Archive-Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1992 00:06:53 CDT Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1992 00:05:49 CDT From: "Hunter Goatley, WKU" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095E6B6.9B370B80.17732@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: MX-LIST Administrivia: Monthly Post Last modified: 2-JUL-1992 00:40 01:26 (Created) Welcome to MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET, an electronic mailing list established for the discussion of the Message Exchange mail software. This is a routine posting you will see from time to time on MX-List. The MX-List archives are maintained at ARCHIVES@WKUVX1.BITNET. To get a copy of any month's postings, send an e-mail message with the body SEND MX-List.yyyy-mm to ARCHIVES@WKUVX1.BITNET, where "yyyy" is the year and "mm" is the numeric representation of the month. For example, the message SENDME MX-List.1992-04 will send the archives for April 1992. To remove yourself from the mailing list, send the following command to LISTSERV@WKUVX1.BITNET: SIGNOFF MX-List LISTSERV supports a few other commands for your convenience. The following commands can be handled automatically by the list processor: SIGNOFF MX-List - to remove yourself from the list REVIEW MX-List - to get a list of subscribers QUERY MX-List - to get the status of your entry on the list SET MX-List NOMAIL - to remain on the list but not receive mail SET MX-List MAIL - to resume receiving mail from the list SET MX-List CONCEAL - to not report your address in a REVIEW SET MX-List NOCONCEAL - to report your address in a REVIEW SET MX-List REPRO - to receive posts you make to MX-List SET MX-List NOREPRO - to not receive posts you make to MX-List LIST - to get a list of mailing lists served by WKUVX1 HELP - to receive a help file By default, subscriptions are set to MAIL, REPRO, NOCONCEAL. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions about MX-List, please contact the list owner at the address below. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Hunter Goatley, VAX Systems Programmer goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Western Kentucky University Academic Computing, STH 226 (502) 745-5251 Bowling Green, KY 42101 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1992 15:34:09 CDT From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Request for MLF enhancement. Message-ID: <1992Aug1.073142.4384@dmc.com> Date: 1 Aug 92 07:31:42 EDT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I'm not QUITE sure how it happened, but a mailer daemon out in netland got fixated on my MX listserv address which caused the listserv to respond with help which caused the mailer daemon to bounce mail back to the listserve and a mail loop resulted. I got out of it by shutting down mlf, waiting 24 hours, cleaing up the pending jobs, and restarting mlf. I'ld like MLF to be configurable to accept a bunch of address to which information would NOT be sent. Ideally I would be able to exclude an individual mailbox, node, subnet, etc. I'ld settle for being able to exclude individual addresses though. -- Dick Munroe Internet: munroe@dmc.com Doyle Munroe Consultants, Inc. UUCP: ...uunet!thehulk!munroe 267 Cox St. Office: (508) 568-1618 Hudson, Ma. FAX: (508) 562-1133 GET CONNECTED!!! Send mail to info@dmc.com to find out about DMConnection. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1992 21:00:37 CDT From: Subject: Re: MX and match mail References: <0095E64EF2F88AA0.2F004FCA@giant.IntraNet.com> Sender: (Usenet administrator) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1992 15:17:12 GMT Message-ID: <1992Aug3.151712.12369@cpu.com> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <0095E64EF2F88AA0.2F004FCA@giant.IntraNet.com>, del@giant.IntraNet.com (G. Del Merritt) writes: >... >For "security" and compartmentalization reasons, we want to move UUCP >(our hook to the outside world) from the cluster to the 750. This >makes the 750 the "corporate mail gateway". My question is: can/will >MX help me make a gracefull transition? I would like my cluster >users, who are used to typing: > To: uucp%"JLuser@somecorp.com" > >to just switch to something equally easy as: > To: mx%"JLuser@somecorp.com" > >Sooo, what's the best/right way to do this? Should I have MX running >on the cluster and the 750? Should/could they talk via DECnet, or >must it be a TCP/IP? Can MX just mung VAX MAIL addresses, inbound and >outbound, to "to the right thing"? > Have MX run on all of the VAXen. If you pull the latest version you can have them talk over DECnet very easily. It is a little more of a pain with the older versions. >I have MX 2.3 (plus the 2.3-1 upgrade) on tape. Would it be more >worth my while to drag 3.x off the net? (Since I'm a uucp site >without direct FTP access, it would have to come in as encoded/split >mail.) Yes, pull the latest. You can request that it be mailed to you, i think it comes in as over 100 messages. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1992 08:40:27 CDT Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1992 08:49:45 EDT From: "Brian Tillman, Smiths Industries, VAX Support, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: ken@dom.dom.uab.edu CC: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095EA24.768D9440.12807@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: LPR with VMS 5.5-1 I suspect that the problem is resulting from V5.5's rewrite of the queue manager. You might try rebuilding the LPR image, if you can. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- Brian Tillman | Internet: tillman@swdev.si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. | 4141 Eastern Ave. MS129 | Hey, I said this stuff myself. Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 | My company has no part in it. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1992 21:53:10 CDT From: daveh@vax.oxford.ac.uk Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: MAILQUEUE - does it work? Message-ID: <1992Aug5.170740.8080@vax.oxford.ac.uk> Date: 5 Aug 92 16:07:40 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Is the MAILQUEUE program supposed to work? We would like to be able to use it. (we're running VMS 5.5 and MX 3.1C) Dave -- David Hastings | "Imposition of order=escalation of chaos" VAX Systems Programmer | Oxford University Computing Services| "Just when you think you've won the daveh@vax.oxford.ac.uk | rat race, along come faster rats" ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1992 06:34:44 CDT Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1992 07:28:19 EDT From: Ta Fuh Chiam Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095EAE2.40629A00.335@VULCAN.CBA.OHIOU.EDU> Subject: RE: MAILQUEUE - does it work? >Is the MAILQUEUE program supposed to work? We would like to be able to use it. SO, what do you mean exactly? Are you having problem? As far as I know, it works. Ta Fuh Chiam ============================================================================ Ta Fuh Chiam Ohio University, College of Business Administration / Phone: (614)593-2088 Management Information Systems FAX: (614)593-1388 Copeland Hall 22 INTERNET : chiam@vulcan.cba.ohiou.edu Athens, Ohio 45701, U.S.A. or : chiam@ouvaxa.ucls.ohiou.edu BITNET : CHIAM@OUACCVMB Use my first Internet address if at all possible. Disclaimer: What I have said are my opinions, not of anyone else. ============================================================================ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1992 11:23:51 CDT Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1992 11:26:03 EDT From: "Brian Tillman, Smiths Industries, VAX Support, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: Postmaster@plasma.inpe.br CC: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095EB03.76F53B60.13282@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: Recurrent error messages Here's what your errors could mean: $ write sys$output f$message("%x838") %SYSTEM-W-DATAOVERUN, data overrun $ write sys$output f$message("%x2c") %SYSTEM-F-ABORT, abort Perhaps your ethernet card is flakey. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- Brian Tillman | Internet: tillman@swdev.si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. | 4141 Eastern Ave. MS129 | Hey, I said this stuff myself. Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 | My company has no part in it. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1992 23:38:21 CDT From: daveh@vax.oxford.ac.uk Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: RE: MAILQUEUE - does it work? Message-ID: <1992Aug6.161744.8115@vax.oxford.ac.uk> Date: 6 Aug 92 15:17:44 GMT References: <0095EAE2.40629A00.335@VULCAN.CBA.OHIOU.EDU> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <0095EAE2.40629A00.335@VULCAN.CBA.OHIOU.EDU>, chiam@VULCAN.CBA.OHIOU.EDU (Ta Fuh Chiam) writes: >>Is the MAILQUEUE program supposed to work? We would like to be able to use it. > > SO, what do you mean exactly? Are you having problem? As far as I know, it > works. > > Ta Fuh Chiam > I get no output from mailqueue even if there are items belonging to me in the queue. Dave -- David Hastings | "Imposition of order=escalation of chaos" VAX Systems Programmer | Oxford University Computing Services| "Just when you think you've won the daveh@vax.oxford.ac.uk | rat race, along come faster rats" ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 02:51:05 CDT Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 09:45:09 EDT From: Matthias Clausen DESY -KRYK- / D-Hamburg Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: VAX-Cluster Mail bouncer To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: claus@HERACC.desy.de Message-ID: <0095EBBE.885875A0.1161@heracc.desy.de> I have MX running on a cluster. Currently there is only one node running MX -> HERACC The cluster alias is VXHERA and has a different IP number. Sending mail to HERACC is ok. Sending mail to VXHERA will cause the following error: Domain-to-path mappings: Domain="heracc.desy.de", Path=Local Domain="*.UUCP", Path=SMTP, Route="uunet.uu.net" Domain="*", Path=SMTP Domain="heracc", Path=Local Domain="[131.169.1.97]", Path=Local Domain="*.BITNET", Path=SMTP, Route="VXDESY.DESY.DE" Domain="VXHERA", Path=Local I already tried with - or without the Domain="VXHERA" path - no difference. I am shure it's only a little thing I missed, but which? Thanks for any help Matthias Clausen Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron DESY Gruppe: KRYK / F36H Notkestrasse 85 VXHERA::CLAUS W-2000 Hamburg 52 CLAUS@DESYVAX.BITNET Tel: -49 40 8998-3256 claus@heracc.desy.de Fax: -49 40 8998-5388 PSI%(0262)45050354002::CLAUS ================================================================================ >A problem occurred during SMTP delivery of your message. > >Error occurred sending to the following user(s): > (via vxhera.desy.de): > %MX_SMTP-F-TRANSACTION_FAI, transaction failed > > Transcript: > Rcvd: 220 heracc.desy.de MX V3.1C SMTP server ready at Tue, 04 Aug 1992 > 09:24:39 EDT > Sent: HELO heracc.desy.de > Rcvd: 250 Verification failed for heracc.desy.de > 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 heracc.desy.de Service closing transmission channel >======================================================================== > >Message follows. > >Received: from heracc.desy.de (VXHERA) by heracc.desy.de (MX V3.1C) with SMTP; > Tue, 04 Aug 1992 09:24:37 EDT >Received: from heracc.desy.de (VXHERA) by heracc.desy.de (MX V3.1C) with SMTP; > Tue, 04 Aug 1992 09:24:34 EDT >Received: from heracc.desy.de (VXHERA) by heracc.desy.de (MX V3.1C) with SMTP; > Tue, 04 Aug 1992 09:24:30 EDT >Received: from heracc.desy.de (VXHERA) by heracc.desy.de (MX V3.1C) with SMTP; > Tue, 04 Aug 1992 09:24:27 EDT >Received: from heracc.desy.de (VXHERA) by heracc.desy.de (MX V3.1C) with SMTP; > Tue, 04 Aug 1992 09:24:23 EDT >Received: from heracc.desy.de (VXHERA) by heracc.desy.de (MX V3.1C) with SMTP; > Tue, 04 Aug 1992 09:24:19 EDT >Received: from heracc.desy.de (VXHERA) by heracc.desy.de (MX V3.1C) with SMTP; > Tue, 04 Aug 1992 09:24:16 EDT >Received: from DSYIBM.DESY.DE by heracc.desy.de (MX V3.1C) with SMTP; Tue, 04 > Aug 1992 09:24:11 EDT >Received: from DSYIBM.DESY.DE by DSYIBM.DESY.DE (IBM MVS SMTP R1.0.2) with BSMT P > id 2942; Tue, 04 Aug 92 09:24:16 MET >Date: TUE, 4 AUG 92 09:23:42 MESZ >From: Hans Frese +49 40 8998-2588 >Subject: DNC-26 am 6.8.92 um 15:00 >To: Matthias Clausen +49 40 8998-3256 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Matthias Clausen Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron Gruppe: KRYK DESY/Hamburg, Germany ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 07:22:04 CDT Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 08:14:49 EDT From: Ta Fuh Chiam Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095EBB1.E9A2FF40.351@VULCAN.CBA.OHIOU.EDU> Subject: RE: MAILQUEUE - does it work? >I get no output from mailqueue even if there are items belonging to me in the >queue. What is the status of those items that belong to you? MAILQUEUE will only show those entries that are IN-PROGRESS or READY. Completed entries are not shown. As far as I know, it is working fine here. Ta Fuh Chiam ============================================================================ Ta Fuh Chiam Ohio University, College of Business Administration / Phone: (614)593-2088 Management Information Systems FAX: (614)593-1388 Copeland Hall 22 INTERNET : chiam@vulcan.cba.ohiou.edu Athens, Ohio 45701, U.S.A. or : chiam@ouvaxa.ucls.ohiou.edu BITNET : CHIAM@OUACCVMB Use my first Internet address if at all possible. Disclaimer: What I have said are my opinions, not of anyone else. ============================================================================ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 07:50:29 CDT Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1992 08:44 EST From: "DAVID L. CUSTER" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: MAILER To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Isn't MX supposed to distribute Bitnet mail to intended users whenever it is sent to MAILER? Is it a mistake to have our Bitnet server1 tag indicate that our node hasa such a service? ***************** Here is an example: **************************** From: MX%"jim@math.psu.edu" 13-JUN-1992 20:06:52.85 To: MAILER CC: Subj: Sun patch 100482-02 Return-Path: <@psuhmed.rcf.hmc.psu.edu:MAILER@PSUSUN1.BITNET> Received: from PSUSUN1 (MAILER) by psuhmed.rcf.hmc.psu.edu (MX V3.0) with Jnet; Sat, 13 Jun 1992 20:06:41 EDT HELO psusun1 TICK 18416 MAIL FROM: RCPT TO: DATA Received: from leibnini.math.psu.edu ([128.118.24.21]) by psusun1.cs.psu.edu with SMTP id <292482>; Sat, 13 Jun 1992 12:47:36 -0400 Received: from descrap.math.psu.edu by leibnini.math.psu.edu with SMTP (5.65+/psu-relay-1.1) id AA00505; Sat, 13 Jun 92 12:47:24 -0400 . . . ********************** End example ********************* Thank you in advance for any answer. Dave Custer ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 07:57:23 CDT Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 07:57:03 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: SYSMGR@PSUHMED.BITNET Message-ID: <0095EBAF.6E8E2020.5015@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: MAILER "DAVID L. CUSTER" writes: > > Isn't MX supposed to distribute Bitnet mail to intended users whenever it >is sent to MAILER? Is it a mistake to have our Bitnet server1 tag indicate >that our node hasa such a service? > Only if the message is a BSMTP message. This one was not: >Return-Path: <@psuhmed.rcf.hmc.psu.edu:MAILER@PSUSUN1.BITNET> >Received: from PSUSUN1 (MAILER) by psuhmed.rcf.hmc.psu.edu (MX V3.0) with Jnet; ^^^^ Non-BSMTP messages to MAILER are delivered to MAILER. Apparently, PSUSUN1 does *not* know that PSUHMED has a MAILER installed. Sounds like the XMAILER.NAMES on PSUSUN1 is out-of-date. I have this problem with a number of sites---HARVUNXW has had this problem for more than a year and repeated attempts to get somebody there to fix the problem have been fruitless. They don't even bother to respond. Typical UNIX administrator.... Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 08:13:53 CDT Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 08:08:12 CDT From: "George D. Greenwade" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: claus@heracc.desy.de, claus@DESYVAX.BITNET Message-ID: <0095EBB0.FD9EC520.13136@SHSU.edu> Subject: RE: VAX-Cluster Mail bouncer On Fri, 07 Aug 1992 09:45:09 EDT, Matthias Clausen posted (reformatted slightly): > I have MX running on a cluster. Currently there is only one node running MX > -> HERACC The cluster alias is VXHERA and has a different IP number. > Sending mail to HERACC is ok. Sending mail to VXHERA will cause the > following error: > > >A problem occurred during SMTP delivery of your message. > > > >Error occurred sending to the following user(s): > > (via vxhera.desy.de): > > %MX_SMTP-F-TRANSACTION_FAI, transaction failed MX doesn't know VXHERA is local -- it's trying to go via SMTP. Here's why: > Domain-to-path mappings: > Domain="heracc.desy.de", Path=Local > Domain="*.UUCP", Path=SMTP, Route="uunet.uu.net" > Domain="*", Path=SMTP Everything after this is moot -- everything not already routed will match "*" and be processed accordingly. Thus, move: > Domain="heracc", Path=Local > Domain="[131.169.1.97]", Path=Local > Domain="*.BITNET", Path=SMTP, Route="VXDESY.DESY.DE" > Domain="VXHERA", Path=Local to before the Domain="*" line and it ought to work fine. Regards, George %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% George D. Greenwade, Ph.D. Bitnet: BED_GDG@SHSU Department of Economics and Business Analysis THEnet: SHSU::BED_GDG College of Business Administration Voice: (409) 294-1266 P. O. Box 2118 FAX: (409) 294-3612 Sam Houston State University Internet: bed_gdg@SHSU.edu Huntsville, TX 77341 bed_gdg%SHSU.decnet@relay.the.net %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 08:56:24 CDT Message-ID: To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET From: "Pasztor Miklos" Date: 7 Aug 92 15:32:02 GMT+1 Subject: RE: MAILER Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hunter Goatley writes: ->Non-BSMTP messages to MAILER are delivered to MAILER. Apparently, ->PSUSUN1 does *not* know that PSUHMED has a MAILER installed. Sounds ->like the XMAILER.NAMES on PSUSUN1 is out-of-date. -> ->I have this problem with a number of sites---HARVUNXW has had this ->problem for more than a year and repeated attempts to get somebody ->there to fix the problem have been fruitless. They don't even bother ->to respond. Typical UNIX administrator.... I have the following workaround for this problem: I forward mail of the MAILER user to qqq@xyzzy, and define path xyzzy as SITE. In mx_exe:site_deliver.com I read the message file, get the RFC 822 From: and To: lines, and re-send it. If I fail to get this parameters I send the letter to the postmaster (it's me :-), and try to do something "with hand". If anybody is interested in detail, drop me a line and I can send the piece of DCL code. Regards, Pa'sztor Miklo's E-mail: pasztor@hugbox.bitnet MTA SZTAKI/ASZI Budapest, Hungary ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 09:03:36 CDT Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 09:03:11 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095EBB8.AB8DE240.5035@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: MAILER "Pasztor Miklos" writes: > >Hunter Goatley writes: > >->Non-BSMTP messages to MAILER are delivered to MAILER. Apparently, >->PSUSUN1 does *not* know that PSUHMED has a MAILER installed. Sounds >->like the XMAILER.NAMES on PSUSUN1 is out-of-date. >-> >->I have this problem with a number of sites---HARVUNXW has had this >->problem for more than a year and repeated attempts to get somebody >->there to fix the problem have been fruitless. They don't even bother >->to respond. Typical UNIX administrator.... > The other frustrating thing about this is that HARVUNXW percent hacks any "From:" addresses going through it, frequently resulting in lines that exceed 80 characters, causing the line to wrap, causing the "From:" line to be invalid when MX gets it, resulting in a VMS Mail "From:" line of "<@WKUVX1.BITNET:MAILER@HARVUNXW.BITNET>". Grrrr. MX does everything it can, but HARVUNXW screws it up too much. > I have the following workaround for this problem: > I forward mail of the MAILER user to qqq@xyzzy, and > define path xyzzy as SITE. > In mx_exe:site_deliver.com I read the message file, get the RFC 822 > From: and To: lines, and re-send it. If I fail to get this > parameters I send the letter to the postmaster (it's me :-), and > try to do something "with hand". That's slick---I never even thought of doing it that way. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 09:27:04 CDT Message-ID: To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET From: "Pasztor Miklos" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 7 Aug 92 15:58:15 GMT+1 Subject: Receipt confirmation Confirmation: message read at 15:58, 7 Aug 92 Subject: RE: MAILER ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 10:14:16 CDT Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 10:59:24 EDT From: Mighty Firebreather Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: MIKLOS@ub40.sztaki.hu Message-ID: <0095EBC8.E7F88C20.8638@nscvax.princeton.edu> Subject: RE: Receipt confirmation >From: MX%"MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET" 7-AUG-1992 10:31:00.57 >To: DRAGON >CC: >Subj: Receipt confirmation > >Return-Path: <@UKCC.uky.edu:list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET> >Received: from UKCC.uky.edu by NSCVAX.PRINCETON.EDU (MX V3.1C) with SMTP; Fri, > 07 Aug 1992 10:30:54 EDT >Received: from ukcc.uky.edu by UKCC.uky.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id > 0531; Fri, 07 Aug 92 10:29:52 EDT >Received: from UKCC by ukcc.uky.edu (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 4466; Fri, 07 > Aug 92 10:28:45 EDT >Received: from WKUVX1.BITNET by ukcc.uky.edu (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 4319; > Fri, 07 Aug 92 10:27:02 EDT >Errors-To: list-mgr@WKUVX1.BITNET >X-ListName: Message Exchange Discussion List >Received: from HUGBOX.BITNET (MAILER) by WKUVX1 (MX V3.1C) with BSMTP; Fri, 07 > Aug 1992 09:26:55 CDT >Received: from charon.sztaki.hu by HUGBOX.SZTAKI.HU (MX V3.1C) with SMTP; Fri, > 07 Aug 1992 16:16:43 gmt+1 >Received: From ASZI/WORKQUEUE by charon.sztaki.hu via Charon 3.4 with IPX id > 100.920807155823.448; 07 Aug 92 15:58:38 -0100 >Message-ID: >To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET >From: "Pasztor Miklos" >Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET >Date: 7 Aug 92 15:58:15 GMT+1 >Subject: Receipt confirmation >X-mailer: Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R1). > >Confirmation: message read at 15:58, 7 Aug 92 >Subject: RE: MAILER Why am I getting *this* from the mailing list? I get enough junk mail already! ************************************************************************* * * * Here, there be dragons! * * dragon@nscvax.princeton.edu * * * * Richard B. Gilbert * ************************************************************************* ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 12:16:46 CDT Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 08:29:05 PDT From: Tim Hedrick Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095EBB3.E87BF980.537@SYBIL.risc.rockwell.com> Subject: Changing an incorrect destination address in MX 3.1 [repost] [Note - this is a repost from last week - I never saw the message on the distribution & figured no one else saw it either (just got on "The List" last week). Besides, I still have messages being queued for delivery to non-existent addresses.] MX'ers: Does anyone know of a way to change an incorrect destination address once a message has been queued? Is the _best_ approach to edit the message's SRC_INFO file? If so, does anyone have a convenient way of doing this? If not, what is the _best_ approach? Any info or constructive comments would be appreciated. Thanks! Tim Hedrick VAX Systems Manager Science Center Rockwell International tkh@risc.rockwell.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 13:03:46 CDT Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 16:20:30 EDT From: Matthias Clausen DESY -KRYK- / D-Hamburg Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@RPIECSVX.BITNET CC: claus@heracc.desy.de Message-ID: <0095EBF5.C36E7A40.1213@heracc.desy.de> Subject: solved: VAX-Cluster Mail bouncer The following problem has been solved by the contribution of many mx-friends on the list. Thanks to all of them! Since the solution should be distributed I send it to the list. PROBLEM: -------- >>I have MX running on a cluster. >>Currently there is only one node running MX -> HERACC >>The cluster alias is VXHERA and has a different IP number. >>Sending mail to HERACC is ok. >>Sending mail to VXHERA will cause the following error: >> >>Domain-to-path mappings: >> Domain="heracc.desy.de", Path=Local >> Domain="*.UUCP", Path=SMTP, Route="uunet.uu.net" >> Domain="*", Path=SMTP >> Domain="heracc", Path=Local >> Domain="[131.169.1.97]", Path=Local >> Domain="*.BITNET", Path=SMTP, Route="VXDESY.DESY.DE" >> Domain="VXHERA", Path=Local SOLUTION: --------- >Order is IMPORTANT! Change the above to the following order and it >should be fine: > >Domain-to-path mappings: > Domain="heracc.desy.de", Path=Local > Domain="heracc", Path=Local > Domain="[131.169.1.97]", Path=Local > Domain="VXHERA", Path=Local > Domain="*.UUCP", Path=SMTP, Route="uunet.uu.net" > Domain="*.BITNET", Path=SMTP, Route="VXDESY.DESY.DE" > Domain="*", Path=SMTP > > >You can do this easily by deleting the bitnet, uucp, and * paths and then >re-adding them in. They MUST be last. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Matthias Clausen Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron Gruppe: KRYK DESY/Hamburg, Germany ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992 15:57:12 CDT Subject: Re: VAX-Cluster Mail bouncer Message-ID: <1992Aug7.173157.8554@news.arc.nasa.gov> From: Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1992 17:31:57 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Sender: usenet@news.arc.nasa.gov References: <0095EBBE.885875A0.1161@heracc.desy.de> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <0095EBBE.885875A0.1161@heracc.desy.de>, Matthias Clausen DESY -KRYK- / D-Hamburg writes: >Domain-to-path mappings: > Domain="heracc.desy.de", Path=Local > Domain="*.UUCP", Path=SMTP, Route="uunet.uu.net" > Domain="*", Path=SMTP > Domain="heracc", Path=Local > Domain="[131.169.1.97]", Path=Local > Domain="*.BITNET", Path=SMTP, Route="VXDESY.DESY.DE" > Domain="VXHERA", Path=Local The problem here is the order of your path mappings. MX goes through the list in the order as they appear, and does wildcard matching. So the ones after the "*" one won't ever get used. The way to fix that is to use REMOVE PATH * DEFINE PATH * SMTP That will get the "*" path out of there and add it back in, but at the bottom of the list. Then, when you want to add any other path definitions, you would use the following sequence of commands: REMOVE PATH * DEFINE PATH "vxhera.desy.de" LOCAL ! just an example DEFINE PATH * SMTP -Matt -- Matthew Madison | madison@tgv.com | +1 408 427 4366 TGV, Inc. | 603 Mission Street | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1992 17:49:26 CDT Subject: MX and All-in-1 query Message-ID: <1992Aug10.102848.53@wronz.org.nz> From: sherriff@wronz.org.nz Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 10 Aug 92 10:28:48 +1200 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET We are having problems with All-in-1/MRGATE addresses not being understood by some mail products particularly PMDF and MX - remote mail recipients cannot reply to messages and sometimes messages get trashed without us being aware of the fact. We are looking at ways around this problem - one method would be to buy PMDF and the PMDF/MRGATE interface but the current cost structure (3 years $ up front) tends to put us off. MX looks like a suitable product but I do not know anything about how it handles All-in-1 mail. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance -- John Sherriff Internet: SHERRIFF@WRONZ.ORG.NZ Computer Manager PSI: (05301)30000047::SHERRIFF Wool Research Organisation Christchurch Telephone: (+64) (+3) 325 2421 New Zealand Fax: (+64) (+3) 325 2717 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1992 17:49:35 CDT From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Large MX_ROOT:[QUEUE] performance problems. Message-ID: <1992Aug7.163931.4401@dmc.com> Date: 7 Aug 92 16:39:31 EDT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET This doesn't happen often, but when it does the current MX queue strategy REALLY slows down. Every once in a while, my system gets hit with several thousand, yes, thousand, messages inbound from UUCP (this is NOT accident, I'm doing it deliberately). When that happens I wind up with at least 3*several thousand files in the MX_ROOT:[QUEUE] directory and the router performance tunnels (I suspect that part of the problem is a very large queue control file as well, but we can talk about that later). You can SEE the problem with performance by attempting a directory of the device which takes a VERY long time to happen. I suspect that you could speed things up significantly if you partitioned the queue area in 100 to 300 directories using a hash of some time to put queue data files into one of the "appropriate" directories. Eventually I will be pushing hundreds of messages (hopefully thousands) through my system using MX and I'm VERY concerned about the performance characteristics of the queue. Just a thought for version 3.2 (or 3.1d or whatever it will be called). Dick -- Dick Munroe Internet: munroe@dmc.com Doyle Munroe Consultants, Inc. UUCP: ...uunet!thehulk!munroe 267 Cox St. Office: (508) 568-1618 Hudson, Ma. FAX: (508) 562-1133 GET CONNECTED!!! Send mail to info@dmc.com to find out about DMConnection. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1992 17:49:51 CDT From: Subject: Re: MX and match mail Message-ID: <1992Aug5.090755@mccall.com> Date: 5 Aug 92 15:07:55 GMT References: <0095E64EF2F88AA0.2F004FCA@giant.IntraNet.com> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <0095E64EF2F88AA0.2F004FCA@giant.IntraNet.com>, del@giant.IntraNet.com (G. Del Merritt) writes: >I would like my cluster >users, who are used to typing: > To: uucp%"JLuser@somecorp.com" > >to just switch to something equally easy as: > To: mx%"JLuser@somecorp.com" That's precisely what it'd be. You can even define a logical name so that they can continue to use "uucp%", either as a transition aid, or permanently. >Sooo, what's the best/right way to do this? Should I have MX running >on the cluster and the 750? Should/could they talk via DECnet, or >must it be a TCP/IP? They can use DECnet. MX does store and forward over decnet, so if your user's machine is up, but the 750 or the DECnet is down, MX will accept the message and send it later when everything's back up. (Ditto for TCP/IP of course, just wanted to contrast to the way VMS mail uses DECnet.) >Can MX just mung VAX MAIL addresses, inbound and >outbound, to "to the right thing"? Yes, if I understand the question. It can do all of that that UUCP is currently doing for you. The very latest version, 3.1C can use UUCP rewrite rules, so if you've developed uucp rewrite rules to fix up bogus addresses that are coming in to you, you can continue to use them rather than develop new ones. I was EXTREMELY happy to see this! >I have MX 2.3 (plus the 2.3-1 upgrade) on tape. Would it be more >worth my while to drag 3.x off the net? (Since I'm a uucp site >without direct FTP access, it would have to come in as encoded/split >mail.) I really don't know what the old versions are like since I just installed MX recently myself, but I do know that if you want to use the uucp rewrite rules, you need the current version. That feature isn't even in the manual, it's in the release notes. -- Terry Poot The McCall Pattern Company (uucp: ...!rutgers!depot!mccall!tp) 615 McCall Road (800)255-2762, in KS (913)776-4041 Manhattan, KS 66502, USA ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 02:30:41 CDT Date: 11 Aug 1992 09:19:05 +0200 From: "Alberto Meregalli (SIC)" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: subscription To: MX-LIST@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095EEDF8E15D180.202041B1@decvax.cesi.it> I would subscribe this mailing list. Thank you. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Alberto Meregalli, SIC tel. +39 2 2125 249 Centro Elettrotecnico Sperimentale Italiano fax +39 2 2125 520 Via Rubattino, 54 - I 21034 Milano meregalli@cesi.it ...i2unix!cesi!meregalli ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 09:10:37 CDT Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 09:25:13 EDT From: "Brian Tillman, Smiths Industries, VAX Support, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: munroe@dmc.com CC: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095EEE0.693BCEE0.14564@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: Large MX_ROOT:[QUEUE] performance problems. Dick Munroe (munroe@dmc.com) writes: >This doesn't happen often, but when it does the current MX queue strategy >REALLY slows down. Every once in a while, my system gets hit with several >thousand, yes, thousand, messages inbound from UUCP (this is NOT accident, I'm >doing it deliberately). When that happens I wind up with at least 3*several >thousand files in the MX_ROOT:[QUEUE] directory and the router performance >tunnels I'd say this behavior is a well-know VMS artifact. When a directory's used size exceeds 128 blocks, the one page (512 bytes) VMS directory cache can't hold as many pointers to the starting point of the files in the directory. When this happens, performance starts to slip dramatically. When the directory reaches about 1500 blocks used, you've effectively reduced all lookups to pure sequential searches of the directory which the cache doesn't help. There's an article on DSNlink about this, I believe. DEC modified their CMS product to use special subdirectories to circumvent this problem. DEC's Ada product still has this problem and large Ada libraries have the same type of performance degradation. Things are especially bad when you delete files in alphabetical order. When a block at the start of the directory empties, VMS moves all subsequent blocks forward. We've even gone so far as to write our own delete program that deletes from the end of the alphabet forward. Certainly MX could be modified to use the multiple directory scheme that CMS uses, but I uspect it's not a trivial change. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- Brian Tillman | Internet: tillman@swdev.si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. | 4141 Eastern Ave. MS129 | Hey, I said this stuff myself. Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 | My company has no part in it. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 10:57:17 CDT From: kpy!!kpy.com!pedersen@netcom.com Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Sender: pedersen@kpy.com Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 08:18:15 PDT From: "Bill Pedersen, KPY Corp" To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: pedersen@kpy.com Message-ID: <0095EED7.0EAA2A20.768@kpy.com> Subject: Re: MX and match mail From: X-Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx Subject: Re: MX and match mail Date: 5 Aug 92 15:07:55 GMT References: <0095E64EF2F88AA0.2F004FCA@giant.IntraNet.com> Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Organization: The McCall Pattern Co., Manhattan, KS, USA Lines: 45 Nntp-Posting-Host: mis1 Nntp-Posting-User: tp To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET X-Gateway-Source-Info: USENET In Message-ID: <1992Aug5.090755@mccall.com>, Terry Poot answers (G. Del Merritt): >> >I would like my cluster >> >users, who are used to typing: >> > To: uucp%"JLuser@somecorp.com" >> > >> >to just switch to something equally easy as: >> > To: mx%"JLuser@somecorp.com" >> >> That's precisely what it'd be. You can even define a logical >> name so that they can continue to use "uucp%", either as a >> transition aid, or permanently. But if one wants to keep the NICE features of DECUS UUCP to handle mail with "smart hosts" and UUCP style addressing MAKE SURE you keep using uucp% and the REAL uucp foreign mail protocol for OUTBOUND mail from VMS MAIL users. MX does not understand these features. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 13:07:33 CDT Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 13:05:06 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095EEFF.20FCD740.6174@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: Is there a point to MIME with VMS Mail? I picked up the RFCs for MIME last weekend. MIME stands for Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions and it describes an encoding system for mail messages so that binaries, images, etc., can be sent through normal Internet mail. I read through the document with an eye toward making MX MIME-compliant sometime down the road (not anytime soon, mind you!!). After reading the document, I have one major question: why? Let me be more specific: I understand the purpose behind MIME, and agree that it sounds nice. However, if your primary interface is VMS Mail (as I imagine is true on the MX list), most of MIME's features are meaningless. The simple encoding of some binary characters makes sense, but most of the MIME stuff is geared toward your being able to send, for example, three copies of a document in a single mail message: a text file, a PostScript file, and a DVI file, say. A MIME-compliant mailer will present the user only with what he can handle, which, in the case of VMS Mail, would be only the text file (or the PS file if you use DECwindows mail). Other than the automatic stripping out of everything else, I don't see much advantage to claiming MIME compliance. Has anybody else read the RFC? Do you have any thoughts about it? Let me repeat that I'm just speaking hupothetically here---it'll be a while before I even try to add MIME to MX, if I ever do. But PMDF has it (which makes sense, since Ned Freed co-authored the MIME RFC), so I can see somebody claiming they need it in MX.... Hunter, who hopes he hasn't created a monster by bringing this up ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 14:12:37 CDT Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 11:39:06 EDT From: Stan Quayle Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095F085.722483C0.20134@engclu.doh.square-d.com> Subject: RE: Is there a point to MIME with VMS Mail? Well, it *is* possible to attach a file to VMS Mail using an undocumented hook. You could "starbust" the incoming MIME message into pieces that have the appropriate file attached. When the user receives the message, he is prompted to extract the file. I'd probably not lose any sleep on this until the RFC becomes a recommended standard. ----------------- Stan Quayle N8SQ +1 614 764-4212 Internet: quayle@engclu.doh.square-d.com UUCP: osu-cis!squared!quayle Square-D Company, 5160 Blazer Parkway, Dublin, OH 43017 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 14:13:06 CDT From: whgoat01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: WKUVX1 power failure Message-ID: <1992Aug12.101043.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> Sender: (Network News System) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 14:10:43 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET WKU is experiencing a power failure on half the campus. It went out Tuesday, 08/11, at 1:30 and isn't expected to be restored until late Wednesday afternoon. If you've asked for files from one of the WKUVX1 file servers, or have sent mail to one of the WKUVX1 mailing lists, your message is queued at WKYUVM until the power is restored and, hopefully, WKUVX1 comes back on-line. Ya know, I never realized just how much of what I do depends on having power..... Hunter, working from a different account ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 14:13:39 CDT Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 16:36:27 EDT From: "Brian Tillman, Smiths Industries, VAX Support, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095EF1C.A76F4DE0.14604@swdev.si.com> Subject: Delivering DECnet mail Two questions. Please answer each. I know that MX will deliver SMTP mail using DECnet. Can it also deliver DECnet mail to another node? In other words, suppose I have MX running on node A and I want to send mail to node B by addressing it to MX%"smith@b". Do I need MX running on B as well, or can MX turn the address into B::SMITH somehow? If it can, is there some general means I can use to tell MX to do this, as opposed to having to specify a route for every single node in my DECnetwork? Now, suppose I do have MX running on node B. I know I can specify a route such that MX%"smith@b.dnet" will go throught the SMTP over DECnet path, but what about, again, MX%"smith@b"? Can I get MX to realize this should be delivered via DECnet_SMTP? -----------------------------+-------------------------------- Brian Tillman | Internet: tillman@swdev.si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. | 4141 Eastern Ave. MS129 | Hey, I said this stuff myself. Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 | My company has no part in it. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 14:16:36 CDT From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: MX or UUCP munging To lines? Message-ID: <1992Aug12.054528.4424@dmc.com> Date: 12 Aug 92 05:45:28 EDT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I'm not sure who is at fault here, might be MX, might be UUCP, I suspect MX without proof, but a client has noticed that the To: header coming through my system was getting munged. Here is a copy of the header as receive through "another system": To: Multiple recipients of list TRANSIT here is the header as received through mine: To: Multiple@1776.COM, recipients@1776.COM, of@1776.COM, list@1776.COM, TRANSIT@1776.COM I saw something like this with uAccess which didn't correctly implement RFC822 comment lines. Since I don't have the sources for MX/UUCP handy can someone take a guess as to whose fault this is? Thanks -- Dick Munroe Internet: munroe@dmc.com Doyle Munroe Consultants, Inc. UUCP: ...uunet!thehulk!munroe 267 Cox St. Office: (508) 568-1618 Hudson, Ma. FAX: (508) 562-1133 GET CONNECTED!!! Send mail to info@dmc.com to find out about DMConnection. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 14:16:48 CDT Subject: Re: MX and match mail Message-ID: <1992Aug12.091828@mccall.com> From: Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 09:18:28 CST Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET References: <0095EED7.0EAA2A20.768@kpy.com> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <0095EED7.0EAA2A20.768@kpy.com>, pedersen@kpy.com (Bill Pedersen, KPY Corp) writes: >In Message-ID: <1992Aug5.090755@mccall.com>, >Terry Poot answers (G. Del Merritt): > >>> That's precisely what it'd be. You can even define a logical >>> name so that they can continue to use "uucp%", either as a >>> transition aid, or permanently. > >But if one wants to keep the NICE features of DECUS UUCP to >handle mail with "smart hosts" and UUCP style addressing >MAKE SURE you keep using uucp% and the REAL uucp foreign >mail protocol for OUTBOUND mail from VMS MAIL users. MX >does not understand these features. Since MX uses UUCP to do the sending, smart hosts are still available, as they are used transparently. If the address is handed to uucp, and uucp can't resolve it, it should send it to the smart host, whether the address came from MX or a user. This assumes, of course, that your MX path definitions allow the addresses to get to UUCP, but that is really another matter. At a non-internet uucp site, virtually everything will be handed directly to uucp, and it should process the addresses just like it does when you use uu%. As for uucp-style addressing, I was wondering about that. I actually didn't define the logical name, so I can use uucp% on those rare occasions that I need to use a bang path, or if I want to bypass MX for whatever reason (like if it breaks). But I only have 2 users (including me) so there isn't much of a transition to worry about. I suppose you could define uucp% to use MX to ease the transition, and define something else to use uucp directly as an escape feature, but that would be a bit weird. -- Terry Poot The McCall Pattern Company (uucp: ...!rutgers!depot!mccall!tp) 615 McCall Road (800)255-2762, in KS (913)776-4041 Manhattan, KS 66502, USA ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 14:17:09 CDT Subject: Misconfigured UCX? Message-ID: <1992Aug12.234800.29944@cco.caltech.edu> From: Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 23:48:00 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Sender: news@cco.caltech.edu To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Sorry for asking a frequently-asked question, but I never thought I'd be saddled with setting up MX on a system running UCX. Here's the router log file: 12-AUG-1992 19:39:29.05 %PROCESS, Processing entry number 22 12-AUG-1992 19:39:29.40 %PROCESS, Status from READ_INFO was 00000001 12-AUG-1992 19:39:29.40 %PROCESS, Message originated in VMS Mail. 12-AUG-1992 19:39:29.41 %PROCESS, will run domain expander on envelope addresses. 12-AUG-1992 19:39:29.41 %PROCESS, Processing address: 12-AUG-1992 19:39:30.32 %PROCESS, ... address now reads: 12-AUG-1992 19:39:30.32 %PROCESS, will run domain expander on message headers. 12-AUG-1992 19:39:31.10 %PROCESS, ... for system@IMG.UMD.EDU expanded IMG.UMD.EDU to img 12-AUG-1992 19:39:32.07 %PROCESS, Finished VMSmail-origin preprocessing. 12-AUG-1992 19:39:32.07 %PROCESS, Recipient #0: 12-AUG-1992 19:39:32.08 %REWRITE, No rewrite rules matched 12-AUG-1992 19:39:32.34 %FINDPATH, Site-spec expand on sol1.gps.caltech.edu err=00000000 12-AUG-1992 19:39:32.34 %FINDPATH, domain name SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU matched path pattern * 12-AUG-1992 19:39:32.34 %PROCESS, Rewrote as - next hop sol1.gps.caltech.edu, path 2 12-AUG-1992 19:39:32.56 %PROCESS, Adding to SMTP path: . 