Archive-Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 10:53:42 -0800 Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 12:54:25 -0500 From: system@niuhep.physics.niu.edu Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM Message-ID: <009E0983.050CF753.11@niuhep.physics.niu.edu> Subject: que full The disk I have mx installed on was getting a bit crowded and users were getting mx que full messages, even after we cleaned up the disk. I shutdown and restarted and that cleaned the problem up but... any clues as to what might have been going on? What I should have looked for? "MX_FLQ_DISK_FREE_RESERVED" = "1" What are the allowed values for this? (must it be an integer?) If I deassign it I assume it will go to zero? ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 02:39:07 -0800 Subject: Re: que full From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <38215e00@news.kapsch.co.at> Date: 4 Nov 1999 11:20:48 +0100 To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU In article <009E0983.050CF753.11@niuhep.physics.niu.edu>, system@niuhep.physics.niu.edu writes: >The disk I have mx installed on was getting a bit crowded >and users were getting mx que full messages, even after we >cleaned up the disk. More infos please. How big is the disk ? How much blocks are free (now, during the problems, before) ? >I shutdown and restarted and that cleaned the problem up but... >any clues as to what might have been going on? >What I should have looked for? > > "MX_FLQ_DISK_FREE_RESERVED" = "1" > >What are the allowed values for this? (must it be an integer?) >If I deassign it I assume it will go to zero? Allowed (integer) values are 0-100 (percent of disk space). Default value is 10 (not zero). All infos are from experience. This logical is still not documented. -- Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Tel. +43 1 81111-2651 Network and OpenVMS system manager Fax. +43 1 81111-888 FBFV/Information Services E-mail eplan@kapsch.net <<< KAPSCH AG Wagenseilgasse 1 PSImail PSI%(0232)281001141::EPLAN A-1121 VIENNA AUSTRIA "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" "VMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT V8.0 to be!" Compaq, 22-Sep-1998 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 06:41:20 -0800 Sender: madison@MadGoat.Com Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 06:41:15 -0800 From: Matt Madison Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: system@niuhep.physics.niu.edu Message-ID: <009E0A18.0E11FDE0.6@MadGoat.Com> Subject: RE: que full >The disk I have mx installed on was getting a bit crowded >and users were getting mx que full messages, even after we >cleaned up the disk. > >I shutdown and restarted and that cleaned the problem up but... >any clues as to what might have been going on? >What I should have looked for? > > "MX_FLQ_DISK_FREE_RESERVED" = "1" > >What are the allowed values for this? (must it be an integer?) >If I deassign it I assume it will go to zero? No, it will default to 1. The valid range is 1-90, and represents a percentage value. If you really want to exceed 99% capacity of the queue disk, you can use $ DEFINE/SYSTEM/EXEC MX_FLQ_DISK_FREE_ABSOLUTE n where "n" is the number of disk blocks that you wish to keep free (minimum allowed value is 1024). This setting overrides the standard percentage-based logical. -Matt -- Matthew Madison | MadGoat Software | PO Box 556, Santa Cruz, CA 95061 USA madison@madgoat.com http://www.madgoat.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 09:21:32 -0800 From: goathunter@PROCESS.COM (Hunter Goatley) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Does MX 4.2 have any known y2k problems? Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 17:13:32 GMT Message-ID: <3821be84.16957333@news.wku.edu> To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU On Mon, 25 Oct 1999 16:50:45 GMT, sol@mail.adldata.com wrote: >Has anyone done any Y2K testing for MX 4.2. > >The http://www.madgoat.com/y2k.html says that MX 5 is y2k >compliant but says nothing (either way) about MX 4.2. > There should be no problems in that either, unless you use the old MultiNet MM, which is not Y2K-compliant. Everything else in MX is, as long as your system is OK. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, goathunter@PROCESS.COM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 23:01:51 -0800 Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 08:01:22 +0200 From: "Eberhard Mater, DV-IG, 0551/709-2453" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009E0AEC.69BAE7E0.1@dlrvms.go.dlr.de> Subject: Can't access MX-list archiv Hi, is there any good reason, why i can't access the MX-List archiv? Has anyone else the same problem? "ERROR The requested URL could not be retrieved While trying to retrieve the URL: http://www2.wku.edu:81/scripts/mxarchive/as_init.com? The following error was encountered: Access Denied. Access control configuration prevents your request from being allowed at this time. " Eberhard -- Eberhard Mater Email: Eberhard.Mater@debis-sfr.de debis Systemhaus Phone: +49 (551) 709-2453 Solutions for Research GmbH (dSH SfR) FAX: +49 (551) 709-2169 Bunsenstr.10 D-37073 Goettingen Germany ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 12:56:35 -0800 Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 14:56:23 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009E0BEF.8E3195CD.22@ALPHA.WKU.EDU> Subject: RE: Can't access MX-list archiv "Eberhard Mater, DV-IG, 0551/709-2453" writes: > >is there any good reason, why i can't access the MX-List archiv? >Has anyone else the same problem? > > >"ERROR > The requested URL could not be retrieved > While trying to retrieve the URL: > http://www2.wku.edu:81/scripts/mxarchive/as_init.com? > Drop the ":81". It's no longer needed, and WKU no longer has a sever running on port 81. Just use: http://www2.wku.edu/scripts/mxarchive/as_init.com?MX-List Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com http://www2.wku.edu/hunter/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 07:16:37 -0800 Message-ID: <3826E9F4.CEFD562C@ulm.edu> Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 09:19:16 -0600 From: Chance Eppinette Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mx-list@madgoat.com Subject: Mail messages to wrong INBOX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, I have recently seen an occurence where recepients for a mail message are not obeyed. IE, a mail message destined for one person on our MX based system actually went into another person's mail folder upon delivery. There is nothing in the headers of the message to indicate that the 2nd person should have received the message. The message did go to the specified recepient, but it also went to the 2nd person. Does this type problem fall under MX or would this be a VMS mail problem? The message was sent through SMTP, so I know it had to pass through MX at some point. Thanks, Chance Eppinette ULM 318-342-5021 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 11:24:37 -0800 Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 13:25:23 -0500 From: system@niuhep.physics.niu.edu Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009E0D75.2CAD2EEA.15@niuhep.physics.niu.edu> Subject: RE: Mail messages to wrong INBOX No answers, just questions :( Could you post the headers? The headers as identical for both messages? Both accounts which recieved the message are on the same system? ============================================= Hello, I have recently seen an occurence where recepients for a mail message are not obeyed. IE, a mail message destined for one person on our MX based system actually went into another person's mail folder upon delivery. There is nothing in the headers of the message to indicate that the 2nd person should have received the message. The message did go to the specified recepient, but it also went to the 2nd person. Does this type problem fall under MX or would this be a VMS mail problem? The message was sent through SMTP, so I know it had to pass through MX at some point. Thanks, Chance Eppinette ULM 318-342-5021 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 11:55:54 -0800 Message-ID: <38272B44.6DAEA4BF@ulm.edu> Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 13:57:56 -0600 From: Chance Eppinette Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Mail messages to wrong INBOX References: <009E0D75.2CAD2EEA.15@niuhep.physics.niu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Could you post the headers? >The headers as identical for both messages? (The uccnichols account that this message also landed in, but shouldn't) From: SMTP%"REGILLILAND@ALPHA.ULM.EDU" To: SMTP%"dgrpugh@alpha.nlu.edu" CC: Subj: A shaggy frog story Return-Path: Received: from ALPHA.ULM.EDU (10.146.9.54) by Alpha.nlu.edu (MX V5.1-X An7g) with ESMTP; Mon, 8 Nov 1999 10:17:40 -1300 Message-ID: <38271517.E8FAF365@ALPHA.ULM.EDU> Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 10:23:19 -0800 From: "KATHERYN M. GILLILAND" Reply-To: REGILLILAND@ALPHA.ULM.EDU Organization: PROJECT TALENT SEARCH X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Barbara Pugh Subject: A shaggy frog story Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (The dgrpugh account that it did appear in as it should have) From: SMTP%"REGILLILAND@ALPHA.ULM.EDU" To: SMTP%"dgrpugh@alpha.nlu.edu" CC: Subj: A shaggy frog story