1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 06 Dec 2003	Volume 2003 : Issue 674       Contents:: %MOUNT-W-HOMBLKBAD, primary home block is bad; backup used> Re: %MOUNT-W-HOMBLKBAD, primary home block is bad; backup used Re: Dead Console? Re: DFU LINK/TRACEBACK (was: Re: OpenVMS Freeware V6.0 On-Line)  Re: DS700 RAS configuration ! Re: Freeware download corrupt (?) ! Re: Freeware download corrupt (?) ! Re: Freeware download corrupt (?)  Re: Hairdoo Economics  Re: Hairdoo Economics  Re: Hairdoo Economics  Re: Hairdoo Economics  Re: Hairdoo Economics : Re: I wonder if this HP director will resign from HP's BOD: Re: I wonder if this HP director will resign from HP's BOD Re: New patchkits available  nobody <nobody@nobody.com> Re: nobody <nobody@nobody.com>: Re: OpenVMS clusters give Windows, Unix thorough thrashing: Re: OpenVMS clusters give Windows, Unix thorough thrashing: Re: OpenVMS clusters give Windows, Unix thorough thrashing: Re: OpenVMS clusters give Windows, Unix thorough thrashing: Re: OpenVMS clusters give Windows, Unix thorough thrashing: Re: OpenVMS clusters give Windows, Unix thorough thrashing Re: OpenVMS org  Re: OpenVMS org  Re: OpenVMS org 5 Re: OT Very scary: Cars running on Microsoft software 5 Re: OT Very scary: Cars running on Microsoft software 5 Re: OT Very scary: Cars running on Microsoft software 5 Re: OT Very scary: Cars running on Microsoft software & Re: Pictures from the OpenVMS bootcamp& Re: Pictures from the OpenVMS bootcamp& Re: Pictures from the OpenVMS bootcamp& Re: Pictures from the OpenVMS bootcamp& Re: Pictures from the OpenVMS bootcamp& Re: Pictures from the OpenVMS bootcamp  REPLY/STATUS in another VMS node$ Re: REPLY/STATUS in another VMS node$ Re: REPLY/STATUS in another VMS node$ RE: Routable Protocol for Clustering$ Re: Routable Protocol for Clustering$ Re: Routable Protocol for Clustering$ Re: Routable Protocol for Clustering$ RE: Routable Protocol for Clustering$ Re: Routable Protocol for Clustering$ RE: Routable Protocol for Clustering$ Re: Routable Protocol for Clustering$ Re: Routable Protocol for Clustering1 Re: setting password with external authentication 9 Re: Sun to use AMD Opteron - announcement expected Monday 9 Re: Sun to use AMD Opteron - announcement expected Monday 9 Re: Sun to use AMD Opteron - announcement expected Monday 9 Re: Sun to use AMD Opteron - announcement expected Monday + Re: Telnet session with fixed TNAnnn: name? + Re: Telnet session with fixed TNAnnn: name?  Re: Unknown memory modules.  Re: Unknown memory modules. = Re: VMS clusters prove they are the best - Sun comes in last! = Re: VMS clusters prove they are the best - Sun comes in last! = Re: VMS clusters prove they are the best - Sun comes in last!  Re: VMS on PDP-10?0 RE: Will VMS contribute to Microsoft's profits ?0 Re: Will VMS contribute to Microsoft's profits ?0 Re: Will VMS contribute to Microsoft's profits ?0 Re: Will VMS contribute to Microsoft's profits ?0 Re: Will VMS contribute to Microsoft's profits ?0 Re: Will VMS contribute to Microsoft's profits ?4 Re: Will VMS have to pay royalties Microsoft ? (FAT)4 Re: Will VMS have to pay royalties Microsoft ? (FAT)4 Re: Will VMS have to pay royalties Microsoft ? (FAT)N [SURVEY] Do you still code programs in Cobol? Ingres? On vax/vms/alpha/itanium  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 15:56:32 -0500 From: norm.raphael@metso.comC Subject: %MOUNT-W-HOMBLKBAD, primary home block is bad; backup used Q Message-ID: <OFCD945187.15C79EE1-ON85256DF3.00729902-85256DF3.00735850@metso.com>   B I get This from the 03XAA OpenVMS Alpha LIB PKG Q4CY03 UPD disk 2.0 Is this universal?  Is it any cause for concern?8 $ MOU/NOASS/NOWRI/SYSTEM  $2$DKA600 "AXPBINDEC032" JAMCD: %MOUNT-W-HOMBLKBAD, primary home block is bad; backup used< %MOUNT-I-MOUNTED, AXPBINDEC032 mounted on _$2$DKA600: (ELMX)   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 21:51:22 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) G Subject: Re: %MOUNT-W-HOMBLKBAD, primary home block is bad; backup used 3 Message-ID: <u57Ab.10255$951.9284@news.cpqcorp.net>   p In article <OFCD945187.15C79EE1-ON85256DF3.00729902-85256DF3.00735850@metso.com>, norm.raphael@metso.com writes:  C :I get This from the 03XAA OpenVMS Alpha LIB PKG Q4CY03 UPD disk 2. 1 :Is this universal?  Is it any cause for concern? 9 :$ MOU/NOASS/NOWRI/SYSTEM  $2$DKA600 "AXPBINDEC032" JAMCD ; :%MOUNT-W-HOMBLKBAD, primary home block is bad; backup used = :%MOUNT-I-MOUNTED, AXPBINDEC032 mounted on _$2$DKA600: (ELMX)   @   So long as the CD volume has been completely mounted (and thatA   appears the case here), this error has been safely resolved and 2   the data recovered from an alternate home block.  ?   I do not know if this is a universal problem (and this is the ?   first report of this I've seen with this distro), though I do =   know we have been making changes in this area of the volume =   structure.  (These changes should not be applicable to this A   disk, however, as these volume structure changes only come into ?   play only on OpenVMS V8.1 and later baselevels.  Not here, in    other words.)   ?   I have same random errors involving media-level errors, and I @   have also seen cases where the media and the driver were found?   incompatible.  I have also seen errors where some dual-format <   volume software has had problems constructing the ODS file#   system blocks entirely correctly.      Some obvious questions...   A   What OpenVMS version and architecture did you use when mounting 
   this media?   -   What specific model of CD drive was in use?   5   Does this error occur only with this particular CD?   7   Have you tried accessing this CD in another CD drive?     N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    	--     3  HOMBLKBAD,  primary home block is bad; backup used   $   Facility:     MOUNT, Mount Utility  N   Explanation:  The primary home block of a disk is corrupt or unreadable; the:                 backup volume is used to mount the volume.  I   User Action:  Repair the disk using the Analyze/Disk_Structure utility.    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 19:09:05 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)  Subject: Re: Dead Console 2 Message-ID: <lJ4Ab.10230$sQ.2602@news.cpqcorp.net>  i In article <bqnrgk$m47$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl>, "Tomasz Dryjanski" <tdryjanski.nospam@hotmail.com> writes: / :>   An AlphaServer 2000 series, I will assume.  :  :This is a right assumption. : F :>   There are various other "2000" series Alpha systems including theG :>   DEC 2000 series -- there are other non-Alpha 2000 series boxes, as F :>   well.  (Please be very specific when referencing the system modelD :>   name, and please consider avoiding attempts at abbreviating the2 :>   model name -- ambiguities induce confusions.) : + :I had no idea there were different models. $ :This is an Alpha 2000 4/233 server.  >   Um, you are (still) appreviating the system model names. :-)@   (The system name is "AlphaServer 2000", and not "Alpha 2000".)  ?   One way to get a displayed model name whilst running OpenVMS:    $ show license/charge  ..; This is a AlphaServer GS160 6/731, hardware model type 1968  ..  C   The SRM console can also display the full system marketing model     (SMM) name, as well.    1 :It was just to point out that the monitor works.   I   Exactly what sort of monitor?  Monitors are stupid devices, when viewed H   in isolation.  Terminals have a few brains, and some processing -- andH   are usually ROM-based devices.  Thin clients typically have a few moreF   features, and fit between usually-ROM based terminals and host-basedJ   terminal emulators.  Host-based terminal emulators have more brains. :-)  I :>   Please see the FAQ for pinouts, and ensure you are using the correct K :>   settings and the correct adapters.  There are two different DB9-to-MMJ L :>   adapters seen with OpenVMS-associated hardware, and only one of the two/ :>   is appropriate in any particular instance.  : . :It used to work with the same cabling scheme. :I didn't mention it - sorry.   J   Has the console and the wiring scheme been disturbed, rewired, otherwiseI   reconfigured, hardware temporarily redeployed elsewhere before a return C   to this use, the console been reset, or stuff otherwise shuffled?     J :>   It is possible that the console hardware has failed, but that case --I :>   in isolation -- is  comparatively rare.  Well, I have seen bent pins  :>   on the connectors...  : : :They do not seem to be bent. So it seems that we have the& :comparatively rare situation here. :(  '   Possible, but not yet certain.  :-)     F   Check the MMJ wiring for signal continuity, of course.  An ohm meterD   or multi-meter can be used, or a serial line breakout box (if you <   have one) can be useful when troubleshooting these errors.  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 18:54:58 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) H Subject: Re: DFU LINK/TRACEBACK (was: Re: OpenVMS Freeware V6.0 On-Line)1 Message-ID: <6w4Ab.10227$sQ.431@news.cpqcorp.net>   m In article <bqmvhl$8cn13@doiweb4.volkswagen.de>, Karl Rohwedder <extern.karl.rohwedder@volkswagen.de> writes:  :A little errata with DFU: : O :	the image is linked /TRACEBACK, so DFU$STARTUP fails to install it with privs   :   Patch the transfer array in the image header, then.  :-)  A   Details on patching are in the FAQ, and you'll want to zonk all B   but one of the entries -- all but the last, IIRC -- in the image%   transfer array in the image header.      N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------   Date: 5 Dec 2003 07:45:07 -0800 & From: jordan@ccs4vms.com (Rich Jordan)$ Subject: Re: DS700 RAS configuration= Message-ID: <cc5619f2.0312050745.4f2d898a@posting.google.com>   Z "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@MMaz.com> wrote in message news:<3FCE152A.5020908@MMaz.com>... > 7 > Port  4:                               Server: DS7000  >   H > Character Size:            8           Input Speed:               9600H > Flow Control:            XON           Output Speed:              9600H > Parity:                 None           Modem Control:          Enabled > Stop Bits:           Dynamic >   H > Access:                Local           Local Switch:              NoneH > Backwards Switch:       None           Name:                    PORT_4H > Break:                 Local           Session Limit:                4H > Forwards Switch:        None           Type:                      AnsiH > Default Protocol:        LAT           Default Menu:              NoneH >                                        Dialer Script:             None > Dedicated Service: V4100 >    > Authorized Groups:   0 > (Current)  Groups:   0 >    > Enabled Characteristics:= > Autobaud,  Autoconnect,  Autoprompt,  Broadcast,  Failover, @ > Input Flow Control,  Lock,  Loss Notification,  Message Codes,$ > Output Flow Control,  Verification >    ...   F > If you have problems with baud, most likely it is your modem (in my E > estimation), because with this config we the DS connects at 115200:  > 7 > Port  4:                               Server: DS7000  >   H > Character Size:            8           Input Speed:             115200H > Flow Control:            XON           Output Speed:            115200H > Parity:                 None           Modem Control:          Enabled > Stop Bits:           Dynamic >   H > Access:                Local           Local Switch:              NoneH > Backwards Switch:       None           Name:                    PORT_4H > Break:                 Local           Session Limit:                4H > Forwards Switch:        None           Type:                      AnsiH > Default Protocol:        LAT           Default Menu:              NoneH >                                        Dialer Script:             None > ...  > Barry    Barry,F      thanks for the samples.  We didn't have problems using the dialupD for a straight terminal connection, though; I've got modems on DS200C and DS700-16s that are only used for terminal dialin and connect at E 19200 and 38400 without problems (old configs from 14.4 modem days).  F I only had the one modem for PPP dialin testing, and I believe you areE correct that it must have been the source of the speed problem.  I'll E make sure whatever modems we try later have the documented ability to B lock the serial port speed instead of apparently letting it float.  *       What make/model modem are you using?   Rich Jordan  CCS    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 23:46:05 GMT ( From: Alder <PGDEHMKOKIMD@spammotel.com>* Subject: Re: Freeware download corrupt (?)+ Message-ID: <1N8Ab.18670$bC.13041@clgrps13>    Craig A. Berry wrote::  - > In article <3fcfbc45$1@obsidian.gov.bc.ca>, . >  "Alder" <MUNDDGNTDYTV@spammotel.com> wrote: >  >  > M >>As noted above, I currently have the VMS73_ACRTL V6.0 patch installed (from M >>the HP FTP site).  Previous to that I was at VMS73_ACRTL V3.0 level.  Could  >>that be the problem? >  > I > Most likely.  Or rather most likely the Ghostscript port has failed to  I > anticipate that the C run-time would later provide its own versions of  8 > the standard functions that cause the linker conflict.  H Actually, I have no idea if Ghostscript would have installed under DECC @ ECO 3 either.  I updated to DECC ECO 6 before trying to install D Ghostscript.  Perhaps we could have a poll of which version of DECC + _will_ allow Ghostscript 8.11 to installed.    Anyone?    Alder    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 13:28:00 -0600 6 From: "Craig A. Berry" <craigberry@mac.com.spamfooler>* Subject: Re: Freeware download corrupt (?)T Message-ID: <craigberry-105A26.13275905122003@dsl081-159-101.chi1.dsl.speakeasy.net>  + In article <3fcfbc45$1@obsidian.gov.bc.ca>, ,  "Alder" <MUNDDGNTDYTV@spammotel.com> wrote:    M > As noted above, I currently have the VMS73_ACRTL V6.0 patch installed (from M > the HP FTP site).  Previous to that I was at VMS73_ACRTL V3.0 level.  Could  > that be the problem?  G Most likely.  Or rather most likely the Ghostscript port has failed to  G anticipate that the C run-time would later provide its own versions of  6 the standard functions that cause the linker conflict.  < > > :The following product will be installed to destination:B > > :    FREEWARE AXPVMS GHOSTSCRIPT V8.11      DISK$NET:[000000.] > > :  > > :Portion done: 0% : > > :%PCSI-I-PRCOUTPUT, output from subprocess follows ...= > > :%LINK-W-MULDEF, symbol decc$gxvsnprintf multiply defined F > > :        in module DECC$SHR file SYS$COMMON:[SYSLIB]DECC$SHR.EXE;1< > > :%LINK-W-MULDEF, symbol decc$gxsnprintf multiply definedF > > :        in module DECC$SHR file SYS$COMMON:[SYSLIB]DECC$SHR.EXE;1  E Ghostscript should either not defer linking until install time or it  C should not use standard function names for its own replacements of  C those functions on systems that don't have them.  Fixing this most  C likely involves going back to the build scripts and compiling with  E /PREFIX=EXCEPT=(gxvsnprintf,gxsnprintf), or modifying the sources to  H use different function names, either directly or (preferably) via macro  or the prefix pragma.    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 20:09:49 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) * Subject: Re: Freeware download corrupt (?)1 Message-ID: <hC5Ab.10243$oS.753@news.cpqcorp.net>    In article <craigberry-105A26.13275905122003@dsl081-159-101.chi1.dsl.speakeasy.net>, "Craig A. Berry" <craigberry@mac.com.spamfooler> writes: , :In article <3fcfbc45$1@obsidian.gov.bc.ca>,- : "Alder" <MUNDDGNTDYTV@spammotel.com> wrote:   H :Most likely.  Or rather most likely the Ghostscript port has failed to H :anticipate that the C run-time would later provide its own versions of 7 :the standard functions that cause the linker conflict.  ..F :Ghostscript should either not defer linking until install time or it D :should not use standard function names for its own replacements of 2 :those functions on systems that don't have them.   H   Ah, another program caught by this classic coding error -- if you wantH   or need your own routines, use your own private routine names.  Do notB   use the standard C routine names for your own code.  (Most any CH   programmer porting C stuff around gets caught by this one, too, eitherE   by directly introducing this coding mistake, or by encountering the I   resulting duplicate-symbol errors during a port of the resulting code.)   H   My favorite variant: a programmer that thought the standard C routinesF   should have different calling interfaces for the local versions, andH   that also harbored an assumption around which of the duplicate routine8   names present would get found and used first.  Oops...    N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 17:06:40 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> Subject: Re: Hairdoo Economics) Message-ID: <3FD1016E.B3A9E4FD@istop.com>    David Harrold wrote:O > Porting an operating system from one hardware architecture to another isn't a  > significant investment?   G From the customer's point of view, no. Valuuable engineer time is spent Q re-inventing a wheel instead of improving an existing perfectly functional wheel.   K Now, HP doesn't care that VMS's progress will be slowed down by a number of N years because resources will be assigned to the porting, but customers do care= because features they need will take longer to appear to VMS.   I Secondly, since IA64 is not seen as a winner in the industry, there is no L motivation to go to IA64 from a customer's point of view, especially since aK convertion to a new platform, even if the hardware s donated by the vendor, L involves significant costs for the customer. And again, the customer will beL busy porting their code and retesting it to certify its operation on the newI platform instead of spending time making their employer more competitive.   