Archive-Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 00:02:08 -0500 Sender: Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 00:01:54 -0500 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BB185.B0BF4B20.361@wku.edu> Subject: MX-LIST Administrivia: Monthly Post Posting statistics for list MX-LIST during September 1997 Total number of posts: 63 Total number of posters: 25 Total number of subscribers: 0 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, 8 Oct 1997 07:54:58 -0500 Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 14:54:17 MET_DST From: "Ruth Thieme, GSI Darmstadt,Tel. 06159 712556" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: thieme@axp602.gsi.de Message-ID: <009BB782.838C52A0.333@axp602.gsi.de> Subject: German Umlauts and Mailinglists Hi, very often our mails are written in german and contain umlauts. If we send them to a single recepient, he will see thoose umlauts, but if we send the same mails to an MX-mailinglists, no umlauts will be seen by the recipients. It seems to me in this case only 7-bit will be interpreted. Is it right and is there a solution for this problem? Thanks for every help Ruth Thieme ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 13:01:57 -0500 Message-ID: <199710081801.OAA28833@mail3.uts.ohio-state.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 14:00:31 -0400 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: "Harrington B. Laufman" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: What migth cause this error message? We are testing the abstracting of our services, ie. we will have smtp.ag.ohio-state.edu point to an smtp server and mail.ag.etc point to a pop server. Currently both point to our VAX 4000-300, MultiNet V3.2 under VMS V5.4-3 machine. Works OK until I do a "Reply" to a message which has the "mail.ag.etc" as a return address. These bounce with message: Error-For: hlaufman@mail.ag.ohio-state.edu Error-Code: 2 Error-Text: %MX_SMTP-F-TRANSACTION_FAI, transaction failed -(Via mail.ag.ohio-state.edu) -Transcript: -Rcvd: 220 agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu MX V4.1 VAX SMTP server ready at Wed, 08 Oct 1997 08:31:00 +500 -Sent: HELO agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu -Rcvd: 250 Hello, agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu -Sent: MAIL FROM: -Rcvd: 250 MAIL command accepted. -Sent: RCPT TO: -Rcvd: 250 Recipient okay (at least in form) -Sent: DATA -Rcvd: 354 Start mail input; end with . -Rcvd: 554 Received too many times by this host. -Sent: QUIT -Rcvd: 221 agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu Service closing transmission channel Error-End: 1 error detected ------------------------------ Rejected message ------------------------------ Received: from agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu by agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Wed, 08 Oct 1997 08:30:58 +500 Received: from agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu by agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Wed, 08 Oct 1997 08:30:54 +500 Received: from agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu by agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Wed, 08 Oct 1997 08:30:49 +500 Received: from agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu by agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Wed, 08 Oct 1997 08:30:45 +500 [...] Any hint to what is going on? I don't understand the "received too many times" error. Regards, harry ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 13:04:26 -0500 Sender: goathunter@MadGoat.com Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 13:04:08 -0500 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: HLAUFMAN@MAGNUS.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU Message-ID: <009BB773.20BD18A2.3@goat.process.com> Subject: RE: What migth cause this error message? "Harrington B. Laufman" writes: > >Works OK until I do a "Reply" to a message which has the "mail.ag.etc" >as a return address. These bounce with message: > [...] >Received: from agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu by agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu (MX V4.1 >VAX) with SMTP; Wed, 08 Oct 1997 08:30:58 +500 You need to do: MCP> DEFINE PATH agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu LOCAL MCP> SAVE MCP> RESET ROUTER The Router is dropping through the PATHs and agvax2 is matching "*" to go out via SMTP, so it goes "out" to agvax2 from agvax2. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:06:01 -0500 Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 16:44:06 GMT From: Chris.Sharman@ccagroup.co.uk Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: info-vax@mvb.saic.com CC: MX-List@wkuvx1.wku.edu, Chris.Sharman@ccagroup.co.uk Message-ID: <009BB924.302FCACF.1@ccagroup.co.uk> Subject: Mail attachments Is there any way to send mail with files as attachments from VMS ? We're using Alpha VMS 6.2, MX 4.1. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:08:33 -0500 Sender: goathunter@MadGoat.com Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:08:08 -0500 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: Chris.Sharman@ccagroup.co.uk Message-ID: <009BB962.37DFBE86.3@goat.process.com> Subject: RE: Mail attachments Chris.Sharman@ccagroup.co.uk writes: > >Is there any way to send mail with files as attachments from VMS ? >We're using Alpha VMS 6.2, MX 4.1. If you are sending files to another VMS system running MX, MultiNet SMTP, or PMDF, you can use SEND/FOREIGN in VMS Mail: MAIL> send/noedit/foreign file.ext To: xxxxx That causes a special base64-encoded MIME-message to be created. However, the format is a special VMS format understood only by MX, MultiNet, and PMDF. Otherwise, you can check out MPACK/MUNPACK, available from ftp2.kcl,ac.uk, and soon to be added to my archives. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 19:56:39 -0500 Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 19:56:24 EST From: Noah Chanin Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@madgoat.com Message-ID: <009BBAD1.61CC0F72.880@earlham.edu> Subject: rms corruption, quotas & permissions I have been looking through the archives of this list as well as WIS on www.service.digital.com and other faqs, but I continued to be plagued by problems with my mail system. I suspect it is a VMS problem, not an MX problem, but I need help. So far, I haven't been able to definitivley figure out what subsystem is the trouble maker. If anyone has seen problems like this, can suggest ways of debugging, or provide any insight to these problems, I'd be grateful. Here's my setup: VMS6.1 (upgraded from 5.5-2 at the end of August). These problems have been happening since the upgrade, so that says soemthing. We use with MX4.2, and have listserv 1.8c and iupop3 in the mix. We have the most recent version of multinet, and the MAIL and RMS patchs for 6.1 as well as other manadatory patches. This is all running on a 4 node VAX cluster. I'd be happy to provide more detail if necessary. The main problem I have is that my users' mail.mai files are getting corrupted. Here's a bounce from a list serve that couldn't deliver. >>Error-Text: Error in delivery to user SOME_USER >> %MAIL-E-SENDERR, error sending to user SOME_USER >> -MAIL-W-WRITEERR, error writing >$2$DIA0:[SOME_USER.MAIL]MAIL.MAI;1 >> -RMS-F-IRC, illegal record encountered; VBN or record number = >>226 I thought that the MAIL patch was supposed to resolve this issue, but it hasn't helped us at all. Convert fixs the problem. These has happened to about 150 people on my system. We have over 2,500+ mail address that are associated with an actual account on the system. Probably 1,500 of these are being used on a day to day basis. This problem hasn't been restricted to just one disk, to just one group, etc. I am having a very tough time seeing a pattern. It seems random. I have been trying to eliminate any possible outside causes. I've been removing non-existent accounts from the mail profile. I don't believe this should matter, but it makes me feel better. I've been making sure that all forwarded mail has correct syntax. I've been trying to make sure that my system is as standard and simple as possible. I've been trying to reduce the noise to help me filter out the pattern. If you have any ideas at all, please let me know. Secondly, Another really odd problem is that a few users have had the permissions on the mail.mai file change from: mail.mai (s:rw,o:rw,,) to mail.mai (s:wd,o:wd,,) I would have though it was a user created problem, but I've seen it on several accounts so far, some of which haven't been logged onto interactively since the problem occured. Again, there is no pattern that I see yet. Has anyone seen this one? If anyone has any advice, please send it. Thanks, Noah Chanin Earlham College Systems Manager ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 06:18:52 -0500 Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 11:40:38 BST From: Andy Harper Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: A.HARPER@kcl.ac.uk Message-ID: <009BBB55.4A72BC9D.197@alder.cc.kcl.ac.uk> Subject: RE: rms corruption, quotas & permissions >I have been looking through the archives of this list as well as >WIS on www.service.digital.com and other faqs, but I continued to >be plagued by problems with my mail system. I suspect it is a VMS problem, >not an MX problem, but I need help. >So far, I haven't been able to definitivley figure out what subsystem is the >trouble maker. If anyone has seen problems like this, can suggest ways of >debugging, or provide any insight to these problems, I'd be grateful. > >Here's my setup: >VMS6.1 (upgraded from 5.5-2 at the end of August). >These problems have been happening since the upgrade, so that says >soemthing. We use with MX4.2, and have listserv 1.8c and iupop3 in the mix. >We have the most recent version of multinet, and the MAIL and RMS patchs >for 6.1 as well as other manadatory patches. >This is all running on a 4 node VAX cluster. >I'd be happy to provide more detail if necessary. > >The main problem I have is that my users' mail.mai files are getting corrupted. >Here's a bounce from a list serve that couldn't deliver. > >>>Error-Text: Error in delivery to user SOME_USER >>> %MAIL-E-SENDERR, error sending to user SOME_USER >>> -MAIL-W-WRITEERR, error writing >>$2$DIA0:[SOME_USER.MAIL]MAIL.MAI;1 >>> -RMS-F-IRC, illegal record encountered; VBN or record number = >>>226 This sounds ominously like theRMS corruption problem that was prevalent in VMS 5.5-2. The effect is to cause mail.mai files to get corrupted (amongst other things). Upgrading to VMS 6.1 fixes the underlying problem but does not fix up those MAIL.MAI files already mangled. As ypou say, a CONVERT or COMPRESS operation on the mail.mai file resets the attributes correctly with no loss of data. >I thought that the MAIL patch was supposed to resolve this issue, but it >hasn't helped us at all. There is a patch to mail available for this problem (you dont say which mail patch you applied but it's worth checking that the release notes mention this specific problem so you can be sure it was the right one). Also, as I noted above, it wont fix up already corrupted files - you'll have to find and fix those yourself. >Convert fixs the problem. Yes indeed. As does a MAIL COMPRESS operation. Why not tell all your users to do a compress ? Or only do it if they experience the problem? Regards, Andy Harper Kings College London ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:29:38 -0500 Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 10:29:44 -0400 From: "Brian Tillman, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: chanino@earlham.edu Message-ID: <009BBB4B.629624E0.1@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: rms corruption, quotas & permissions Noah Chanin (chanino@earlham.edu) writes: See the following DSNlink articles: 1. *OpenVMS] ALPRMS04_061 Alpha V6.1 RMS/Convert ECO Summary 2. *OpenVMS] VAXRMS04_061 VAX V6.1 RMS/CONVERT ECO Summary This is a known problem with OpenVMS V6.1. Get the patches from Digital. -- Brian Tillman Internet: tillman_brian at si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. tillman at swdev.si.com 4141 Eastern Ave., MS239 Addresses modified to prevent Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 SPAM. Replace "at" with "@" This opinion doesn't represent that of my company ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 14:04:16 -0500 Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:22:26 EDT From: Brian Reed Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BBB5B.217FE4BD.1@cbict3.cb.lucent.com> Subject: RE: Mail attachments Hunter replied: >Chris.Sharman@ccagroup.co.uk writes: >>Is there any way to send mail with files as attachments from VMS ? >>We're using Alpha VMS 6.2, MX 4.1. > >Otherwise, you can check out MPACK/MUNPACK, available from >ftp2.kcl,ac.uk, and soon to be added to my archives. I have mpack, but am having a problem with the mail. I am trying to send a file to my boss, but he can't read it. I used mpack to encode it, then mailed it from the command line. I believe the problem is that VMS mail is adding to and/or modifying the headers, making his mail reader not recognize the message as a MIME message. I found an earlier article, but it was using the VMS POP server to strip the VMS headers off (ignore_mail11_headers), but he's using another mail server (Microsoft mail probably). So I take it I need to get the message sent out with the proper headers (or unaltered ones), but I don't know how to accomplish this. Brian D. Reed Lucent Technologies Columbus Works bdreed1@lucent.com 614-860-6218 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 14:07:42 -0500 Sender: goathunter@MadGoat.com Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 14:07:25 -0500 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BBB69.CB97D344.9@goat.process.com> Subject: RE: Mail attachments Brian Reed writes: > >I have mpack, but am having a problem with the mail. >I am trying to send a file to my boss, but he can't >read it. I used mpack to encode it, then mailed it >from the command line. > Yeah, I started playing with MPACK Friday night and found lots of things that are not finished with the VMS port. >I believe the problem is that VMS mail is adding to and/or >modifying the headers, making his mail reader not recognize >the message as a MIME message. > Close. The problem is that MPACK just generates 3 or 4 lines (MIME-Version, etc.) and expects sendmail to provide the rest. In this case, it's MX that provides them, but MX doesn't know the message begins with lines that should be part of the header, so it does: Received: ... More MX headers ... mpack headers ... message text The mpack headers end up getting treated as part of the message body. I'm now investigating a way to do this for MX V5.0. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 14:31:54 -0500 Sender: mhitch@msu.oscs.montana.edu Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:31:26 MDT -0600 From: "Michael L. Hitch" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BBB64.C4C30C01.26@msu.oscs.montana.edu> Subject: RE: Mail attachments Brian Reed writes: > I found an earlier article, but it was using the VMS POP > server to strip the VMS headers off (ignore_mail11_headers), > but he's using another mail server (Microsoft mail probably). > So I take it I need to get the message sent out with the > proper headers (or unaltered ones), but I don't know how > to accomplish this. The OpenVMS version of PINE can send MIME-encoded attachements. --- Michael L. Hitch mhitch@montana.edu Computer Consultant, Information Technology Center Montana State University, Bozeman, MT USA ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 14:33:45 -0500 Sender: BRAD Message-ID: <34421524.110F07E8@tgsmc.com> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:33:40 +0000 From: Brad Hughes Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Mail attachments References: <009BBB69.CB97D344.9@goat.process.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hunter Goatley wrote: > [snip] > > I'm now investigating a way to do this for MX V5.0. > > Hunter > ------ > Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ > MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS > http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html Speaking of MX V5.0, is it Real Soon Now? ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 14:36:02 -0500 Sender: goathunter@MadGoat.com Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 14:35:36 -0500 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BBB6D.BBDEAA87.8@goat.process.com> Subject: Re: Mail attachments Brad Hughes writes: > >> I'm now investigating a way to do this for MX V5.0. >> > >Speaking of MX V5.0, is it Real Soon Now? Yes. It is, I think, in its final beta-test cycle right now. Still no idea of an actual date, but soon.... Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 14:56:34 -0500 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: LOCAL stops after 48 hours Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:47:57 +0000 Message-ID: <343EB09D.48475AA8@MadGoat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU John Selph wrote: > > We have a strange (and sudden problem). A few days ago, MX 4.2 stopped > delivering LOCAL mail. Everything external goes out, but nothing gets to > VMS users. I stopped MX and restarted it, compressed queues, none of that > helped. I rebooted, it worked for a couple of days and has stopped again. > I will reboot again, but why is it doing this? Anyone? > > -- > John Selph, selphj@alpha.obu.edu > Network Manager, Ouachita Baptist University There's a memory leak in callable MAIL in VMS up to 7.0 (?) that can cause the MX Local process to die. That's my guess as to what you're seeing. Also, be sure you're running with the latest MX_LOCAL.EXE. An updated (from V4.2) version of that can be found on ftp.madgoat.com in [.MX.MX042.PATCHES]. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 22:30:12 -0500 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: MX 5.0 and character set flag Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 16:24:57 +0000 Message-ID: <34424B59.3F01CB9@MadGoat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Ruslan R. Laishev wrote: > > Hi All ! > Will be available as feauture in MX 5.0: > > 1) change/add in RFC822 header character set flag? > 2) dynamic translate body and subject field from ONE encoding (iso8859-5 by > example) to other (KOI8-R by examples :))? > > PS:I known about site provider interface support in MX, but... > Sorry, but no, there are no plans for either in MX V5.0. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 05:36:03 -0500 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: MX 5.0 and character set flag Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:28:04 +0300 Message-ID: <34435743.D2449438@DeltaTel.RU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Hunter Goatley To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Hi ! Hunter Goatley wrote: > > Ruslan R. Laishev wrote: > > > > Hi All ! > > Will be available as feauture in MX 5.0: > > > > 1) change/add in RFC822 header character set flag? [...] > Sorry, but no, there are no plans for either in MX V5.0. > Perphaps, You can add some code in mx_mailshr which writing "charset=some_string", where some_string is extracted from VMS logicals ? PS: Now, in Russia coexists several character sets: DOS (cp866),Windows (cp1251), KOI8-R, KOI7, ISO8859-5. And we have big problems exchane information if mail header not contain this information (charset). Anyway, MX is great stuff! Thanx. -- Syncerely yours... +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ Delta Telecom JSC Phone:7+ (812) 112-0699 191119,Russia, St.Petersburg, Fax: 7+ (812) 112-1099 Transportny per. 3 Fido: 2:5030/279 +-------------------------------------- Last SysAdmin in the GrayWall+ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 09:13:30 -0500 Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 16:12:50 MET-1MET DST From: Dominique HOUVIEZ Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BBC44.7B896E30.105@l3av01.univ-lille3.fr> Subject: transaction failed Hello, Yesterday I had two problems from the same user sending mail (with Eudora) in UK. >--> Error description: > >Error-For: Gavin.Budge@uce.ac.uk >Error-Code: 2 >Error-Text: %MX_SMTP-F-TRANSACTION_FAI, transaction failed > -(Via uce.ac.uk) > -Transcript: > -Rcvd: 220-isis.uce.ac.uk pp 8.1 #7 (blenheim) of Sat Mar 4 03:10:30 GMT 1995 Here > -Rcvd: 220 Pleased to meet you (IDENT) (ESMTP) (contact: postmaster@isis.uce.ac.uk) > -Sent: HELO L3AV01.univ-lille3.fr > -Rcvd: 250 isis.uce.ac.uk: L3AV01.univ-lille3.fr 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 isis.uce.ac.uk says goodbye to L3AV01.univ-lille3.fr at Mon Oct 13 10:07:43. >--> Error description: > >Error-For: susan.margetts@ntu.ac.uk >Error-Code: 2 >Error-Text: %MX_SMTP-F-TRANSACTION_FAI, transaction failed > -(Via ntu.ac.uk) > -Transcript: > -Rcvd: 220 pixie.ntu.ac.uk PP Here - Pleased to meet you (Complaints/bugs to: postmaster@ntu.ac.uk) > -Sent: HELO L3AV01.univ-lille3.fr > -Rcvd: 250 pixie.ntu.ac.uk: L3AV01.univ-lille3.fr 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 pixie.ntu.ac.uk says goodbye to L3AV01.univ-lille3.fr at Mon Oct 13 12:12:35. Since his messages contain accentuated letters, I recommanded him to use "Quoted-Printable" and it seems to work, but I am surprised especially for the first one that says : Pleased to meet you (IDENT) (ESMTP) and then MX answers HELO and not EHLO. I am also surprised because it is the first time I have this problem though I use MX since a long time. Thanks in advance for your advice. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=|=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dominique HOUVIEZ | Email: houviez@univ-lille3.fr Systems & Network eng. | Web: www.univ-lille3.fr Centre de Ressources Informatiques | Vox: +33 320 41 61 21 Universite Charles de Gaulle-Lille 3 | Fax: +33 320 41 60 01 B.P. 149 | F59653 VILLENEUVE d'ASCQ Cedex | -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=|=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 08:18:01 -0500 Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 09:18:03 -0400 From: "Brian Tillman, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@madgoat.com Message-ID: <009BBCD3.B3DBCEC0.1@swdev.si.com> Subject: Documentation wish I'd like a section added to MCP's HELP (or to MX_MAIL.HLB) with a list of the logical names available for controlling MX's behavior. To facilitate this, I'll try to develop a first cut myself and submit it for review. It might take a couple of weeks, as I don't have a ton of spare time, but I think the MX developers might be sympathetic to that condition. -- Brian Tillman Internet: tillman_brian at si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. tillman at swdev.si.com 4141 Eastern Ave., MS239 Addresses modified to prevent Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 SPAM. Replace "at" with "@" This opinion doesn't represent that of my company ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 11:57:52 -0500 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Mail attachments Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 11:15:25 +0000 Message-ID: <344B3D4D.58B144FE@MadGoat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Sam Rozenfeld wrote: > > Did I miss the 5.0 announcement ? Is it out there yet ? > No, not yet.... Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 13:55:54 -0500 Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 14:55:55 -0400 From: "Brian Tillman, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: mx-list@madgoat.com Message-ID: <009BC0F0.BB2379A0.18@swdev.si.com> Subject: Wish list entry Please allow MX's agents to open their various log files shared read. If a batch job can do it, why not MX? -- Brian Tillman Internet: tillman_brian at si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. tillman at swdev.si.com 4141 Eastern Ave., MS239 Addresses modified to prevent Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 SPAM. Replace "at" with "@" This opinion doesn't represent that of my company ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 15:06:51 -0500 Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 18:30:33 BST From: Andy Harper Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM CC: A.HARPER@kcl.ac.uk Message-ID: <009BC10E.B6C9887C.1132@alder.cc.kcl.ac.uk> Subject: caching SMTP connections On our site, we route all outgoing mail via a couple of dedicated mail gateway boxes. This is used by both VMS and unix systems to handle protocol conversion and alias name mapping, but has the disadvantage of a fixed upper limit on the number of available SMTP channels at any given instant. If the limit is increased above what the boxes can support, then everything bogs down. With international connections, for example, the transfer rate can be very slow so a few incoming messages can hog all the SMTP channels for a long time, stopping internal connections being made and hence causing queues to build up. What you want to be able to do when you eventually manage to grab a free channel is to chuck as many messages down it as you can, dramatically reducing the overall wait time. MX seems to require a separate channel for each message, whereas unix sendmail can keep a single SMTP channel open and send several messages one after the other, avoiding the overhead of opening and closing a connections. Would it be feasible for MX to use the sendmail idea of caching a single channel? I hesitate to request a unix feature in a piece of VMS software but for once, unix has the advantage I think.. Regards, Andy Harper Kings College London ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 16:14:25 -0500 Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 14:14:17 -0700 From: Matt Madison Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <971020141417.2021ca91@Cisco.COM> Subject: RE: Wish list entry >Please allow MX's agents to open their various log files shared read. If a >batch job can do it, why not MX? In V5.0, debug log files will be opened shared-write so you can read them while they are written. The output log files of the detached processes will still be locked -- that's just the way it is for detached processes that don't map DCL. They don't tell you much, anyway, unless a process dies. I'm not sure about the accounting files; I'll check on it when I get a chance. -Matt -- Matthew Madison | | madison@cisco.com Cisco Systems | 101 Cooper St. | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA | +1 408 457 5390 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 17:19:22 -0500 From: "Richard Simons" To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 23:17:01 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: Preventing MX using DNS (now solved) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Apologies for delay in sending this, also to those who gave me the solution but I didn't recognise it. We have solved our problem by defining an alternative name for the mail forwarder HERMES and entering this only in the HOSTS.LOCAL file on TAZ. Simple really, especially as HERMES already had a second DECnet name. My brain must be getting rusty !! Richard R F Simons, DERA, St Andrews Road, Malvern, Worcs., WR14 3PS. Phone 01684 895068, Fax 01684 895700 email: rfs@dra.hmg.gb Technical assistant to Internet mail servers manager. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 14:26:54 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 12:34:24 -0700 Message-ID: <199710211934.MAA05964@ael1.allianceelec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU From: Barry Treahy Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: MX042 hangs during receipt of mail I've had CMP/IP running for a long time on my 5.5-2 system. For the past couple months, I've been fighting with 4.2 of MX to get it to run smoothly, and I'm still having problems. With inbound mail, the server hangs and you can see below in the log file, the network connection is dropped. Well, that isn't entirely true, because I've been monitoring the ports while the SMTP server is hung and the ports are open and established on both systems, its just the that the server is hung. Once the SMTP server connection breaks down, the sending server defers the transmission and tries again. On the second attempt, 1 out of 2 will make it through. Any suggestions on what I can do to make this more reliable because its present state is worthless... Best regards, Barry Treahy $99$DKA0:[MX.SMTP]SMTP_SERVER_LOG.LOG;31 21-OCT-1997 14:32:14.10 STM[1]: Send "220 v4100.mmix.com MX V4.2 VAX SMTP server ready at Tue, 21 Oct 1997 14:32:14 PDT" 21-OCT-1997 14:32:14.15 STM[1]: Receive "EHLO mml1.midwest-microwave.com" 21-OCT-1997 14:32:14.24 STM[1]: Send "250 Verification failed for mml1.midwest-m icrowave.com" 21-OCT-1997 14:32:14.24 STM[1]: Receive "MAIL From:" 21-OCT-1997 14:32:14.34 STM[1]: Send "250 MAIL command accepted." 21-OCT-1997 14:32:14.34 STM[1]: Receive "RCPT To:" 21-OCT-1997 14:32:14.35 STM[1]: Send "250 Recipient okay (at least in form)" 21-OCT-1997 14:42:14.35 STM[1]: Error: status=20EC V4100$ exit %x020ec %SYSTEM-F-LINKDISCON, network partner disconnected logical link --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Barry Treahy, Jr. Email: treahy@allianceelec.com Vice President Phone: (602) 483-9400 x325 FAX: (602) 443-3898 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alliance Electronics, Inc. * 7550 East Redfield Road * Scottsdale, AZ 85260 Semiconductor & Computer System Sales WWW: http://www.allianceelec.com Phone: (800) 608-9494 Email: sales@allianceelec.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... but its a DRY HEAT! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 14:49:31 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 15:49:39 -0400 From: "Brian Tillman, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: treahy@allianceelec.com Message-ID: <009BC1C1.6791A9C0.3@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: MX042 hangs during receipt of mail >I've had CMP/IP running for a long time on my 5.5-2 system. I presume you mean CMUIP. What version? Do you have all the CMUIP patches installed? >%SYSTEM-F-LINKDISCON, network partner disconnected logical link This indicates that the system mml1.midwest-microwave.com (i.e., the SMTP client) is the one with the problem. It is shutting down the connection without properly terminating the session. What version of NETLIB are you using? Try updating it to the latest. -- Brian Tillman Internet: tillman_brian at si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. tillman at swdev.si.com 4141 Eastern Ave., MS239 Addresses modified to prevent Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 SPAM. Replace "at" with "@" This opinion doesn't represent that of my company ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 07:56:09 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 13:32:02 BST From: Andy Harper Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM CC: A.HARPER@kcl.ac.uk Message-ID: <009BC277.57FA093D.57@alder.cc.kcl.ac.uk> Subject: specifying alternative smtp port in MX I know there's a way to make the SMTP_SERVER listen on a port other than 25 by defining a logical name, but I have two questions: 1. Can you have several SMTP_SERVERs running, each listening on a different port? 2. Can the outgoing SMTP process be configured to contact a remote SMTP server on a non-standard port? The reason for wanting this is to allocate 'global' and 'private' SMTP services on our local mail gateways. The global ports would be the standard ones to which all external mail would connect. The private ports would be those to which only internal services connect. Essentially, it's a way of ensuring that there are always SMTP channels available for local services; this has been a big problem here recently with external mail clogging up the existing channels (as I outlined in a recent message). It ought to be trivial to do the first one, except that the existing startup procedure doesn't make it easy. For the second, I would envisage a change to the configuration database where you could configure something like this with MCP: DEFINE PATH *.abc.com smtp /route=gateway.abc.com /port=99 Any thoughts on whether this is a good or bad idea, the feasibility of doing it with MX, and the probability of it being added to the ever-growing 'wish-list'? Regards, Andy Harper Kings College London ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 08:03:46 -0500 Sender: goathunter@MadGoat.com Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 08:03:36 -0500 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: A.HARPER@kcl.ac.uk Message-ID: <009BC249.7694989B.15@goat.process.com> Subject: RE: specifying alternative smtp port in MX Andy Harper writes: > >I know there's a way to make the SMTP_SERVER listen on a port other than 25 by >defining a logical name, but I have two questions: > > 1. Can you have several SMTP_SERVERs running, each listening on a different > port? > Yes, that'll work. > 2. Can the outgoing SMTP process be configured to contact a remote SMTP > server on a non-standard port? > Yes, but unfortunately not the way you've suggested. You can define the logical MX_SMTP_OUT_PORT for MX SMTP to define the port to connect to. Unfortunately, it can't be set on a per-message basis, which probably makes it fairly useless for you. >Any thoughts on whether this is a good or bad idea, the feasibility of doing it >with MX, and the probability of it being added to the ever-growing 'wish-list'? > Adding stuff to the wish list is always doable. ;-) I don't see anything wrong with the idea, other than the limitation I described above. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 08:38:29 -0500 Message-ID: <1134D0C75B6CD01197E800805FA63C8211B520@DTW5> From: Laishev Ruslan Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: specifying alternative smtp port in MX Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 17:37:10 +0300 > > 2. Can the outgoing SMTP process be configured to contact a remote > SMTP > > server on a non-standard port? > > > Yes, but unfortunately not the way you've suggested. You can define > the logical MX_SMTP_OUT_PORT for MX SMTP to define the port to connect > to. Unfortunately, it can't be set on a per-message basis, which > probably makes it fairly useless for you. > [@RRL] Why on a per-message basis ? On destination server. It's right > ? > ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 08:39:44 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 14:38:34 +0100 From: "Jacek W. Tobiasz" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List Subject: Limiting size of mails Message-ID: <97Oct22.144027met.14468@gateway.hq.atm.com.