12-AUG-1992 19:39:32.89 %PROCESS, Path SMTP gets 1 rcpts, entry number 23 The problem, of course, is in the lines: 12-AUG-1992 19:39:30.32 %PROCESS, will run domain expander on message headers. 12-AUG-1992 19:39:31.10 %PROCESS, ... for system@IMG.UMD.EDU expanded - IMG.UMD.EDU to img OK. How do I get the domain expander to not translate IMG.UMD.EDU to img? I don't have access to the UCX manuals (I'm in California, and I'm installing MX on a machine in Maryland, and the local computing center doesn't have the UCX documentation on CDROM). So I'd appreciate it if someone could tell me either: 1) How to get MX not to run the domain expander; or better 2) How to reconfigure UCX's hosts database so that it uses the FQDN as the primary name of the system. Please give explicit instructions if you're answering question 2. Thanks. Again, apologies for not having paid attention on any of the myriad of other occasions when this problem came up. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 16:36:52 CDT Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 10:24:11 EDT From: "Russell O. Redman" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: redman@hiaras.hia.nrc.ca Message-ID: <0095F144.25A61800.2028@hiaras.hia.nrc.ca> Subject: RE: Is there a point to MIME with VMS Mail? I have not read the MIME specification, but the ability to send binary data by e-mail sounds valuable to me. We often face the problem of distributing binary data to our clients. The data is confidential, but does not really require high security. Sending it by e-mail would be exactly right, especially since the datasets are generally quite small. Giving all these people access to our disks through FTP is a lot more work and a lot less secure, both for us and for them. I would cheerfully abandon the VMS mail interface if an alternative was available which was 1) cheap, 2) reliable, 3) fully MIME compliant, 4) loaded with features... ;-). Cheers, Russell O. Redman ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:13:21 CDT Date: 13 Aug 92 11:22:53 EDT From: Andy Barcus Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@RPIECSVX.BITNET Subject: Trouble with configuration of MX.... Message-ID: <920813152253_555063.0_CHL128-1@CompuServe.COM> I am not a VMS person, but I am attempting to get MX working on our systems here. We have three vaxes, a Sun workstation, and a gateway to an E-Mail program on our Novell file server. We will be connected to the Internet (sometime next week), and I'd like to get MX running. I hope to run MX only on one Vax, but I'm not sure that is possible, or even the best thing. One problem I had is that when sending mail to the Sun, the reply-to address was wrong. In trying to fix that, I completly stopped mail from going altogether... I'm baffled.... If you are willing to answer some (perhaps fundamental) questions about my attempt to install MX, please drop me a line. I'd like to speak to someone in person, so please include your telephone number. Thanks, ++ Andy Barcus ++ Network Manager Augustana College Rock Island, IL 309 794 7209 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:14:35 CDT Sender: kish@DRWHO.IAC.HONEYWELL.COM Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 08:59:20 EDT From: kish@DRWHO.IAC.HONEYWELL.COM Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095F06F.209D3EE0.1518@DRWHO.IAC.HONEYWELL.COM> Subject: RE: Is there a point to MIME with VMS Mail? I havent read the RFC bt I thought it was a poormans X.400 mechanism for permiting binary attachements and allowing SMTP to do X.400 enclosures. Am I on the wrong track... ( I guess I could just track down the RFC :) ) KISH@DRWHO.IAC.HONEYWELL.COM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:15:56 CDT Subject: Auto mail archiving software Message-ID: <1992Aug14.133954.37@dymaxion.ns.ca> From: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 14 Aug 92 13:39:53 AST To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET We are running MX v3.0 and are looking for auto-mail-archiving software for mail traffic in both directions so we can track customer support via E-Mail. Is there anything out there? Ben. --- Ben Armstrong, Software Development bus: (902)422-1973 Dymaxion Research Ltd., fax: (902)421-1267 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1R2 Internet: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:16:04 CDT Subject: "Safe" auto-responder software Message-ID: <1992Aug14.134328.38@dymaxion.ns.ca> From: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 14 Aug 92 13:43:27 AST To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET We are running MX v3.0 and are looking for "safe" auto-mail-responder software (i.e. that will catch mail loops and exclude mailing list sites) to issue notification to clients when they try to contact customer support staff when they are away. Can anyone help me out? Ben. --- Ben Armstrong, Software Development bus: (902)422-1973 Dymaxion Research Ltd., fax: (902)421-1267 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1R2 Internet: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:16:12 CDT Subject: Re: MX and match mail Message-ID: <1992Aug13.134336.25922@cpu.com> From: Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 13:43:36 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Sender: (Usenet administrator) References: <0095EED7.0EAA2A20.768@kpy.com>,<1992Aug12.091828@mccall.com> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1992Aug12.091828@mccall.com>, tp@mccall.com (Terry Poot) writes: > >In article <0095EED7.0EAA2A20.768@kpy.com>, pedersen@kpy.com (Bill Pedersen, KPY >Corp) writes: > >As for uucp-style addressing, I was wondering about that. I actually didn't >define the logical name, so I can use uucp% on those rare occasions that I need >to use a bang path, or if I want to bypass MX for whatever reason (like if it >breaks). But I only have 2 users (including me) so there isn't much of a >transition to worry about. > Terry, MX can handle bang paths, I use them all of the time. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:16:30 CDT Sender: westerm@aclcb.purdue.edu Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 10:43:01 EDT From: Rick Westerman Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095F07D.9C830C20.4091@bchm1.aclcb.purdue.edu> Subject: RE: Is there a point to MIME with VMS Mail? > Is there a point to MIME with VMS Mail? > A MIME-compliant mailer will present the user ... [with] the text file > or the PS file if you use DECwindows mail. This by itself seems handy. Being able to see a postscript component of mail would be, in the future, very nice. Additionally, perhaps DECwindows mail will be upgraded someday to handle sound, so it would nice for MX to handle it as well. > But PMDF has [MIME] ... So what does PMDF do with the MIME stuff? They must see a need for it even if plain old VMS mail doesn't handle non-text. I admit I'm not familiar with PMDF, do they have their own mail interface? -- Rick Rick Westerman System Manager of the AIDS Center Laboratory westerm@aclcb.purdue.edu for Computational Biochemistry (ACLCB), BCHM (317) 494-0505 bldg., Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN 47907 Headline seen on a SUN tabloid: "AIDS killing the world's vampires!" And all this time I thought HIV wasn't good for anything except providing me with a job. :-) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:31:24 CDT Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 13:22:26 EDT From: "Brian Tillman, Smiths Industries, VAX Support, x8425" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: CHRIS@csvax1.ucc.ie CC: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095F093.E17FDE00.15352@swdev.si.com> Subject: RE: Summary: Problems printing POSTSCRIPT using LPR. J.C. Higgins, Sys Admin (CHRIS@csvax1.ucc.ie) writes: >Many postscript files have very large record lengths, so all you need to do >is define a new FORM which has a large line width, and everything should be >rosy. > >$DEFINE/FORM /NOTRUNCATE /WIDTH=32000 /DESC="Special PS Wide Form" No need to do anything with the /WIDTH qualifier, provided you nave /NOTRUNCATE/NOWRAP defined for the form. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- Brian Tillman | Internet: tillman@swdev.si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. | 4141 Eastern Ave. MS129 | Hey, I said this stuff myself. Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 | My company has no part in it. -----------------------------+-------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:42:35 CDT Subject: Customer Support via E-Mail Message-ID: <1992Aug14.133438.36@dymaxion.ns.ca> From: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 14 Aug 92 13:34:38 AST To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET We are attempting to erect an infrastructure for supporting some of our clients via E-Mail. The support structure should work in parallel with phone and fax support, and as such, most things we can do with phone and fax we should now be able to do with E-Mail as well. Some of the issues are as follows: 1. Archiving all E-Mail to/from the outside world - we do this with faxes, we should also be able to do it with mail 2. How to handle staff away (vacation/sick/business trip) - making sure that messages from client to staff don't get missed when they are away - use an auto-responder? - we are well aware of the limitations/liabilities of such creatures with regards to mailing list loops 3. Central support address vs. individual addresses to support staff - individual contacts must be supported and are the mainstay of our phone support, but what is the best way to handle general inquiries - by head of department or other designated person? - by receptionist? Anything which relates to the above points would be helpful to us in making decisions about how the infrastructure should take place: - literature - your own experience with setting up E-Mail support - software: System: VAX/VMS 5.4 - auto-archiver (both directions)? Mailer: MX v3.0 - "safe" auto-responder? TCP/IP: UCX 1.3a Thanks, Ben. --- Ben Armstrong, Software Development bus: (902)422-1973 Dymaxion Research Ltd., fax: (902)421-1267 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1R2 Internet: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:42:46 CDT Subject: Re: Misconfigured UCX? Message-ID: <14970@umd5.umd.edu> From: bleau@umdsp.umd.edu Date: 13 Aug 92 17:38:09 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Sender: news@umd5.umd.edu References: <1992Aug12.234800.29944@cco.caltech.edu> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1992Aug12.234800.29944@cco.caltech.edu>, carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) writes: >Sorry for asking a frequently-asked question, but I never thought I'd be >saddled with setting up MX on a system running UCX. Here's the router log file: > ... >OK. How do I get the domain expander to not translate IMG.UMD.EDU to img? I >don't have access to the UCX manuals (I'm in California, and I'm installing MX >on a machine in Maryland, and the local computing center doesn't have the UCX >documentation on CDROM). So I'd appreciate it if someone could tell me either: > 1) How to get MX not to run the domain expander; or better > 2) How to reconfigure UCX's hosts database so that it uses the FQDN > as the primary name of the system. >Please give explicit instructions if you're answering question 2. Thanks. I recall running into a similar problem over a year ago when installing MX and UCX on a system I used to manage. I think it was resolved through a series of steps, but I only recall some of them. One is that the UCX host database must have the FQDN of the local host _first_, then any aliases for it. Get into UCX and do a SHOW HOST IMG to see how it is defined. Use the command SET HOST hostname/ADDRESS=Internet-address/ALIAS=other-name to define alternate names. This can be repeated as often as desired. If the original name is incorrect (is not FQDN) you may have to first do a SET NOHOST to undefine it, but then _immediately_ do the proper SET HOST commands in the proper sequence so that IMG.UMD.EDU is the first one in the list. Since UCX says host names are case sensitive I put both in, though I never came across a case where I could tell that it mattered. To re-emphasize, the order in which the host name and its aliases are specified in UCX matters to MX, though just why I don't know. (Comments, Matt?) If you make a change to the primary name, double check the UCX startup and configuration files (I think it's called UCX$INET_SET_INTERFACES.COM) just in case the _old_ name was specified there. The last thing you want is for UCX to not work at all, so TELNET and other utilities also fail. If this node is in a cluster be sure to make similar changes on the other nodes in the cluster, as it's quite likely UCX was installed in the same manner on the other nodes. Test it out well on the main node first, though. Sorry I can't be more explicit about the commands, but it has been a while since I solved this one, and I no longer manage the system, so I've lost touch with many of its problems/solutions. BTW, I didn't have UCX manuals either, and we couldn't afford a CD-ROM with a full documentation set and a reader to go along with it. I was able to resolve it with the help file (within UCX), a few friends to post for me, and this news group. Email me directly or post again if you have more problems along these lines and I'll try to jog my memory a bit more. Good luck! Larry Bleau University of Maryland bleau@umdsp.umd.edu 301-405-6223 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 11:48:33 CDT From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Is there a point to MIME with VMS Mail? Message-ID: Sender: (Math Department) References: <0095EEFF.20FCD740.6174@WKUVX1.BITNET> Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 16:10:17 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hunter Goatley writes: >[...] >I read through the document with an eye toward making MX >MIME-compliant sometime down the road (not anytime soon, mind you!!). >After reading the document, I have one major question: why? Good question. I have read a draft version of the RFC as it was distributed with 'metamail', a package which contains a number of patches to make various mail user agents (in the unix world) MIME- friendly. As I see it, MX is made for routing and providing the transport. It shouldn't touch the message itself to hide deficiencies in the user agent. (Strictly speaking: I think that even the sorting of headers above or below the message doesn't belong into MX. But that's a much simpler thing and very convenient to have, so don't take this as a real objection.) Now, one could ask 'Why has nobody written a decent replacement for MAIL?' But that's a different story. (In case you like MAIL, replace 'decent' by 'PD, with sources available and easily changable') -- Thomas Richter -- phone: +49 30 838-3408 Freie Universitaet Berlin psi: (+262)45050230227::RICHTER Institut f. Kristallographie smtp: Takustr. 6, D-1000 Berlin 33 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 12:45:53 CDT Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 12:45:36 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095F2EA.3B879CA0.6881@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: Summary: Is there a point to MIME? Thanks for everyone's input. I had forgotten about MAIL/FOREIGN (in fact, I never even tried it until now). Thomas Richter sums up my thoughts when read the MIME RFC: > >As I see it, MX is made for routing and providing the >transport. It shouldn't touch the message itself to hide deficiencies >in the user agent. > That's exactly what was going through my mind after reading it, though I agree that it has some useful purpose through MAIL/FOREIGN. As I said before, don't expect MX to include anything MIME-related for quite some time, if ever. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 22:42:12 CDT Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 23:35:55 EDT From: Mighty Firebreather Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095F345.148F0CE0.9713@nscvax.princeton.edu> Subject: RE: Misconfigured UCX? Carl, I believe you've bumped into a known problem with UCX. The documentation suggests that the hosts file be set up with alias first and then the FQDN. You need to set up the hosts file so that the FQDN is first, followed by any aliases. ************************************************************************* * * * Here, there be dragons! * * dragon@nscvax.princeton.edu * * * * Richard B. Gilbert * ************************************************************************* ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 09:48:09 CDT From: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: WKU power restored (finally) Message-ID: <1992Aug14.150324.1957@wkuvx1.bitnet> Date: 14 Aug 92 20:03:24 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Well, WKU has finally restored our power. I think it's up now for the long run. The power went off Tuesday, 11-AUG, was out until Thursday, 13-AUG, came up for two hours, then went out again for 24 hours.... The first time, a transformer on the street blew; when they fixed that, a transformer in our building blew. *Fortunately*, the machine room is on the other transformer in our building, so I think we're up now. If you've requested anything from any of the file servers at WKUVX1, please be patient---your files are going out, but there's quite a backlog built up. Thanks for your patience! Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 10:53:28 CDT Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 11:38:57 EDT From: Irv Eisen Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095F3AA.16ACC8E0.6398@ccstat.mc.duke.edu> Subject: re: Misconfigured UCX? <>OK. How do I get the domain expander to not translate IMG.UMD.EDU to img? I <>don't have access to the UCX manuals (I'm in California, and I'm installing MX <>on a machine in Maryland, and the local computing center doesn't have the UCX <>documentation on CDROM). So I'd appreciate it if someone could tell me either: <> 1) How to get MX not to run the domain expander; or better <> 2) How to reconfigure UCX's hosts database so that it uses the FQDN <> as the primary name of the system. <>Please give explicit instructions if you're answering question 2. Thanks. Answer to question 1: You can turn off the domain expander by renaming MX_EXE:DOMAIN_EXPANSION.EXE, deassigning MX_SITE_DOM_EXPANSION and restarting the Router. ========================================================================= | Irv Eisen, Systems Manager Bitnet : EISEN001@DUKEMC | | Cancer Center Internet: IRV@CCSTAT.MC.DUKE.EDU | | Box 3958 | | Duke University Medical Center Voice : (919) 286-7774 | | Durham, NC 27710 Fax : (919) 286-3956 | ========================================================================= ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 15:52:52 CDT Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 13:49:56 PDT From: "Bob Johns, (604)363-6520" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list%wkuvx1.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu Message-ID: <0095F3BC.62C88F40.11986@ccs.ios.bc.ca> Subject: RE: Is there a point to MINE with VMS Mail My users would certainly like a standardized method of exchaning binary files with other users. Hopefully, with time, more and more systems will support X.400, thereby adhering to a formal specification for binary attachments. Since most of my users access Email from their PC's, they naturally want to be able to exchange word processing documents, spreadsheets, and .exe's. VMSmail's "send/foreign" just isn't good enough, partly because it is not supported by Digital (undocumented) and partly because it isn't even compatible with their own Pathworks mail binary attachment capability! So maybe MIME is the way to go. I have picked up the relevant RFC's, so will have a closer look to understand this issue better. As far as PMDF is concerned, it does claim to support MIME. I was curious to find out more about it, so contacted them for info. What I have they sent by FAX, but they also have an Email address ("sales@innosoft.com") in case those asking about it wanted more direct feedback. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Bob Johns | | | Manager, Central Systems & Networks | Internet: bob@ios.bc.ca | | Scientific Computing | | | Institute of Ocean Sciences | Tel : (604)363-6520 | | 9860 West Saanich Rd., Sidney, B.C. | FAX : (604)363-6390 | | Canada V8L 4B2 | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 16:55:12 CDT From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Problem with MX 3.1C and truncated header lines Message-ID: <1992Aug17.154709.6109@dayton.saic.com> Date: 17 Aug 92 15:47:08 EDT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET There seems to be a problem in MX 3.1C where a message that has header lines (and possibly lines in the text) longer than 80 or so characters are truncated. The header lines are correct as the SMTP agent receives them but looking at them in the flq_dir directory, they are truncated. This has caused some problems with other mail systems that don't properly wrap headers. Earle _____________________________________________________________________________ ____ ____ ___ Earle Ake /___ /___/ / / Science Applications International Corporation ____// / / /__ Dayton, Ohio ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet: ake@dayton.saic.com uucp: dayvb!ake NSI-DECnet (SPAN): 28284::ake ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 18:27:33 CDT Subject: Problems with MX SITE/UUCP Processes Message-ID: <1992Aug17.151840.4445@dmc.com> From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 17 Aug 92 19:18:40 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Has anybody seen the MX->UUCP and/or the MX->SITE processes go compute bound and use up 100% of the CPU forever? I've had this happen several times in the last few days (this is the FIRST time it's happened) and the only significant difference to my way of doing business is I've gone to the default queue purge and reclaim times. I installed MX3.1C several weeks ago and haven't had any problems until just the last few days. I've just turned on debugging in the hopes that something will turn up. Is there anything else that I can do to get more information once the problem comes up again? -- Dick Munroe Internet: munroe@dmc.com Doyle Munroe Consultants, Inc. UUCP: ...uunet!thehulk!munroe 267 Cox St. Office: (508) 568-1618 Hudson, Ma. FAX: (508) 562-1133 GET CONNECTED!!! Send mail to info@dmc.com to find out about DMConnection. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 16:37:39 CDT From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: FROM: headers inaccurate Message-ID: <1992Aug18.131555.6111@dayton.saic.com> Date: 18 Aug 92 13:15:55 EDT References: <0095F456.DE2ACF00.3815@CVAX.IPFW.INDIANA.EDU> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <0095F456.DE2ACF00.3815@CVAX.IPFW.INDIANA.EDU>, "Joe Dillon, IU - PU at Fort Wayne, DP Dept." writes: > I need help in solving a mailing problem. We have an IBM bringing in BITnet. > Our VAXCluster accepts IBM's BITnet with Jnet. The VAXCluster also runs > Multinet. We have Novell networks running CC:Mail. CC:Mail's product, > SMTPLINK, is running on a Sun to link VMSMail and CC:Mail. (I liken this to > a triangle with one side open - Novell to IBM) MX has been installed recently > to smoothly link forwarded accounts. At that time Multinet's SMTP server was > disabled. > > The problem: FROM: headers are being stripped on forwarded accounts only if > the account names involved in the forwarding are the same. (i.e. VAX account, > Dillon, is set to forward to CC:Mail account, Dillon. Someone, lets say Bush, > sends mail to VAX account Dillon, CC:Mail account Dillon sees it as coming > from VAX-Dillon, not Bush) > What works is VAX-dummy set to forward to CC:Mail-Dillon, Bush sends same > message in the same way. CC:Mail-Dillon sees it as from Bush and sees > VAX-Dillon was involved too. The problem is the cc:Mail gateway. It is seeing the header that MX added "Reset-From:" and uses that as the "From:" header instead of cheching to see if the "From:" string starts in column 1! We reported this to the cc:Mail folks back when we had 1.2 and they fixed it and gave us a new image. Guess what? When 1.30 came along, the bug was back! They fixed it in beta but it didn't get to the regular release. We just received notice of a beta 2.0 of the gateway. Maybe they finally have it fixed. -Earle _____________________________________________________________________________ ____ ____ ___ Earle Ake /___ /___/ / / Science Applications International Corporation ____// / / /__ Dayton, Ohio ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet: ake@dayton.saic.com uucp: dayvb!ake NSI-DECnet (SPAN): 28284::ake ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 19:55:50 CDT From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Problem with MLF and embedded s Message-ID: <1992Aug18.171614.4448@dmc.com> Date: 18 Aug 92 17:16:13 EDT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I've run into a mailer out there that insists on embedding a carriage return at the end of each line that it send. This blows the SEND functionality for the file servers, e.g., SEND FOO And when the file server tries to parse this for a matching directory, it doesn't work. I have two questions: 1. Is the embedding of the CR reasonable? (I think not, but I'm not THAT conversant with RFC822). 2. Could MX be rigged to filter out control characters in the file server processing? Dick Munroe -- Dick Munroe Internet: munroe@dmc.com Doyle Munroe Consultants, Inc. UUCP: ...uunet!thehulk!munroe 267 Cox St. Office: (508) 568-1618 Hudson, Ma. FAX: (508) 562-1133 GET CONNECTED!!! Send mail to info@dmc.com to find out about DMConnection. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 05:02:55 CDT From: robbie@winkle.bhpese.oz.au Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Default MX transport problem Message-ID: <1992Aug19.175343.250@winkle.bhpese.oz.au> Date: 19 Aug 92 17:53:42 +1000 To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Howdy! I recently saw an article which described a way of setting MX as the default mail transport (namely SET TRANSPORT MX%) which works fine. I can mail to people on my local host and ...whoa... it uses the MX transport. Very nice. However, now when I want to mail to my unix buddies, I get strange behaviour from mail. The following example best describes it. MAIL> SEND To: "russell@cerberus" MAIL> ! Hey, I haven't finished yet... MAIL> ! Let's try something else... MAIL> SEND To: MX%"russell@cerberus" CC: Why can't I leave off the MX% when mailing to a remote host. If I can only use the transport for the local host then I don't think it will be all that useful. We are running MX V3.1C and VMS V5.4-2. aTdHvAaNnKcSe -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Rob Spencer, BHP Information Technology | Sorry, but my .sig Newcastle, Australia Voice: +61 49 40 1673 | is on .sig leave! Bits: robbie@winkle.bhpese.oz.au | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 07:36:11 CDT Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 07:35:37 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095F51A.6CFD9280.7585@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Default MX transport problem robbie@winkle.bhpese.oz.au writes: > >I recently saw an article which described a way of setting MX as the default >mail transport (namely SET TRANSPORT MX%) which works fine. I can mail >to people on my local host and ...whoa... it uses the MX transport. Very >nice. However, now when I want to mail to my unix buddies, I get strange >behaviour from mail. The following example best describes it. > >MAIL> SEND >To: "russell@cerberus" > >MAIL> ! Hey, I haven't finished yet... >MAIL> ! Let's try something else... >MAIL> SEND >To: MX%"russell@cerberus" >CC: > >Why can't I leave off the MX% when mailing to a remote host. If I >can only use the transport for the local host then I don't think it >will be all that useful. > VMS Mail treats anything in quotes as a comment (like a personal name). VMS Mail discards it before handing anything to MX, so you end up with Mail acting like you didn't give an address. You can always apply the "@" patch to Mail, which can be found in the [CONTRIB] directory in MX_ROOT:. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 07:49:27 CDT Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 07:48:54 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: ake@dayton.saic.com Message-ID: <0095F51C.482A2A20.7601@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Problem with MX 3.1C and truncated header lines writes: > > There seems to be a problem in MX 3.1C where a message that has header >lines (and possibly lines in the text) longer than 80 or so characters are >truncated. The header lines are correct as the SMTP agent receives them >but looking at them in the flq_dir directory, they are truncated. This >has caused some problems with other mail systems that don't properly wrap >headers. > Yes, I've found this too. Matt said something once about there being an RFC or part of an RFC that deals with this situation, but he didn't implement it. If I can find it, I'll try to make that a high priority when I start my MX work (most notably because it has affected a couple of my own mailing lists! 8-)). Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 08:42:28 CDT Subject: Does file server accounting exist? Message-ID: <1992Aug20.060334.4450@dmc.com> From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 20 Aug 92 06:03:34 EDT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Is it possible to get accounting information from file/mailing list servers? I can find the the local delivery agent can do accounting, but I'ld really like to keep track of the traffic in and out of the file servers. -- Dick Munroe Internet: munroe@dmc.com Doyle Munroe Consultants, Inc. UUCP: ...uunet!thehulk!munroe 267 Cox St. Office: (508) 568-1618 Hudson, Ma. FAX: (508) 562-1133 GET CONNECTED!!! Send mail to info@dmc.com to find out about DMConnection. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 08:56:32 CDT Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 08:56:00 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: munroe@dmc.com Message-ID: <0095F5EE.D21809A0.7878@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: RE: Does file server accounting exist? writes: > >Is it possible to get accounting information from file/mailing list servers? I >can find the the local delivery agent can do accounting, but I'ld really like >to keep track of the traffic in and out of the file servers. >-- MX should already be keeping a log of all files sent by the file server. You can find it in MX_MLF_DIR:FILESERV_LOG.LOG. If I remember correctly, it's not controlled by an MCP command or a logical, though it probably should be. Incoming files are not tracked, but since every incoming message should generate at least a transaction log, you can get a list of everybody using it. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 03:16:56 CDT From: muneki@kekvax.kek.ac.jp Subject: Re: RE: MAILER Message-ID: Sender: (USENET News System) Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET References: <0095EBAF.6E8E2020.5015@WKUVX1.BITNET> Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 07:54:11 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <0095EBAF.6E8E2020.5015@WKUVX1.BITNET>, goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (Hunter Goatley) writes... >"DAVID L. CUSTER" writes: >> >> Isn't MX supposed to distribute Bitnet mail to intended users whenever it >>is sent to MAILER? Is it a mistake to have our Bitnet server1 tag indicate >>that our node hasa such a service? >> >Only if the message is a BSMTP message. This one was not: > >>Return-Path: <@psuhmed.rcf.hmc.psu.edu:MAILER@PSUSUN1.BITNET> >>Received: from PSUSUN1 (MAILER) by psuhmed.rcf.hmc.psu.edu (MX V3.0) with Jnet; > ^^^^ >Non-BSMTP messages to MAILER are delivered to MAILER. Apparently, >PSUSUN1 does *not* know that PSUHMED has a MAILER installed. Sounds >like the XMAILER.NAMES on PSUSUN1 is out-of-date. > >I have this problem with a number of sites---HARVUNXW has had this >problem for more than a year and repeated attempts to get somebody >there to fix the problem have been fruitless. They don't even bother >to respond. Typical UNIX administrator.... > >Hunter >------ >Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University >goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 08:23:16 CDT Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 08:22:29 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095F6B3.4E1BA060.8106@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: MXSUM bug found and fixed I have found and fixed a bug in MXSUM, an MX [.CONTRIB] program that generates summary reports from the SMTP, LOCAL, and JNET accounting files. MXSUM was written by Harold McKee, a former student who worked for me. The bug was that the total number of files sent was maintained in a byte---which wasn't big enough for large numbers of messages. I changed the byte to a longword and cleaned up the code a little bit. You can get the latest version of MXSUM via anonymous ftp from ftp.spc.edu; you'll need [.MX.CONTRIB]MXSUM.VMS_SHARE. You can also get MXSUM via e-mail by sending the command SEND MXSUM in the body of a mail message to FILESERV@WKUVX1.BITNET. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 18:20:47 CDT Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 18:16:41 CDT From: Larry Horn Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: Info-VAX@CRVAX.SRI.COM CC: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095F961.CF8C2560.3591@okra.millsaps.edu> Subject: setting up news at mixed Ultrix/VMS site I'd like to get news set up at our site. SURAnet can provide a feed. We have an Ultrix (V4.2) station and a VAXcluster (V5.5-1) on our Ethernet. We're using UCX 1.3 and MX 3.1C as TCP/IP and mail software on the VAXen. Do any of you have suggestions / cautions about news packages for this setup? I'm basicly the only Ultrix user (so far). Everyone else lives on the VAXcluster. For example, should I set up news on the Ultrix RISC workstation and just have readers on the VAXen? I'm partial to playing with the workstation, but I suppose ease of installation and use is more important. Thanks, ---------------------------------------- composed: 24-AUG-1992 18:16 C*T ----- Larry Olin Horn / Systems Manager / Voice: (601) 974-1142, Fax: (601) 974-1168 Millsaps College / Computer Services / 1701 N State St / Jackson, MS 39202 USA Internet: hornlo@okra.millsaps.edu (VMS) / hornlo@uw1301.millsaps.edu (Ultrix) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 02:48:47 CDT Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 09:36+0000 Message-ID: <6222360925081992/A07855/RHEA/1168CA633200*> From: Robert Heinze Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: INFO-VAX , mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET, allin-1@SBCCVM.BITNET Subject: X.400 accounting for MRX400 Is anybody aware of any software for analysing DEC's MRX400 logfiles and producing summary reports of users etc. ? Plaese reply directly. I am not on all lists. Robert Heinze heinze@maschinenwesen.fh-kiel.dbp.de Fachhochschule Kiel C=de;A=dbp;P=fh-kiel;OU=maschinenwesen;S=heinze 2300 Kiel Germany ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 10:55:20 CDT Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 10:52:17 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095F9EC.E4F75420.8755@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: X.25 problem in Germany.... Ralph Kloess from Germany called me about a problem he's having with X.25. Having never worked with X.25, he faxed me the (hopefully) relevant config stuff, which I've included below. If anybody can offer assistance, please post it to the list---Ralph can read the list, but can't post to it. FYI, Ralph's phone number is 49-69-27305-165 and his FAX number is 46-69-27305-179. Thanks! Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 From CONFIG.MCP: DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<{u}@{h}.fra.cnca>" "<{u}@{h}>" DEFINE REWRITE_RULE - "<{u}@{h}.psi.cnca>" "<""psi%{h}::{u}""@glory>" DEFINE PATH "GLORY" Local DEFINE PATH "*.FRA.CNCA" DECnet_SMTP DEFINE PATH "*.INCAS.CNCA" x25_smtp/route=glory DEFINE PATH "*.DNET.CNCA" LOCAL DEFINE PATH "*.PSI.CNCA" LOCAL DEFINE PATH "*" DECNET_SMTP [the rest is just defining the retries, etc.] Relevant stuff from MX_XSMTP_LOG.LOG: Processing queue entry number 2657 on node GLORY Recipient: , route=GLORY SMTP_SEND: destination host name is GLORY SMTP_SEND: connecting to GLORY SMTP_SEND: IO$_ACCESS failed 0144, 0000 SMTP send failed, sts=00000144, sts2=00000000 Recipient status=00000144 for Entry now completely processed, no retries needed. A mail message is returned stating: SYSTEM-F-IVDEVNAM, invalid device name ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 12:42:51 CDT Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 12:27:45 CDT From: Larry Horn Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: hornlo@okra.millsaps.edu Message-ID: <0095F9FA.3AFBABC0.4072@okra.millsaps.edu> Subject: MX implementation of mailing lists I've set up a few local mailing lists. Using the /REPLY_TO qualifier with a single item (SENDER or LIST) works fine. If I issue a VAXmail REPLY command, the right thing gets stuffed into the VAXmail "To: " line, then I'm prompted for CC:, Subject: is filled in, etc. If /REPLY_TO=(LIST,SENDER), only the list name goes onto the "To:" line. The "Reply-To:" header within the body of the message is OK, but of course VAXmail pays no attention to it. I know that by the time I REPLY within VAXmail, MX has no control over what happens, but would it be possible for MX to stuff BOTH addresses into the VAXmail "From:" header, or would that break something? In other words, I'd like to see, when I read a message from a list with (LIST,SENDER), From: MX%"list@here",MX%"sender@here" To: me Subj: xxxx body so than when I REPLY To: MX%"list@here",MX%"sender@here" CC: Subj: RE: xxxx ... Sorry if this is too off the wall.... ---------------------------------------- composed: 25-AUG-1992 12:26 C*T ----- Larry Olin Horn / Systems Manager / Voice: (601) 974-1142, Fax: (601) 974-1168 Millsaps College / Computer Services / 1701 N State St / Jackson, MS 39202 USA Internet: hornlo@okra.millsaps.edu (VMS) / hornlo@uw1301.millsaps.edu (Ultrix) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:17:48 CDT Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:13:56 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095FA00.AE4FD820.8801@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: X25 problem solved Ralph Kloess got back to me a minute ago and said they fixed their X.25 problem. Basically, the X.25 server was incorrectly configured, and their path should have use the logical name of the system as defined in the PSI logical name table. He's going to write up additional (better?) instructions for configuring X.25 and I'll incorporate those in the next MX, whenever that'll be. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:27:26 CDT Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 19:14 GMT From: "Joe Desbonnet, UCG Ireland." Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Question about MX's capabilities To: mx-list@RPIECSVX.BITNET Message-ID: <01GO0CRDBF9C8WXESG@bodkin.ucg.ie> Can someone tell me if MX would be useful to me in this situation: I am looking for an alternative to PMDF for email. My local VAX must initiate all connections to the remote VAX which is the mail gateway. The connection is a via a commercial X25 network and the people at the remote node do not want to clock up any network costs delivering mail to me. The remote VAX is runing a recent version of PMDF. I know both PMDF and MX support SMTP over X25 so I guess it should be possible for both packages to communicate with each other without any problems (?) but can MX be configured so that all email transactions occur without the remote computer initiating connections? Thanks, Joe. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 14:30:41 CDT Sender: simon@shrsys.hslc.org Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 15:21:49 EDT From: Alan Simon Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-LIST@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095FA12.8BCFE260.18888@shrsys.hslc.org> Subject: Problem with Receiving Mail I am having problems receiving mail on my system. I am running MX3.1B, Multinet 3.0, and VMS 5.4-2. My domain is HSLC.ORG. The primary name server is called SHRSYS.HSLC.ORG. There is a secondary name server called SYSMGR.HSLC.ORG. Currently, users can receive mail at USER@SHRSYS.HSLC.ORG. In an attempt to shorten the address to USER@HSLC.ORG, I added the following MX record to both name servers: HSLC.ORG. IN MX 10 SHRSYS.HSLC.ORG. I then added the following path in MCP (yes, before the Domain="*", Path=SMTP): Domain="hslc.org", Path=Local Some internet sites are now able to send to USER@HSLC.ORG, while others get messages such as ILLEGAL HOST/DOMAIN NAME FOUND, although sending to USER@SHRSYS.HSLC.ORG still works just fine. Some sites can send to USER@HSLC.ORG one day and not the next. This has been a problem for several weeks now, long enough to update name server caches. Can anyone tell me what I missed? Thanks for the help. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alan Simon simon@shrsys.hslc.org Associate Director VOICE: (215) 222-1532 Health Sciences Libraries Consortium FAX: (215) 222-0416 3600 Market Street, Suite 550 Philadelphia, PA 19104 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 17:54:28 CDT Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 15:42:52 PDT From: "John F. Sandhoff" Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: simon@shrsys.hslc.org, syssand@CCVAX.CCS.CSUS.EDU Message-ID: <0095FA15.7CBB61C0.12640@CCVAX.CCS.CSUS.EDU> Subject: RE: Problem with Receiving Mail > I am having problems receiving mail on my system... > In an attempt to shorten the address to USER@HSLC.ORG, I added the following > MX record to both name servers: > > HSLC.ORG. IN MX 10 SHRSYS.HSLC.ORG. > > Some internet sites are now able to send to USER@HSLC.ORG, while others get > messages such as ILLEGAL HOST/DOMAIN NAME FOUND, although sending to > USER@SHRSYS.HSLC.ORG still works just fine. Though I'm not familiar with the specifics, as I understand it some mailers demand that a destination address have an 'A' record available. They don't use it if there's also an MX record, but they still demand an 'A' record. Yeah, seems silly to me too... I've read explanations as to why the necessity of an 'A' record is "correct" but don't remember offhand. Anyways, that *may* be why other mailers are choking. They want to see an 'A' record for HSLC.ORG. John F. Sandhoff, University Network Support California State University, Sacramento - USA sandhoff@csus.edu ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 18:23:04 CDT Subject: Re: X.25 problem in Germany.... Message-ID: <1992Aug26.093758.1@matai.vuw.ac.nz> From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 21:37:58 GMT Sender: (USENET News System) References: <0095F9EC.E4F75420.8755@WKUVX1.BITNET> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <0095F9EC.E4F75420.8755@WKUVX1.BITNET>, Hunter Goatley writes: [Stuff deleted] > > Relevant stuff from MX_XSMTP_LOG.LOG: > > Processing queue entry number 2657 on node GLORY > Recipient: , route=GLORY > SMTP_SEND: destination host name is GLORY > SMTP_SEND: connecting to GLORY ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I think the problem is here. If it working correctly then it should actually give the PSI number when is says "connecting to ...". Is GLORY defined in the PSI$DTE_TABLE? > SMTP_SEND: IO$_ACCESS failed 0144, 0000 > SMTP send failed, sts=00000144, sts2=00000000 > Recipient status=00000144 for > Entry now completely processed, no retries needed. > > A mail message is returned stating: SYSTEM-F-IVDEVNAM, invalid device name -- Andrew Greer, VAX/VMS Systems Programmer -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Computing Services Centre | Domain: Andrew.Greer@vuw.ac.nz Victoria University | Phone: +64 4 495-5048 P.O. Box 600 | Fax: +64 4 471-5386 Wellington, New Zealand | ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:56:52 CDT From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Problem sending mail with two periods in username Message-ID: <1992Aug25.221538.6118@dayton.saic.com> Date: 25 Aug 92 22:15:37 EDT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I had a little problem sending a message to the username larry.e..files@f117.n207.z1.fidonet.org. It seems MX doesn't like the two periods in a row in the username part of the address. This is MX 3.1C, VMS 5.4-2, using MultiNet 3.1B. From: MX%"Postmaster@Dayton.SAIC.COM" 25-AUG-1992 22:00:52.54 To: AKE CC: Subj: Message routing error Note: this message was generated automatically. Problem occurred during message routing for the following: Address: (originally: ) Error: Invalid address. Message follows. Received: by Dayton.SAIC.COM (MX V3.1C) id 8295; Tue, 25 Aug 1992 21:56:50 EDT Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 21:56:48 EDT From: Earle Ake X-MX-Warning: Warning -- Invalid "To" header. To: larry.e..files@f117.n207.z1.fidonet.org Message-ID: <0095FA49.B9F5FB2A.8295@Dayton.SAIC.COM> Here is the router debug. 25-AUG-1992 22:09:21.28 %PROCESS, Processing entry number 8301 25-AUG-1992 22:09:21.48 %PROCESS, Status from READ_INFO was 00000001 25-AUG-1992 22:09:21.48 %PROCESS, Message originated in VMS Mail. 25-AUG-1992 22:09:21.55 %PROCESS, will run domain expander on envelope addresses. 25-AUG-1992 22:09:21.55 %PROCESS, will run domain expander on message headers. 25-AUG-1992 22:09:22.67 %PROCESS, Finished VMSmail-origin preprocessing. 25-AUG-1992 22:09:22.67 %PROCESS, Recipient #0: 25-AUG-1992 22:09:22.67 %PROCESS, Invalid address: 25-AUG-1992 22:09:22.67 %PROCESS, Beginning ERRORQ processing. 