Return-Path: Received: from ALPHA.ULM.EDU (10.146.9.54) by Alpha.nlu.edu (MX V5.1-X An7g) with ESMTP; Mon, 8 Nov 1999 10:17:40 -1300 Message-ID: <38271517.E8FAF365@ALPHA.ULM.EDU> Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 10:23:19 -0800 From: "KATHERYN M. GILLILAND" Reply-To: REGILLILAND@ALPHA.ULM.EDU Organization: PROJECT TALENT SEARCH X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Barbara Pugh Subject: A shaggy frog story Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Both accounts which recieved the message are on the same system? Yes, both accounts are on the same system. Chance Eppinette ULM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 05:20:27 -0800 Subject: Re: Mail messages to wrong INBOX From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <38281c76@news.kapsch.co.at> Date: 9 Nov 1999 14:07:02 +0100 To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU In article <3826E9F4.CEFD562C@ulm.edu>, Chance Eppinette writes: >I have recently seen an occurence where recepients for a mail message are not obeyed. >IE, a mail message destined for one person on our MX based system actually went into >another person's mail folder upon delivery. There is nothing in the headers of the message >to indicate that the 2nd person should have received the message. The >message did go to the specified recepient, but it also went to the 2nd person. > >Does this type problem fall under MX or would this be a VMS mail problem? The message >was sent through SMTP, so I know it had to pass through MX at some point. If the sender specified a BCC for the 2nd address, you won't see this in the headers (most mailers do not add BCC addresses to the SMTP header - otherwise the CC won't be blind - only in the SMTP envelope). So it is possible, that this is normal behaviour... -- Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Tel. +43 1 81111-2651 Network and OpenVMS system manager Fax. +43 1 81111-888 FBFV/Information Services E-mail eplan@kapsch.net <<< KAPSCH AG Wagenseilgasse 1 PSImail PSI%(0232)281001141::EPLAN A-1121 VIENNA AUSTRIA "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" "VMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT V8.0 to be!" Compaq, 22-Sep-1998 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 06:53:46 -0800 Message-ID: <382835FE.B1839CC8@ulm.edu> Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 08:55:58 -0600 From: Chance Eppinette Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Mail messages to wrong INBOX References: <38281c76@news.kapsch.co.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Peter responded: > If the sender specified a BCC for the 2nd address, you won't see this > in the headers (most mailers do not add BCC addresses to the SMTP header - > otherwise the CC won't be blind - only in the SMTP envelope). > > So it is possible, that this is normal behaviour... > > -- > Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Tel. +43 1 81111-2651 > Network and OpenVMS system manager Fax. +43 1 81111-888 > FBFV/Information Services E-mail eplan@kapsch.net > <<< KAPSCH AG Wagenseilgasse 1 PSImail PSI%(0232)281001141::EPLAN > A-1121 VIENNA AUSTRIA "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" > "VMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT V8.0 to be!" Compaq, 22-Sep-1998 I did not realize that BCC was actually hidden from the recepients, but it is. I am pretty sure that was this particular condition, but I just wanted to make sure it wasn't a problem with the system. Thanks Chance Eppinette ULM ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 07:00:26 -0800 Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 09:01:20 -0500 From: system@niuhep.physics.niu.edu Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009E0E19.744E392A.18@niuhep.physics.niu.edu> Subject: Re: Mail messages to wrong INBOX What is the difference between CC BCC FCC and all the other CCs that sometimes show up? ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 07:52:47 -0800 Message-ID: <1EB2B4072C92D3118976006097D07CFAE125@buzz.hspg.com> From: Andrew Robinson Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: "'MX-List@MadGoat.com'" Subject: RE: Mail messages to wrong INBOX Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 15:52:05 -0000 CC = Carbon Copy FCC = Forward (Or File or First) Carbon Copy (Same as CC) BCC = Blind Carbon Copy (None of the other recipients see's this recipient) Regards Andrew Robinson -----Original Message----- From: system@niuhep.physics.niu.edu [mailto:system@niuhep.physics.niu.edu] Sent: 09 November 1999 14:01 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: Mail messages to wrong INBOX What is the difference between CC BCC FCC and all the other CCs that sometimes show up? ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 08:19:04 -0800 Subject: Re: Mail messages to wrong INBOX From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <3828459e@news.kapsch.co.at> Date: 9 Nov 1999 17:02:38 +0100 To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU In article <009E0E19.744E392A.18@niuhep.physics.niu.edu>, system@niuhep.physics.niu.edu writes: >What is the difference between CC BCC FCC and all the other CCs that sometimes >show up? CC Carbon Copy BCC Blind Carbon Copy Rest Don't know A mail consists of three parts. SMTP message envelope (see RFC821) MAIL FROM: RCPT TO: SMTP message header (see RFC822) To: From: Subject: Date: SMTP message body Think of a normal snail mail letter. If you send a letter (consisting of a message header and a message body) to a person, stuff it in a envelope, the address on the envelope defines which persons get the letter (regardless what's on the head of the letter). If you make a copy of the letter, stuff it in another envelope and send this letter to another person, the first person won't get any knowledge of this. (the same happens with a blind carbon copy). If you write a CC on the letter, telling the first person, that you will send a copy to another (named) person, then both persons will know of each other. One is/feels directly addressed (and should react somehow) and the other is/feels only being informed (may react, but isn't supposed/required to). Is this enough for a start ? -- Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Tel. +43 1 81111-2651 Network and OpenVMS system manager Fax. +43 1 81111-888 FBFV/Information Services E-mail eplan@kapsch.net <<< KAPSCH AG Wagenseilgasse 1 PSImail PSI%(0232)281001141::EPLAN A-1121 VIENNA AUSTRIA "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" "VMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT V8.0 to be!" Compaq, 22-Sep-1998 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 13:57:13 -0800 Return-Path: Message-ID: <541C9C38F3F3D111A3230000F89CCCCC018AA8C7@issmsg1.iss.msfc.nasa.gov> From: "Porter, Linda" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: "'MX-List@MadGoat.com'" Subject: Mail loop - help with a filter Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 15:55:23 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Our readers received another looped mail message. I've got the header of the received duplicated message, here, below. Based on this header, what new filter can I install? Looks like the received "From" headers are incomplete. Should I block all messages from asm-mail (wildcard)? Received: from X500MSFC.MSFC.NASA.GOV ([128.158.33.214]) by issmsg1.iss.msfc.nasa.gov with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2448.0) id WKJ53RQP; Tue, 9 Nov 1999 15:06:22 -0600 Return-Path: Received: from sslab.msfc.nasa.gov by x500msfc.msfc.nasa.gov with ESMTP; Tue, 9 Nov 1999 15:07:37 -0600 X-ListName: Science at Marshall Headline List Received: from asm-mail (131.187.253.59) by sslab.msfc.nasa.gov (MX V5.1-X An9n) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 9 Nov 1999 14:30:57 -0600 Received: from po ([199.218.125.171] (may be forged)) by asm-mail (2.5 Build 2639 (Berkeley 8.8.6)/8.8.4) with SMTP id PAA00747 for ; Tue, 09 Nov 1999 15:31:19 -0500 X-Mailer: BeyondMail for Windows/Professional 2.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit To: express-delivery@sslab.msfc.nasa.gov From: NASA Science News Subject: NASA applying space technology to help farmers diagnose fields Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 00:02:22 -0800 X-BeyondMail-Priority: 1 Reply-To: expressreply@sslab.msfc.nasa.gov X-Original-Reply-To: expressreply@sslab.msfc.nasa.gov Message-Id: <009E0D04.FEE3917C.25@sslab.msfc.nasa.gov> Conversation-Id: <009E0D04.FEE3917C.25@sslab.msfc.nasa.gov> ============= Linda Porter Code SD23 Science Directorate NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville AL 35812 (256)544-7588 (256)544-7128 (fax) linda.porter@msfc.nasa.gov http://science.nasa.gov/ -----Original Message----- From: eplan@kapsch.net [mailto:eplan@kapsch.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 1999 7:07 AM To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU Subject: Re: Mail messages to wrong INBOX In article <3826E9F4.CEFD562C@ulm.edu>, Chance Eppinette writes: >I have recently seen an occurence where recepients for a mail message are not obeyed. >IE, a mail message destined for one person on our MX based system actually went into >another person's mail folder upon delivery. There is nothing in the headers of the message >to indicate that the 2nd person should have received the message. The >message did go to the specified recepient, but it also went to the 2nd person. > >Does this type problem fall under MX or would this be a VMS mail problem? The message >was sent through SMTP, so I know it had to pass through MX at some point. If the sender specified a BCC for the 2nd address, you won't see this in the headers (most mailers do not add BCC addresses to the SMTP header - otherwise the CC won't be blind - only in the SMTP envelope). So it is possible, that this is normal behaviour... -- Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Tel. +43 1 81111-2651 Network and OpenVMS system manager Fax. +43 1 81111-888 FBFV/Information Services E-mail eplan@kapsch.net <<< KAPSCH AG Wagenseilgasse 1 PSImail PSI%(0232)281001141::EPLAN A-1121 VIENNA AUSTRIA "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" "VMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT V8.0 to be!" Compaq, 22-Sep-1998 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 14:19:18 -0800 Subject: MX ECO status From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <38289c26@news.kapsch.co.at> Date: 9 Nov 1999 23:11:50 +0100 To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU http://www.madgoat.com/mx51_patches.html Currently ECO 2-4, 6-8 and 10 are "official" for MX V5.1. ECO 10 replaced ECO 5 which replaced ECO 1. ECO 9 and 11-14 are "experimental". 1) Is there a general rule, when a ECO gets out of "experimental" and becomes "official" ? 2) ECO 9 effects images also found in ECO 6 and ECO 7. It tells, it replaces ECO 7. No mention of ECO 6. Seems to be a bug in MX051_ECO09_README.TXT 3) ECO 11 replaces ECO 4 ECO 12 replaces ECO 10 (and 5 and 1) ECO 13 replaces ECO 3 ECO 14 replaces ECO 8 Can we expect that every new ECO will replace an existing ECO or will there be ECOs only fixing a single problem (means eg. ECO 15 fixes a problem in eg. MAILQUEUE.EXE but does not replace ECO 9 which besides other images also fixes MAILQUEUE.EXE) In the first case, over time, almost all ECOs get some kind of "mandatory" means all higher numbered ECOs includes many lower numbered ECOs (which I can live with). 4) Will there ever be a Maint-Version (eg. V5.1-1) Kit containing all ECOs ? Maybe even installable by PCSI/VMSinstal ? Its funny, that images of the MX V5.1 are newer than the ECO kit EXE files, if you install freshly MX V5.1 (because the *.EXE get linked during a V5.1 installation but are already linked in the ECO kits). 5) When can we expect a next version of MX giving new features ? My favorites are "MCP QUEUE READY/FINAL" or "DSN request overrides" a) if a stupid SMTP server (like our own Firewall is) does have a size limit but does not have ESMTP support (so no SIZE option), it aborts the mail at the size limit. Is annoying to see, that MX retries then this mail (though it could never be successful delivered) for umpteen (eg. 96) times to finally bounce it back to the sender (saying stupid things like "disconnected logical link"). With a /FINAL qualifier, an experienced MX manager could then cancel the rest of the retries (eg. up to 95) to save bandwidth. b)M$ Exchange always requests something like "NOTIFY=FAILURE RETURN=FULL" instead of only a "NOTIFY=FAILURE RETURN=HEADERS". Our slow X.25 links got VERY expensive cause of Exchange and we are now forced to upgrade to satellite to reduce the costs again. Many TIA -- Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Tel. +43 1 81111-2651 Network and OpenVMS system manager Fax. +43 1 81111-888 FBFV/Information Services E-mail eplan@kapsch.net <<< KAPSCH AG Wagenseilgasse 1 PSImail PSI%(0232)281001141::EPLAN A-1121 VIENNA AUSTRIA "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" "VMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT V8.0 to be!" Compaq, 22-Sep-1998 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 23:53:13 -0800 Message-ID: <38292485.60D66A14@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU> Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 10:53:41 +0300 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: MX ECO status (my vote) References: <38289c26@news.kapsch.co.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi ! I known a bit about of ECO 14. In SMTP server is introduced addition to SITE interface. This callout allow to performs inside/outside address checking by external "user written" modules. In my case I have a module which performs checking against RADIUS "online users" database. Peter LANGSTOEGER wrote: > > http://www.madgoat.com/mx51_patches.html > > Currently ECO 2-4, 6-8 and 10 are "official" for MX V5.1. > ECO 10 replaced ECO 5 which replaced ECO 1. > ECO 9 and 11-14 are "experimental". > > 1) Is there a general rule, when a ECO gets out of "experimental" and > becomes "official" ? > > 2) ECO 9 effects images also found in ECO 6 and ECO 7. > It tells, it replaces ECO 7. No mention of ECO 6. > Seems to be a bug in MX051_ECO09_README.TXT > > 3) ECO 11 replaces ECO 4 > ECO 12 replaces ECO 10 (and 5 and 1) > ECO 13 replaces ECO 3 > ECO 14 replaces ECO 8 > > Can we expect that every new ECO will replace an existing ECO > or will there be ECOs only fixing a single problem (means eg. ECO 15 > fixes a problem in eg. MAILQUEUE.EXE but does not replace ECO 9 which > besides other images also fixes MAILQUEUE.EXE) > > In the first case, over time, almost all ECOs get some kind of "mandatory" > means all higher numbered ECOs includes many lower numbered ECOs > (which I can live with). > > 4) Will there ever be a Maint-Version (eg. V5.1-1) Kit containing all ECOs ? > Maybe even installable by PCSI/VMSinstal ? > Its funny, that images of the MX V5.1 are newer than the ECO kit EXE files, > if you install freshly MX V5.1 (because the *.EXE get linked during a V5.1 > installation but are already linked in the ECO kits). > > 5) When can we expect a next version of MX giving new features ? > My favorites are "MCP QUEUE READY/FINAL" or "DSN request overrides" > > a) if a stupid SMTP server (like our own Firewall is) does have a size > limit but does not have ESMTP support (so no SIZE option), it aborts > the mail at the size limit. Is annoying to see, that MX retries then this > mail (though it could never be successful delivered) for umpteen (eg. 96) > times to finally bounce it back to the sender (saying stupid things > like "disconnected logical link"). With a /FINAL qualifier, an experienced > MX manager could then cancel the rest of the retries (eg. up to 95) to save > bandwidth. > > b)M$ Exchange always requests something like "NOTIFY=FAILURE RETURN=FULL" > instead of only a "NOTIFY=FAILURE RETURN=HEADERS". Our slow X.25 links > got VERY expensive cause of Exchange and we are now forced to upgrade > to satellite to reduce the costs again. > > Many TIA > > -- > Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Tel. +43 1 81111-2651 > Network and OpenVMS system manager Fax. +43 1 81111-888 > FBFV/Information Services E-mail eplan@kapsch.net > <<< KAPSCH AG Wagenseilgasse 1 PSImail PSI%(0232)281001141::EPLAN > A-1121 VIENNA AUSTRIA "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" > "VMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT V8.0 to be!" Compaq, 22-Sep-1998 -- Regards. +.....................pure personal opinion..........................+ HTTP://WWW.RadiusVMS.COM - Kick ass VMS solution ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 06:31:13 -0800 Sender: madison@MadGoat.Com Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 06:31:08 -0800 From: Matt Madison Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: eplan@kapsch.net Message-ID: <009E0F96.CD53806A.1@MadGoat.Com> Subject: RE: MX ECO status >http://www.madgoat.com/mx51_patches.html > >Currently ECO 2-4, 6-8 and 10 are "official" for MX V5.1. >ECO 10 replaced ECO 5 which replaced ECO 1. >ECO 9 and 11-14 are "experimental". > >1) Is there a general rule, when a ECO gets out of "experimental" and >becomes "official" ? Generally, the rule is that ECO has to be in use at enough sites to satisfy me that it is really working properly. >2) ECO 9 effects images also found in ECO 6 and ECO 7. >It tells, it replaces ECO 7. No mention of ECO 6. >Seems to be a bug in MX051_ECO09_README.TXT That's one of the other general rules... the README file has to be accurate. :-) >3) ECO 11 replaces ECO 4 >ECO 12 replaces ECO 10 (and 5 and 1) >ECO 13 replaces ECO 3 >ECO 14 replaces ECO 8 > >Can we expect that every new ECO will replace an existing ECO >or will there be ECOs only fixing a single problem (means eg. ECO 15 >fixes a problem in eg. MAILQUEUE.EXE but does not replace ECO 9 which >besides other images also fixes MAILQUEUE.EXE) > >In the first case, over time, almost all ECOs get some kind of "mandatory" >means all higher numbered ECOs includes many lower numbered ECOs >(which I can live with). In general, ECOs that replace an image will be cumulative, so a later- numbered ECO will contain all the changes from previous ECOs. >4) Will there ever be a Maint-Version (eg. V5.1-1) Kit containing all ECOs ? >Maybe even installable by PCSI/VMSinstal ? >Its funny, that images of the MX V5.1 are newer than the ECO kit EXE files, >if you install freshly MX V5.1 (because the *.EXE get linked during a V5.1 >installation but are already linked in the ECO kits). > >5) When can we expect a next version of MX giving new features ? >My favorites are "MCP QUEUE READY/FINAL" or "DSN request overrides" [...] I hope to have a new minor release ready for beta before the end of the calendar year, hopefully sooner. As for a maintenance release for 5.1, I've refrained from doing one mainly because there are only a few ECOs on the "recommended" list. If that number goes up before the new release is ready, I will probably put together a 5.1 maintenance update kit as well. -Matt -- Matthew Madison | MadGoat Software | PO Box 556, Santa Cruz, CA 95061 USA madison@madgoat.com http://www.madgoat.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 06:44:22 -0800 Sender: madison@MadGoat.Com Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 06:44:18 -0800 From: Matt Madison Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009E0F98.A458D217.9@MadGoat.Com> Subject: RE: Mail loop - help with a filter >Our readers received another looped mail message. I've got the header of >the received duplicated message, here, below. Based on this header, what new >filter can I install? Looks like the received "From" headers are >incomplete. Should I block all messages from asm-mail (wildcard)? Blocking asm-mail's address, 131.187.253.59, or the domain asm-intl.org, might help. It would be easier to tell if you could capture the incoming message before it gets processed by the mailing list. -Matt >Received: from X500MSFC.MSFC.NASA.GOV ([128.158.33.214]) by >issmsg1.iss.msfc.nasa.gov with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail >Service Version 5.5.2448.0) > id WKJ53RQP; Tue, 9 Nov 1999 15:06:22 -0600 >Return-Path: >Received: from sslab.msfc.nasa.gov by x500msfc.msfc.nasa.gov with ESMTP; >Tue, 9 Nov 1999 15:07:37 -0600 >X-ListName: Science at Marshall Headline List > >Received: from asm-mail (131.187.253.59) by sslab.msfc.nasa.gov (MX V5.1-X > An9n) with ESMTP for ; > Tue, 9 Nov 1999 14:30:57 -0600 >Received: from po ([199.218.125.171] (may be forged)) by asm-mail (2.5 Build > 2639 (Berkeley 8.8.6)/8.8.4) with SMTP id PAA00747 for > ; > Tue, 09 Nov 1999 15:31:19 -0500 >X-Mailer: BeyondMail for Windows/Professional 2.3 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit >To: express-delivery@sslab.msfc.nasa.gov >From: NASA Science News >Subject: NASA applying space technology to help farmers diagnose fields >Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 00:02:22 -0800 >X-BeyondMail-Priority: 1 >Reply-To: expressreply@sslab.msfc.nasa.gov >X-Original-Reply-To: expressreply@sslab.msfc.nasa.gov >Message-Id: <009E0D04.FEE3917C.25@sslab.msfc.nasa.gov> >Conversation-Id: <009E0D04.FEE3917C.25@sslab.msfc.nasa.gov> > >============= >Linda Porter >Code SD23 >Science Directorate >NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center >Huntsville AL 35812 > >(256)544-7588 >(256)544-7128 (fax) >linda.porter@msfc.nasa.gov > >http://science.nasa.gov/ > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: eplan@kapsch.net [mailto:eplan@kapsch.net] >Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 1999 7:07 AM >To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU >Subject: Re: Mail messages to wrong INBOX > > >In article <3826E9F4.CEFD562C@ulm.edu>, Chance Eppinette >writes: >>I have recently seen an occurence where recepients for a mail message are >not obeyed. >>IE, a mail message destined for one person on our MX based system actually >went into >>another person's mail folder upon delivery. There is nothing in the >headers of the message >>to indicate that the 2nd person should have received the message. The >>message did go to the specified recepient, but it also went to the 2nd >person. >> >>Does this type problem fall under MX or would this be a VMS mail problem? >The message >>was sent through SMTP, so I know it had to pass through MX at some point. > >If the sender specified a BCC for the 2nd address, you won't see this >in the headers (most mailers do not add BCC addresses to the SMTP header - >otherwise the CC won't be blind - only in the SMTP envelope). > >So it is possible, that this is normal behaviour... > >-- >Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Tel. +43 1 81111-2651 >Network and OpenVMS system manager Fax. +43 1 81111-888 >FBFV/Information Services E-mail eplan@kapsch.net ><<< KAPSCH AG Wagenseilgasse 1 PSImail PSI%(0232)281001141::EPLAN >A-1121 VIENNA AUSTRIA "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" >"VMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT V8.0 to be!" Compaq, >22-Sep-1998 -- Matthew Madison | MadGoat Software | PO Box 556, Santa Cruz, CA 95061 USA madison@madgoat.com http://www.madgoat.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:20:26 -0800 Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 11:20:28 CST From: Ravi Kochhar Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com, kochhar@physiology.wisc.edu Message-ID: <009E12E3.E2617E80.81@physiology.wisc.edu> Subject: Turn off relay of outbound e-mail? Our configuration: VMS 5.5-2, MX v4.2 Is it possible to turn off relay of just outgoing e-mail to prevent relay of spam? We have another system we can use for outgoing mail, but would like to retain the present one for incoming mail. Any other suggestions are also welcome. PS: I can't seem to reach the searchable MX archives. Is there another site for that? Thanks, Ravi Kochhar Univ. of Wisconsin ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:25:24 -0800 Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 11:25:15 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <991115112515.202000c2@process.com> Subject: RE: Turn off relay of outbound e-mail? Ravi Kochhar writes: > > PS: I can't seem to reach the searchable MX archives. Is there another > site for that? > The proper URL is: http://www2.wku.edu/scripts/mxarchive/as_init.com?MX-List Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ http://www2.wku.edu/hunter/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 07:00:05 -0800 Message-ID: <009301bf329e$9919f520$d6001c7e@si.com> From: "Brian Tillman" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: CC: Subject: A new wrinkle in the SPAMmer arsenal Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 09:58:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Today I received a message (SPAM) that is brand new in the SPAMmer message world. It is a message that is intended for HTML-aware mail agents. It's written _backward_, with a prepended javascript that reverses the message upon display. Any anti-spam tool that relies upon scanning the message body for keywords will be stymied by this. I've included it below for your edification. Fortunately, those of us who scan the headers can still catch it. Brian Tillman Internet: tillman_brian at si.com Smiths Industries, Inc. tillman at swdev.si.com 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS Addresses modified to prevent Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991 SPAM. Replace "at" with "@" This opinion doesn't represent that of my company -----Original Message----- Return-Path: Received: from checkers.si.com (126.1.8.254) by benzie.si.com (MX V5.1-1 VnHt) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 19 Nov 1999 01:41:46 -0500 Received: from challenger.si.com (unverified) by checkers.si.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with SMTP id for ; Fri, 19 Nov 1999 01:41:30 -0500 Received: by challenger.si.com; id BAA20447; Fri, 19 Nov 1999 01:40:18 -0500 (EST) From: Received: from 01-025.050.popsite.net(209.118.105.25) by challenger.si.com via smap (V4.2) id xma020010; Fri, 19 Nov 99 01:39:15 -0500 Subject: Christmas Computer Special Intel 400Mhz- $299 To: HolidayShopper@swdev.si.com Reply-To: Computer_Wholesalers@hotmail.com Message-ID: Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 01:43:10 -0500 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Home Page ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 12:12:21 -0800 Message-ID: <3835AF5E.9091D4C6@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU> Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 23:13:18 +0300 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mx-List@MadGoat.com Subject: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello All! What it's mean:"MX Local Locating @ 6968 Local delivery agent" ? -- Regards. +.....................pure personal opinion..........................+ Free & commercial software for ISP -> HTTP://WWW.RadiusVMS.COM +.....................Kick ass VMS solution!.........................+ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 12:15:40 -0800 Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 14:15:31 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <991119141531.202000b9@process.com> Subject: RE: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." "Ruslan R. Laishev" writes: > >Hello All! > What it's mean:"MX Local Locating @ 6968 Local delivery >agent" ? It's searching through the queue, looking for an entry to process. Entry 6968 is, if I remember right, the "best" entry found so far matching the proper criteria (size, for example). Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ http://www2.wku.edu/hunter/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 12:19:47 -0800 Message-ID: <3835B11C.7293512A@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU> Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 23:20:44 +0300 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." References: <991119141531.202000b9@process.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hunter Goatley wrote: > > "Ruslan R. Laishev" writes: > > > >Hello All! > > What it's mean:"MX Local Locating @ 6968 Local delivery > >agent" ? > > It's searching through the queue, looking for an entry to process. > Entry 6968 is, if I remember right, the "best" entry found so far > matching the proper criteria (size, for example). Thanks. Can you provide more details about of criteria? > > Hunter > ------ > Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ > http://www2.wku.edu/hunter/ -- Regards. +.....................pure personal opinion..........................+ Free & commercial software for ISP -> HTTP://WWW.RadiusVMS.COM +.....................Kick ass VMS solution!.........................+ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 12:26:24 -0800 Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 14:26:15 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <991119142615.202000b9@process.com> Subject: Re: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." "Ruslan R. Laishev" writes: > >> It's searching through the queue, looking for an entry to process. >> Entry 6968 is, if I remember right, the "best" entry found so far >> matching the proper criteria (size, for example). > Thanks. > > Can you provide more details about of criteria? Sure. It's always based on size (i.e, it looks for the smallest message), unless you define the MX_LOCAL_FIFO logical name, in which case the entries are processed based on date (first in, first out). Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ http://www2.wku.edu/hunter/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 12:31:14 -0800 Message-ID: <005001bf32cd$27312580$010020ac@sysman_home.deltatel.ru> From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: Subject: Re: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 23:32:08 +0300 >"Ruslan R. Laishev" writes: >> >>> It's searching through the queue, looking for an entry to process. >>> Entry 6968 is, if I remember right, the "best" entry found so far >>> matching the proper criteria (size, for example). >> Thanks. >> >> Can you provide more details about of criteria? > >Sure. It's always based on size (i.e, it looks for the smallest >message), unless you define the MX_LOCAL_FIFO logical name, in which >case the entries are processed based on date (first in, first out). Thankyou Hunter! > >Hunter >------ >Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ > http://www2.wku.edu/hunter/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 12:40:13 -0800 Message-ID: <006901bf32ce$6b033f90$010020ac@sysman_home.deltatel.ru> From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: Subject: Re: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 23:40:33 +0300 >"Ruslan R. Laishev" writes: >> >>> It's searching through the queue, looking for an entry to process. >>> Entry 6968 is, if I remember right, the "best" entry found so far >>> matching the proper criteria (size, for example). >> Thanks. >> >> Can you provide more details about of criteria? > >Sure. It's always based on size (i.e, it looks for the smallest >message), unless you define the MX_LOCAL_FIFO logical name, in which >case the entries are processed based on date (first in, first out). It's fullscan through MX_SYSTEM_QUEUE.FLQ_CTL? Oh, we have a .FLQ_CTL file with size 100035 blocks, due a huge numbers of relayed mails. Is there any advice for speed-up processing? > >Hunter >------ >Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ > http://www2.wku.edu/hunter/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 12:42:17 -0800 Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 14:42:06 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <991119144206.202000b9@process.com> Subject: Re: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." "Ruslan R. Laishev" writes: > >>Sure. It's always based on size (i.e, it looks for the smallest >>message), unless you define the MX_LOCAL_FIFO logical name, in which >>case the entries are processed based on date (first in, first out). > It's fullscan through MX_SYSTEM_QUEUE.FLQ_CTL? Yes. > Oh, we have a .FLQ_CTL file with size 100035 blocks, due a huge numbers >of relayed mails. Is there any advice for speed-up processing? No. About the only thing you can do is try to minimize the number of agents trying to search all at once (for example, let your Locals finish before starting your SMTPs, etc.). Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ http://www2.wku.edu/hunter/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 12:49:24 -0800 Message-ID: <008801bf32cf$b2b83920$010020ac@sysman_home.deltatel.ru> From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: Subject: Re: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 23:50:18 +0300 >"Ruslan R. Laishev" writes: >> >>>Sure. It's always based on size (i.e, it looks for the smallest >>>message), unless you define the MX_LOCAL_FIFO logical name, in which >>>case the entries are processed based on date (first in, first out). >> It's fullscan through MX_SYSTEM_QUEUE.FLQ_CTL? > >Yes. What you think about of indexed access? > >> Oh, we have a .FLQ_CTL file with size 100035 blocks, due a huge numbers >>of relayed mails. Is there any advice for speed-up processing? > >No. About the only thing you can do is try to minimize the number of >agents trying to search all at once (for example, let your Locals >finish before starting your SMTPs, etc.). > >Hunter >------ >Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ > http://www2.wku.edu/hunter/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 12:53:17 -0800 Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 14:53:08 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <991119145308.202000b9@process.com> Subject: Re: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." "Ruslan R. Laishev" writes: > > What you think about of indexed access? MX used to use an indexed file for the database. It was horrendously slow. The new queue file is not an indexed file, but it does contain a bitmap indicating used cells and a linked list of the entries. Because the entries can be created in any order by multiple agents, there's no real good way (that I can see) to implement an index that would help. What it does now is just step through the linked list, looking at each entry. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ http://www2.wku.edu/hunter/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 13:04:05 -0800 Message-ID: <3835BB70.64E1A19F@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU> Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 00:04:48 +0300 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Re: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." References: <991119145308.202000b9@process.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hunter Goatley wrote: > > "Ruslan R. Laishev" writes: > > > > What you think about of indexed access? > > MX used to use an indexed file for the database. It was horrendously > slow. You mean 4.2 ? > The new queue file is not an indexed file, but it does contain > a bitmap indicating used cells and a linked list of the entries. You mean 5.1 ? > Because the entries can be created in any order by multiple agents, > there's no real good way (that I can see) to implement an index that > would help. What it does now is just step through the linked list, > looking at each entry. Sure. > > Hunter > ------ > Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ > http://www2.wku.edu/hunter/ -- Regards. +.....................pure personal opinion..........................+ Free & commercial software for ISP -> HTTP://WWW.RadiusVMS.COM +.....................Kick ass VMS solution!.........................+ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 13:11:35 -0800 Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 15:11:20 -0600 From: Hunter Goatley Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <991119151120.202000b9@process.com> Subject: Re: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." "Ruslan R. Laishev" writes: > > You mean 4.2 ? No, I mean V3.x. The new queue file was introduced in MX V4.0. Performance increased by several hundred percent. Hunter ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ http://www2.wku.edu/hunter/ ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 09:17:45 -0800 Sender: madison@MadGoat.Com Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 09:17:40 -0800 From: Matt Madison Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: Laishev@smtp.deltatel.ru Message-ID: <009E16C0.8E847232.1@MadGoat.Com> Subject: Re: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." >> > What you think about of indexed access? >> >> MX used to use an indexed file for the database. It was horrendously >> slow. > You mean 4.2 ? No, pre-V4.0. >> The new queue file is not an indexed file, but it does contain >> a bitmap indicating used cells and a linked list of the entries. > You mean 5.1 ? No, V4.0 and later. -Matt -- Matthew Madison | MadGoat Software | PO Box 556, Santa Cruz, CA 95061 USA madison@madgoat.com http://www.madgoat.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 16:45:47 -0800 Subject: Re: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <3836f269$1@news.kapsch.co.at> Date: 20 Nov 1999 20:11:37 +0100 To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU In article <3835AF5E.9091D4C6@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU>, "Ruslan R. Laishev" writes: > What it's mean:"MX Local Locating @ 6968 Local delivery >agent" ? Hunter will surely explain it in detail. But from my experience, I say, when you see it, consider restarting MX. We had several occasional hangs (but no queue corruptions !) with (almost) all agents hanging in "Locating...". If it happens again, with the current ECO level (ECO 1-14) or V5.1-1 I'll cry for help... just my 0.02 -- Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Tel. +43 1 81111-2651 Network and OpenVMS system manager Fax. +43 1 81111-888 FBFV/Information Services E-mail eplan@kapsch.net <<< KAPSCH AG Wagenseilgasse 1 PSImail PSI%(0232)281001141::EPLAN A-1121 VIENNA AUSTRIA "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" "VMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT V8.0 to be!" Compaq, 22-Sep-1998 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 22:09:41 -0800 Message-ID: <001301bf33e7$2501f350$010020ac@sysman_home.deltatel.ru> From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: Subject: Re: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:10:42 +0300 >In article <3835AF5E.9091D4C6@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU>, "Ruslan R. Laishev" writes: >> What it's mean:"MX Local Locating @ 6968 Local delivery >>agent" ? > >Hunter will surely explain it in detail. > >But from my experience, I say, when you see it, consider restarting MX. >We had several occasional hangs (but no queue corruptions !) with >(almost) all agents hanging in "Locating...". It's take place after restart. > >If it happens again, with the current ECO level (ECO 1-14) or V5.1-1 >I'll cry for help... > >just my 0.02 > >-- >Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Tel. +43 1 81111-2651 >Network and OpenVMS system manager Fax. +43 1 81111-888 >FBFV/Information Services E-mail eplan@kapsch.net ><<< KAPSCH AG Wagenseilgasse 1 PSImail PSI%(0232)281001141::EPLAN >A-1121 VIENNA AUSTRIA "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" >"VMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT V8.0 to be!" Compaq, 22-Sep-1998 > ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 04:32:51 -0800 Subject: Re: MX Local agent status "Locating at @..." From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <3837e3fc@news.kapsch.co.at> Date: 21 Nov 1999 13:22:20 +0100 To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU >>> What it's mean:"MX Local Locating @ 6968 Local delivery >>>agent" ? >> >>Hunter will surely explain it in detail. >> >>But from my experience, I say, when you see it, consider restarting MX. >>We had several occasional hangs (but no queue corruptions !) with >>(almost) all agents hanging in "Locating...". > It's take place after restart. That wasn't what I meant. I mean, all agents (at least Router, Local and SMTP) did hang in "Locating..." for hours (but without beeing caused by a MX restart). And a MX restart did then fix it... -- Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Tel. +43 1 81111-2651 Network and OpenVMS system manager Fax. +43 1 81111-888 FBFV/Information Services E-mail eplan@kapsch.net <<< KAPSCH AG Wagenseilgasse 1 PSImail PSI%(0232)281001141::EPLAN A-1121 VIENNA AUSTRIA "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" "VMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT V8.0 to be!" Compaq, 22-Sep-1998 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 11:00:29 -0800 Message-ID: From: Joyce Cogar Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: "'MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM'" Subject: ORIGIN UNKNOWN , CANCELLED FOR MAIL SENT FROM MX HOST AFTER UPGRA DE TO MX051 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 13:56:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain After upgrade to mx051 from 042 mail send from local use xxx to themselves fails with unknown origin , cancelled in mcp queue show/full user has vms mail set forward/user=xxx mx%"xxx@mydomain" patches 2,4, and 10 applied to mx051 How do I fix this? UMS01>mcp MCP> queue show/all/full Entry: 1, Origin unknown Status: CANCELLED, size: 18 bytes Created: 23-NOV-1999 13:40:26.96, expires 23-DEC-1999 13:40:26.96 Last modified 23-NOV-1999 13:40:37.48 Recipient #1: ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 11:55:29 -0800 Sender: madison@MadGoat.Com Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 11:55:23 -0800 From: Matt Madison Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: JCogar@usmsc.edu Message-ID: <009E1932.16963296.2@MadGoat.Com> Subject: RE: ORIGIN UNKNOWN , CANCELLED FOR MAIL SENT FROM MX HOST AFTER UPGRA DE TO MX051 > After upgrade to mx051 from 042 mail send from local use xxx to >themselves fails with unknown origin , cancelled in mcp queue show/full > > user has vms mail set forward/user=xxx mx%"xxx@mydomain" >patches 2,4, and 10 applied to mx051 > > How do I fix this? Just to make sure... you did shut down and restart MX after applying the patches, right? Also, does the user get an error message from VMS MAIL when the problem occurs? If so, can you include the text of the error? -Matt -- Matthew Madison | MadGoat Software | PO Box 556, Santa Cruz, CA 95061 USA madison@madgoat.com http://www.madgoat.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 12:44:59 -0800 Message-ID: From: Joyce Cogar Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: "'MX-List@MadGoat.com'" Subject: RE: ORIGIN UNKNOWN , CANCELLED FOR MAIL SENT FROM MX HOST AFTER U PGRA DE TO MX051 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 15:40:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Hi, user doesn't see error message - guessing that user can't get error message because users mail forward not seen as local upgraded from 4.2 without any manual changes to configuration - just the changes the upgrade made automatically running on cluster ums from node ums01 MCP> show all Configuration file: MX_DEVICE:[MX]MX_CONFIG.MXCFG;64 MX version id is: MX V5.1-X Domain-to-path mappings: Domain="ums01.minc.umd.edu", Path=Local Domain="ums00.minc.umd.edu", Path=Local Domain="ums00.umssc.edu", Path=Local Domain="ums01.umssc.edu", Path=Local Domain="ums01.usmsc.edu", Path=Local Domain="*.BITNET", Path=SMTP, Route="cunyvm.cuny.edu" Domain="*.UUCP", Path=SMTP, Route="uunet.uu.net" Domain="*", Path=SMTP Aliases: LocalName="Postmaster", Address="zzz@ums01.usmsc.edu" LocalName="POSTMAST", Address="zzz@ums01.usmsc.edu" SMTP agent settings: Retry interval: 0 00:30:00.00 Maximum number of retries: 96 Number of DNS failure retries: 12 Accounting: disabled Default router: (none) SMTP server settings: Allow VRFY commands: enabled Act as SMTP relay for any host: enabled Validate sender's domain name: disabled Realtime Blackhole List check: disabled LOCAL agent settings: DECnet delivery retry interval: 0 00:30:00.00 Maximum number of retries: 96 Accounting disabled. Multiple VMS Mail From: addresses allowed. Local delivery errors are not CC'ed to local Postmaster. Incoming quoted-printable MIME messages are decoded. EXQUOTA privilege is enabled during local deliveries. Top headers: FROM,SENDER,TO,RESENT_TO,CC,RESENT_CC,BCC,RESENT_BCC,MESSAGE_ID, RESENT_MESSAGE_ID,IN_REPLY_TO,REFERENCES,KEYWORDS,SUBJECT, ENCRYPTED,DATE,REPLY_TO,RECEIVED,RESENT_REPLY_TO,RESENT_FROM, RESENT_SENDER,RESENT_DATE,RETURN_PATH,OTHER Bottom headers: (none) ROUTER agent settings: Accounting: disabled Automatic percent-hack handling: enabled Sender header for outgoing VMS Mail messages: included if necessary JNET agent settings: Automatic percent-hack handling: enabled BSMTP replies: disabled Accounting: disabled Lenient about gatewaying mail: no No mailer username set. DECnet_SMTP agent settings: Retry interval: 0 00:30:00.00 Maximum number of retries: 96 Accounting disabled. SITE agent settings: Retry interval: 0 00:30:00.00 Maximum number of retries: 96 X25_SMTP agent settings: Retry interval: 0 00:30:00.00 Maximum number of retries: 96 Accounting disabled. MLF agent settings: Maximum recipients per message: NONE (no limit) Days of week to delay file server files: Monday,Tuesday,Wednesday,Thursday,Friday,Saturday,Sunday No local domains defined. No inside networks/hosts defined. MCP> > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Madison [SMTP:madison@MadGoat.COM] > Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 2:55 PM > To: MX-List@MadGoat.com > Cc: JCogar@usmsc.edu > Subject: RE: ORIGIN UNKNOWN , CANCELLED FOR MAIL SENT FROM MX HOST > AFTER UPGRA DE TO MX051 > > > After upgrade to mx051 from 042 mail send from local use xxx to > >themselves fails with unknown origin , cancelled in mcp queue show/full > > > > user has vms mail set forward/user=xxx mx%"xxx@mydomain" > >patches 2,4, and 10 applied to mx051 > > > > How do I fix this? > > Just to make sure... you did shut down and restart MX after applying the > patches, right? Also, does the user get an error message from VMS MAIL > when the problem occurs? If so, can you include the text of the error? > > -Matt > > -- > Matthew Madison | MadGoat Software | PO Box 556, Santa Cruz, CA 95061 > USA > madison@madgoat.com > http://www.madgoat.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 12:50:31 -0800 Subject: Re: ORIGIN UNKNOWN , CANCELLED FOR MAIL SENT FROM MX HOST AFTER UPGRA DE TO MX051 From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER) Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <383afc9d@news.kapsch.co.at> Date: 23 Nov 1999 21:44:13 +0100 To: MX-List@LISTS.WKU.EDU In article , Joyce Cogar writes: > After upgrade to mx051 from 042 mail send from local use xxx to >themselves fails with unknown origin , cancelled in mcp queue show/full > > user has vms mail set forward/user=xxx mx%"xxx@mydomain" >patches 2,4, and 10 applied to mx051 > > How do I fix this? I once had this and it turned out to be not related to MX051 or patches. If you do a (implicit maybe) $ MAIL/EDIT from a terminal which is not a supported CRT, you get a message in VMSmail %MAIL-E-SENDABORT, no message sent just at the time the editor should be invoked. But you won't get the %TPU-E-NONANSICRT, SYS$INPUT must be supported CRT which is the real reason. Matt, Hunter, I think this should be covered in the MX doc or FAQ. -- Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Tel. +43 1 81111-2651 Network and OpenVMS system manager Fax. +43 1 81111-888 FBFV/Information Services E-mail eplan@kapsch.net <<< KAPSCH AG Wagenseilgasse 1 PSImail PSI%(0232)281001141::EPLAN A-1121 VIENNA AUSTRIA "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" "VMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT V8.0 to be!" Compaq, 22-Sep-1998 ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 08:41:10 -0800 Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 10:40:59 -0600 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev at DLS" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM Message-ID: <009E19F0.DC0CFF7F.7@mail.dls.net> Subject: MX Local & disusered user Hi ! I have a situation which looks like a problem: We have a user which is disusered in SYSUAF, incoming mail for this account seems to lock MX Local agent. MCP STAT show that MX Local processing the same entry for very long time. ECO 6,10/14 was applied. TIA. C U, SysMan ..........................................................+ | Cel: +7 (901) 971-3222 http://home.dls.net | Fax: +7 (812) 115-1035 ................................................... Frying on the VMS + ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 09:11:01 -0800 Sender: madison@MadGoat.Com Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 09:10:55 -0800 From: Matt Madison Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: laishev@mail.dls.net Message-ID: <009E19E4.46F52601.5@MadGoat.Com> Subject: RE: MX Local & disusered user > I have a situation which looks like a problem: >We have a user which is disusered in SYSUAF, incoming mail for this account >seems to lock MX Local agent. MCP STAT show that MX Local processing the same >entry for very long time. > > ECO 6,10/14 was applied. How about ECOs 2 and 4? Do you want the user to receive mail? If not, set it DISMAIL also. -Matt -- Matthew Madison | MadGoat Software | PO Box 556, Santa Cruz, CA 95061 USA madison@madgoat.com http://www.madgoat.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 09:29:41 -0800 Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 11:27:29 -0600 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev at DLS" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: madison@MadGoat.COM CC: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM Message-ID: <009E19F7.5AC89BFF.26@mail.dls.net> Subject: RE: MX Local & disusered user Hi Matt! > I have a situation which looks like a problem: >We have a user which is disusered in SYSUAF, incoming mail for this account >seems to lock MX Local agent. MCP STAT show that MX Local processing the same >entry for very long time. > > ECO 6,10/14 was applied. How about ECOs 2 and 4? Ok. I just applied these ECOs. Do you want the user to receive mail? If not, set it DISMAIL also. Yes. We need to receive mails for disusered accounts, because after some time these accounts will switched to an active state again. Thanks Matt! I'll continue investigate situation. -Matt -- Matthew Madison | MadGoat Software | PO Box 556, Santa Cruz, CA 95061 USA madison@madgoat.com http://www.madgoat.com C U, SysMan ..........................................................+ | Cel: +7 (901) 971-3222 http://home.dls.net | Fax: +7 (812) 115-1035 ................................................... Frying on the VMS + ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 10:32:59 -0800 Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 12:31:56 -0600 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev at DLS" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Message-ID: <009E1A00.5BBD2D6A.58@mail.dls.net> Subject: RE: MX Local & disusered user Hi Matt! > I have a situation which looks like a problem: >We have a user which is disusered in SYSUAF, incoming mail for this account >seems to lock MX Local agent. MCP STAT show that MX Local processing the same >entry for very long time. > > ECO 6,10/14 was applied. How about ECOs 2 and 4? Ok. I just applied these ECOs. Do you want the user to receive mail? If not, set it DISMAIL also. Ok. Some other info: disk quota for this user is exhausted, may be it's reason hor hanging of MX Local? -Matt -- Matthew Madison | MadGoat Software | PO Box 556, Santa Cruz, CA 95061 USA madison@madgoat.com http://www.madgoat.com Regards, SysMan at DLS. www.dls.net - "Connecting with care" , ph:847/854-4799,fax:847/854-0970 www.radiusvms.com - Free & commercial software for ISP running OpenVMS. ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 01:06:26 -0800 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 10:02:04 +0100 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: Anders Olsson Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: Trusted users cannot send mail MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello! With help mostly from you I got rid of open relaying via my mailserver. Now I have some problems with opening up the server for certain users.=20 Swedish universities have an agreement with a commersial service provider. Students, researchers etc can work from home and still have adresses identifying their institutions. I have had problems to solve this situation. I had these settings (I omitt what=B4s irrelevant): SMTP server settings: Allow VRFY commands: disabled Act as SMTP relay for any host: disabled [SHOW LOCAL_DOMAINS lists hosts] Validate sender's domain name: enabled Realtime Blackhole List check: enabled (domain: rbl.maps.vix.com) Local domain patterns for SMTP relay checks: *.KTH.SE =20 Inside IP networks/hosts: 130.237.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 Now I also want people to be able to send mail from home when using this service provider. They have addresses like this: du128-235.ppp.kth-anst.tninet.se . Our university have an range if IP:s, 195.100.235.128-191 . I thought it would be sufficient just to just change local domain pattern so I changed the settings to:=20 Local domain patterns for SMTP relay checks: *.KTH.SE *.KTH-ANST.TNINET.SE =20 Inside IP networks/hosts: 130.237.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 That didn=B4t work as shown in one logfile 27-NOV-1999 12:28:04.62: MX SMTP server: rejected message from to sent by [195.100.235.128] due to disabled rela y Must I change the inside IP also or must I put in these IPnumbers in the local domain, all 64 of them or is there another solution. There is no case-sensitivity involved here, is there? Anyway, readig the documents got me thinking that what I had done would be sufficient. By the way, we have MX 5.1 and VMS 7.1. Excuse this talkaholic message. I couldn't explane it in any shorter way. Thanks for any help? ---------------------------------------------------------- Anders Olsson Royal Institute of Technology Library S-100 44 Stockholm Sweden ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 07:00:23 -0800 Sender: madison@MadGoat.Com Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 07:00:17 -0800 From: Matt Madison Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: anders@lib.kth.se Message-ID: <009E1DBF.DB02DAE4.1@MadGoat.Com> Subject: RE: Trusted users cannot send mail MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >With help mostly from you I got rid of open relaying via my mailserver. No= w >I have some problems with opening up the server for certain users.=20 =5B...=5D >Now I also want people to be able to send mail from home when using this >service provider. They have addresses like this: >du128-235.ppp.kth-anst.tninet.se . Our university have an range if IP:s, >195.100.235.128-191 . > >I thought it would be sufficient just to just change local domain pattern >so I changed the settings to:=20 > >Local domain patterns for SMTP relay checks: > *.KTH.SE > *.KTH-ANST.TNINET.SE >=20 >Inside IP networks/hosts: > 130.237.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 > >That didn=B4t work as shown in one logfile > >27-NOV-1999 12:28:04.62: MX SMTP server: rejected message from >se> to sent by =5B195.100.235.128=5D due to d= isabled >rela >y > >Must I change the inside IP also or must I put in these IPnumbers in the >local domain, all 64 of them or is there another solution. There is no >case-sensitivity involved here, is there? Anyway, readig the documents got >me thinking that what I had done would be sufficient. By the way, we have >MX 5.1 and VMS 7.1. You need to add the service provider's network to the INSIDE_NETWORK list, too. If I did my math right, this one command should do the trick: DEFINE INSIDE_NETWORK 195.100.235.128/NETMASK=3D255.255.255.192 -Matt --=20 Matthew Madison =7C MadGoat Software =7C PO Box 556, Santa Cruz, CA 950= 61 USA madison=40madgoat.com http://www.madgoat= .com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 07:22:57 -0800 Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 16:18:36 +0100 To: MX-List@MadGoat.com From: Anders Olsson Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com Subject: RE: Trusted users cannot send mail In-Reply-To: <009E1DBF.DB02DAE4.1@MadGoat.Com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >>Must I change the inside IP also or must I put in these IPnumbers in the >>local domain, all 64 of them or is there another solution. There is no >>case-sensitivity involved here, is there? Anyway, readig the documents got >>me thinking that what I had done would be sufficient. By the way, we have >>MX 5.1 and VMS 7.1. > >You need to add the service provider's network to the INSIDE_NETWORK list, >too. If I did my math right, this one command should do the trick: > > DEFINE INSIDE_NETWORK 195.100.235.128/NETMASK=3D255.255.255.192 > >-Matt > >--=20 > But wouldn=B4t this just allow the user who happened to get that ip-number. We got from 128 to 191 for the last group of numbers.=20 What if I did=20 DEFINE INSIDE_NETWORK 195.100.235.*/NETMASK=3D255.255.255.0 wouldn=B4t the ones with, for example, 195.100.235.149 be able then?=20 Is the manual really clear about this? Under the command define local I couldn=B4t see that I also had to change define_inside. Anders __________________________________________________________ " En juste flanellograf sl=E5r vilken webl=E4sare som helst" (L.= Wittgenstein) __________________________________________________________ Anders Olsson, Systemadministrat=F6r, KTHB tel: 08-790 71 07 alt. 070-641 39 63 Fax: 08-790 78 52 mailto:anders@lib.kth.se ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 07:47:52 -0800 Sender: madison@MadGoat.Com Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 07:47:47 -0800 From: Matt Madison Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: anders@lib.kth.se Message-ID: <009E1DC6.7DE366A6.1@MadGoat.Com> Subject: RE: Trusted users cannot send mail MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >>You need to add the service provider's network to the INSIDE_NETWORK list= , >>too. If I did my math right, this one command should do the trick: >> >> DEFINE INSIDE_NETWORK 195.100.235.128/NETMASK=3D255.255.255.192 >> >>-Matt >> >>--=20 >> >But wouldn=B4t this just allow the user who happened to get that ip-number= . >We got >from 128 to 191 for the last group of numbers.=20 >What if I did=20 >DEFINE INSIDE_NETWORK 195.100.235.*/NETMASK=3D255.255.255.0 > >wouldn=B4t the ones with, for example, 195.100.235.149 be able then?=20 That's not the correct syntax for an INSIDE_NETWORK definition. The comman= d I gave you should work OK. The source address is ANDed with the NETMASK, and if the result equals the network number specified, it's a match. The netmask I gave you will retain the top two bits of the last byte, and they'= ll have to be =2210=22 for there to be a match; I believe that's the correct w= ay to specify a range of 128 through 191. Anything above 191 or below 128 wil= l be excluded, which is what you want. >Is the manual really clear about this? Under the command define local I >couldn=B4t see >that I also had to change define_inside. Yes, perhaps it could be clearer. -Matt --=20 Matthew Madison =7C MadGoat Software =7C PO Box 556, Santa Cruz, CA 950= 61 USA madison=40madgoat.com http://www.madgoat= .com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 08:34:38 -0800 Message-ID: From: Joyce Cogar Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: "'MX-List@MadGoat.com'" Subject: RE: ORIGIN UNKNOWN , CANCELLED FOR MAIL SENT FROM MX HOST AFTER U PGRA DE TO MX051 Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 11:30:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I did shutdown after applying the patches. I am still having this problem. I turned on debug (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE) [kernel] [shareable,system] [Protection=(RWC,RWC,R,R)] [Owner=[VMS,SYSTEM]] "MX_LOCAL_DEBUG" [exec] = "1" "MX_ROUTER_DEBUG" [exec] = "1" "MX_SITE_DEBUG" [exec] = "1" "MX_SMTP_DEBUG" [exec] = "1" no error information showed up in any of the *.log files. I didn't get any logs with the .log_processid this is a cluster - how do I resolve the origin unknown problem??? > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Madison [SMTP:madison@MadGoat.COM] > Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 2:55 PM > To: MX-List@MadGoat.com > Cc: JCogar@usmsc.edu > Subject: RE: ORIGIN UNKNOWN , CANCELLED FOR MAIL SENT FROM MX HOST > AFTER UPGRA DE TO MX051 > > > After upgrade to mx051 from 042 mail send from local use xxx to > >themselves fails with unknown origin , cancelled in mcp queue show/full > > > > user has vms mail set forward/user=xxx mx%"xxx@mydomain" > >patches 2,4, and 10 applied to mx051 > > > > How do I fix this? > > Just to make sure... you did shut down and restart MX after applying the > patches, right? Also, does the user get an error message from VMS MAIL > when the problem occurs? If so, can you include the text of the error? > > -Matt > > -- > Matthew Madison | MadGoat Software | PO Box 556, Santa Cruz, CA 95061 > USA > madison@madgoat.com > http://www.madgoat.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 09:36:28 -0800 Sender: madison@MadGoat.Com Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 09:36:23 -0800 From: Matt Madison Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-List@MadGoat.com CC: JCogar@usmsc.edu Message-ID: <009E1DD5.A9A1ABAE.1@MadGoat.Com> Subject: RE: ORIGIN UNKNOWN , CANCELLED FOR MAIL SENT FROM MX HOST AFTER U PGRA DE TO MX051 > I did shutdown after applying the patches. I am still having this >problem. I turned on debug > > >(LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE) [kernel] [shareable,system] > [Protection=(RWC,RWC,R,R)] [Owner=[VMS,SYSTEM]] > > "MX_LOCAL_DEBUG" [exec] = "1" > "MX_ROUTER_DEBUG" [exec] = "1" > "MX_SITE_DEBUG" [exec] = "1" > "MX_SMTP_DEBUG" [exec] = "1" >no error information showed up in any of the *.log files. I didn't get any >logs with the .log_processid >this is a cluster - how do I resolve the origin unknown problem??? I think we need some more information: Does this happen for all users, or just one particular user? Does it happen only on VMS MAIL entry, or do messages coming in via SMTP get the same treatment? What is the outcome of the following commands: $ pctfree = F$INTEGER(F$TRNLNM("MX_FLQ_DISK_FREE_RESERVED")) $ capacity = F$GETDVI("MX_FLQ_DIR","MAXBLOCK") $ freeblks = F$GETDVI("MX_FLQ_DIR","FREEBLOCKS") $ pctactual = freeblks * 100 / capacity $ WRITE SYS$OUTPUT F$FAO("max=!UL,free=!UL,pct=!UL,required=!UL,full=!UL",- capacity,freeblks,pctactual,pctfree) $ IF pctactual .LT. pctfree THEN WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "QUEUE FULL" If this happens only through VMS MAIL, can you include a session log of one of the failures? Typically, an entry shows up with "origin unknown" when the message entry was cancelled prematurely. What I'm trying to figure out here is what is causing the cancellation to occur. -Matt -- Matthew Madison | MadGoat Software | PO Box 556, Santa Cruz, CA 95061 USA madison@madgoat.com http://www.madgoat.com ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 19:19:39 -0800 Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 21:15:30 CDT From: J Kmoch Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: MX-LIST@MADGOAT.COM CC: kmoch@whscdp.whs.edu Message-ID: <009E1E37.54725FE0.10@whscdp.whs.edu> Subject: insecure email relay We have been detected by ORBS as an insecure email relay. This has probably been discussed before, so can someone point me to some information or directions to secure our email server? We are using MX 4.2 on a VMS 6.2 system. Thanks for your help. Joe -- Joe Kmoch Washington High School kmoch@whs.edu 2525 N. Sherman Blvd (414) 449-2765 (office) Milwaukee, WI 53210 (414) 444-9250 (fax) (414) 444-9760 (gen school phone) ================================================================================ Archive-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 20:54:01 -0800 Message-ID: <019901bf3aee$edb12420$de2c67cb@stmarks.pp.catholic.edu.au> From: "Geoff Roberts" Reply-To: MX-List@MadGoat.com To: References: <009E1E37.54725FE0.10@whscdp.whs.edu> Subject: Re: insecure email relay Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:24:04 +1030 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ----- Original Message ----- From: J Kmoch To: Cc: Sent: Tuesday, 30 November 1999 12:45 Subject: insecure email relay > We have been detected by ORBS as an insecure email relay. This has probably > been discussed before, so can someone point me to some information or > directions to secure our email server? We are using MX 4.2 on a VMS 6.2 > system. Unfortunately, it means you MUST upgrade to MX 5.1 MX 4.2 has no facility to allow for disabling of relaying. Period. I'm sure the Madgoat folks will give you a good deal. They looked after us. Cheers Geoff Roberts Computer Systems Manager Saint Mark's College Port Pirie, South Australia. Email: geoffrob@stmarks.pp.catholic.edu.au netcafe@pirie.mtx.net.au ICQ #: 1970476