1 INFO-VAX	Thu, 27 Dec 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 719       Contents:5 =?GB2312?B?zfjC57ncwO28xrfRz7XNs9Taz9/K1NPDyerH6w==?= > Re: Buffer Overflows - again Was: (Re: Congratulations for the> Re: Buffer Overflows - again Was: (Re: Congratulations for the> Re: Buffer Overflows - again Was: (Re: Congratulations for the> Re: Buffer Overflows - again Was: (Re: Congratulations for the> Re: Buffer Overflows - again Was: (Re: Congratulations for the9 Re: Changing the target (was Re: ... Alphacide both ways) * Re: Congratulations for the festive season* Re: Congratulations for the festive season2 Gartner deems SQL Server, XP, Microsoft "UNSECURE"6 Re: Gartner deems SQL Server, XP, Microsoft "UNSECURE"6 Re: Gartner deems SQL Server, XP, Microsoft "UNSECURE"6 Re: Gartner deems SQL Server, XP, Microsoft "UNSECURE"0 Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceeds- Re: Minute Day of the DCL: the 2001 Challenge % Re: modem config for terminal server? ; Re: News Alert: Air Packaging Technologies (OTC BB:AIRP.OB) , ODS-5 Case preservation - was something else, Re: OpenVMS  vs. Unix  -  put up or shut up!, Re: OpenVMS  vs. Unix  -  put up or shut up!, Re: OpenVMS  vs. Unix  -  put up or shut up!, Re: OpenVMS  vs. Unix  -  put up or shut up!, Re: OpenVMS  vs. Unix  -  put up or shut up! Security privileges  Re: Security privileges 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) 7 Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS) % Re: What Goes Around, Comes Around... & Re: What Goes Around, Comes Around....& Re: What Goes Around, Comes Around....& Re: What Goes Around, Comes Around....& Re: What Goes Around, Comes Around....& Re: What Goes Around, Comes Around....% Where oh where has The Register gone? ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone? ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone? ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone? ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone? ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone? ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone? ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone? ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone? ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone? ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone? ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone? ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone? ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:36:34 +0800  From: sales@econet.com.cn > Subject: =?GB2312?B?zfjC57ncwO28xrfRz7XNs9Taz9/K1NPDyerH6w==?=9 Message-ID: <iss.5c14.3c2add52.34488.1@mx2.east.saic.com>   L 1/C+tLXEv827p6GizfjC57i61PDIy6OsxPq6wwogICAgyOe6ztPQ0Ke1xMD708O6zbncwO3P38K3L 18rUtKOs0tS+ob/sytW72M2218q78rz1x+EKxvPStdTa1eK3vcPmtcS4urWjo6yzyc6qz7XNs7ncL wO3Usbyx0Oi94r72tcTOyszioaPG5ArW0NfuudjQxLXEvs3Kx834wufKudPDx+m/9rXEudzA7aOsL sPzAqM2zvMbTw7unyc/N+MH3wb+jrAq8xsvjyc/N+LfR08OjrLzHwry3w87KxNrI3aOsv9jWxrfDL zsrB98G/tcguCiAgICDS17/GzfjC59XrttTJz8r2zsrM4qOszqogSVNQIKGixvPKwtK1taXOu6GiL 1f64rrv6CrnYoaK089DNzfiwyaGi0afQo6Gi16HVrNChx/i1yNPDu6fM4bmpwcvSu8zXyv2+3de8L yLehogqwssirv8m/v6GistnX98Hpu+63vbHjtcS8xrfRz7XNs6Gjy/zNqLn9ttTN+MLnwffBv7rNL CsqxvOS1xLLJvK+8x8K8us231s72o6y94brPuPfW1rzGt9HV/rLfo6iwtMqxvOShorC0wfcKwb+hL orD81MK1yKOpo6zJ+rPJ1eu21LK7zazTw7un1cu6xbvySVAgtdjWt7XEyrG85KGiwfcKwb+6zbfRL 08PQxc+io6yyosfSzOG5qbLp0a+6zdXLtaW08tOhuabE3KGjCiAgICDP1tTauMOy+sa30tG+rb+qL t6LN6rPJo6yyos22t8XK0LOho6y7ttOtzai5/bXn19MK08q8/rvxyKHT0LnYuMOy+sa3tcTP6s+4L 18rBz6GjzazKsc7Sw8e/qs2owcvU2s/f0d3KvgrGvcyoo6y49867us/X97vvsOm/ydLUzai5/bfDL zsrS1M/CzfjWt7340NDU2s/fytTTw6GjCs341rejumh0dHA6Ly9ubWJzLmVjb25ldC5jb20uY24KL 08O7p8P7LL/awe7H682ouf2159fT08q8/sv3yKGjqNaxvdO72Li0sb7Tyrz+vLS/yaOpoaMKCrTzL wazS17/GzfjC59PQz965q8u+IEhUVFA6Ly9XV1cuRUNPTkVULkNPTS5DTgoKPT09PT09PT09PT09L PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQq4w9PKvP7TL ySC/xszY08q8/si6t6LI7bz+ILeiy80s08q8/sTayN3T67/GzNjI7bz+zt652Aq/xszYyO28/iBoL dHRwOi8vd3d3LmNhcmV0b3AuY29tCj09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09L PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0KCgo9PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09L PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09CrjD08q8/tPJIL/GzNjTyrz+yLq3osjtL vP4gt6LLzSzTyrz+xNrI3dPrv8bM2MjtvP7O3rnYCr/GzNjI7bz+IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuY2FyZXRvL cC5jb20KPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PQo=   ------------------------------  ! Date: Thu, 27 Dec 01 10:38:17 GMT  From: jmfbahciv@aol.com G Subject: Re: Buffer Overflows - again Was: (Re: Congratulations for the * Message-ID: <a0f531$so$1@bob.news.rcn.net>  , In article <3C289D5F.6080106@tsoft-inc.com>,,    David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote: >> Adam Price wrote: > = >>>How many of those nice SC class supercomputers that Compaq % >>>has been selling recently run VMS?  > G >It would seem to me that users of supercomputers who are doing number  G >crunching would like as little as possible between their calculations  > >and the CPU(s).  From this perspective a minimal OS would be F >appriciated.  Note that such type of computing doesn't care too much J >about user friendly interfaces, databases, security, features, and such. D >  All that just takes away from the job at hand, crunching numbers. > D >Any OS chossen for providing the least amount of services/overhead D >should not be declared the best general purpose OS on such a basis.  9 A good OS would provide that number crunching service by  D treating at least one of its CPUs as a calculating device.  TOPS-10 4 was on the path of being able to do that with SMP.    ? It had started out doing this with master/slave and the SET CPU < ONLY CPU1 command but that wasn't a very good approach sinceB those number crunchers also seemed to want to do I/O occasionally.   /BAH  ' Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:24:33 GMT ' From: bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net> G Subject: Re: Buffer Overflows - again Was: (Re: Congratulations for the 0 Message-ID: <3C2B229A.EA2E7988@bellatlantic.net>   jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote: > . > In article <3C289D5F.6080106@tsoft-inc.com>,. >    David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote: > >> Adam Price wrote: > > ? > >>>How many of those nice SC class supercomputers that Compaq ' > >>>has been selling recently run VMS?  > > H > >It would seem to me that users of supercomputers who are doing numberH > >crunching would like as little as possible between their calculations? > >and the CPU(s).  From this perspective a minimal OS would be G > >appriciated.  Note that such type of computing doesn't care too much K > >about user friendly interfaces, databases, security, features, and such. F > >  All that just takes away from the job at hand, crunching numbers. > > E > >Any OS chossen for providing the least amount of services/overhead F > >should not be declared the best general purpose OS on such a basis. > : > A good OS would provide that number crunching service byE > treating at least one of its CPUs as a calculating device.  TOPS-10 4 > was on the path of being able to do that with SMP. > A > It had started out doing this with master/slave and the SET CPU > > ONLY CPU1 command but that wasn't a very good approach sinceD > those number crunchers also seemed to want to do I/O occasionally. Barb, B you are correct. in the 70s/80s The dec concept of SMP was rather H immature. We had a few variations on the hardware side that would allow D various means of multiprocessing.  If you go back to the transputer H stuff, an experiment that was at least interesting in its architecture, G you find cruncher/compute engine, limited i/o and limited memory.  The  E whole push toward SMP was to provide some real boost in computational D capability without knowing what that really meant. We hung array andC accelerated vector processors off various systems to give them some > enhanced crunch power.  Mean while, we tried to design systemsD with the right compute/io balance point.  I maybe wrong but  I don'tC believe we ever reached a maturity level in the SMP realm on the 10 > family, even with the vaxen.  The alpha boxes and the crossbar