25-AUG-1992 22:09:24.25 %PROCESS, RETURN_MESSAGE status was 00000001 25-AUG-1992 22:09:24.26 %PROCESS, Marking this entry as finished. -Earle ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:47:25 CDT Date: 26 Aug 1992 08:24:28 +0100 (MET) From: SYSTEM@CNUCE.CNR.IT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Re: Question about MX's capabilities To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <01GO143RJ2AU000ADG@ICNUCEVX.CNUCE.CNR.IT> I don't know MX capabilities, but I think that SMTP doesn't permit to open connection to get mail from a remote site. I'm not sure. Is a protocol limitation? I have solved similar problems, very well, by Phonenet over X.25 (Phonent is a PMDF Transport mechanism). With this solution you will have also useful accounting information about messages transfer. Francesco Gennai ---------- ---------- Francesco Gennai Email: francesco.gennai@cnuce.cnr.it CNUCE - ISTITUTO DEL CNR Tel: +39 (50) 593274 Via S. Maria, 36 Telex: 500371 CNUCE I 56126 PISA ITALY FAX: +39 (50) 589354 ---------- ---------- ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 09:09:32 CDT Subject: MX install heterogenous cluster/shared mail database Message-ID: <1992Aug26.094330.41@dymaxion.ns.ca> From: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 26 Aug 92 09:43:29 AST To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I'm not quite sure how to set up MX on our clustered site of two nodes. It's a heterogenous site with SYS$SYSDEVICE: pointing to two separate disks but it uses a shared mail database. I only have TCP/IP on the first node. I find the installation documentation rather skimpy. For one thing, the only clustered installation example in the v3.0 manual is for a homogenous site. Furthermore, the manual talks about what choices you have at each question, but does not explain how to make those choices. In particular, I'm not quite sure which delivery agents need to run on which nodes. Here are my best guesses: - install MX only on the first node (DYMA) - Select: Base MX software, NETLIB, SMTP, SMTP-over-DECnet, and Documentation - MX Cluster Name = DYMA - MX network node name = dymaxion.ns.ca - TCP/IP = UCX V1.3 - all MX directories go on DYM$DISK:[MX...] for DYMA - DYM$DISK: points to the same disk on each system, unlike SYS$SYSDEVICE: - local delivery agent runs on both DYMA and DYME (the other node) - is this correct, even though the two nodes share the same mail database? - SMTP delivery agent runs on DYMA only - SMTP-over-DECnet delivery agent runs on both DYMA and DYME - Create SMTP-over-DECnet server object - Modify all PATH definitions to use SMTP-over-DECnet instead of SMTP except the path for dymaxion.ns.ca remains Local Is this correct? --- Ben Armstrong, Software Development bus: (902)422-1973 Dymaxion Research Ltd., fax: (902)421-1267 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1R2 Internet: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 09:11:04 CDT Subject: Re: MX install heterogenous cluster/shared mail database Message-ID: <1992Aug26.094958.42@dymaxion.ns.ca> From: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 26 Aug 92 09:49:57 AST References: <1992Aug26.094330.41@dymaxion.ns.ca> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1992Aug26.094330.41@dymaxion.ns.ca>, I wrote: > I'm not quite sure how to set up MX on our clustered site of two nodes. I forgot to add one point: - do I run the router on both nodes (DYMA and DYME)? - if I do this, do I then set up different PATH definitions by running MCP on both nodes? - i.e. on DYMA (the node with TCP/IP) all outgoing paths use SMTP while on DYME all outgoing paths use SMTP-over-DECnet? Ben. --- Ben Armstrong, Software Development bus: (902)422-1973 Dymaxion Research Ltd., fax: (902)421-1267 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1R2 Internet: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 09:38:33 CDT Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 10:32:07 EDT From: Mighty Firebreather Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095FAB3.3E039580.10737@nscvax.princeton.edu> Subject: RE: Problem sending mail with two periods in username Earle Ake writes: > > I had a little problem sending a message to the username >larry.e..files@f117.n207.z1.fidonet.org. It seems MX doesn't like the two >periods in a row in the username part of the address. This is MX 3.1C, VMS >5.4-2, using MultiNet 3.1B. > > I had this problem with an early version of CMU-TEK. This version took "Richard B. Gilbert" from the owner field of the UAF and converted it to "Richard.B..Gilbert" causing various peoples mailers to barf. The solution, in my case, was to remove the periods from the owner field of the UAF. I was told at the time that two consecutive periods in the address violated the requirements of one of the RFCs; I don't remember which one. I'd say that MX is probably right and larry.e..files is wrong. ************************************************************************* * * * Here, there be dragons! * * dragon@nscvax.princeton.edu * * * * Richard B. Gilbert * ************************************************************************* ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 10:16:09 CDT Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 10:26:30 EDT From: Stan Quayle Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095FAB2.755F72C0.20881@engclu.doh.square-d.com> Subject: RE: MX install heterogenous cluster/shared mail database If your systems share the same mail database, you only need one delivery agent. If your systems *don't* share the same mail database, you can still get away with only one agent, with proper use of rewrite rules (but it's lot more complicated). Why are you running SMTP-over-DECnet? You don't need that for delivery between the 2 VAXen. Your configuration should look like: DYMA Base MX software, NETLIB, SMTP (UCX 1.3), Documentation Network node name = dymaxion.ns.ca All MX processes run on DYMA DYME Runs the MX startup script (which doesn't start any processes) If you want users on the 2 systems to have distinct addresses (dyma.dymaxion.. and dyme.dymaxion...) then you'll have some work to do with logical names and rewrite rules. But I wouldn't recommend it (that's what we're doing here--our systems do not share the mail database). ----------------- Stan Quayle N8SQ +1 614 764-4212 Internet: quayle@engclu.doh.square-d.com UUCP: osu-cis!squared!quayle Square-D Company, 5160 Blazer Parkway, Dublin, OH 43017 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 11:48:11 CDT Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 11:30 CST From: "H.A. Kippenhan Jr." Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Lost MAIL.TXT files To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Some time back I posted a query about lost MAIL.TXT files on a system where MX was running along with TGV MultiNet, and Joiner's JNET product. The list readership offered a number of possible sources of the problem, but no real resolution (other than doing frequent ANALYZE/REPAIR's). I just received this from the people here on site who make source kits, patches, etc. available to system administrators. I don't have access to DSNlink, so I can't provide any more details about the patch than what appears below. I hope that those of you who were kind enough to reply to my original post about this problem find it of some interest. CSCPAT_1041011 MAIL_SERVER's code assumes that nothing's going to go wrong between the time it creates the temporary MAIL.TXT file and the time it delivers that mail and subsequently deletes the temporary file. This is, of course, a bad assumption. If, for any reason, the mail message delivery is aborted, MAIL_SERVER will neglect to delete the MAIL.TXT file it created, leaving a lost (not pointed to by any directory) file on the disk. This patch may only be installed on VMS Version(s) 5.4 through 5.5-1. Best regards. - Kipp - {~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~} { H.A. Kippenhan Jr. | Internet: Kippenhan@FNDCD.FNAL.GOV } { Fermi National Accelerator Lab. | HEPnet/NSI DECnet: FNDCD::KIPPENHAN } { P.O. Box 500 MS: WH-6W/234 | BITnet: Kippenhan@FNDCD.BITNET } { Batavia, Illinois 60510 | Telephone: (708) 840-8068 } {~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~} ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 12:53:51 CDT Subject: Re: X25 problem solved Message-ID: <1992Aug26.155641.13544@infodev.cam.ac.uk> From: Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 15:56:41 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Sender: (USENET news) References: <0095FA00.AE4FD820.8801@WKUVX1.BITNET> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <0095FA00.AE4FD820.8801@WKUVX1.BITNET>, goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (Hunter Goatley) writes: |> Ralph Kloess got back to me a minute ago and said they fixed their |> X.25 problem. Basically, the X.25 server was incorrectly configured, |> and their path should have use the logical name of the system as |> defined in the PSI logical name table. |> |> He's going to write up additional (better?) instructions for |> configuring X.25 and I'll incorporate those in the next MX, whenever |> that'll be. If there's going to be significant delay, why not post it to the list? The existing instructions were so terse that I gave up (not actually _requiring_ the facility...). -- Robin (dump Brian Kay) Fairbairns, using the facilities of the U of Cambridge Computer Lab, for which permission is gratefully acknowledged. [Well - I'm about to sign off with the Dept of Unemployment... :-)] ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 12:54:03 CDT Subject: Re: Question about MX's capabilities Message-ID: <1992Aug26.155444.13481@infodev.cam.ac.uk> From: Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 15:54:44 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Sender: (USENET news) References: <01GO0CRDBF9C8WXESG@bodkin.ucg.ie> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <01GO0CRDBF9C8WXESG@bodkin.ucg.ie>, PHYDESBONNET@bodkin.ucg.ie (Joe Desbonnet, UCG Ireland.) writes: |> Can someone tell me if MX would be useful to me in this situation: |> |> I am looking for an alternative to PMDF for email. My local VAX must initiate |> all connections to the remote VAX which is the mail gateway. The connection is |> a via a commercial X25 network and the people at the remote node do not want |> to clock up any network costs delivering mail to me. The remote VAX is runing |> a recent version of PMDF. I know both PMDF and MX support SMTP over X25 so I |> guess it should be possible for both packages to communicate with each |> other without any problems (?) but can MX be configured so that all email |> transactions occur without the remote computer initiating connections? If your X25 connection permits reverse charging (and if PMDF is capable of asserting it) you could absorb all the call costs that way. Not, you understand, that I managed to get the X25-smtp working myself (not my job any more :-( ). -- Robin (dump Brian Kay) Fairbairns, using the facilities of the U of Cambridge Computer Lab, for which permission is gratefully acknowledged. [Well - I'm about to sign off with the Dept of Unemployment... :-)] ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 13:07:07 CDT Sender: goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 13:04:21 EDT From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095FAC8.828BF020.9140@WKUVX1.BITNET> Subject: Re: X25 problem solved writes: > >goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET (Hunter Goatley) writes: >|> Ralph Kloess got back to me a minute ago and said they fixed their [...] >|> He's going to write up additional (better?) instructions for >|> configuring X.25 and I'll incorporate those in the next MX, whenever >|> that'll be. > >If there's going to be significant delay, why not post it to the list? >The existing instructions were so terse that I gave up (not actually >_requiring_ the facility...). I'll post it as soon as I get them from Ralph. He's going to have to find somebody else to mail them to me, as he can't send mail to Internet or BITNET addresses. I'll keep you posted---so to speak. >Robin (dump Brian Kay) Fairbairns, using the facilities of the U of >Cambridge Computer Lab, for which permission is gratefully acknowledged. >[Well - I'm about to sign off with the Dept of Unemployment... :-)] Great! Congratulations! Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 14:48:20 CDT Sender: naresh@cffls.mm.uky.edu Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 15:36:15 EDT From: naresh@LOCALHOST Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: mx-list@WKUVX1.BITNET Message-ID: <0095FADD.BA6E6080.31@cffls.mm.uky.edu> Subject: minor problems -from 2.0 to3.1 Hi, I just upgraded from v2.0 to v3.1c of MX. Everything seems to be working ok except two minor problems. I am sure they are addressed to in the documentation but I have to print out and read. Meanwhile, if any one knows the quick fix, I shall appreciate receiving it. (1) My return address shows up as username@LOCALHOST and so the person receiving mail can not reply to it easily. (2) in v2.0, I had a sig file which I used to append to the message using "/sig" at the end of the message. It does not seem to work. I shall try to reproduce both problems in this message. Please let me know the answers. Thanks. /sig ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 17:11:39 CDT From: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: Solved MX install heterogenous cluster Message-ID: <1992Aug26.152756.43@dymaxion.ns.ca> Date: 26 Aug 92 15:27:54 AST References: <0095FAB2.755F72C0.20881@engclu.doh.square-d.com> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <0095FAB2.755F72C0.20881@engclu.doh.square-d.com>, QUAYLE@engclu.doh.square-d.com (Stan Quayle) writes: > If your systems share the same mail database, you only need one delivery agent. > If your systems *don't* share the same mail database, you can still get away > with only one agent, with proper use of rewrite rules (but it's lot more > complicated). > > Why are you running SMTP-over-DECnet? You don't need that for delivery between > the 2 VAXen. > > Your configuration should look like: > > DYMA Base MX software, NETLIB, SMTP (UCX 1.3), Documentation > Network node name = dymaxion.ns.ca > All MX processes run on DYMA > > DYME Runs the MX startup script (which doesn't start any processes) > Thanks. This is, in fact, exactly what Matt Madison suggested. As soon as I figure out whether I can make do with the few global sections we have left or whether I need to wait till the weekend to do an AUTOGEN to get some more, I'll be able to see if the whole thing works. Ben. --- Ben Armstrong, Software Development bus: (902)422-1973 Dymaxion Research Ltd., fax: (902)421-1267 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1R2 Internet: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 10:04:20 CDT From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Subject: MX 3.1c and UCX 2.0 - Do they work? Message-ID: <1992Aug27.141711.9810@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> Sender: news@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 14:17:11 GMT To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hullo all, Just got ahold of UCX 2.0. However, I haven't installed it yet. Among other things, I'm wondering if MX 3.1c will work properly with UCX 2.0. At the moment, I'm running MX 3.0 (and some revision letter I can't recall right now), and UCX 1.3a. I figure that if this does work out, I'll upgrade UCX and MX in one swell foop. :-) So, does anyone have any first-hand experience on MX 3.1c and UCX 2.0? Thanks! --- Jim Gaynor | "Man-of-Many-Beeping-Sounds-and-Flashing-Lights" - KAJ OSU/ACS/FMS/OCES | or ObDiscl: Everything stated here and above is _my_ opinion. Mine mine mine! ObQuote: "Every devil I meet becomes a friend of mine." - Indigo Girls ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 11:44:31 CDT Subject: Non-Internet hostname aliasing Message-ID: <1992Aug27.103843.46@dymaxion.ns.ca> From: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 27 Aug 92 10:38:42 AST To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET How do I define mail/telnet/ftp aliases for Internet and non-Internet host names? I have tried UCX SET HOST, which works fine for Internet addresses, but what about non-Internet addresses, like user%foo@foobar.bar or user@foo.BITNET? I can't do: UCX SET HOST "%foo@foobar.bar"/address=?.?.?.?