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Hello ! Just read Andy question and your quick response Hunter, so will add another topic to the wish list. It is doable, as you said :-) I would like to be able to restrict size of mail to some value. I do not like to look at MX tryinng 10th time send 30MB mail. Of course I can cancel it, I can educate my users, but what to do with incomming external mail ? Todays Internet is not friendly. And I don't think other admins like big mails from my users. Of course it would be great to be able to define diffrent limits for diffrent agents, but for now single limit is ok. Dosn't ESMTP sned message size at beginnig of SMTP session ? Can we at least block such messages ? I asked it some time ago. There were no plans to include this feature with MX 5.0 at that time. OK. Hunter, Matt and others (?) really appreciate your work with MX. It is great. Regards Jacek Tobiasz ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 08:58:11 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:58:29 -0400 From: "Brian Tillman, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC259.836A2080.1@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: specifying alternative smtp port in MX >Yes, but unfortunately not the way you've suggested. You can define >the logical MX_SMTP_OUT_PORT for MX SMTP to define the port to connect >to. Unfortunately, it can't be set on a per-message basis, which >probably makes it fairly useless for you. What about having more than one MX_MAILSHR image, such as MXxxx_MAILSHR, where "xxx" is the port number. Then mail can be sent to MXxxx%"address"? Perhaps this isn't practical. I'm just brainstorming. -- Brian Tillman Internet: tillman_brian at si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. tillman at swdev.si.com 4141 Eastern Ave., MS239 Addresses modified to prevent Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 SPAM. Replace "at" with "@" This opinion doesn't represent that of my company ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:26:09 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 10:14:57 -0400 From: "Brian Tillman, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC25B.CFC8AF80.5@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: specifying alternative smtp port in MX >Yes, but unfortunately not the way you've suggested. You can define >the logical MX_SMTP_OUT_PORT for MX SMTP to define the port to connect >to. Unfortunately, it can't be set on a per-message basis, which >probably makes it fairly useless for you. OK, here's another whacked-out idea. What about a pseudo-domain for utilizing the outgoing agents running on alternate ports? For example, sending to user@domain.xxx, where "xxx" is the port specifier. Or, how about @domain.port:user@domain? Or how about using the /TYPE qualifier on the SEND command, with the value of /TYPE being the port. Naturally, these ideas are worth every cent you paid for them. -- Brian Tillman Internet: tillman_brian at si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. tillman at swdev.si.com 4141 Eastern Ave., MS239 Addresses modified to prevent Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 SPAM. Replace "at" with "@" This opinion doesn't represent that of my company ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:29:09 -0500 Sender: goathunter@MadGoat.com Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:29:00 -0500 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC255.649CB842.13@goat.process.com> Subject: RE: specifying alternative smtp port in MX Laishev Ruslan writes: > >> Yes, but unfortunately not the way you've suggested. You can define >> the logical MX_SMTP_OUT_PORT for MX SMTP to define the port to connect >> to. Unfortunately, it can't be set on a per-message basis, which >> probably makes it fairly useless for you. > [@RRL] Why on a per-message basis ? On destination server. It's right > ? If the setup allows *all* outgoing SMTP mail to be delivered to a single system (or multiple systems) on the specified port, then yes, it should work OK. This means that a bunch of machines on-site all running MX could forward all their mail to a central system running the Server on the odd port, while it sends out all external mail through the normal port 25. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:56:16 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 14:23:35 BST From: Andy Harper Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: goathunter@MadGoat.com CC: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM, A.HARPER@kcl.ac.uk Message-ID: <009BC27E.8BD52CC2.553@alder.cc.kcl.ac.uk> Subject: RE: specifying alternative smtp port in MX >>I know there's a way to make the SMTP_SERVER listen on a port other than 25 by >>defining a logical name, but I have two questions: >> >> 1. Can you have several SMTP_SERVERs running, each listening on a different >> port? >> >Yes, that'll work. With the current mx_startup, i cant see how to do this. I think it needs to be changed so that you can specify the port number for each server started. >> 2. Can the outgoing SMTP process be configured to contact a remote SMTP >> server on a non-standard port? >> >Yes, but unfortunately not the way you've suggested. You can define >the logical MX_SMTP_OUT_PORT for MX SMTP to define the port to connect >to. Unfortunately, it can't be set on a per-message basis, which >probably makes it fairly useless for you. I wasn't really requiring it on a per-message basis but rather a per-site basis so that all messages routed a particular way can go via the non-standard port at that remote site. >>Any thoughts on whether this is a good or bad idea, the feasibility of doing it >>>with MX, and the probability of it being added to the ever-growing 'wish-list'? >> >Adding stuff to the wish list is always doable. ;-) I don't see >anything wrong with the idea, other than the limitation I described >above. Great, perhaps it can be added then..? Regards, Andy Harper Kings College London ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 10:30:12 -0500 Message-ID: <1134D0C75B6CD01197E800805FA63C8211B528@DTW5> From: Laishev Ruslan Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: specifying alternative smtp port in MX Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 19:29:25 +0300 > >Yes, but unfortunately not the way you've suggested. You can define > >the logical MX_SMTP_OUT_PORT for MX SMTP to define the port to > connect > >to. Unfortunately, it can't be set on a per-message basis, which > >probably makes it fairly useless for you. > > What about having more than one MX_MAILSHR image, such as > MXxxx_MAILSHR, where > "xxx" is the port number. Then mail can be sent to MXxxx%"address"? > [@RRL] No,No !!! User who will send mail MUST BE KNOWN TCP POSRT > NUMBER !!! > > Perhaps this isn't practical. > [@RRL] Oh yes !!! > ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 00:01:56 -0500 Sender: goathunter@MadGoat.com Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 00:01:46 -0500 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC2CF.510859BF.2@goat.process.com> Subject: RE: Limiting size of mails "Jacek W. Tobiasz" writes: > >I would like to be able to restrict size of mail to some value. I do not [...] It's on the wish list already.... >Dosn't ESMTP sned message size at beginnig of SMTP session ? Can we at >least block such messages ? > It can, but MX doesn't check that (yet). >I asked it some time ago. There were no plans to include this feature with >MX 5.0 at that time. > There still aren't, but it is on the wish list. >OK. Hunter, Matt and others (?) really appreciate your work with MX. >It is great. > Thanks, Jacek! Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 00:05:19 -0500 Sender: goathunter@MadGoat.com Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 00:05:07 -0500 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC2CF.C8CB4930.8@goat.process.com> Subject: RE: specifying alternative smtp port in MX Andy Harper writes: > >>> 1. Can you have several SMTP_SERVERs running, each listening on a different >>> port? >>> > With the current mx_startup, i cant see how to do this. I think it needs to > be changed so that you can specify the port number for each server started. > Right, the current MX_STARTUP wasn't designed to let you do what you're trying to do. You'll have to start them manually. >>Yes, but unfortunately not the way you've suggested. You can define >>the logical MX_SMTP_OUT_PORT for MX SMTP to define the port to connect >>to. Unfortunately, it can't be set on a per-message basis, which >>probably makes it fairly useless for you. > > I wasn't really requiring it on a per-message basis but rather a per-site > basis so that all messages routed a particular way can go via the > non-standard port at that remote site. > Yeah. that's what I meant. ;-) >>Adding stuff to the wish list is always doable. ;-) I don't see >>anything wrong with the idea, other than the limitation I described >>above. > > Great, perhaps it can be added then..? > Yes, I've added it to the wish list. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 01:20:55 -0500 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: How to filter messages with mx Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 01:10:16 +0000 Message-ID: <344EA3F8.6589FE7F@MadGoat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Jim Strother wrote: > > Due to the increasing number of spammers running free on the internet, I > would like to configure mx 4.2 on my vax to block and throw away > messages that originate from made up return domains. Is there a way to > do this? Thanks. > You can't do that in MX V4.2, but you will be able to in the upcoming MX V5.0.... Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 08:44:55 -0500 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 08:50:25 CST6CDT5,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: system@niuhep.physics.niu.edu Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC319.2AF49D0C.19@niuhep.physics.niu.edu> Subject: Re: How to filter messages with mx >> Due to the increasing number of spammers running free on the internet, I >> would like to configure mx 4.2 on my vax to block and throw away >> messages that originate from made up return domains. Is there a way to >> do this? Thanks. >You can't do that in MX V4.2, but you will be able to in the upcoming >MX V5.0.... OH! HUGS AND KISSES!!!!!!!!!! Sorry for that outburst, but I think my thankfullness (if not the manner of expressing it) is felt by many. :) Robert ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 18:28:55 -0500 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 16:36:30 -0700 Message-ID: <199710232336.QAA08678@ael1.allianceelec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU From: Barry Treahy Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Problems with outgoing mail and DNS I seem to be really struggling with getting MX working... If I get inbound traffic up, something else breaks... Presently messages are no going out and looking that the logfile, it appears that SMTP is having problems with DNS resolution. ALLIANCEELEC.COM is an alias for SMTP.ALLIANCEELEC.COM and has worked great for years to permit people to send mail to me@allianceelec.com vs. me@smtp.allianceelec.com. What is busted now? $99$DKA0:[MX.SMTP]MX_SMTP_LOG.LOG;29 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.11 Processing queue entry number 4 on node V4100 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.18 Recipient: , route=ALLIANCEEL EC.COM 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.18 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name ALLIANCEELEC.COM 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.18 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 0000002C 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.28 SMTP_SEND: Failed, sts=00000870 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.28 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name MML1.MIDWEST-MICROWAVE .COM 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 0000002C 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 SMTP_SEND: Failed, sts=00000870 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 SMTP send failed, sts=0C278024, sts2=00000870 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 Recipient status=0C278024 for 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.41 1 rcpts need retry, next try 23-OCT-1997 19:29:06.41 V4100$ ipncp IPNCP> hostnm allianceelec.com Host 'ALLIANCEELEC.COM' Full Name = ''imum referral limit exceeded %IPACP-E-DSNAMERR, Domain service: name error (no such name) IPNCP> hostnm midwest-microwave.com Host 'MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM' Full Name = ''referral limit exceeded %IPACP-E-DSNAMERR, Domain service: name error (no such name) IPNCP> hostnm smtp.allianceelec.com Host 'SMTP.ALLIANCEELEC.COM' Full Name = 'ael1.allianceelec.com' Address [1] = 38.253.197.11 IPNCP> hostnm smtp.midwest-microwave.com Host 'SMTP.MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM' Full Name = 'mml1.midwest-microwave.com' Address [1] = 38.214.250.11 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Barry Treahy, Jr. Email: treahy@allianceelec.com Vice President Phone: (602) 483-9400 x325 FAX: (602) 443-3898 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alliance Electronics, Inc. * 7550 East Redfield Road * Scottsdale, AZ 85260 Semiconductor & Computer System Sales WWW: http://www.allianceelec.com Phone: (800) 608-9494 Email: sales@allianceelec.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... but its a DRY HEAT! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 04:54:30 -0500 Sender: henrym@CVOBKU.CVO.MP.USBR.GOV Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 02:54:22 -0700 From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: cmu-tek-tcp@sacto.mp.usbr.gov, henrym@SACTO.MP.USBR.GOV Message-ID: <009BC3B0.97F97BBF.11@CVOBKU.CVO.MP.USBR.GOV> Subject: RE: Problems with outgoing mail and DNS > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 23-OCT-1997 16:34:45.29 > To: MX%"MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU" > CC: > Subj: Problems with outgoing mail and DNS > On Thu, 23 Oct 1997 16:36:30 -0700, Barry Treahy said: Barry Treahy writes: > > I seem to be really struggling with getting MX working... If I get inbound > traffic up, something else breaks... Presently messages are no going out > and looking that the logfile, it appears that SMTP is having problems with > DNS resolution. ALLIANCEELEC.COM is an alias for SMTP.ALLIANCEELEC.COM and > has worked great for years to permit people to send mail to > me@allianceelec.com vs. me@smtp.allianceelec.com. > > What is busted now? > > $99$DKA0:[MX.SMTP]MX_SMTP_LOG.LOG;29 > > 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.11 Processing queue entry number 4 on node V4100 > 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.18 Recipient: , route=ALLIANCEEL > EC.COM > 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.18 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name ALLIANCEELEC.COM > 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.18 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 0000002C > 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.28 SMTP_SEND: Failed, sts=00000870 > 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.28 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name MML1.MIDWEST-MICROWAVE > .COM > 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 0000002C > 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 SMTP_SEND: Failed, sts=00000870 > 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 SMTP send failed, sts=0C278024, sts2=00000870 > 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 Recipient status=0C278024 for > > 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.41 1 rcpts need retry, next try 23-OCT-1997 19:29:06.41 > > > V4100$ ipncp > IPNCP> hostnm allianceelec.com > Host 'ALLIANCEELEC.COM' Full Name = ''imum referral limit exceeded > > > %IPACP-E-DSNAMERR, Domain service: name error (no such name) > IPNCP> hostnm midwest-microwave.com > Host 'MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM' Full Name = ''referral limit exceeded > > > %IPACP-E-DSNAMERR, Domain service: name error (no such name) > IPNCP> hostnm smtp.allianceelec.com > Host 'SMTP.ALLIANCEELEC.COM' Full Name = 'ael1.allianceelec.com' > > Address [1] = 38.253.197.11 > IPNCP> hostnm smtp.midwest-microwave.com > Host 'SMTP.MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM' Full Name = 'mml1.midwest-microwave.com' > > Address [1] = 38.214.250.11 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Barry Treahy, Jr. Email: treahy@allianceelec.com > Vice President Phone: (602) 483-9400 x325 > FAX: (602) 443-3898 > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Alliance Electronics, Inc. * 7550 East Redfield Road * Scottsdale, AZ 85260 > Semiconductor & Computer System Sales WWW: http://www.allianceelec.com > Phone: (800) 608-9494 Email: sales@allianceelec.com > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ... but its a DRY HEAT! > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Barry, Can you please send a copy of your NAMRES$CONFIG file? -HWM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 10:21:16 -0500 Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 08:29:01 -0700 Message-ID: <199710241529.IAA09613@ael1.allianceelec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: Barry Treahy Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: Problems with outgoing mail and DNS Here is the requested NAMRES$CONFIG file... V4100$ type namres$config ; ; NAMRES.CONFIG ; ; Description: ; ; Define domain server context of system ; ; Syntax: ; ; DOMAIN_SERVER:domain:servername:address:port ; ;Domain_Server:MMIX.COM:V4100.MMIX.COM:38.214.251.100:53 Domain_Server:MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM:MML1.MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM:38.214.250.11:53 Domain_Server:AEIX.COM:AEALPHA.AEIX.COM:38.253.198.12:53 ; ; Define parital name resolvers ;DOMAIN_Resolver:V4100.MMIX.COM:38.214.251.100:53 DOMAIN_Resolver:MML1.MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM:38.214.250.11:53 DOMAIN_Resolver:AEALPHA.AEIX.COM:38.253.198.12:53 ; ; ; Define suffix table for local domain. ; Suffix table not used if Domain_Resolver present. ; Syntax: Domain_Suffix:suffix-string ; Domain_Suffix:MMIX.COM Domain_Suffix:. ; ; Initialize Logging state. Use 0 unless debugging ; Logging:15 ; ; Set server debug. Nonzero means debugging. ; Variable:DEBUG:15 At 02:54 AM 10/24/97 -0700, you wrote: >> From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 23-OCT-1997 16:34:45.29 >> To: MX%"MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU" >> CC: >> Subj: Problems with outgoing mail and DNS >> > >On Thu, 23 Oct 1997 16:36:30 -0700, Barry Treahy said: >Barry Treahy writes: > >> >> I seem to be really struggling with getting MX working... If I get inbound >> traffic up, something else breaks... Presently messages are no going out >> and looking that the logfile, it appears that SMTP is having problems with >> DNS resolution. ALLIANCEELEC.COM is an alias for SMTP.ALLIANCEELEC.COM and >> has worked great for years to permit people to send mail to >> me@allianceelec.com vs. me@smtp.allianceelec.com. >> >> What is busted now? >> >> $99$DKA0:[MX.SMTP]MX_SMTP_LOG.LOG;29 >> >> 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.11 Processing queue entry number 4 on node V4100 >> 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.18 Recipient: , route=ALLIANCEEL >> EC.COM >> 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.18 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name ALLIANCEELEC.COM >> 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.18 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 0000002C >> 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.28 SMTP_SEND: Failed, sts=00000870 >> 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.28 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name MML1.MIDWEST-MICROWAVE >> .COM >> 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 0000002C >> 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 SMTP_SEND: Failed, sts=00000870 >> 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 SMTP send failed, sts=0C278024, sts2=00000870 >> 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 Recipient status=0C278024 for > > >> 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.41 1 rcpts need retry, next try 23-OCT-1997 19:29:06.41 >> >> >> V4100$ ipncp >> IPNCP> hostnm allianceelec.com >> Host 'ALLIANCEELEC.COM' Full Name = ''imum referral limit exceeded >> >> >> %IPACP-E-DSNAMERR, Domain service: name error (no such name) >> IPNCP> hostnm midwest-microwave.com >> Host 'MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM' Full Name = ''referral limit exceeded >> >> >> %IPACP-E-DSNAMERR, Domain service: name error (no such name) >> IPNCP> hostnm smtp.allianceelec.com >> Host 'SMTP.ALLIANCEELEC.COM' Full Name = 'ael1.allianceelec.com' >> >> Address [1] = 38.253.197.11 >> IPNCP> hostnm smtp.midwest-microwave.com >> Host 'SMTP.MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM' Full Name = 'mml1.midwest-microwave.com' >> >> Address [1] = 38.214.250.11 >> > > >Barry, > > Can you please send a copy of your NAMRES$CONFIG file? > >-HWM > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Barry Treahy, Jr. Email: treahy@allianceelec.com Vice President Phone: (602) 483-9400 x325 FAX: (602) 443-3898 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alliance Electronics, Inc. * 7550 East Redfield Road * Scottsdale, AZ 85260 Semiconductor & Computer System Sales WWW: http://www.allianceelec.com Phone: (800) 608-9494 Email: sales@allianceelec.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... but its a DRY HEAT! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 13:15:11 -0500 Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 08:59:52 GMT From: Chris.Sharman@ccagroup.co.uk Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@madgoat.com CC: Chris.Sharman@ccagroup.co.uk Message-ID: <009BC3E3.A7894EAB.2@ccagroup.co.uk> Subject: Re: How to filter messages with mx >>> Due to the increasing number of spammers running free on the internet, I >>> would like to configure mx 4.2 on my vax to block and throw away >>> messages that originate from made up return domains. Is there a way to >>> do this? Thanks. > >>You can't do that in MX V4.2, but you will be able to in the upcoming >>MX V5.0.... > >OH! HUGS AND KISSES!!!!!!!!!! Yes. Absolutely ?! Just one query - does this have implications for receiving mail via lists, often with munged return addresses (to prevent spam) ? ______________________________________________________________________ Chris Sharman Chris.Sharman@CCAgroup.co.uk CCA Stationery Ltd, Eastway, Fulwood, Preston, Lancashire, PR2 9WS. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 13:18:53 -0500 Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 14:19:09 -0400 From: "Brian Tillman, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC410.42145020.10@swdev.si.com> Subject: Re: How to filter messages with mx >Just one query - does this have implications for receiving mail via lists, >often with munged return addresses (to prevent spam) ? Those of us who have been fortunate to be beta-testing MX 5.0 have had little trouble with receiving mailing list distributions. Since _you_ will control what MX allows in, it should not be a problem. -- Brian Tillman Internet: tillman_brian at si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. tillman at swdev.si.com 4141 Eastern Ave., MS239 Addresses modified to prevent Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 SPAM. Replace "at" with "@" This opinion doesn't represent that of my company ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 15:23:34 -0500 Sender: henrym@CVOBKU.CVO.MP.USBR.GOV Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 13:23:13 -0700 From: "Henry W. Miller" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: henrym@SACTO.MP.USBR.GOV Message-ID: <009BC408.71854E11.14@CVOBKU.CVO.MP.USBR.GOV> Subject: RE: Problems with outgoing mail and DNS > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 24-OCT-1997 08:33:21.94 > To: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" > CC: > Subj: RE: Problems with outgoing mail and DNS > On Fri, 24 Oct 1997 08:29:01 -0700, Barry Treahy said: Barry Treahy writes: > Here is the requested NAMRES$CONFIG file... > > V4100$ type namres$config > ; > ; NAMRES.CONFIG > ; > ; Description: > ; > ; Define domain server context of system > ; > ; Syntax: > ; > ; DOMAIN_SERVER:domain:servername:address:port > ; > ;Domain_Server:MMIX.COM:V4100.MMIX.COM:38.214.251.100:53 > Domain_Server:MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM:MML1.MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM:38.214.250.11:53 > Domain_Server:AEIX.COM:AEALPHA.AEIX.COM:38.253.198.12:53 OK, are these known, good servers? > ; > ; Define parital name resolvers > ;DOMAIN_Resolver:V4100.MMIX.COM:38.214.251.100:53 > DOMAIN_Resolver:MML1.MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM:38.214.250.11:53 > DOMAIN_Resolver:AEALPHA.AEIX.COM:38.253.198.12:53 > ; You might as well comment out those preceeding lines - they shouldn't do anything in the later releases. > ; > ; Define suffix table for local domain. > ; Suffix table not used if Domain_Resolver present. > ; Syntax: Domain_Suffix:suffix-string > ; > Domain_Suffix:MMIX.COM > Domain_Suffix:. > ; > ; Initialize Logging state. Use 0 unless debugging > ; > Logging:15 > ; > ; Set server debug. Nonzero means debugging. > ; > Variable:DEBUG:15 > Set DEBUG to 0 - it is only for debugging the interface between NAMRESD and IPACP. Effectively, it decouples NAMRES from working in a normal environment. Also, add these lines: Variable:DEBUG:0 Variable:RECURSE:1 Variable:TIMEOUT:5 -HWM > > At 02:54 AM 10/24/97 -0700, you wrote: > >> From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 23-OCT-1997 16:34:45.29 > >> To: MX%"MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU" > >> CC: > >> Subj: Problems with outgoing mail and DNS > >> > > > >On Thu, 23 Oct 1997 16:36:30 -0700, Barry Treahy > said: > >Barry Treahy writes: > > > >> > >> I seem to be really struggling with getting MX working... If I get inbound > >> traffic up, something else breaks... Presently messages are no going out > >> and looking that the logfile, it appears that SMTP is having problems with > >> DNS resolution. ALLIANCEELEC.COM is an alias for SMTP.ALLIANCEELEC.COM and > >> has worked great for years to permit people to send mail to > >> me@allianceelec.com vs. me@smtp.allianceelec.com. > >> > >> What is busted now? > >> > >> $99$DKA0:[MX.SMTP]MX_SMTP_LOG.LOG;29 > >> > >> 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.11 Processing queue entry number 4 on node V4100 > >> 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.18 Recipient: , > route=ALLIANCEEL > >> EC.COM > >> 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.18 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name ALLIANCEELEC.COM > >> 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.18 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 0000002C > >> 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.28 SMTP_SEND: Failed, sts=00000870 > >> 23-OCT-1997 18:58:40.28 SMTP_SEND: looking up host name > MML1.MIDWEST-MICROWAVE > >> .COM > >> 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 SMTP_SEND: DNS_MXLOOK status is 0000002C > >> 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 SMTP_SEND: Failed, sts=00000870 > >> 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 SMTP send failed, sts=0C278024, sts2=00000870 > >> 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.29 Recipient status=0C278024 for > >> > > >> 23-OCT-1997 18:59:06.41 1 rcpts need retry, next try 23-OCT-1997 > 19:29:06.41 > >> > >> > >> V4100$ ipncp > >> IPNCP> hostnm allianceelec.com > >> Host 'ALLIANCEELEC.COM' Full Name = ''imum referral limit exceeded > >> > >> > >> %IPACP-E-DSNAMERR, Domain service: name error (no such name) > >> IPNCP> hostnm midwest-microwave.com > >> Host 'MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM' Full Name = ''referral limit exceeded > >> > >> > >> %IPACP-E-DSNAMERR, Domain service: name error (no such name) > >> IPNCP> hostnm smtp.allianceelec.com > >> Host 'SMTP.ALLIANCEELEC.COM' Full Name = 'ael1.allianceelec.com' > >> > >> Address [1] = 38.253.197.11 > >> IPNCP> hostnm smtp.midwest-microwave.com > >> Host 'SMTP.MIDWEST-MICROWAVE.COM' Full Name = 'mml1.midwest-microwave.com' > >> > >> Address [1] = 38.214.250.11 > >> > > > > > >Barry, > > > > Can you please send a copy of your NAMRES$CONFIG file? > > > >-HWM > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Barry Treahy, Jr. Email: treahy@allianceelec.com > Vice President Phone: (602) 483-9400 x325 > FAX: (602) 443-3898 > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Alliance Electronics, Inc. * 7550 East Redfield Road * Scottsdale, AZ 85260 > Semiconductor & Computer System Sales WWW: http://www.allianceelec.com > Phone: (800) 608-9494 Email: sales@allianceelec.com > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ... but its a DRY HEAT! > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 18:43:28 -0600 From: stenns@vw.tci.uni-hannover.de (Michael Stenns) Subject: Re: Problem with date Date: 27 Oct 1997 21:12:16 GMT Message-ID: <63303g$k4f$1@newsserver.rrzn.uni-hannover.de> Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Sam Rozenfeld (rozenfeld@dls.net) wrote: >I know it sounds like a POP3 server issue but I will run it by you all >anyway. I am running on MX 4.2, Alpha VMS 6.2. I have a tonn of processes >swapped out and for some reason my users effective 19th of October started >seeing Email downloaded through POP3 server looking like it is dated 1-22-97 >instead of 10-22-97. As a result all of their email is arriving dated >January. :(. Where does email client gets the date when it retrieves the >message ? Does that come from SMTP header or POP3 server ? The date info comes from the SMTP headers, but not all clients uses the same info's from there. Most clients uses the "Date:" line, but some uses the "Received:" line instead. Also the smtp headers might be constructed by the OpenVMS POP3 server. Which POP3 server do you use? Exists the problem with different email clients? Michael -- Michael Stenns Email: stenns@vw.tci.uni-hannover.de ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 07:05:39 -0600 Sender: tjgp@blackwell.co.uk Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 13:33:39 BST From: John Powers Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: john.powers@blackwell.co.uk Message-ID: <009BC72E.90A1D660.215@blackwell.co.uk> Subject: Router occasionally crashes. We have a little problem which appears only occasionally (i.e. rarely more than once or sometimes twice a month) where our router crashes. We have robomon watching it and auto-restarting it, so its not a great problem, but if anybody has a fix then I would like to hear. Also it would be useful to publicise it, so there is a chance of a fix in a later version. We are running MX 4.2 plus the new whizz-bang extras in the patch directory. On VAX-VMS 5.5-2 (yes, I know..) Here is a copy of the log.. %LIB-F-FATERRLIB, fatal error in library -LIB-F-INSEF, insufficient event flags %TRACE-F-TRACEBACK, symbolic stack dump follows module name routine name line rel PC abs PC 0000D9CE 0000D9CE 00052301 00052301 00051FFF 00051FFF 0004E010 0004E010 0004BEB7 0004BEB7 0004B652 0004B652 PROCESS PROCESS 303 00000406 000042D8 MX_ROUTER MX_ROUTER 44 000003D1 000029D1 INSEF sounds like I'm not freeing my event flags, but I don't know how to do that manually. Any ideas anybody? Cheers. John. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Powers - Blackwell's, Oxford - - "fee issuing thirty mails" (anag.) john.powers@blackwell.co.uk (Internet) Blackwells Booksellers - Visit our PSI%234284400179::TJGP (PSImail) home page: http://www.blackwell.co.uk/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 10:41:32 -0600 Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 17:39:14 MET-1MET DST From: "Michael Lemke, Sternwarte Bamberg, Phone: +49-951-9522216" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: ragon@aic.mdc.com CC: INFO-VAX@MVB.SAIC.COM, MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM, ai26@sternwarte.uni-erlangen.de Message-ID: <009BC750.DF56E454.7@sternwarte.uni-erlangen.de> Subject: Re: set forward to more than one recepient In a message of Tue, 28 Oct 1997 10:07:14 -0600 Received on Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:12:52 MET-1MET DST ragon@aic.mdc.com wrote to Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >rozenfeld@dls.net wrote: >> >> Hi, is there any way to set forwarding in VMS to more than one SMTP >> recepients. >> I am using MX 4.2 transport and I have tried this so far without success: >> >> mail> set forward smtp%"""recepient1@domain""",smtp%"""recepient2@domain""" >> >> I tried using dual or triple doublequotes. Any help with this would be >> greatly appreciated. >> >> Sincerely, >> Sam Rozenfeld. > >IIRC, If you place all the forwarding addresses inside 1 smtp%"...", it >will work. >ie... >MAIL> SET FORWARD "smtp%"""recepient1@domain,recepient2@domain""" > It does with UCX but unfortunately not with MX. Any way to do this with MX? -- Michael Lemke Sternwarte Bamberg, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany (lemke@sternwarte.uni-erlangen.de or michael@astro.as.utexas.edu) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 11:20:12 -0600 Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 12:19:34 EST From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: ai26@sternwarte.uni-erlangen.de, hardis@garnet.nist.gov Message-ID: <009BC724.3760EA00.14@garnet.nist.gov> Subject: Re: set forward to more than one recepient >> Hi, is there any way to set forwarding in VMS to more than one SMTP >> recepients. > It does with UCX but unfortunately not with MX. Any way to do this with > MX? Use a mailing list. The VMS "@FILE.NAME" might work -- try it. But certainly setting forwarding to: MX%"list-name" would work just fine. - Jonathan ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 12:11:00 -0600 Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 19:10:45 MET-1MET DST From: "Michael Lemke, Sternwarte Bamberg, Phone: +49-951-9522216" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: INFO-VAX@MVB.SAIC.COM, ai26@sternwarte.uni-erlangen.de Message-ID: <009BC75D.A7F7EBFE.12@sternwarte.uni-erlangen.de> Subject: Re: set forward to more than one recepient In a message of Tue, 28 Oct 1997 12:19:34 EST Received on Tue, 28 Oct 1997 18:45:15 MET-1MET DST Jonathan E. Hardis wrote to: Message Exchange Discussion List >>> Hi, is there any way to set forwarding in VMS to more than one SMTP >>> recepients. > >> It does with UCX but unfortunately not with MX. Any way to do this with >> MX? > >Use a mailing list. Never having looked at MX mailing lists but it sounds like overkill. I mean, I don't want a mailing list, like this one, with `subscribe', `remove' and all that stuff. All I want is some sort of alias that sends a mail message to a group of users. Amazing UCX does something MX can't (SMTP%"User1,user2,user3"). >The VMS "@FILE.NAME" might work -- try it. Not with SET FORWARD. >But >certainly setting forwarding to: MX%"list-name" would work just fine. > -- Michael Lemke Sternwarte Bamberg, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany (lemke@sternwarte.uni-erlangen.de or michael@astro.as.utexas.edu) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 03:01:52 -0600 Sender: meregalli@cesi.it Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 10:01:10 +0100 From: Alberto Meregalli (DIF) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: meregalli@cesi.it Message-ID: <009BC7DA.0BF00552.44@cesi.it> Subject: Re: set forward to more than one recepient >>> Hi, is there any way to set forwarding in VMS to more than one SMTP >>> recepients. This is how I do that: 1) I define a path to MX like mcp DEFINE PATH "CESI_SITE" Site 2) then a forward like MAIL> SET FORWARD /USER=forward_name mx%"forward_name@cesi_site" 3) then I put in mx_exe:site_deliver.com $! $ OPEN /READ aa 'p3' $ READ aa riga $ CLOSE aa $ riga = riga - "<" - ">" $ user_name = f$edit (f$element (0, "@", riga), "upcase") $ ON WARNING THEN GOTO ERROR $ dominio = f$edit (p1, "upcase") $ mx_enter = "$mx_exe:mx_site_in" $! this section for messages addressed to "forward_name" $ IF dominio .EQS. "CESI_SITE" .AND. user_name .EQS. "FORWARD_NAME" $ THEN $ mx_enter = "$mx_exe:mx_site_in" $ mx_enter 'p2' mx_root:[liste_locali]forward_name.mx 'p4' $ EXIT 1 $ ENDIF 4) and this is mx_root:[liste_locali]forward_name.mx 5) if you haven't yet done, you must enable MX_SITE Perhaps it's a bit laborious for the first "list", but after that you have very little to adjust. I hope that helps you --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 21:07:51 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Year 2000? Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 20:49:05 +0000 Message-ID: <3457A141.6244B6B@MadGoat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Clive McDowell wrote: > > Is MX operating over VMS on Alpha platforms millenium compliant? > As mail generally handles dates as text strings I imagine that if > VMS generates this correctly it shouldn't be an issue but I just > thought I'd ask in case there was anything I hadn't considered. > MX uses normal VMS time formats for everything, so there should be no problems unless problems are found in the underlying VMS routines. (Essentially, this means that no, there won't be any 2000 problems in MX.) Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 21:18:29 -0600 Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 20:18:15 MST -0700 From: Mark Tarka Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC830.407FCC91.5@earth.oscs.montana.edu> Subject: Re: Year 2000? In article <3457A141.6244B6B@MadGoat.com>, Hunter Goatley writes: [NB Quote symbol is "|" for the current message.] |Clive McDowell wrote: |> |> Is MX operating over VMS on Alpha platforms millenium compliant? |> As mail generally handles dates as text strings I imagine that if |> VMS generates this correctly it shouldn't be an issue but I just |> thought I'd ask in case there was anything I hadn't considered. |> |MX uses normal VMS time formats for everything, so there should |be no problems unless problems are found in the underlying VMS |routines. | |(Essentially, this means that no, there won't be any 2000 problems |in MX.) WHOA! Am I reading, that as long as VMS does the right thing, MX will follow? But hasn't it been, that the rumor mill has it, that VMS doesn't have a Y2K plan. Mark Gosh...some of these Montanans really like to cheat.... ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 01:31:49 -0600 Message-ID: From: MICHALECZ@scigames.at Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: "'MX-List@MadGoat.com'" Subject: AW: Year 2000? Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 08:31:30 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mark Tarka wrote: >Am I reading, that as long as VMS does the right thing, MX will >follow? >But hasn't it been, that the rumor mill has it, that VMS doesn't >have a Y2K plan. >Thats not true. VMS has a full Y2K plan. Dec has web pages for the status >of all their software products becoming year 2000 certified. Including >version >numbers and estimated completion times. But not all s/w products will >become year 2000 certified. (Sorry. I don't have the exact www adresses at the moment.) Martin Michalecz ************************************************************************ ***************** Dipl. Ing. Martin Michalecz Scientific Games AG Klitschgasse 2-4 A-1130 Wien AUSTRIA E-mail: MICHALECZ@scigames.at Phone: + 43 1 80100 0 Fax: + 43 1 80100 25 >---------- >Von: Mark Tarka[SMTP:ichjsmt@earth.oscs.montana.edu] >Gesendet: Donnerstag, 30. Oktober 1997 04:18 >An: MX-List@MadGoat.com >Betreff: Re: Year 2000? > >In article <3457A141.6244B6B@MadGoat.com>, Hunter Goatley > writes: > >[NB Quote symbol is "|" for the current message.] >|Clive McDowell wrote: >|> >|> Is MX operating over VMS on Alpha platforms millenium compliant? >|> As mail generally handles dates as text strings I imagine that if >|> VMS generates this correctly it shouldn't be an issue but I just >|> thought I'd ask in case there was anything I hadn't considered. >|> >|MX uses normal VMS time formats for everything, so there should >|be no problems unless problems are found in the underlying VMS >|routines. >| >|(Essentially, this means that no, there won't be any 2000 problems >|in MX.) > >WHOA! > >Am I reading, that as long as VMS does the right thing, MX will >follow? > >But hasn't it been, that the rumor mill has it, that VMS doesn't >have a Y2K plan. > > > Mark Gosh...some of these Montanans really like to cheat.... > > > ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 07:02:27 -0600 Sender: goathunter@MadGoat.com Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 07:02:21 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC88A.3B2C1CAA.35@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: Re: Year 2000? Mark Tarka writes: > >|(Essentially, this means that no, there won't be any 2000 problems >|in MX.) > >WHOA! > >Am I reading, that as long as VMS does the right thing, MX will >follow? > >But hasn't it been, that the rumor mill has it, that VMS doesn't >have a Y2K plan. > As someone else posted, Digital has a Y2K plan. In any case, MX uses the VMS time format (a quadword) and services, so all years are always represented as 4 digits. There are no stupid UNIXisms in date handling in MX or in the VMS routines (AFAIK) called by MX. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com TCPware & MultiNet: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 07:34:15 -0600 From: eplan@kapsch.co.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER) Subject: Re: Heresy Suggestions? (Possible Migration to PMDF) Date: 30 Oct 97 12:33:57 GMT Message-ID: <34587eb5.0@nevada.kapsch.co.at> Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU In article , mfleming@csubak.edu (Michael W. Fleming) writes: >We are looking at the possibility of migrating to PMDF. There are two >main reasons--1) It's a supported commercial product, 2) IMAP4 server. > >We're running MX4.2 and have about 3 dozen mailing lists. The mailing >lists are the main concern with respect to migration. > >I'm getting ready to demo the PMDF MTA and would like to do it on the >machine where we do lots of mail but I don't want to disrupt the mailing >lists. Suggestions? Keep with MX (as we do) and wait for IMAP4 in TCPware V5.3 ;-) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Tel. +43 1 81111-2382 Network and OpenVMS system manager Fax. +43 1 81111-888 Technical Computer Center (ADV) E-mail eplan@kapsch.net <<< KAPSCH AG Wagenseilgasse 1 PSImail PSI%(0232)281001141::EPLAN A-1121 VIENNA AUSTRIA "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 07:36:34 -0600 Sender: goathunter@MadGoat.com Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 07:36:24 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC88E.FCC49A79.9@goat.process.com> Subject: Re: Heresy Suggestions? (Possible Migration to PMDF) eplan@kapsch.co.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER) writes: > >Keep with MX (as we do) and wait for IMAP4 in TCPware V5.3 ;-) > IMAP4 will also appear in MultiNet V4.1, scheduled for release in early 1998. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 08:32:08 -0600 Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 08:31:55 CST6CDT5,M4.1.0,M10.5.0 From: system@niuhep.physics.niu.edu Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC896.BE5A7873.5@niuhep.physics.niu.edu> Subject: Re: Heresy Suggestions? (Possible Migration to PMDF) In article , mfleming@csubak.edu (Michael W. Fleming) writes: >We are looking at the possibility of migrating to PMDF. There are two >main reasons--1) It's a supported commercial product, 2) IMAP4 server. The ?new? PINE for VMS distribution (as discussed on comp.os.vms I am not sure where I got mine but Yehavi@VMS.HUJI.AC.IL wrote much of the VMS code and A.Harper@kcl.ac.uk did a fair amount of modifying) has an IMAP server. Robert ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 09:55:23 -0600 Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 15:47:36 BST From: Andy Harper Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: A.HARPER@kcl.ac.uk Message-ID: <009BC8D3.9B6DC1CF.88@alder.cc.kcl.ac.uk> Subject: Re: Heresy Suggestions? (Possible Migration to PMDF) >The ?new? PINE for VMS distribution (as discussed on comp.os.vms I am not >sure where I got mine but Yehavi@VMS.HUJI.AC.IL wrote much of the VMS >code and A.Harper@kcl.ac.uk did a fair amount of modifying) has an IMAP >server. The IMAP server with PINE is only IMAP2 bis at present but I am in the process of porting the latest washington IAMP 4.1 BETA. You can pick up PINE 3.91-1 (includes the IMAP and POP servers)from: http://alder.cc.kcl.ac.uk/pine-vms/ You'll need either NETLIB or MULTINET for the network support, and a C compiler. VAX C, GNU C or DEC C. PINE 3.91-2 is imminent. Regards, Andy Harper Kings College London ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 10:39:05 -0600 Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 8:38:49 -0800 From: Matt Madison Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <971030083849.2030bd98@Cisco.COM> Subject: Re: Year 2000? >As someone else posted, Digital has a Y2K plan. In any case, MX uses >the VMS time format (a quadword) and services, so all years are always >represented as 4 digits. There are no stupid UNIXisms in date >handling in MX or in the VMS routines (AFAIK) called by MX. With the one exception of delivery to the mailboxes used by MultiNet's MM user agent, which embeds 2-digit dates in its internal headers (just one reason why MM is no longer a supported part of MultiNet). -Matt -- Matthew Madison | | madison@cisco.com Cisco Systems | 101 Cooper St. | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA | +1 408 457 5390 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 12:37:49 -0600 Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 16:02:02 GMT From: Chris.Sharman@ccagroup.co.uk Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@madgoat.com CC: Chris.Sharman@ccagroup.co.uk Message-ID: <009BC8D5.9FE2A4B7.1@ccagroup.co.uk> Subject: Re: Year 2000? >But hasn't it been, that the rumor mill has it, that VMS doesn't >have a Y2K plan. VMS has only ever supported a date/time format good from 17-NOV-1858 to 31-DEC-9999 (yes 9999, not 1999). Internally it's good beyond that, but none of the ascii routines deal with 5 digit years: talk to your local Digital Support office. The LIB RTL gained support for text input/output of dates with two digit years sometime around V5.x, but converts them to the standard internal format. Recently f$cvtime started accepting 2 digit years: 57-99 get 19, 00-56 get 20. There was an issue earlier this year with some Unix compatible stuff in the C RTL failing 19-MAY-1997. In summary, VMS has been Y2K compliant since it was born. That's not to say that all applications on VMS are compliant though: programmers are free to do their own thing, but then that's their problem, not VMS's. It's easy to write bad programs even on a good OS, but VMS makes it easy to do it right. ______________________________________________________________________ Chris Sharman Chris.Sharman@CCAgroup.co.uk CCA Stationery Ltd, Eastway, Fulwood, Preston, Lancashire, PR2 9WS. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 13:47:11 -0600 Sender: BRAD Message-ID: <345873A5.7109736E@tgsmc.com> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 11:46:45 +0000 From: Brad Hughes Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Year 2000? References: <009BC8D5.9FE2A4B7.1@ccagroup.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Chris.Sharman@ccagroup.co.uk wrote: > > VMS has only ever supported a date/time format good from 17-NOV-1858 > to 31-DEC-9999 (yes 9999, not 1999). Internally it's good beyond that, but none > of the ascii routines deal with 5 digit years: talk to your local Digital > Support office. > My understanding is that an SPR has been submitted on this problem and that DEC has stated that this will be addressed in "a future release of VMS". ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 14:12:19 -0600 Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 14:06:34 CST From: iman@access.tkm.mb.ca Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@madgoat.com Message-ID: <009BC8C5.7E3C0F7A.2@access.tkm.mb.ca> Subject: MX 4.2, Multinet 3.5, Alpha V6.1, System-f-linkdiscon Environment: MX V4.2 Multinet 3.5 Rev a Alpha VMS V6.1 There appears to be a problem sending mail messages with attachments out from the MX SMTP server. I turned on "MX_SMTP_DEBUG" and reviewed the logfiles. MX appears to make a connection to the other and begin to start transferring the mail message and the attachment. But part way through the attachment an error: 30-OCT-1997 10:25:55.92 SMTP send failed, sts=0C27804A, sts2=000020EC 30-OCT-1997 10:25:55.92 Recipient sta23 30-OCT-1997 10:25:56.24 *** End of processing pass *** Does any one have a solution or explanation for the following (error 20ec)? SYSTEM-F-LINKDISCON, network partner disconnect logical link Thanks, Jim Gamble TKM Software. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 15:33:34 -0600 Sender: goathunter@MadGoat.com Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 15:33:26 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC8D1.A1240E0F.19@goat.process.com> Subject: RE: MX 4.2, Multinet 3.5, Alpha V6.1, System-f-linkdiscon iman@access.tkm.mb.ca writes: > >Does any one have a solution or explanation for the following (error 20ec)? > > SYSTEM-F-LINKDISCON, network partner disconnect logical link > It's the remote system that's closing the connection, not the MX side.... Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 19:56:44 -0600 Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 20:56:15 EST From: Brian Reed Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC8FE.BA1576E7.1@cbict3.cb.lucent.com> Subject: RE: MX 4.2, Multinet 3.5, Alpha V6.1, System-f-linkdiscon >>Does any one have a solution or explanation for the following (error 20ec)? >> >> SYSTEM-F-LINKDISCON, network partner disconnect logical link >> >It's the remote system that's closing the connection, not the MX >side.... If this isn't on the list, can the message be modified, to indicate that it's the remote node that is the problem (and not the local node)? This question has popped up a couple of times, and I've gotten confused myself looking at a "show queue" output, at first thinking it was failing on this end. Brian D. Reed Lucent Technologies Columbus Works bdreed1@lucent.com 614-860-6218 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 20:08:34 -0600 Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 21:08:00 -0500 From: "Brian Tillman, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC900.5DFB87A0.1@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: MX 4.2, Multinet 3.5, Alpha V6.1, System-f-linkdiscon >If this isn't on the list, can the message be modified, to >indicate that it's the remote node that is the problem >(and not the local node)? It already does. It says "network _partner_" (emphasis mine. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 09:23:00 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Heresy Suggestions? (Possible Migration to PMDF) Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 08:50:40 +0000 Message-ID: <34599BE0.4B77297F@MadGoat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: MX-List@WKUVX1.WKU.EDU Darko Bulat wrote: > > Michael W. Fleming wrote: > > > > We are looking at the possibility of migrating to PMDF. There are two > > main reasons--1) It's a supported commercial product, 2) IMAP4 server. > > > 1) I presume that some people would be more than happy to offer you a > qualified and professional assistance as well as support for MX as > well. For the money, of course. > For years, when people have written to me saying they're switching to PMDF because it's supported, I've pointed out that MX is supported as best we can free of charge, and that I'd be happy to provide real support in exchange for $$$. But, for some reason, they'd rather switch (despite telling how much more they prefer MX) than give some money for support on a freeware package..... Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 10:46:41 -0600 From: Javier Henderson Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <199710311646.IAA02071@scv-cse-20.cisco.com> Subject: Re: Heresy Suggestions? (Possible Migration to PMDF) To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 08:46:50 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <34599BE0.4B77297F@MadGoat.com> from "Hunter Goatley" at Oct 31, 97 08:50:40 am MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > For years, when people have written to me saying they're switching > to PMDF because it's supported, I've pointed out that MX is supported > as best we can free of charge, and that I'd be happy to provide real > support in exchange for $$$. But, for some reason, they'd rather > switch (despite telling how much more they prefer MX) than give some > money for support on a freeware package..... Back in '93, my employer at the time was going through a corporate acquisition. The corporate auditors were "very concerned" that I was running several non-commercial/unsupported packages like MX, ANU News, etc. It wasn't a deal breaker by any means, but I had to convince them that the software was safe. -jav ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 15:12:54 -0600 Sender: BRAD Message-ID: <3459D948.47C89A9C@tgsmc.com> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 13:12:40 +0000 From: Brad Hughes Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Heresy Suggestions? (Possible Migration to PMDF) References: <34599BE0.4B77297F@MadGoat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hunter Goatley wrote: > > For years, when people have written to me saying they're switching > to PMDF because it's supported, I've pointed out that MX is supported > as best we can free of charge, and that I'd be happy to provide real > support in exchange for $$$. But, for some reason, they'd rather > switch (despite telling how much more they prefer MX) than give some > money for support on a freeware package..... > I'm not in that boat, but perhaps the people that *are* need to show that they can get some support from a corporate entity. Maybe Process Software can provide your/Matt's/whoever's services under their name. That should satisfy "pointy-haired" management... ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 15:36:04 -0600 Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971031133554.02e35db8@osshe.edu> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 13:35:54 -0800 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: Dan Sugalski Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Heresy Suggestions? (Possible Migration to PMDF) In-Reply-To: <3459D948.47C89A9C@tgsmc.com> References: <34599BE0.4B77297F@MadGoat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 01:12 PM 10/31/1997 +0000, Brad Hughes wrote: >Hunter Goatley wrote: >> >> For years, when people have written to me saying they're switching >> to PMDF because it's supported, I've pointed out that MX is supported >> as best we can free of charge, and that I'd be happy to provide real >> support in exchange for $$$. But, for some reason, they'd rather >> switch (despite telling how much more they prefer MX) than give some >> money for support on a freeware package..... >> > >I'm not in that boat, but perhaps the people that *are* need to show >that they can get some support from a corporate entity. Maybe Process >Software can provide your/Matt's/whoever's services under their name. >That should satisfy "pointy-haired" management... Maybe someone needs to start up a company or consultancy to support this sort of thing. There are a bunch of folks that do this for various GNU products, and a few that do it for Perl, so why not the major VMS freeware? Dan ----------------------------------------"it's like this"------------------- Dan Sugalski (541) 737-3348 even samurai SysAdmin have teddy bears Oregon State system of Higher Education and even the teddy bears sugalskd@osshe.edu get drunk ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 15:39:04 -0600 Sender: goathunter@MadGoat.com Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 15:38:53 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC99B.8E7144A6.27@goat.process.com> Subject: MX BOF at DECUS planned In case any of you are going to DECUS in Anaheim next week, I'm doing a session "Introduction to MX" on Wednesday at 3:00 in B8. I'm also planning to host an MX BOF sometime, though I can't schedule that until I get there. I will also be in the Process booth at various times, so feel free to stop by! Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 18:04:21 -0600 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 19:04:20 EST From: john@Argent-Software.com Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC9B8.41A8564C.23@Argent-Software.com> Subject: RE: MX BOF at DECUS planned > >In case any of you are going to DECUS in Anaheim next week, I'm doing >a session "Introduction to MX" on Wednesday at 3:00 in B8. > Will this cover V4.2 or V5.0? John Vottero John@Argent-Software.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 18:22:46 -0600 Sender: goathunter@MadGoat.com Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 18:22:37 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009BC9B2.6DD57F48.9@goat.process.com> Subject: RE: MX BOF at DECUS planned john@Argent-Software.com writes: > >> >>In case any of you are going to DECUS in Anaheim next week, I'm doing >>a session "Introduction to MX" on Wednesday at 3:00 in B8. >> > >Will this cover V4.2 or V5.0? > Yes. ;-) It's mostly a general overview of what MX is, but there will be some MX V5.0 info. MX V5.0 *will* be discussed at the MX BOF, whenever that's scheduled. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 19:26:51 -0600 From: Javier Henderson Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <199711010127.RAA02363@scv-cse-20.cisco.com> Subject: Re: MX BOF at DECUS planned To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 17:27:01 +1600 (PST) In-Reply-To: <009BC9B2.6DD57F48.9@goat.process.com> from "Hunter Goatley" at Oct 31, 97 06:22:37 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > It's mostly a general overview of what MX is, but there will be some > MX V5.0 info. MX V5.0 *will* be discussed at the MX BOF, whenever > that's scheduled. Do it for Tuesday, so I can attend :)