 technologyF employed in the multiproc boxes is rather impressive and does seem to F display a substantial level of maturity in some respects. However, theE key imho is the compilers and really the OS.  Perhaps one could argue G that the DS series alphas are just a loosely coupled system in the same G box, I could not argue this either way.  But the OS, the bsd variants,  G VMS, DU/Tru, and Linux all seem to support the multi cpu boxes and make 3 them perform - depending on the problem of course!!  >  > /BAH > ) > Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.    ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 14:35:55 +0100 (MET) 9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> G Subject: Re: Buffer Overflows - again Was: (Re: Congratulations for the ; Message-ID: <01KCD6ZNE3B88ZE7Q7@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>   H > It would seem to me that users of supercomputers who are doing number H > crunching would like as little as possible between their calculations ? > and the CPU(s).  From this perspective a minimal OS would be  G > appriciated.  Note that such type of computing doesn't care too much  K > about user friendly interfaces, databases, security, features, and such.   > C > All that just takes away from the job at hand, crunching numbers.   C True in theory.  In practice, however, compiler quality is also an  H issue, and perhaps binary compatibility with a development machine.  An 7 advantage of VMS: the same on a small or large machine.    ------------------------------  ! Date: Thu, 27 Dec 01 13:25:27 GMT  From: jmfbahciv@aol.com G Subject: Re: Buffer Overflows - again Was: (Re: Congratulations for the + Message-ID: <a0fese$534$1@bob.news.rcn.net>   0 In article <3C2B229A.EA2E7988@bellatlantic.net>,+    bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net> wrote:  >jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:  >>  / >> In article <3C289D5F.6080106@tsoft-inc.com>, / >>    David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:  >> >> Adam Price wrote:  >> >@ >> >>>How many of those nice SC class supercomputers that Compaq( >> >>>has been selling recently run VMS? >> >I >> >It would seem to me that users of supercomputers who are doing number I >> >crunching would like as little as possible between their calculations @ >> >and the CPU(s).  From this perspective a minimal OS would beH >> >appriciated.  Note that such type of computing doesn't care too muchG >> >about user friendly interfaces, databases, security, features, and   such. G >> >  All that just takes away from the job at hand, crunching numbers.  >> >F >> >Any OS chossen for providing the least amount of services/overheadG >> >should not be declared the best general purpose OS on such a basis.  >>  ; >> A good OS would provide that number crunching service by F >> treating at least one of its CPUs as a calculating device.  TOPS-105 >> was on the path of being able to do that with SMP.  >>  B >> It had started out doing this with master/slave and the SET CPU? >> ONLY CPU1 command but that wasn't a very good approach since E >> those number crunchers also seemed to want to do I/O occasionally.  >Barb,C >you are correct. in the 70s/80s The dec concept of SMP was rather  
 >immature.  : Nope.  We didn't have an SMP concept in the 70s; we had a > master/slave concept then.  During that time, the applications? that required a dedicated CPU was offloaded to a mini...usually @ an -11 but I've heard of some amazing things that were done with PDP-8s.   C > .. We had a few variations on the hardware side that would allow  E >various means of multiprocessing.  If you go back to the transputer  I >stuff, an experiment that was at least interesting in its architecture,  B >you find cruncher/compute engine, limited i/o and limited memory.  = Which didn't handle number crunching at all.  Hint: those who : had such problems needed the answers to be recorded.  Also> number crunching usually involved lots of data.  That required memory and input facilities.     > ...  The  F >whole push toward SMP was to provide some real boost in computational3 >capability without knowing what that really meant.   > Nope.  The whole push towards SMP was to make use of the extra CPUs' capabilities.    > ... We hung array and D >accelerated vector processors off various systems to give them some? >enhanced crunch power.  Mean while, we tried to design systems E >with the right compute/io balance point.  I maybe wrong but  I don't D >believe we ever reached a maturity level in the SMP realm on the 10 >family, even with the vaxen.     = You are wrong.  We simply did not have the time to evolve the 9 SMP idea.  Not even JMF nor TW appreciated the thing they : implemented to all of its possibilities.  I was working on& them when the product line got killed.  $ > ..The alpha boxes and the crossbar >technology G >employed in the multiproc boxes is rather impressive and does seem to  G >display a substantial level of maturity in some respects. However, the . >key imho is the compilers and really the OS.   @ Nope.  The key to maturity is a cooperation between the hardwareA and software developers.  DEC never had that.  I think it was due > to the almost 100% turnover of personnel on the hardware side.A The reason we kept designing really awful peripherals is that the ? old dogs who had learned the tricks with one design didn't stay  for the next generation.   > .. Perhaps one could argueH >that the DS series alphas are just a loosely coupled system in the sameH >box, I could not argue this either way.  But the OS, the bsd variants, H >VMS, DU/Tru, and Linux all seem to support the multi cpu boxes and make4 >them perform - depending on the problem of course!!  = JMF did a Unix SMP.  The OS had a flaw in its philosophy that ; didn't allow reentrancy.  I've lost the writeup about those < specific problems.  Some day, the people who co-authored may post it.   /BAH  ' Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:30:04 GMT ' From: bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net> G Subject: Re: Buffer Overflows - again Was: (Re: Congratulations for the 0 Message-ID: <3C2B4E17.469FE1C7@bellatlantic.net>   jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote: > 2 > In article <3C2B229A.EA2E7988@bellatlantic.net>,- >    bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net> wrote:  > >jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:  > >>1 > >> In article <3C289D5F.6080106@tsoft-inc.com>, 1 > >>    David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:  > >> >> Adam Price wrote:  > >> >B > >> >>>How many of those nice SC class supercomputers that Compaq* > >> >>>has been selling recently run VMS? > >> >K > >> >It would seem to me that users of supercomputers who are doing number K > >> >crunching would like as little as possible between their calculations B > >> >and the CPU(s).  From this perspective a minimal OS would beJ > >> >appriciated.  Note that such type of computing doesn't care too muchH > >> >about user friendly interfaces, databases, security, features, and > such. I > >> >  All that just takes away from the job at hand, crunching numbers.  > >> >H > >> >Any OS chossen for providing the least amount of services/overheadI > >> >should not be declared the best general purpose OS on such a basis.  > >>= > >> A good OS would provide that number crunching service by H > >> treating at least one of its CPUs as a calculating device.  TOPS-107 > >> was on the path of being able to do that with SMP.  > >>D > >> It had started out doing this with master/slave and the SET CPUA > >> ONLY CPU1 command but that wasn't a very good approach since G > >> those number crunchers also seemed to want to do I/O occasionally.  > >Barb,D > >you are correct. in the 70s/80s The dec concept of SMP was rather > >immature. > ; > Nope.  We didn't have an SMP concept in the 70s; we had a @ > master/slave concept then.  During that time, the applicationsA > that required a dedicated CPU was offloaded to a mini...usually B > an -11 but I've heard of some amazing things that were done with	 > PDP-8s. ? Tuat was why I said 70s/80s.  Go back to your memory of Hydra,  < the 11/74, and the others that were done in the 70s. In the . early 80s there were the efforts you refer to. > D > > .. We had a few variations on the hardware side that would allowF > >various means of multiprocessing.  If you go back to the transputerJ > >stuff, an experiment that was at least interesting in its architecture,D > >you find cruncher/compute engine, limited i/o and limited memory. > ? > Which didn't handle number crunching at all.  Hint: those whou< > had such problems needed the answers to be recorded.  Also@ > number crunching usually involved lots of data.  That required > memory and input facilities.: Crap. What you refer to as number crunching, I am not sure? of.  I am specifically not citing examples to keep this generalQ= but if you want examples, fluid dyanmics, weather simulation,rE and so on. I don't know what you mean by memory and input facilities. 9 I cite machines used to do weather prognostication in theS; 70s and 80s. Their models were large but the computers had  C rather limited memory compared to what is available now.  Of coursei@ they require mem and io. I don't recall how big the internal memI on a transputer was. I do recall that when various array processers were i= added to machines, they often came with their own local mem -h say FPS, or Cray, or Sky.. >  > > ...  TheH > >whole push toward SMP was to provide some real boost in computational5 > >capability without knowing what that really meant.u > @ > Nope.  The whole push towards SMP was to make use of the extra > CPUs' capabilities.e >  > > ... We hung array andnF > >accelerated vector processors off various systems to give them someA > >enhanced crunch power.  Mean while, we tried to design systemsdG > >with the right compute/io balance point.  I maybe wrong but  I don't F > >believe we ever reached a maturity level in the SMP realm on the 10 > >family, even with the vaxen.e > ? > You are wrong.  We simply did not have the time to evolve the ; > SMP idea.  Not even JMF nor TW appreciated the thing theye< > implemented to all of its possibilities.  I was working on( > them when the product line got killed. > & > > ..The alpha boxes and the crossbar
 > >technologyhH > >employed in the multiproc boxes is rather impressive and does seem toI > >display a substantial level of maturity in some respects. However, theT/ > >key imho is the compilers and really the OS.g > B > Nope.  The key to maturity is a cooperation between the hardwareC > and software developers.  DEC never had that.  I think it was due-@ > to the almost 100% turnover of personnel on the hardware side.C > The reason we kept designing really awful peripherals is that the8A > old dogs who had learned the tricks with one design didn't stay8 > for the next generation.; To that I say bullshit.  In 8, 11, and 10 land we did have 6A cooperation between the hw and sw crew.  You know that.  I spent cB plenty of time working otu design details with sw folks on variousB io devices before they were built.  Yes there was a turn over Yes  many of us left. >  > > .. Perhaps one could argueJ > >that the DS series alphas are just a loosely coupled system in the sameI > >box, I could not argue this either way.  But the OS, the bsd variants,gJ > >VMS, DU/Tru, and Linux all seem to support the multi cpu boxes and make6 > >them perform - depending on the problem of course!! > ? > JMF did a Unix SMP.  The OS had a flaw in its philosophy thatW= > didn't allow reentrancy.  I've lost the writeup about thoset> > specific problems.  Some day, the people who co-authored may
 > post it. >  > /BAH > ) > Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.8   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:50:22 GMT7* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>B Subject: Re: Changing the target (was Re: ... Alphacide both ways)B Message-ID: <ijIW7.414333$8q.35076514@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message/ news:3C287827.3FAD9F55@swissonline.delete.ch...T >S& > Bill Todd wrote (in another posting) >7L > > No, you've given up shooting entirely and retreated to the same kinds of7 > > pleading that have been so ineffective in the past.T >TJ > Don't ever try to tell me what I think or why I think it!  I am the only > person who ever knows that.G  I Since I did nothing of the kind, perhaps you're yet another whose reading6I skills need polishing.  I did explicitly *speculate* on what you might beTH thinking, and will continue to feel free to do so:  it's what one shouldC expect when one's actions seem inconsistent with one's prior stated:J positions.  And I did state (above) what you're *doing*, regardless of how you may choose to view it.  I In the final paragraph of a different post, 12/24/01 6:45 P.M. EST, I didtL accuse you of watering down your statements in the hope of establishing someH kind of effective communication with the cretins running Compaq.  *That*L sentence did indeed presume to devine your intent from your words, and whileH that intent seemed crystal-clear if there is some other explanation feel free to present it.m  L In the absence of such, I'll stand by my comparison to Neville Chamberlain'sL hopeful but misguided attitude in 1938.  If you'd like a more modern exampleI that touches on slightly different aspects of the situation, consider the I Gulf War.  Saddam Hussein presented the world with a sudden fait accomplitI (occupied Kuwait) in much the same manner as Compaq did on June 25th, and K the easiest thing to do would have been just to shrug our shoulders and let K it stand:  he had what he wanted, we could buy oil from him as easily as wenK could from Kuwait, getting him out of there would not be easy or cheap, andiL we had enough experience dealing with him to know that it was possible to do so.   J While there may have been strategic reasons to want to roll back the clockK in that case, they weren't what caused such massive popular support for it:-L it just stuck in people's craws to let such overt aggression go unanswered -L it just wasn't right.  I feel the same way about what happened on June 25th,I but if the rest of the world is willing to choke it down and keep dealing@F with those responsible for it then I'm certainly not going to press on alone.   ...d  H > One important thing factor is getting a re-invigorated approach to VMSI > happening as soon as possible regardless of any merger that may happen.tB > As you say, any delays will only see further deterioration.  TheG > abandoning of the merger should cause a major reshuffle within CompaqeH > and while that *may* be a good thing, there are no guarantees that the! > situation for VMS will improve.N  L The only guarantee is that the people will have been replaced by a differentJ set who at least have not *already proven* unresponsive to what we have to offer.   >tG > What I am trying to do by my emphasis on poor marketing is to sow the : > seeds for a positive change whichever way the game goes.  F The existing ground has already proven unfertile, so sowing them there2 rather than promoting a change is a waste of time.  I I've asked you several times to specify exactly how your current approachtK differs from the abjectly failed approaches that we and others have pursuedhF for years.  Marketing problems were the centerpiece of the analysis weH submitted to Capellas.  He brushed it down to Marcello, whom we met withF along with his entire staff (including the marketing people) - so thatE ground was covered 18 months ago.  People have been sending emails tor' everyone they could think of for years.f  C And yet, VMS marketing hasn't changed a whit.  Customers still haveeI difficulty researching VMS solutions, and when they do succeed in gettingoK information it's still accompanied by pressure to consider Wintel solutionsaF instead.  New VMS development is even worse off than before June 25th:J they're getting a few more people, but the existing experienced developersL like Fred and Hoff are now neck-deep in porting rather than adding features,K so it's a net loss (unless one considers the port to be more important thanrI keeping Alpha alive and VMS moving forward would have been).  And the VMS D customer base will erode *at least* until VMS becomes available on a platform with a future.d  G You say the economic situation now makes things different.  If Compaq'suG management couldn't see the benefits of focusing on their higher-marginhL products before, just what makes you think that they'll be more clear-headedL now that they have the added pressures of a recession and a stumbling merger
 to deal with?   I As I said above, if you and the rest of those who initially seemed prettytG upset would prefer to retreat into such fantasies I'm not about to playcK nursemaid to try to keep you from getting burned by them.  But don't expect- me to agree.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 03:36:04 -0500B- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>B3 Subject: Re: Congratulations for the festive season , Message-ID: <3C2ADD4B.FCF038DF@videotron.ca>   Jim Becker wrote: B > Another possibility is that given all the stock exchanges, stateF > lotteries, and funds transfers that run on VMS, you'd think that the8 > places with all the money would be the bigger targets.  + Humm, try netcraft on the various places...h  # NASDAQ runs IIS as its web servers.hM LOTO-QUEBEC also runs on IIS for its web servers. (they are a tandem shop for  the actual lottery).  0 The NYSE is more serious, it runs apache on IBM.  K A machine hidden in the basement (or below a mountain) and not connected to,J the internet is not likely to get the hacker attempts that a popular, well known corporate web site is.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 01:20:22 -08001% From: Dean Woodward <deanw@rdrop.com> 3 Subject: Re: Congratulations for the festive seasong) Message-ID: <3C2AE7D6.943445B6@rdrop.com>3   Jim Becker wrote:  > B > Another possibility is that given all the stock exchanges, stateF > lotteries, and funds transfers that run on VMS, you'd think that the8 > places with all the money would be the bigger targets.  ? Mu.  I seriously doubt those machines are connected to publicly>= accessible networks (i.e., the internet) for attack by random>= strangers.  Those that are I would expect to be behind rather ( sophisticated firewalls and VPN devices.   > You'd alsoH > think VMS would be a bigger target given that the vast majority of theD > world's CPUs are manufactured under VMS control. Yet it's just not > happening.  G See above; I see little, if any, need for those machines to have accessi to the internet.   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Dec 2001 06:29:20 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski); Subject: Gartner deems SQL Server, XP, Microsoft "UNSECURE"n= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0112270629.50c24670@posting.google.com>e  6 More Microsoft patches for your 80 million servers ...  ' http://www.theinquirer.net/27120101.htm   ) SQL Server hit by big bad security holes c   Happy holedays P& By Mike Magee, 27/12/2001 08:51:03 BST    F MICROSOFT IS CELEBRATING the end of 2001 by warning its customers thatF two holes in SQL Server have joined the major security hole in Windows$ XP it revealed the week before Yule.? That news comes with a warning from influential market researchcD company the Gartner Group that Microsoft has to improve its software, development and testing to stay in the game.  D The SQL Server holes, the patch for which can be found here, affects- versions 7.0 and Server 2000, said Microsoft.l  F The problem can lead to denial of service attacks, if the patch is not applied, said Microsoft.  @ The new bugs are related to text formatting functions containingD unchecked buffers, and went largely unnoticed after the WinXP hoohahC and over the Yuletide period, but are rated by the Vole as posing aa moderate risk.  ? Meanwhile, Internet News gives Gartner's damning verdict on how B insecure its Web server software is, a story which you can find by clicking just here. t   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:08:44 +0100 1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> ? Subject: Re: Gartner deems SQL Server, XP, Microsoft "UNSECURE" 5 Message-ID: <3C2B397C.3A882212@swissonline.delete.ch>t   Bob Ceculski wrote:  > 8 > More Microsoft patches for your 80 million servers ... > ) > http://www.theinquirer.net/27120101.htmn > * > SQL Server hit by big bad security holes >  > Happy holedays( > By Mike Magee, 27/12/2001 08:51:03 BST > H > MICROSOFT IS CELEBRATING the end of 2001 by warning its customers thatH > two holes in SQL Server have joined the major security hole in Windows& > XP it revealed the week before Yule.A > That news comes with a warning from influential market researchoF > company the Gartner Group that Microsoft has to improve its software. > development and testing to stay in the game.    D I thought XP was supposed to be the most secure form of Windows everF released.  This and the urgent patch for plug-and-pray make that boast sound rather hollow.     John McLeany   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:35:16 +0100  From: Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl>? Subject: Re: Gartner deems SQL Server, XP, Microsoft "UNSECURE"a' Message-ID: <3C2B3FB4.20206327@home.nl>e   John McLean wrote:   > Bob Ceculski wrote:  > >t: > > More Microsoft patches for your 80 million servers ... > >s+ > > http://www.theinquirer.net/27120101.htm  > >o, > > SQL Server hit by big bad security holes > >t > > Happy holedays* > > By Mike Magee, 27/12/2001 08:51:03 BST > >aJ > > MICROSOFT IS CELEBRATING the end of 2001 by warning its customers thatJ > > two holes in SQL Server have joined the major security hole in Windows( > > XP it revealed the week before Yule.C > > That news comes with a warning from influential market researchoH > > company the Gartner Group that Microsoft has to improve its software0 > > development and testing to stay in the game. > F > I thought XP was supposed to be the most secure form of Windows everH > released.  This and the urgent patch for plug-and-pray make that boast > sound rather hollow.  I Why ? XP is most likely the most secure form of Windows. Just imagine how ( "secure" the rest of the M$ junk is. :-)     >o >a
 > John McLeanh   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Dec 2001 09:53:15 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)@? Subject: Re: Gartner deems SQL Server, XP, Microsoft "UNSECURE" 3 Message-ID: <y0hkniKeomgs@eisner.encompasserve.org>   i In article <3C2B397C.3A882212@swissonline.delete.ch>, John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> writes:o  F > I thought XP was supposed to be the most secure form of Windows ever   It is.  H > released.  This and the urgent patch for plug-and-pray make that boast > sound rather hollow.  B The Plug and Pray vulnerability also applies to previous versions.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 08:46:16 GMTp. From: "Duane Sand" <Duane.Sand@mindspring.com>9 Subject: Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceeds = Message-ID: <sdBW7.6262$7p6.130521@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>e   > > Terry C. Shannon wrote:hC > > > Why on God's green earth would Microsoft want to buy VMS when F > > > they've already been granted executive clemency for stealing the? > > > Son-of-VMS Mica code back in 1989? Fact of the matter is,hB > > > Microsoft has had access to the IP since, what, August 1995? > >i > "Peter da Silva" wrote:aC > > They could use FreePort Express technology to run Win32 apps in H > > multiple virtual sessions, and rename it "NT Enterprise Datacenter". >  "Terry C. Shannon" wroteH > Indeed they could... but if FreePort Express/FX!32 et al was so great,@ > why didn't more folks run their Intel windoze apps on AlphaNT.C > Seems that emulation/translation isn't acceptable, especially forc > mission-critical apps.   Umm,9 Some 85% of mission-critical apps on NSK Himalaya systems;? today are running in an FX!32-like translation mode emulating ap8 1976 stack minicomputer, rather than recompiled into the Mips spu's native mode.n   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 10:58:24 -0000 3 From: "Malcolm" <malcolm@neverness.freeserve.co.uk>o6 Subject: Re: Minute Day of the DCL: the 2001 Challenge/ Message-ID: <a0euqd$uak$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk>s  0 "a.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org> wrote in message! news:3C2773FE.A88A5466@iee.org...w > Malcolm wrote: > >u4 > > "a.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org> wrote in message8 > > > Your loop seems to go from 0 to (string length-1),( > > > but the original FORTRAN code went  > > > from 1 to (string length). >rJ > > ...but strings in DCL start at 0. And the way it works, the variable I
 > > counts upmE > > to one less than the number of characters. If you had FOOBAR as ai string,o@ > > the first character is LINE[0,8] and the last is LINE[40,8]. >t% > Both code examples whip through the ( > strings correctly (i.e. from beginning
 > to end). >e > Both also do this part:u >n > > > $ X = (R .AND. 31) + I >e* > The first time through the FORTRAN loop,# > I will be 1 (one). The first timei! > through the DCL loop it will bea$ > 0 (zero). The XOR will not produce# > the same result in the two cases.c Aha! I see what you mean now...m    % I issue the following patch. Replace:c $ X = (R .AND. 31) + I with $ X = (R .AND. 31) + (I+1)   Should sort it...tL I guess. Maybe I should try running it against the data file for the game to see what happens.e  8 You are in a maze of twisty little UNIXes, all alike ;-)   > " > So the DCL as presented will not > decode identically to the   > FORTRAN code. (Unless I missed > something along the way!). >l > As a simple test, try R=0.! > For the 1st char of the string,s > the DCL routine will doa >i >   char <= char XOR 0 >  > whereas the original FORTRAN	 > will dos >f >   char <= char XOR 1 >e >o	 > AntonionC Oh well ;-) We all make mistakes. I guess I forfeit my prize now...h  	 -Malcolm.t   >b > -- >i > ---------------b/ > Antonio Carlini             arcarlini@iee.orgt   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 15:43:49 GMT 2 From: "frank brown" <frank.brown@ci.seattle.wa.us>. Subject: Re: modem config for terminal server?1 Message-ID: <VkHW7.94$RO1.9964@news-west.eli.net>   K Thanks you guys, as you noticed modem control was disabled, I was unable to G enable it (heh) because as it turns out the Decserver 300 does not havenK modem control in the hardware!  So I fixed the problem by setting the modemt to use xon/xoff flow control.e  E BTW result codes on the modem are disabled so dynamic access is not agH problem; also the modem's port speed is fixed at 9600 (the link speed is$ variable to match the remote modem).  I So everything is the same on the port, as I posted it, the only change to E fix the problem was to change the modem's flow control setting once IrK learned about Decserver 300 not having modem control (DTR).  Hooda thunkit?t   -Frank  < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message! news:3C2A914D.4E0917B0@fsi.net...  > frank brown wrote: > > C > > Character Size:            8           Input Speed:        9600 C > > Flow Control:            XON           Output Speed:       9600rC >                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^d >gE > If you're going to force this data rate (I noticed Autobaud was nothD > enabled), you must lock the modem so that it uses only 9600 as itsE > serial port speed, regardless of what link speed is negotiated. YoupJ > could also lock the link speed at 9600; however, this may cause problemsD > with modems that won't accept that link speed for whatever reason. >nJ > Ideally, you want autobaud enabled; however, you may still need to limitD > the modem's serial port speed to 19200 or less, depending upon theF > server and/or its firmware. Some work at 28800, 33600 or even 56000. > Some do not. >hC > > Parity:                 None           Modem Control:  Disablede > J > This seems odd, as Brian noted. I expected to see Modem Control enabled. > C > > Access:              Dynamic           Local Switch:       Nonen >mG > Eh, I'm not real comfortable with access dynamic, unless result codesi > are disabled on the modem. >l > -- > David J. Dachterat > dba DJE Systemso > http://www.djesys.com/ >l* > Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page:! > http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/e   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Dec 2001 07:37:06 -0800- From: tessier-ashpool@usa.net (Chris Bardell)wD Subject: Re: News Alert: Air Packaging Technologies (OTC BB:AIRP.OB)= Message-ID: <9f261edc.0112270737.196e6970@posting.google.com>c   What is this shit?   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:38:22 GMT - From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network>t5 Subject: ODS-5 Case preservation - was something elset* Message-ID: <3C2B5415.2050801@qsl.network>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:  J >>In message <3C2AD22E.E3080E72@home.nl>, Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> writes: >>T >>>You can't directly rename a file from let's say FILENAME.DAT to FileName.Dat. YouL >>>have to use one step extra, for instance FILENAME.DAT to FILENAME.DATX to >>>FileName.Dat.    E If there is previous versions of a file, then new generations of the tG same file name will maintain the same case as the previous generations.   L This is when the rename to a different filename intermediate step is needed.    > > I have seen the original phenomenon, although perhaps not onC > version 1.  I think a more through set of tests would be requiredc > to see it never happens.    5 $purge 'file' ! before using rename to set it's case.t   -Johne wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only     n   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 08:47:58 +0100  From: Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl>5 Subject: Re: OpenVMS  vs. Unix  -  put up or shut up!l' Message-ID: <3C2AD22E.E3080E72@home.nl>o   Don Sykes wrote:   > Jack Patteeuw wrote: > >dM > > First, I cut my teeth on VMS many years ago and it is still my first love M > > (with TOPS20 a close second).  I have been doing Unix (Tru64 and Solaris)tC > > sys admin for the past 6 years so let me clear a few things up.t > >t > > Bob Ceculski wrote:r > > >lF > > > Why don't you tell us why unix is better than VMS?  All you unixI > > > people always say it is better, but never tell anyone why?  It suredJ > > > hasn't beat VMS in head to head overall competitions (VMS 99.9%) .../ > > > its file system sure doesn't beat RMS .... > >.M > > Well, RMS is **NOT** a file system.  It's a layer that sits on top of the L > > file system.  Sometimes it does get in the way but most of the time it'sM > > fantastic !  Understand that WinDoz and Unix folk never heard of ISAM andoH > > would rather pay extra $$$ for those fancy things called "relationalL > > databases" so they can get there friends jobs as dba's and get more free5 > > lunch from the Oracle, Ingress, etc, sales folks.l > >l9 > > >if you pull the plug on the box, your in trouble ...o > >rM > > Not a problem any more !!  Tru64 solved it years ago, Solaris finally didtK > > in V8.  AIX also has had a log based file system for awhile.  HP-UX ???c > > ! > > > clustering, forget about it  > >iO > > Some Unix folks will claim they had it for years with NFS.  But we all knownN > > what is truly unique about VMSclusters is the distributed lock manager andK > > mandatory (file) locking.  Truclusters claims they can do it; I haven'tt
 > > tried it.h > >uK > > > ... I had a nt/unix guy come in once for some nt troubleshooting, andeL > > > after a little tour he fell in love w/vms ... his only complaint, onlyO > > > 8 dir levels, but I showed him work arounds, and he found that acceptablecN > > > ... so what makes unix better than vms?  Security?  don't make me laugh! > > E > Solved w/ ODS-5 disks which also provide filename case sensitivity.e  P Well, not really. ODS-5 accepts filenames in lowercase, but does not distinguishO between lower- and uppercase names. Something like FileName.Dat is identical tonO FILENAME.DAT or filename.dat, you can't create three different files with thoserH names in one directory. However you can access the file using uppercase,. lowercase, or any mix of upper- and lowercase.  Q You can't directly rename a file from let's say FILENAME.DAT to FileName.Dat. YoueI have to use one step extra, for instance FILENAME.DAT to FILENAME.DATX ton
 FileName.Dat.    >tJ > I must say I do like Unix's symbolic links in some cases too. VMS's hard > links can be problematic.  >nN > > I sure wish I had ACLs that worked in a heterogeneous environment !!  JustN > > try to figure out how to prevent a user from going "outbound" on your Unix > > box. > >tL > > > Scalibility?  I don't think so ... Can someone enlighten us stupid vmsP > > > users?  We have time>now to settle this once and for all over the holidays' > > > ... VMS record stands for itself!t > >p> > > Perhaps, but we all know that Beta is better than VHS  !!! > > -- > >m > > Jack Patteeuwy   ------------------------------   Date: 27 Dec 2001 12:31:11 GMT1 From: JONESD@er6.eng.ohio-state.edu (David Jones)h5 Subject: Re: OpenVMS  vs. Unix  -  put up or shut up!.: Message-ID: <a0f4af$e5u$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>  H In message <3C2AD22E.E3080E72@home.nl>, Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> writes:R >You can't directly rename a file from let's say FILENAME.DAT to FileName.Dat. YouJ >have to use one step extra, for instance FILENAME.DAT to FILENAME.DATX to >FileName.Dat.   The above is untrue:  4 	$ write sys$Output f$getjpi("0","parse_style_perm")	 	EXTENDEDn 	$ dir login   	Directory USER$DISK:[JONES]   	LOGIN.COM;1   	Total of 1 file.  	$ rename login.com Login.Comu 	$ dir login   	Directory USER$DISK:[JONES]   	Login.Com;1   	Total of 1 file.n      < David L. Jones               |      Phone:    (614) 292-6929- Ohio State University        |      Internet: L 140 W. 19th St. Rm. 231a     |               jonesd@er6s1.eng.ohio-state.edu: Columbus, OH 43210           |               vman+@osu.edu  1 Disclaimer: I'm looking for marbles all day long.t   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Dec 2001 09:48:34 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)l5 Subject: Re: OpenVMS  vs. Unix  -  put up or shut up!t3 Message-ID: <QP6YaSSHs+6K@eisner.encompasserve.org>n  n In article <a0f4af$e5u$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, JONESD@er6.eng.ohio-state.edu (David Jones) writes:J > In message <3C2AD22E.E3080E72@home.nl>, Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> writes:S >>You can't directly rename a file from let's say FILENAME.DAT to FileName.Dat. YouaK >>have to use one step extra, for instance FILENAME.DAT to FILENAME.DATX to  >>FileName.Dat.  >  > The above is untrue: > 6 > 	$ write sys$Output f$getjpi("0","parse_style_perm") > 	EXTENDEDp > 	$ dir login >  > 	Directory USER$DISK:[JONES] >  > 	LOGIN.COM;1 >  > 	Total of 1 file.e > 	$ rename login.com Login.Com- > 	$ dir login >  > 	Directory USER$DISK:[JONES] >  > 	Login.Com;1 >  > 	Total of 1 file.r  < I have seen the original phenomenon, although perhaps not onA version 1.  I think a more through set of tests would be requiredh to see it never happens.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:18:00 -0800i! From: Jack Hamilton <jfh@acm.org>e5 Subject: Re: OpenVMS  vs. Unix  -  put up or shut up!R8 Message-ID: <6qlm2usejogdo22oip21ps0ob3svri0s2k@4ax.com>   Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> wrote:a  F >> Solved w/ ODS-5 disks which also provide filename case sensitivity. >YQ >Well, not really. ODS-5 accepts filenames in lowercase, but does not distinguish P >between lower- and uppercase names. Something like FileName.Dat is identical toP >FILENAME.DAT or filename.dat, you can't create three different files with thoseI >names in one directory. However you can access the file using uppercase,a/ >lowercase, or any mix of upper- and lowercase.   E I'd say that's an advantage, not a drawback.  Natural languages don'taF use case to signify meaning*; why should computer languages, which are@ designed for human use?  VMS did it right and Unix did it wrong.  ( * with a few exceptions such as job/Job.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:14:58 -0500u* From: John Reagan <john.reagan@compaq.com>5 Subject: Re: OpenVMS  vs. Unix  -  put up or shut up!-) Message-ID: <3C2B6522.6090601@compaq.com>1   Larry Kilgallen wrote:     > > > I have seen the original phenomenon, although perhaps not onC > version 1.  I think a more through set of tests would be requireds > to see it never happens. >   F It has to do with the fact that a file only has one entry in the .DIR 3 file and just has pointers to the various versions.    For example,  ! (hiyall)$ set proc/parse=extendeda (hiyall)$ dir foo.dat ! %DIRECT-W-NOFILES, no files found  (hiyall)$ create FOO.DAT   Exit (hiyall)$ create foo.dat   Exit (hiyall)$ dir foo.datL   Directory EFS$:[REAGAN]o  = FOO.DAT;2                  0/0        27-DEC-2001 13:08:09.65.= FOO.DAT;1                  0/0        27-DEC-2001 13:08:04.54a   Total of 2 files, 0/0 blocks.   D !Notice that both are FOO.DAT eventhough I tried to make the 2nd oneB !with lower case.  An DUMP/DIRECTORY would show what is happening.A !Traditional ODS-5 .DIR files won't allow the same name to appearpC !differing only by case.  In the COE version, that can happen after  !you enable the feature. !-   (hiyall)$ rena FOO.DAT Foo.daTK %RENAME-I-RENAMED, EFS$:[REAGAN]FOO.DAT;2 renamed to EFS$:[REAGAN]FOO.DAT;2r (hiyall)$ dir foo.datE   Directory EFS$:[REAGAN]B  = FOO.DAT;2                  0/0        27-DEC-2001 13:08:09.65e= FOO.DAT;1                  0/0        27-DEC-2001 13:08:04.54s   Total of 2 files, 0/0 blocks.u  @ !This rename didn't do what you want since the main entry in the& !.DIR file is "FOO.DAT" with ;1 and ;2 !k   (hiyall)$ pur foo.dat:; %PURGE-I-FILPURG, EFS$:[REAGAN]FOO.DAT;1 deleted (0 blocks)  (hiyall)$ rena FOO.DAT Foo.daTK %RENAME-I-RENAMED, EFS$:[REAGAN]FOO.DAT;2 renamed to EFS$:[REAGAN]Foo.daT;1P (hiyall)$ dir foo.date   Directory EFS$:[REAGAN]o  = Foo.daT;1                  0/0        27-DEC-2001 13:08:09.65    Total of 1 file, 0/0 blocks.  B !Now it works since there was only one version.  The old "FOO.DAT"@ !was removed from the .DIR file and the new "Foo.daT" was added. !o   -- w John Reagane' Compaq Pascal/{A|I}MACRO Project Leader-   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Dec 2001 04:09:20 -0800- From: dev_singh123@yahoo.com (Devendra Singh)g Subject: Security privileges= Message-ID: <6a2dfb96.0112270409.1f9e86ec@posting.google.com>-   Hi,-@ I want to define a general operator through adduser utility with minimum F security privileges provided (netmbx only). After logging through this generalEF user i want operators(with full security privileges granted ) to login0 and their corresponding log files  be generated.2 for this i am using the command in my shell script $ set host 0 /logo  % (a)Can you suggest any other method ?   @ (b) the files sethost.log can be edited through any account even though the protection given isa- $set protection=(S:R,O:R,G:R,W:R) sethost.log   F can you describe what commands are to bo issued for file protection.??  & (c) can proxy account do the same work  & Please Help me out as soon as possible   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Dec 2001 09:46:25 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)n  Subject: Re: Security privileges3 Message-ID: <iuU0xxQeDQk8@eisner.encompasserve.org>n  m In article <6a2dfb96.0112270409.1f9e86ec@posting.google.com>, dev_singh123@yahoo.com (Devendra Singh) writes:  > Hi,cB > I want to define a general operator through adduser utility with	 > minimumnH > security privileges provided (netmbx only). After logging through this	 > general H > user i want operators(with full security privileges granted ) to login2 > and their corresponding log files  be generated.4 > for this i am using the command in my shell script > $ set host 0 /log  > ' > (a)Can you suggest any other method ?   I Pre-submit batch jobs for typical operator activity (e.g., backup disk 3)t8 and let the operators release the jobs when appropriate.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 12:16:37 -0500 ) From: "Mike Foley" <mikiefoley@yahoo.com>m@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)/ Message-ID: <u2mlkaf2ftri4c@corp.supernews.com>-  <     I know of at least one person, Dave Cantor, who is still+     submitting bug reports on TECO to Andy.   H                                                                     mike  5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messagee< news:UD6U7.162725$C8.11304881@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >c4 > "Alan Greig" <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote in message4 > news:87a12uom8c4rpr8hls98lv89psis2od0cc@4ax.com... >s > ...e >hB > > Someone within Compaq still cares enough to fight to keep Teco > > supported. >   > Andy would be a prime suspect. >n > - bill >w >s >h   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Dec 2001 11:47:49 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)h@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)3 Message-ID: <zRUTTAE$bGIk@eisner.encompasserve.org>c  [ In article <u2mlkaf2ftri4c@corp.supernews.com>, "Mike Foley" <mikiefoley@yahoo.com> writes:3 > > >     I know of at least one person, Dave Cantor, who is still- >     submitting bug reports on TECO to Andy.p  D For which other VMS editors can anyone name the current maintainer ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:18:55 -0500n* From: John Reagan <john.reagan@compaq.com>@ Subject: Re: VMS missing features (was how to do deamons on VMS)) Message-ID: <3C2B660F.6030405@compaq.com>t   Larry Kilgallen wrote:   > F > For which other VMS editors can anyone name the current maintainer ? >   F Yes I *CAN* for EDIT/ACL, EDIT/EDT, EDIT/FDL, EDIT/SUM, EDIT/TPU, and  LSEDIT.    :-) :-)i   --   John Reagann' Compaq Pascal/{A|I}MACRO Project Leader    ------------------------------    Date: 27 Dec 2001 05:12:48 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)r. Subject: Re: What Goes Around, Comes Around...3 Message-ID: <uNh+G+yInpB7@eisner.encompasserve.org>i  p In article <qh4l2u4rs521pt1e261ds8nacef81qaa8f@4ax.com>, israel r t <israelrt@antispam.optushome.com.au> writes:  H > On the grounds of reliability, security , design and features, MulticsC > had everything else ( VMS , MVS , OS360 , Unix ) beat hands down..  @ Since VMS came later it did have opportunity to avoid the famous@ Multics security bug involving putting the plaintext password so? it straddled a page boundary and seeing whether a pagefault wash> encountered before the password was rejected.  This provided a9 method of foolproof password guessing in order 36*N time.t  ? I presume Multics eventually fixed this, but VMS actually wouldo@ not be likely to encounter this error because a full hash of the; password is used and VMS copies arguments into system space  before evaluating.   Sometimes older is not better.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:30:47 +0100e1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>c/ Subject: Re: What Goes Around, Comes Around....m5 Message-ID: <3C2ADC37.42F2C965@swissonline.delete.ch>    Tim Llewellyn wrote: >  .... > B > hmmm, pay attention, VMS will be ported to IA64, Tru64 will not.+ > A minor point maybe but you bought it up.   H What I find interesting Tim, is that I'm pretty certain that when it wasF announced that Alpha was transferring to Intel, Capellas said that VMS# *and Tru64* would be ported to IPF.u  F It seems fairly certain that discussions with HP were underway to someG extent and that the two Unixes would have come up in those discusions.  8 For Tru64 it looks like a PORT + some other big changes.     John McL   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 14:20:34 +0200 2 From: Mike Rechtman <michael.rechtman@digital.com>/ Subject: Re: What Goes Around, Comes Around....e+ Message-ID: <3C2B2E32.1BB9BE00@digital.com>'  $ Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote: >    > , > News> set ignore comp.os.vms/from=*israel* >t Hey, I resent that!!  