/alias="foo" or UCX SET HOST "foo.BITNET"/address=?.?.?.?/alias="foobar" because neither of these hostnames map to actual Internet addresses. I tried omitting "/address" but it didn't work. Do I fake the Internet address by just making it the address of the router node (e.g. the address of foobar.bar in the first case and the BITNET gateway address in the second case)? Will UCX SET HOST even accept my first example, or does it choke on the percent-hack? I realize that for non-Internet nodes I'm not going to be able to do an ftp or telnet anyway, but I want a single approach to hostname aliasing which I can use for mail, ftp, and telnet for all addresses. I could always fall back to using MX to do the aliasing, but my first choice would be to have UCX handle everything so I only have to change things in one place. Ben. --- Ben Armstrong, Software Development bus: (902)422-1973 Dymaxion Research Ltd., fax: (902)421-1267 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1R2 Internet: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 20:45:21 CDT Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 21:35:49 EDT From: gadsden@MUSC.BITNET Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: gadsden@MUSC.BITNET Message-ID: <0095FBD9.2037F1A0.25854@lp.musc.edu> Subject: Need Help Setting Up MLF We are running MX 3.1C on a standalone VAX with JNET and TGV Multinet; we've been using MX's routing features quite happily for over a year, but now we're trying to set up a mailing list for the first time. I must be doing something incredibly dumb, because I just can't get things to work. Here are the commands I've used to set up a test list: DEFINE LIST "MYTEST" - /OWNER=("gadsden@lp.musc.edu")- /NOMODERATOR- /REPLY_TO=(LIST,SENDER)- /ARCHIVE=USER2:[GADSDEN.MXTESTL] - /NOADD_MESSAGE - /NOREMOVE_MESSAGE - /NOFORWARD_MESSAGE - /DESCRIPTION="Test List" - /ERRORS_TO="gadsden@lp.musc.edu" - /PROTECTION=(SYSTEM:RWED,OWNER:RWED,GROUP:RWED,WORLD:WE) Once the MYTEST list is defined, a test user has no problem using mail to MX's LISTSERV address to subscribe, review, signoff, etc. However, any mail sent to the MYTEST-REQUEST address bounces (MX tries to deliver it through the LOCAL interface rather than passing it to MLF). Likewise, any mail the test user sends to the MYTEST address bounces. It doesn't seem to matter if the test user's mail to MYTEST-REQUEST or MYTEST originates in VMS Mail on the VAX, or arrives via smtp. It gets bounced either way. What in the world am I doing wrong?!? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Richard Gadsden Internet: gadsden@musc.edu Academic Systems Manager BITNET: GADSDEN@MUSC Medical University of South Carolina Voice: 803/792-8307 Charleston, SC, USA Fax: 803/792-8319 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 09:02:29 CDT Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 09:57:45 EDT From: gadsden@MUSC.BITNET Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET CC: gadsden@MUSC.BITNET Message-ID: <0095FC40.C5AC5600.26054@lp.musc.edu> Subject: RE: Need Help Setting Up MLF >We are running MX 3.1C on a standalone VAX with JNET and TGV Multinet; we've >been using MX's routing features quite happily for over a year, but now we're >trying to set up a mailing list for the first time. I must be doing something >incredibly dumb, because I just can't get things to work.... Many thanks to Earle Ake (ake@DAYVC.Dayton.SAIC.COM), who suggested shutting down and restarting the router process. Apparently a bug in 3.1C prevents the router from re-reading the config file when a RESET is issued to it. Once I had shut down and restarted MX, the list started working. Thanks, Earle! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Richard Gadsden Internet: gadsden@musc.edu Academic Systems Manager BITNET: GADSDEN@MUSC Medical University of South Carolina Voice: 803/792-8307 Charleston, SC, USA Fax: 803/792-8319 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 09:41:26 CDT Subject: Re: MX 3.1c and UCX 2.0 - Do they work? Message-ID: <1992Aug28.132102.28832@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> From: Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 13:21:02 GMT Sender: (USENET News System) References: <1992Aug27.141711.9810@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In <1992Aug27.141711.9810@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> GAYNOR@agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu writes: [...] # So, does anyone have any first-hand experience on MX 3.1c and UCX 2.0? # # Thanks! I have UCX 2.0 (the distribution version now - not any more the field test) here, and it works without any problems with MX 3.1c. I had just to disable the UCX SMTP service and it worked... no problems at all. I had much more problems migrating from UCX 2.0 FT to the final version :-( Greetings, Bernd Onasch ,-----------------------------------------------------------------------------. |Bernd Onasch _,---._ One half of mine is human [Spock]| |Informatik Rechnerabteilung [IRA] / \__,--.I'll never understand humans| |University of Karlsruhe __,--/ \ \ No, I'm from Iowa - I only| |Germany (FRG) / | Uranus | / work in outer space [Kirk]| | ONASCH@ira.uka.de \ \ ____/----' Hello computer ?!? [Scott]| | PSI%45050365300::ONASCH `_____\---' / There shall be no peace...as long| | CCC_ONAS@DULRUU51.BITNET `-___-' as Kirk lives [Klingon Ambassador]| `-----------------------------------------------------------------------------' ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 00:30:01 CDT Subject: Reply/From conversion? Message-ID: <1992Aug28.141010.1@aloha.pas.ti.com> From: cooper@aloha.pas.ti.com Date: 28 Aug 92 14:10:10 EDT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Hi there, We have just installed MX3.1, and have gotten some pretty good results with incoming mail. But, outgoing mail still has problems with Reply-To's. Here's the configuration: We have a feed from the outside world that sends any mail with the .pas.ti.com domain to a local VAX (called lanai) running MX using the SMTP protocol. This node will probably be the only node that talks SMTP (the rest of them will expect VAXmail.) Lanai takes that incoming mail, and runs it through the following rewrite rule: Rewrite "<{user}@{host}.pas.ti.com>" => "<{user}%{host}@lanai.pas.ti.com>" Our path looks like this: Domain-to-path mappings: Domain="lanai.pas.ti.com", Path=Local Domain="lanai", Path=Local Domain="*.pas.ti.com", Path=Local Domain="*", Path=SMTP We have no aliases (aliasi? ;^) defined, but we do have automatic percent-hack enabled. Incoming mail works just fine. We can receive mail with no problem, and the above method seems to work faster in processing than having multiple rewrite rules and specifying .dnet as the local domain. Here's the problem (Judging from the rest of the posts, this is not new): When I send mail out, the recipient get the famous From: line: From: <"aloha::cooper"@lanai.pas.ti.com> Now, we have looked at the two contribution sources for NAME_CONVERSION, and DOMAIN_EXPANSION. (BLISS is not our forte.) But, it looks we would have to have a name_conversion and a domain expansion to modify the username, and the local host name. What we would like to have is the above From: address to be converted to From: Does anybody have the same situation, and have written a name_conversion/ domain_expansion routine(s) to do the above? We only have had a few days exposure to this great package, and we would like to use it more. Email or post at your leisure. -- -- Thaddeus O. Cooper (cooper@aloha.pas.ti.com) ---------------------------+---------------------------------------------------- Texas Instruments |Disclaimer: Datclaimer, Deeudderclaimer Process Automation Systems |Right now it's only a notion, but I think I can get 410 - 785 - 6431 |money to make it into a concept, and then later |turn it into an idea. (Lacey Party Guest-Annie Hall) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 02:28:32 CDT Subject: Re: Reply/From conversion? Message-ID: <1992Aug29.004922.21996@news.arc.nasa.gov> From: Date: 29 Aug 92 00:49:22 GMT Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Sender: usenet@news.arc.nasa.gov References: <1992Aug28.141010.1@aloha.pas.ti.com> To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET In article <1992Aug28.141010.1@aloha.pas.ti.com>, cooper@aloha.pas.ti.com writes: >Here's the problem (Judging from the rest of the posts, this is not new): >When I send mail out, the recipient get the famous From: line: > >From: <"aloha::cooper"@lanai.pas.ti.com> > >Now, we have looked at the two contribution sources for NAME_CONVERSION, >and DOMAIN_EXPANSION. (BLISS is not our forte.) But, it looks we would >have to have a name_conversion and a domain expansion to modify the >username, and the local host name. > >What we would like to have is the above From: address to be converted to > >From: > >Does anybody have the same situation, and have written a name_conversion/ >domain_expansion routine(s) to do the above? If you have MX V3.1C (the absolutely latest version), you should find that the name_conversion interface has been updated to allow this kind of rewrite to occur. The example source was updated to reflect the change (basically, you add a routine called FULL_CONVERT to your name_conversion module); I'm not sure if Earle Ake's contributed name_conversion code (which is in C, incidentally) got updated in time for the release. I believe I also updated the programmer's reference manual. -Matt -- Matthew Madison | madison@tgv.com | +1 408 427 4366 TGV, Inc. | 603 Mission Street | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 15:58:10 CDT From: meadows@cslvax.weeg.uiowa.edu Subject: Mailing List HELP Message-ID: <1992Aug31.195824.27446@news.weeg.uiowa.edu> Date: 31 Aug 92 19:58:24 GMT Sender: (News) Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET OK, I've been using MX for over a year now & love it. Now I've just had an opportunity to start using the Mailing List stuff & I'm having some small problems. Here's info about the list from MCP: Name: HTM-List Owner: "meadows@CSLVAX.WEEG.UIOWA.EDU" Reply-to: List, Sender Archive: $2$DKA200:[MX.MX031.ML_ARCHIVES] Add message: MX_MLIST_DIR:HTM-LIST_ADD_MESSAGE.TXT Remove message: MX_MLIST_DIR:HTM-LIST_REMOVE_MESSAGE.TXT Forwarded-to-owner message: MX_MLIST_DIR:HTM-LIST_FORWARD_MESSAGE.TXT Description: Test Mailing List on CSLVAX Errors-to: meadows@cslvax.weeg.uiowa.edu Protection: (SYSTEM:RWED,OWNER:RWED,GROUP:RWD,WORLD) The list gets set up fine & I (as the owner) can ADD, REMOVE, REVIEW, etc. just fine to HTM-List-Request. When a user sends a message to HTM-List-Request, to SUBSCRIBE, it sends a mesage to me telling me he wants to subscribe (good). After I ADD them, they indeed can see messages posted to the Mailing List. The problem is they never get any add message. When they send a request for HELP, they never get the HELP file, when they ask for REVIEW, they never get a list of members, when they are REMOVED, they never get the remove message, and they never get the forward message either. In each case, the log file makes it look like all is OK, but the user never sees anything. An example is this log file from an instance where the user sent a HELP request to HTM-List-Request: 31-AUG-1992 11:49:20.83 Processing queue entry number 1914 31-AUG-1992 11:49:21.46 Checking local name: HTM-List-Request 31-AUG-1992 11:49:21.46 This is a list control address. 31-AUG-1992 11:49:21.59 LIST_CTRL_REQ: Message is from: vwcnon@vaxa.weeg.uiow a.edu 31-AUG-1992 11:49:21.82 LIST_CTRL_REQ: command is: HELP 31-AUG-1992 11:49:21.99 MLIST_SEND_HELP: Sending reply to: Weeg Test Account 31-AUG-1992 11:49:23.84 MLIST_SEND_HELP: Sent. 31-AUG-1992 11:49:23.93 All done with this entry. I've check file locations and protections, and restarted all the MX processes, but nothing seems to help. - What do I need to do??? Thanks, Howard *************************************************************************** * Howard Meadows Sr. Systems Programmer Weeg Computing Center * * University Of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa 52242 Phone: 319-335-5519 * * meadows@cslvax.weeg.uiowa.edu or meadowva@uiamvs.bitnet * *************************************************************************** ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:59:11 CDT Subject: UCX SMTP vs MX Message-ID: <1992Aug31.125352.47@dymaxion.ns.ca> From: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 31 Aug 92 12:53:52 AST To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET I hear that UCX 2.0 (or whatever it's called now) supports SMTP. Is this true? If so, has anyone compared it with MX? It would be nice if we didn't have to maintain two separate products. Ben. --- Ben Armstrong, Software Development bus: (902)422-1973 Dymaxion Research Ltd., fax: (902)421-1267 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1R2 Internet: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:59:34 CDT Subject: UCX SET HOST confuses MX Message-ID: <1992Aug31.130825.48@dymaxion.ns.ca> From: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca Reply-To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Date: 31 Aug 92 13:08:24 AST To: MX-List@WKUVX1.BITNET Does anybody know why the following might confuse MX? $ UCX SET HOST "foo.bar.one"/address=1.2.3.4/alias="one" . . . SET HOST "foo.bar.five"/address=5.2.3.4/alias="five" After setting up a few aliases this way, one of our people tried to send a message to mx%"user@foo.bar.one" which automagically got redirected to mx%"user@foo.bar.five" resulting in the message being bounced back because there is no "user" at foo.bar.five - Note that the aliases weren't even used - I have no rewrite rules in MX - I have no SET HOST/ROUTE entries which might reroute the message (other than the standard ones for .BITNET and .UUCP) - There is no forwarding address for user@foo.bar.one - The substitution of "foo.bar.five" for "foo.bar.one" happens before the mail header lines are even generated - i.e. there are no "Resent:" header lines in the message which gets bounced off of foo.bar.five and the "To:" message says the recipient is "user@foo.bar.five", not "user@foo.bar.one" - This behaviour persisted even after I did an "MCP shutdown" and restarted MX with MX_STARTUP - I can still Telnet/Ftp to foo.bar.one, the problem only seems to be when I use MX - After I REMOVEd the host aliases from my local host name database, we had no problem sending messages to "user@foo.bar.one" --- Ben Armstrong, Software Development bus: (902)422-1973 Dymaxion Research Ltd., fax: (902)421-1267 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1R2 Internet: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca