MAY-1997 14:06:14.20 Last modified 24-APR-1997 14:06:15.58 SMTP entry #141, status: READY, size: 11737 bytes, waiting for retry until 24- APR-1997 14:36:21.59 Created: 24-APR-1997 14:06:14.85, expires 24-MAY-1997 14:06:14.20 Last modified 24-APR-1997 14:06:21.60 Recipient #1: , Route=aol.com Error count=1 Last error: %SYSTEM-F-CONNECFAIL, connect to network object timed-out or f ailed -- Brendan Welch, system analyst, UMass/Lowell, W1LPG, welchb@woods.uml.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 14:33:58 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 15:33:37 EDT From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: welchb@woods.uml.edu, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009B344D.57EB0D60.14@garnet.nist.gov> Subject: RE: Embarrassingly simple question > Why does the following message appear on our system? It _apparently_ > has no author or recipient at this location? (I think the fact that it > is AOL is not essential; but that presumably is the cause of the timeout.) Someone sent the message to your system, which is trying to forward it. A likely suspect would be someone with Eudora, who has set hdmhos@aol.com as his return address, and who has set your system to be the SMTP Server. Yes, AOL is likely the cause of the timeout (on the transmission). - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 15:58:53 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: Re: Embarrassingly simple question Message-ID: From: levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: 24 Apr 1997 20:39:50 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1997Apr24.151238.1@aspen> welchb@woods.uml.edu (Brendan Welch, W1LPG) writes: Why does the following message appear on our system? It _apparently_ has no author or recipient at this location? (I think the fact that it is AOL is not essential; but that presumably is the cause of the timeout.) Apparently, someone is using you as a relay, god knows why... -- 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: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 03:53:45 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 01:53:28 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B34A3.EF023ED4.6@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: Embarrassingly simple question > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 24-APR-1997 12:41:32.51 > Subj: Embarrassingly simple question Brendan, > Why does the following message appear on our system? It _apparently_ > has no author or recipient at this location? (I think the fact that it > is AOL is not essential; but that presumably is the cause of the timeout.) > -- > > Entry: 32, Origin: [SMTP] > Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 11737 bytes > Created: 24-APR-1997 14:06:14.20, expires 24-MAY-1997 14:06:14.20 > Last modified 24-APR-1997 14:06:15.58 > SMTP entry #141, status: READY, size: 11737 bytes, waiting for retry until 24- > APR-1997 14:36:21.59 > Created: 24-APR-1997 14:06:14.85, expires 24-MAY-1997 14:06:14.20 > Last modified 24-APR-1997 14:06:21.60 > Recipient #1: , Route=aol.com > Error count=1 > Last error: %SYSTEM-F-CONNECFAIL, connect to network object timed-out or f > ailed Actually, that is pretty essential to the problem. Do you know all of those problems that have been reported in the press recently about customers having problems logging in to AOL? Well, the overload affects their mail system as well. I've seen messages take up to 12 hours to get delivered to AOL; I've seen bounced mail messages take as long as 26 hours to come back from AOL recently! > -- > Brendan Welch, system analyst, UMass/Lowell, W1LPG, welchb@woods.uml.edu -HWM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 07:27:28 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 07:27:22 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009B34D2.93F5EE08.25@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Embarrassingly simple question "Henry W. Miller" writes: > >I've seen messages take up to 12 >hours to get delivered to AOL; I've seen bounced mail messages take as >long as 26 hours to come back from AOL recently! > Is that all? 8-) Lately, I've seen bounces come back a *week* after AOL received 'em.... Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 07:57:29 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: The From line ? Message-ID: <1997Apr25.084903.28@euler.tam.cornell.edu> From: william@fractl.tam.cornell.edu Date: 25 Apr 97 08:49:02 +5 Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Hello All I have a program written using the callable VMSMail routines. Its funcition is to forward mail to another address while leaving the mail on the VMS system. Basic Structure: Incoming mail is sent to the users mail file. The process checks the newmail count every 10 min to see if newmail has been received. If a new message(s) has arrived I extract the sender from the VMSMail From line. Using mail$message_get with mail$_message_from as an argument I get the senders address from the from line. The message is then resent I use the mail$send_add_attribute to change the from address to the address of the origional sender which I got above. (Yes I have the necessary privs to do this). However it seems when I try this that the messages hangs in the MX queue so I have a couple of questions. 1. Where does mx look for the senders address in terms of local mail. Does it simply accept the from line or does it get the name from the process directly ? 2. What might be causing a message with a changed from line to hang. Thanks ======================================================================= ___Bill william@fractl.tam.cornell.edu wth1@Cornell.edu ======================================================================= ======================================================================= ___Bill william@fractl.tam.cornell.edu wth1@Cornell.edu ======================================================================= ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 08:27:07 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 06:26:51 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B34CA.201CA164.7@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: Embarrassingly simple question > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 25-APR-1997 05:52:30.85 > Subj: RE: Embarrassingly simple question > "Henry W. Miller" writes: > > > >I've seen messages take up to 12 > >hours to get delivered to AOL; I've seen bounced mail messages take as > >long as 26 hours to come back from AOL recently! > > > Is that all? 8-) Lately, I've seen bounces come back a *week* after > AOL received 'em.... > Maybe the packets are crossing the International Date Line... But seriously folks... I have seen them take close to a week to drain all of the bouncers of of their system once I identify and remove a bum address. And I have seen duplicates come back from them, over and over... > Hunter > ------ > Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com > http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html -HWM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 08:40:56 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 09:40:40 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <199704251340.JAA13968@loki.atcon.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: mx-list@madgoat.com From: jetman@ATCON.COM (David Crowell) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: manually inserting msgs into mx queues I've got an old mail queue that wasn't quite empty when I upgraded to MX42. Is it possible to reinsert these messages into the new queue, perhaps by manually copying the files? Probably not but I thought I'd check. I suspect that that file sitting in [MX042.QUEUE] contains a large array or a linked list of all messages in which case simply copying messages into the queue directories wouldn't work. Its only ~100 messages so manually forwarding these messages may have to be a make-work project for our latest co-op student employee. >:) Thanks.. ..dc ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 08:45:22 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 08:45:16 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: JETMAN@ATCON.COM Message-ID: <009B34DD.76095BC5.13@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: manually inserting msgs into mx queues jetman@ATCON.COM (David Crowell) writes: > >I've got an old mail queue that wasn't quite empty when I upgraded >to MX42. Is it possible to reinsert these messages into the new >queue, perhaps by manually copying the files? > >Probably not but I thought I'd check. I suspect that that file sitting >in [MX042.QUEUE] contains a large array or a linked list of all messages >in which case simply copying messages into the queue directories wouldn't >work. > No, it won't. >Its only ~100 messages so manually forwarding these messages may have to >be a make-work project for our latest co-op student employee. >:) > The MX_REFEED utility may help you out. It's on ftp.madgoat.com in [.MX.CONTRIB]. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 09:10:06 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 07:09:50 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B34D0.213BBE44.11@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: manually inserting msgs into mx queues > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 25-APR-1997 06:55:13.65 > Subj: manually inserting msgs into mx queues > I've got an old mail queue that wasn't quite empty when I upgraded > to MX42. Is it possible to reinsert these messages into the new > queue, perhaps by manually copying the files? > > Probably not but I thought I'd check. I suspect that that file sitting > in [MX042.QUEUE] contains a large array or a linked list of all messages > in which case simply copying messages into the queue directories wouldn't > work. > > Its only ~100 messages so manually forwarding these messages may have to > be a make-work project for our latest co-op student employee. >:) > > Thanks.. > ..dc > Yes, it's possible. If you installed the contributed software, check out the MX_REFEED.ZIP file. Now, if you have been following this list for a few days, as I think that you have, I found several bugs in the MX_REFEED come; check out: ftp://sacusr.mp.usbr.gov/mx/refeed For an updated version of the source. Good luck, -HWM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 09:50:51 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: welchb@woods.uml.edu (Brendan Welch, W1LPG) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Embarrassingly simple question Date: 25 Apr 97 10:31:14 -0500 Message-ID: <1997Apr25.103114.1@aspen> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU > Apparently, someone is using you as a relay, god knows why... I am still quite hazy on the technicalities of the whole thing, but would the following be a more-or-less rational scenario? A user at AOL is trying to send a form letter to lots of places. But because AOL is unreliable, he gets a friend at this university to send the letter, but still making it look like it came from AOL (so that delivery failures would go to his real account at AOL, and replies would go there also). -- Brendan Welch, system analyst, UMass/Lowell, W1LPG, welchb@woods.uml.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 10:23:04 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 10:22:58 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: WELCHB@WOODS.UML.EDU Message-ID: <009B34EB.1C309766.3@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Re: Embarrassingly simple question welchb@woods.uml.edu (Brendan Welch, W1LPG) writes: > >> Apparently, someone is using you as a relay, god knows why... > >I am still quite hazy on the technicalities of the whole thing, but would >the following be a more-or-less rational scenario? > >A user at AOL is trying to send a form letter to lots of places. But >because AOL is unreliable, he gets a friend at this university to >send the letter, but still making it look like it came from AOL >(so that delivery failures would go to his real account at AOL, and >replies would go there also). Yes. Or one of your students has an AOL account and wants replies to go back there. Or someone with an AOL account has selected your site to act as a relay for him for whatever reason. The two reasons above are possible reasons, but it could just be that someone picked your site out of the air for some reason. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 10:39:18 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 08:38:57 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B34DC.94591474.11@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: Re: Embarrassingly simple question > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 25-APR-1997 08:30:32.03 > Subj: Re: Embarrassingly simple question Brendan, > > Apparently, someone is using you as a relay, god knows why... > > I am still quite hazy on the technicalities of the whole thing, but would > the following be a more-or-less rational scenario? > > A user at AOL is trying to send a form letter to lots of places. But > because AOL is unreliable, he gets a friend at this university to > send the letter, but still making it look like it came from AOL > (so that delivery failures would go to his real account at AOL, and > replies would go there also). That is possible, but it also might just be that their preferred address is at AOL.COM, and like you said, it being unreliable, they used your system as a relay. It could be innocent. If you see another message stuck like that, and you feel that your system is being used as a SPAM relay point, why not just look at the message and find out? > -- > Brendan Welch, system analyst, UMass/Lowell, W1LPG, welchb@woods.uml.edu -HWM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 13:33:44 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 14:33:24 EDT From: Brian Reed Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009B350E.1844B0A0.5@cbict3.cb.lucent.com> Subject: Re: Embarrassingly simple question >That is possible, but it also might just be that their preferred >address is at AOL.COM, and like you said, it being unreliable, they used >your system as a relay. It could be innocent. If you see another >message stuck like that, and you feel that your system is being used as >a SPAM relay point, why not just look at the message and find out? Is there a way to trap these messages? That is, a message that is using you as a relay. And, is there a way to prevent/stop your site from being used as a relay? Brian D. Reed Lucent Technologies Columbus Works bdreed1@lucent.com 614-860-6218 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 13:35:26 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 13:35:10 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009B3505.F59A791C.20@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Re: Embarrassingly simple question Brian Reed writes: > >Is there a way to trap these messages? That is, a message that >is using you as a relay. > Not really. >And, is there a way to prevent/stop your site from being used as a relay? > That feature will be in the next release of MX, along with the ability to block certain sites from sending mail to your SMTP server. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 15:23:40 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: Re: Embarrassingly simple question Message-ID: From: levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: 25 Apr 1997 20:16:03 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <1997Apr25.103114.1@aspen> welchb@woods.uml.edu (Brendan Welch, W1LPG) writes: A user at AOL is trying to send a form letter to lots of places. But because AOL is unreliable, he gets a friend at this university to send the letter, but still making it look like it came from AOL (so that delivery failures would go to his real account at AOL, and replies would go there also). With lusers, anything is plausible... -- 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: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 15:40:10 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: Re: Embarrassingly simple question Message-ID: From: levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: 25 Apr 1997 20:18:08 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <009B3505.F59A791C.20@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Hunter Goatley writes: >And, is there a way to prevent/stop your site from being used as a relay? > That feature will be in the next release of MX, along with the ability to block certain sites from sending mail to your SMTP server. Hoooray!! -- 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: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 16:01:40 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970425135329.0089a440@stargate.lbcc.cc.or.us> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 13:53:29 -0700 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: Dan Sugalski Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Embarrassingly simple question References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 08:18 PM 4/25/97 GMT, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: >In article <009B3505.F59A791C.20@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Hunter Goatley writes: > > >And, is there a way to prevent/stop your site from being used as a relay? > > > That feature will be in the next release of MX, along with the ability > to block certain sites from sending mail to your SMTP server. > >Hoooray!! More to the point, When? (I know, I know, next week. But this week's lasted 66 days already.... :-) Dan ----------------------------------------"it's like this"------------------- Dan Sugalski (541) 917-4364 even samurai Programmer/SysAdmin have teddy bears Linn-Benton Community College and even the teddy bears sugalsd@stargate.lbcc.cc.or.us get drunk ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 16:06:00 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 16:05:49 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU Message-ID: <009B351B.01872D73.1@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Tentative MX release schedule Dan Sugalski writes: > >More to the point, When? (I know, I know, next week. But this week's lasted >66 days already.... :-) > Well, here's the deal. At the end of December, I finished up MX V4.3 and was planning to release it, but didn't for reasons I can't get into here. The Matt had some time and starting cleaning up a lot of the code and adding even more features (such as those that I mentioned today---blocking certain sites, etc.), which delayed the release. We're hoping to finish everything up in the next week or two and then have a few sites do some serious beta-testing for us. At this point, I'd say June 1 is a real target date for the next release of MX. But we reserve the right to be wrong!! Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 01:52:02 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Subject: Re: Embarrassingly simple question Message-ID: From: levitte@lp.se (Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: 27 Apr 1997 06:39:44 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article <3.0.1.32.19970425135329.0089a440@stargate.lbcc.cc.or.us> Dan Sugalski writes: More to the point, When? (I know, I know, next week. But this week's lasted 66 days already.... :-) Oh, come one... Hunter and Matt are making free software that you can use, and as far as I now, they do it on their free time. Don't ask that kind of question, because there's NO way they are going to be able to tell you for sure. Hunter, Matt, if you say one week, that's fine with me, even if it takes 66 days. And for all others, if you want to get things done faster, why don't you contribute (if you do, please accept my appology for this accusation)? -- 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, 28 Apr 1997 07:51:38 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 14:51:24 CET-DST From: "Rok Vidmar, NUK Ljubljana" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009B376C.1B17EF1C.43@NUK.Uni-Lj.Si> Subject: Re: Reply is broken After upgrade to OpenVMS V7.1 I was subjected to the same VMS MAIL error, which I find extremely annoying at our site: > Andy Rupf writes: > > > > > > > > > Thanks, but I'd figured that part out unfortunately. > > More explicitly, do you know what can I do about it? > > > Nothing you can do about it, as far as I can tell. The problem is > in VMS MAIL. It apparently doesn't expect there to be more than one > address on the To: line for a REPLY. This is under OpenVMS Alpha > V7.0: > > MAIL> repl > To: MX%"goathunter@MadGoat.com"",MX%""goathunter@goat.process.com" > Invalid user specification '",MX%""goathunter@goat.process.com"' > > VMS MAIL is apparently doubling up the quotes in the quoted message > without realizing that there are two separate addresses there. > > Hunter > ------ > Hunter Goatley, Process Software Corporation (TCPware) > http://www.wku.edu/www/madgoat/hunter.html But I disagree with Hunter about nothing can be done about it. If MX did not add 'MX%"' and '"' to the addresses, VMS MAIL would not double the quotes. Or, MX could CC: the second address instead. Regards, Rok Vidmar Internet: rok.vidmar@uni-lj.si National and University Library Phone: +386 61 125 4218 Turjaska 1, 1000 Ljubljana Fax: +386 61 125 5007 Slovenia ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 08:45:01 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 08:44:55 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: ROK.VIDMAR@NUK.UNI-LJ.SI, RANDREW@CCTR.UMKC.EDU Message-ID: <009B3738.E8A3A928.7@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Re: Reply is broken "Rok Vidmar, NUK Ljubljana" writes: > > After upgrade to OpenVMS V7.1 I was subjected to the same VMS MAIL error, >which I find extremely annoying at our site: > [...] >> MAIL> repl >> To: MX%"goathunter@MadGoat.com"",MX%""goathunter@goat.process.com" >> Invalid user specification '",MX%""goathunter@goat.process.com"' >> >> VMS MAIL is apparently doubling up the quotes in the quoted message >> without realizing that there are two separate addresses there. >> [...] > But I disagree with Hunter about nothing can be done about it. If MX did >not add 'MX%"' and '"' to the addresses, VMS MAIL would not double the >quotes. Or, MX could CC: the second address instead. > The next release of MX will allow you to omit 'MX%' and '"' on From: addresses by doing this: $ define/system/exec mx_protocol_prefix " " (The logical is equated with a space character (ASCII 32)). I just tested this under VMS V7.0, and VMS MAIL *does* handle the two addresses OK if the prefix isn't present. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 14:17:12 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 12:16:56 MST From: Ray Harwood -- Data Basix Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM CC: rharwood@Basix.COM Message-ID: <009B3756.87349030.42@Basix.COM> Subject: Domain name portion of mailing list addresses On my little "one man ISP" VAX, all my mailing lists seem to have the appropriate sender and return addresses, such as Listname@Basix.COM. At University Medical Center, though, we're running MX on a variety of machines. I'd like to have addresses like Listname@UMCAZ.EDU, but it's always including the system name, such as Listname@Zeus.UMCAZ.EDU. My guess is that one of the logicals needs to be changed, either MX_NODENAME or MX_VMSMAIL_LOCALHOST (both of these equate to Zeus.UMCAZ.EDU). (I've tried changing the MX_ALIAS_ADDRESSES.TXT file, which does Wonderfully for "regular" names, but doesn't seem to have much effect on the mailing list names.) So a couple of questions for anybody who knows: 1) Does it matter which I change, MX_NODENAME or MX_VMSMAIL_LOCALHOST? 2) Should I change BOTH? (i.e., should these two always match?) 3) What side effects will changing them have? Thanks for any pointers! Ray ----- Ray Harwood | Data Basix | Internet Service Provider for Voice: (520)721-1988 | PO Box 18324 | Dialup, SLIP, & UUCP Services, FAX: (520)721-7240 | Tucson, AZ 85731 | And World Wide Web Pages -- RHarwood@Basix.COM | http://Basix.COM/ | Internet with a Personal Touch ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 14:25:22 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 14:25:14 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: RHARWOOD@BASIX.COM Message-ID: <009B3768.73966D47.17@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Domain name portion of mailing list addresses Ray Harwood -- Data Basix writes: > >So a couple of questions for anybody who knows: > >1) Does it matter which I change, MX_NODENAME or MX_VMSMAIL_LOCALHOST? >2) Should I change BOTH? (i.e., should these two always match?) In general, yes, they should, but they don't have to. >3) What side effects will changing them have? > No mail will go out with ZEUS in the address. If you want to retain @ZEUS for users, but not mailing lists, you can also use /RETURN_ADDRESS on DEFINE LIST to give it a different reply-to address. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software (TCPware for OpenVMS), http://www.process.com http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 07:28:08 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 07:21:24 -0600 From: goathunter@goat.process.com Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Embarrassingly simple question Message-ID: <862316440.21835@dejanews.com> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article , lee@hshuna.hsh.com (Lee Havemann) wrote: > > : That feature will be in the next release of MX, along with the ability > : to block certain sites from sending mail to your SMTP server. > : > > And the very first site that will be blocked is going to be cyberpromo.com... > Yep.... > I eagerly await the next release of MX. Will this be MX 5.0?, and will it > run under VMS V5.5-2? I'm not sure what the version number will be yet, but it will still run on VMS V5.5-2. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 10:15:16 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Message-ID: <199704291514.QAA24872@muttley.cen.hw.ac.uk> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Advice sought on MX SITE issues MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 16:14:28 +0100 From: "David J. Morriss" I'm trying to write some auto-responder software to be invoked by the Site interface. The software will generate reports for certain selected users on request. The scheme I've come up with is to receive and validate the requests in SITE_DELIVER.COM then invoke batch jobs to do the work and mail the user back again. If the request passes initial tests I reply with a quoted version of the original message with the To: and From: headers reversed. Otherwise I exit with a pseudo-fatal error code. My questions are: (a) Has anyone got any software to construct valid replies by munging the original message? I use procmail and formail on my Unix workstation, and these do the trick well, but don't look very portable to VMS. At present I'm parsing the header using a rather too simple VMS gawk script, then rebuilding it. (b) I'm not sure how to construct a valid Message-id: field in a message queued with MX_SITE_IN. Is there anything that can be derived from MX, or do I just build date and time strings? (c) The process named "MX->SITE" seems to stay around forever, once created to run SITE_DELIVER.COM. Is this normal behaviour, or is this the result of a mistake on my part? Thanks. -- David Morriss, Computing Services, | Tel: +44 (0)131 451 3262 (DDI) Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, | FAX: +44 (0)131 451 3261 Scotland, UK | D.J.Morriss@hw.ac.uk ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 15:05:57 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 22:01:06 +0200 From: "GWDVMS::MOELLER" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: Advice sought on MX SITE issues "David J. Morriss" writes: > > I'm trying to write some auto-responder software to be invoked by the Site > interface. The software will generate reports for certain selected users on > request. >[...] > (a) Has anyone got any software to construct valid replies by munging the > original message? [...] I've been using almost exclusively the SITE interface of MX for many years ... In order to return undeliverable mails, I'm using a home-grown BISON(yacc)/VAXC program, starting like %{ /* parse some RFC822 header fields ... dropping domain_literals ([a.b.c.d]) from allowed syntax dropping routes (<@node:...>) from allowed syntax limiting header labels to length = 32 limiting input lines to (trimmed) length = 511 ... and set 3 DCL symbols to (a) a subject string (b) a single "from" address for use with VMS MAIL (the first good one out of REPLY-TO, FROM, and SENDER) (c) an address for returning undeliverable MAIL to (the first good one out of ERRORS-TO and SENDER) NOTE: RETURN-PATH (default) must be handled externally! w.j.m. may 1990, after a more complete RFC822-parser [...] Would you be interested? > (b) I'm not sure how to construct a valid Message-id: field in a message > queued with MX_SITE_IN. Is there anything that can be derived from MX, or do > I just build date and time strings? There's no need to even supply a "message-id" - it's not among the headers required for SMTP mail (actually comes from NEWS). > (c) The process named "MX->SITE" seems to stay around forever, once created > to run SITE_DELIVER.COM. Is this normal behaviour, or is this the result of a > mistake on my part? This is normal behaviour. This one sub-process does all SITE_DELIVER work in sequence. Wolfgang J. Moeller, Tel. +49 551 2011516 or -510, moeller@gwdvms.dnet.gwdg.de GWDG, D-37077 Goettingen, F.R.Germany | Disclaimer: No claim intended! ----- ----- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 15:49:57 CDT Sender: owner-mx-list@wku.edu From: welchb@woods.uml.edu (Brendan Welch, W1LPG) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Brute force command file Date: 30 Apr 97 16:40:53 -0500 Message-ID: <1997Apr30.164053.1@aspen> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU We have still been having unfortunate incidents whereby the mail que gets fouled up. The first evidence of this occurs when the number keeps going higher, in response to MCP QUE STAT. I suspect that I am a neophyte compared to many of you, but I have the fond hope that a few people may find the following useful, and a lot simpler than trying to refeed. I have kept playing around with the commands 1) MCP QUE SHO 2) MCP QUE SHO/BRIEF !for most stuck mail messages, this gives twice as many lines as 1), so in some sense it is not brief 3) MCP QUE SHO/FULL 4) MCP QUE SHO/FULL nnn !where nnn is an interesting message number deduced from above But the following simple file let me see many more messages: $ i = 0 $loop: $ i = i + 1 $ if i .gt. 1100 then exit !1100 chosen from QUE STAT $ mcp que sho/fu 'i $ goto loop As a matter of fact, I captured the output into a log file, and verified that in our case, almost 1000 were in status OPERHOLD, and were almost 2 days old. So I changed the above to read $ i = 0 $loop: $ i = i + 1 $ if i .gt. 1100 then exit $ mcp que sho/fu 'i $ mcp que ready 'i <<<<<<<<< removes from OPERHOLD $ mcp que sho/fu 'i <<<<<<<<< slows things down, and verifies progress $ goto loop In our case, at least, this did a lot of good, and seems to have done no harm. In practice, I often interrupted the .COM file temporarily by using the no-scroll key, and kept using MCP QUE STAT and MCP STAT from another terminal to verify progress. ====== And Hunter adds this warning: Something else you should do and probably aren't: delete messages as soon as they're FINished. You do this by defining: $ define/system/exec MX_FLQ_AUTOPURGE_FIN true I suspect most of your problems are being caused by the MX FLQ Manager not being able to keep up with the amount of mail you're processing. By deleting entries as soon as they're marked FINished, the queue doesn't fill up with FIN entries, making other queue processing much more efficient. -- Brendan Welch, system analyst, UMass/Lowell, W1LPG, welchb@woods.uml.edu