 Mike Rechtman  MCS  Ra'anana, Israel.            ^^^^^^     E ---------------------------------------------------------------------xE Usual disclaimer: All opinions are mine alone, perhaps not even that.m? Mike Rechtman                            *rechtman@tzora.co.il*mF Kibbutz Tzor'a.                          Voice (home): 972-2-9908337  B   "20% of a job takes 80% of the time, the rest takes another 80%"E ---------------------------------------------------------------------t   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 12:55:29 GMT = From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-)s/ Subject: Re: What Goes Around, Comes Around....g0 Message-ID: <00A07234.50BD6957@SendSpamHere.ORG>  ` In article <3C2B2E32.1BB9BE00@digital.com>, Mike Rechtman <michael.rechtman@digital.com> writes:% >Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote:  >> m >J >> .- >> News> set ignore comp.os.vms/from=*israel*5 >> >Hey, I resent that!!m >i >Mike Rechtman >MCS >Ra'anana, Israel. >          ^^^^^^   I It won't block any postings from you or your country.  It will, however, @? block the postings from trolls taking the name of your country.t  4 comp.os.vms posting rule #1.  Don't feed the trolls.? comp.os.vms posting rule #2.  Read comp.os.vms posting rule #1.>   --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMe             J   "And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fiery I   intellect.  Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & Hobbes    ------------------------------    Date: 27 Dec 2001 08:18:14 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) / Subject: Re: What Goes Around, Comes Around....r3 Message-ID: <cD0VrC0uppMz@eisner.encompasserve.org>   \ In article <3C2AC1C6.B7832B83@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: > Tim Llewellyn wrote:C >> hmmm, pay attention, VMS will be ported to IA64, Tru64 will not.s > P > At this point in time, I am not sure you can believe any of this. Compaq is inK > a big vaccum now that the wedding between Curly and Carly isn't doing too N > well. If Compaq is left to fend for itself, it will have to patch up all the3 > bridges it burned since the wedding announcement.i > N > If Tru64 is resurected and Compaq might decide to do to VMS what it intended > to do to Tru64: merge it.  > 8 > In a way, it might make sense to merge VMS with Tru64.  : 	Well in a way, if DII-COE complient, you have merged withA 	Solaris.  Or more accurately, have become a superset of Solaris.(   				Rob.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 15:55:14 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>/ Subject: Re: What Goes Around, Comes Around.... B Message-ID: <CvHW7.248957$C8.17421216@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message/ news:3C2ADC37.42F2C965@swissonline.delete.ch...  >l >" > Tim Llewellyn wrote: > >  > .... > >tD > > hmmm, pay attention, VMS will be ported to IA64, Tru64 will not.- > > A minor point maybe but you bought it up.o >uJ > What I find interesting Tim, is that I'm pretty certain that when it wasH > announced that Alpha was transferring to Intel, Capellas said that VMS% > *and Tru64* would be ported to IPF.a  G Your memory is correct.  And then, with the merger announcement, it waseI stated that all aspects of the Intel deal (presumably including the Tru64 I port) would not be affected.  Only a bit later was the latter modified todI indicate that instead of porting Tru64 a 'Tru64-enhanced' flavor of HP/UX' would be used on Itanic.   > H > It seems fairly certain that discussions with HP were underway to someH > extent and that the two Unixes would have come up in those discusions.: > For Tru64 it looks like a PORT + some other big changes.  L No.  If the merger goes through, the port (at least as of latest statements)	 does not.e   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 07:47:45 -0600y. From: Duncan Brown <brown_du@eisner.decus.org>. Subject: Where oh where has The Register gone?0 Message-ID: <3C2B2681.3238C799@eisner.decus.org>  C One of my favorite sources for clear-headed analysis of news on thetE HP-Compaq merger (and each day's new IIS or Outlook security flaw...)a+ was The Register, at  www.theregister.co.uk,  F It seems to have vanished from the face of the 'net.  I can't reach itH from any one of several different providers, for the last couple of days  now.  Anyone know what happened?   Duncan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 06:57:08 -0700i+ From: "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@mmaz.com>p2 Subject: Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?' Message-ID: <3C2B28B4.9020104@mmaz.com>u   Duncan Brown wrote:u  D >One of my favorite sources for clear-headed analysis of news on theF >HP-Compaq merger (and each day's new IIS or Outlook security flaw...), >was The Register, at  www.theregister.co.uk >eG >It seems to have vanished from the face of the 'net.  I can't reach it I >from any one of several different providers, for the last couple of days!! >now.  Anyone know what happened?y > c It appears that the registrar for the UK, which is Nominet, pulled out all of their DNS references.    Barryn   -- u  @ Barry Treahy, Jr  *  Midwest Microwave  *  Vice President & CIO   A E-mail: Treahy@mmaz.com * Phone: 480/314-1320 * FAX: 480/661-7028E   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 14:48:06 GMTe4 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>2 Subject: Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?0 Message-ID: <3C2B33EB.B2D67F91@blueyonder.co.uk>  B FWIW, I have just connected to the register site fine from the UK.   Duncan Brown wrote:d > E > One of my favorite sources for clear-headed analysis of news on theeG > HP-Compaq merger (and each day's new IIS or Outlook security flaw...)[- > was The Register, at  www.theregister.co.uk  > H > It seems to have vanished from the face of the 'net.  I can't reach itJ > from any one of several different providers, for the last couple of days" > now.  Anyone know what happened?  B FWIW, I have just connected to the register site fine from the UK.   >  > Duncan   -- a Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk  -  C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of e! my employers or service provider.u   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:00:06 -0600s. From: Duncan Brown <brown_du@eisner.decus.org>2 Subject: Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?0 Message-ID: <3C2B3776.5C8A7861@eisner.decus.org>   Tim Llewellyn wrote: > D > FWIW, I have just connected to the register site fine from the UK.  E Can you please tell us what the IP address is?  I found an article in B The Inquirer that says the site is still up, but the DNS record is9 gone.  (I assume you still had the DNS cached somewhere!)s   Thanks,e Duncan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 15:04:53 +0000I  From: Steve.Spires@yellgroup.com2 Subject: Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?: Message-ID: <OF1CE27C7D.FCE71A91-ON00256B2F.0052BC4F@btyp>  G Well, I haven't been able to connect all day long. Just tried again, nooG luck, and I'm in the UK. You didn't have it in your cache or something?    Cheers   Steve Se        H Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> on 12/27/2001 02:48:06 PM    To:        Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com cc:oF From:      Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>, 27 December            2001, 2:48 p.m.  ) Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?m    B FWIW, I have just connected to the register site fine from the UK.   Duncan Brown wrote:  > E > One of my favorite sources for clear-headed analysis of news on theiG > HP-Compaq merger (and each day's new IIS or Outlook security flaw...)D- > was The Register, at  www.theregister.co.uka >yH > It seems to have vanished from the face of the 'net.  I can't reach itJ > from any one of several different providers, for the last couple of days" > now.  Anyone know what happened?  B FWIW, I have just connected to the register site fine from the UK.   >  > Duncan   -- Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk,  B Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of! my employers or service provider.u          F ______________________________________________________________________     [Information] -- PostMaster:D This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) and may beG confidential. If you are not the named addressee, or if the message has:G been addressed to you in error, you must not read, disclose, reproduce, $ distribute or use this transmission.  H Delivery of this message to any person other than the named addressee isG not intended in any way to waive confidentiality.  If you have receivedsK this transmission in error please contact the sender or delete the message.c  
 Thank you.  D Yell Limited, Queens Walk, Oxford Road, Reading, Berkshire, RG1 7PT.; Registered in England and Wales, registered number 4205228.h  I Yellow Pages Sales Limited, Queens Walk, Oxford Road, Reading, Berkshire, D RG1 7PT. Registered in England and Wales, registered number 1403041.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 15:14:07 GMTc4 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>2 Subject: Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?/ Message-ID: <3C2B39EA.86EFA9F@blueyonder.co.uk>   ! Steve.Spires@yellgroup.com wrote:p > I > Well, I haven't been able to connect all day long. Just tried again, nouI > luck, and I'm in the UK. You didn't have it in your cache or something?E >   ! No, cut and paste from the banner:  # 27 December 2001 Updated: 10:55 GMTa  H It is 15:08 here and I haven't accessed that site for some days until I L saw the original post. Plus, I can browse stories I;ve never touched before.  . weird. Maybe there are DNS problems somewhere.      d  ' -- w Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk     C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of .! my employers or service provider.N   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 15:17:51 GMT-4 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>2 Subject: Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?0 Message-ID: <3C2B3A8D.6A12B569@blueyonder.co.uk>   Duncan Brown wrote:9 >  > Tim Llewellyn wrote: > >kF > > FWIW, I have just connected to the register site fine from the UK. > G > Can you please tell us what the IP address is?  I found an article inw   OK, sorry about the DOSa  - C:\WINDOWS\Desktop>ping www.theregister.co.uk-  D Pinging www.theregister.co.uk [213.40.196.64] with 32 bytes of data:  3 Reply from 213.40.196.64: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=52 3 Reply from 213.40.196.64: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=52g3 Reply from 213.40.196.64: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=52 3 Reply from 213.40.196.64: bytes=32 time=38ms TTL=52i  " Ping statistics for 213.40.196.64:8     Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),. Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:4     Minimum = 28ms, Maximum =  38ms, Average =  33ms   C:\WINDOWS\Desktop>timem Current time is  15:11:06.73 Enter new time: ^C   C:\WINDOWS\Desktop>   D > The Inquirer that says the site is still up, but the DNS record is; > gone.  (I assume you still had the DNS cached somewhere!)R   Quite possibly.  >        	 > Thanks,  > Duncan   -- o Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk     C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of  ! my employers or service provider.-   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:04 +0100r1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>e2 Subject: Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?5 Message-ID: <3C2B3C60.48A32DD7@swissonline.delete.ch>l   Duncan Brown wrote:h >  > Tim Llewellyn wrote: > > F > > FWIW, I have just connected to the register site fine from the UK. > G > Can you please tell us what the IP address is?  I found an article inhD > The Inquirer that says the site is still up, but the DNS record is; > gone.  (I assume you still had the DNS cached somewhere!)e > 	 > Thanks,. > Duncan   From tucows.com lookup ....    Domain Name: REGISTER.CO.UKo  B     Registered For: The Register - an information service of Derby Market Research Limiteda       Domain Registered By: IPLn       Registered on 28-Feb-1997.  8     Record last updated on 10-Mar-2000 by apg@ipl.co.uk.  #     Domain servers listed in order:r  3     NS0.IPL.CO.UK                     195.112.52.48V2     DNS0.NILDRAM.CO.UK                195.112.4.142     DNS1.NILDRAM.COM                  193.218.99.3  7     WHOIS database last updated at 06:28:00 27-Dec-2001l  F     The NIC.UK Registration Host contains ONLY information for domainsD     within co.uk, org.uk, net.uk, ltd.uk and plc.uk.  Please use the whoisrC     server at rs.internic.net for Internet Information or the whois. server*     at nic.ddn.mil for MILNET Information.     Cheers   John McLean   ; PS.  That is a cut & paste.  Apologies if the format is bade   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:31:20 -0600 . From: Duncan Brown <brown_du@eisner.decus.org>2 Subject: Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?0 Message-ID: <3C2B3EC8.AD0E2B0B@eisner.decus.org>   Tim Llewellyn wrote: >  > Duncan Brown wrote:c > >: > > Tim Llewellyn wrote: > > > H > > > FWIW, I have just connected to the register site fine from the UK. > >aI > > Can you please tell us what the IP address is?  I found an article inc >  > OK, sorry about the DOSo > / > C:\WINDOWS\Desktop>ping www.theregister.co.uk  > F > Pinging www.theregister.co.uk [213.40.196.64] with 32 bytes of data:   Bingo - that does it.   D http://213.40.196.64/       will get you to their main page.  Though@ there is only one article new from today, and just a couple from0 yesterday.  Something odd is obviously going on!   Duncan   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Dec 2001 10:00:16 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)o2 Subject: Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?3 Message-ID: <mNwHwHQtwasJ@eisner.encompasserve.org>   a In article <3C2B2681.3238C799@eisner.decus.org>, Duncan Brown <brown_du@eisner.decus.org> writes:-E > One of my favorite sources for clear-headed analysis of news on thelG > HP-Compaq merger (and each day's new IIS or Outlook security flaw...)A- > was The Register, at  www.theregister.co.ukm > H > It seems to have vanished from the face of the 'net.  I can't reach itJ > from any one of several different providers, for the last couple of days" > now.  Anyone know what happened? >   * 	No... same here.  They must be down HARD.  < 	They had written up a long piece about a year ago when they? 	were down (not as long, but hard).  Very interesting piece andv> 	the problem revolved around a failed router and having to go ? 	into co-location , the problems getting the keys to unlock thee; 	cage, etc.  I expect a similar story after they come back.   : 	Shame , isn't it?   Imagine if they were a real business.   				Robx   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:31:20 -0700a+ From: "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@mmaz.com>V2 Subject: Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?' Message-ID: <3C2B4CD8.9070903@mmaz.com>   & --------------0500000608060903070301099 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowedj Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit:   Tim Llewellyn wrote:  G >>Can you please tell us what the IP address is?  I found an article in  >> >w >OK, sorry about the DOS > . >C:\WINDOWS\Desktop>ping www.theregister.co.uk >uE >Pinging www.theregister.co.uk [213.40.196.64] with 32 bytes of data:n >n  Thanks for the IP 213.40.196.64,   your DNS must still have an unexpired cache entry because Nominet shows no DNS servers listed.  Using just the IP, the site is still operating...  Thanks.   Barryd   -- o  @ Barry Treahy, Jr  *  Midwest Microwave  *  Vice President & CIO   A E-mail: Treahy@mmaz.com * Phone: 480/314-1320 * FAX: 480/661-7028T      & --------------050000060806090307030109) Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit    <html> <head> </head>t <body> Tim Llewellyn wrote:<br>F <blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:3C2B3A8D.6A12B569@blueyonder.co.uk">   <blockquote type="cite">`     <pre wrap="">Can you please tell us what the IP address is?  I found an article in<br></pre>     </blockquote>     <pre wrap=""><!----><br>OK, sorry about the DOS<br><br><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="C:\WINDOWS\Desktop">C:\WINDOWS\Desktop</a>&gt;ping <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.theregister.co.uk">www.theregister.co.uk</a><br><br>Pinging <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.theregister.co.uk">www.theregister.co.uk</a> [213.40.196.64] with 32 bytes of data:<br></pre>     </blockquote>-
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="$mailwrapcol">Thanks for the IP 213.40.196.64,<br><br>your DNS must still have an unexpired cache entry because Nominet shows no DNS servers listed.  Using just the IP, the site is still operating...  Thanks.<br><br>Barry<br><br>-- H  D Barry Treahy, Jr  *  Midwest Microwave  *  Vice President &amp; CIO    E-mail: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Treahy@mmaz.com">Treahy@mmaz.com</a> * Phone: 480/314-1320 * FAX: 480/661-7028</pre>      <br>     </body>      </html>h  ( --------------050000060806090307030109--   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:34:01 -0700o+ From: "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@mmaz.com>n2 Subject: Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?% Message-ID: <3C2B4D79.20606@mmaz.com>o  & --------------0909000203060406000905089 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowedu Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bitI   John McLean wrote:   >Domain Name: REGISTER.CO.UK >   >Domain servers listed in order: >i4 >    NS0.IPL.CO.UK                     195.112.52.483 >    DNS0.NILDRAM.CO.UK                195.112.4.14-3 >    DNS1.NILDRAM.COM                  193.218.99.3n >@x Yes, but folks where discussing the domain THEREGISTER.CO.UK which is not correctly supporting the needed DNS entries...         WHOIS query result:C  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  !    Domain Name: THEREGISTER.CO.UKp      Registered For: The Register       Domain Registered By: PSINETi  4    Record last updated on 27-Dec-2001 by fg@Nominet.  "    Domain servers listed in order:    6    WHOIS database last updated at 06:28:00 27-Dec-2001       Barrya   -- f  @ Barry Treahy, Jr  *  Midwest Microwave  *  Vice President & CIO   A E-mail: Treahy@mmaz.com * Phone: 480/314-1320 * FAX: 480/661-7028d      & --------------090900020306040600090508) Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii  Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bito   <html> <head> </head>W <body> John McLean wrote:<br>K <blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:3C2B3C60.48A32DD7@swissonline.delete.ch">e  <pre wrap="">Domain Name: REGISTER.CO.UK<br><br>Domain servers listed in order:<br><br>    NS0.IPL.CO.UK                     195.112.52.48<br>    DNS0.NILDRAM.CO.UK                195.112.4.14<br>    DNS1.NILDRAM.COM                  193.218.99.3<br><br></pre>   </blockquote>m   <pre class="moz-signature" cols="$mailwrapcol">Yes, but folks where discussing the domain THEREGISTER.CO.UK which is not correctly supporting the needed DNS entries...<br><br></pre>e    <h2> WHOIS query result: </h2>	   <hr>    (   <pre>   Domain Name: THEREGISTER.CO.UK      Registered For: The Registert      Domain Registered By: PSINETs  4    Record last updated on 27-Dec-2001 by fg@Nominet.  "    Domain servers listed in order:    6    WHOIS database last updated at 06:28:00 27-Dec-2001   </pre>E   <pre class="moz-signature" cols="$mailwrapcol"><br>Barry<br><br>-- p  D Barry Treahy, Jr  *  Midwest Microwave  *  Vice President &amp; CIO    E-mail: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Treahy@mmaz.com">Treahy@mmaz.com</a> * Phone: 480/314-1320 * FAX: 480/661-7028</pre>    <br>	   </body>t	   </html>s  ( --------------090900020306040600090508--   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 18:50:20 +0100 1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>.2 Subject: Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?5 Message-ID: <3C2B5F5C.734B9F6A@swissonline.delete.ch>-   "Barry Treahy, Jr." wrote: >  > John McLean wrote: >  > > Domain Name: REGISTER.CO.UKr# > > Domain servers listed in order:e7 > >     NS0.IPL.CO.UK                     195.112.52.48.6 > >     DNS0.NILDRAM.CO.UK                195.112.4.146 > >     DNS1.NILDRAM.COM                  193.218.99.3 > >(z > Yes, but folks where discussing the domain THEREGISTER.CO.UK which is not correctly supporting the needed DNS entries... >  > WHOIS query result:e > H > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > # >    Domain Name: THEREGISTER.CO.UKh > ! >    Registered For: The Register- > ! >    Domain Registered By: PSINET0 > 6 >    Record last updated on 27-Dec-2001 by fg@Nominet. > $ >    Domain servers listed in order: > 8 >    WHOIS database last updated at 06:28:00 27-Dec-2001 >  > Barryu > --     "Sorry about that chief"  	 John  :-)a   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 18:09:53 GMTo  From: cjt <cheljuba@prodigy.net>2 Subject: Re: Where oh where has The Register gone?+ Message-ID: <3C2B63FD.2FDF3E85@prodigy.net>n   I reached it just a moment ago.r   Duncan Brown wrote:  > E > One of my favorite sources for clear-headed analysis of news on thepG > HP-Compaq merger (and each day's new IIS or Outlook security flaw...)h- > was The Register, at  www.theregister.co.uk  > H > It seems to have vanished from the face of the 'net.  I can't reach itJ > from any one of several different providers, for the last couple of days" > now.  Anyone know what happened? >  > Duncan   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.719 ************************