N As a result of this exercise, the lead VMS had over others will narrow becauseN meanwhile, AIX andf Solaris and even Windows continue to invest resources intoJ improving their systems. And from a customer point of view, the time spentF with the port will allow the customer's competitors to advance faster.  I Yes, you can argue that the port will allow the engineers to clean up the I code, thus making it easier to port to the 8086, but again, that gives no  benefit to the customer today.  M Again, I ask the question: have the number of resources assigned to the TCPIP ) product in increased since HP took over ?    ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 17:42:05 -0500* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> Subject: Re: Hairdoo Economics2 Message-ID: <ssGdnQXa2OUnlEyiRVn-vA@metrocast.net>  5 "David Harrold" <DHarrold@wi.rr.com> wrote in message 2 news:pri1tv0j8fvvkdk8d1ubdr0qg1vrm5rgv4@4ax.com...J > On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 01:51:48 -0500, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> > wrote: >  > >John Smith wrote:= > >> a) the firm is making significant investments in OpenVMS  > > H > >They are not making significant investments in VMS. They are spending money to* > >help support their decision to go IA64. > >  > G > Porting an operating system from one hardware architecture to another  isn't a  > significant investment?   J Not really, when you're in the process of abandoning the existing hardwareI and need a new home if the OS will continue to be sold at all:  it's just G maintaining the minimally-required infrastructure (and mere maintenance J activity does not normally qualify as 'significant investment':  that termL is usually applied to up-front *additional* commitment of resources with the* expectation of *increased* future return).   ...   L > >The port to IA64 is a big distraction from the real needs of VMS, such asJ > >improving the TCPIP stack, improving VMSmail, spending money to get SAP back > >on VMS etc etc. > K > And seeing as the only future platform for VMS is IA64, how is porting to  that > platform a distraction?   J It is a distraction from what the effort could have otherwise been appliedG to.  VMS had no need for this work until cHumPaq stupidly created it by J killing Alpha's future:  without that distraction, the senior people beingJ wasted on the Itanic port could have been addressing actual gaps in the OS! facilities that users care about.   3   Seems to me that should be the place to spend the " > most money to ensure the future. > G > But, I keep forgetting that you are mad about the Alpha decision.  So  anything* > that helps the IA64 plan is a bad thing.   No - you're just clueless.   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 03:42:36 GMT % From: JOBInfo <jobinfo@spacelots.com>  Subject: Re: Hairdoo Economics6 Message-ID: <3FD14322.116660AD@some-obscure-place.com>   John Smith wrote:  > / > Over on www.openvms.org, Terry Shannon writes > > (http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=03/12/04/3038414): >  > "OpenVMS: Built to Last  > C > SKHPC believes OpenVMS has a very bright future. HP isn't running N > advertisements for the OS, but the firm is making significant investments inH > OpenVMS, especially in the areas of business-critical capabilities and- > software that enables eBusiness solutions."  >    and I agree with SKHPC.   F I can't say a whole lot about the covert advertisment, and I cannot --F at this time -- say a whole lot about what I do know... but I am aware@ of SIGNIFICANT back room advertising for Alpha and VMS that haveG included Carly herself... and she wouldn't be out pushing a product she C is about to kill... especially the $$$ and the commitment involved.   ? This will be my only response to this or any requests for "more ? info"...  and as you can see, the headers are obviously forged.    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 05:01:09 GMT % From: "Mike Naime" <mnaime@kc.rr.com>  Subject: Re: Hairdoo Economics: Message-ID: <podAb.108679$Eq1.77942@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>  ? I know that this is feeding the troll, but here goes anyways...   5 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message # news:3FD1016E.B3A9E4FD@istop.com...  > David Harrold wrote:I > > Porting an operating system from one hardware architecture to another  isn't a  > > significant investment?  > I > From the customer's point of view, no. Valuuable engineer time is spent L > re-inventing a wheel instead of improving an existing perfectly functional wheel.  H And what would you know about a paying customers point of view?  My homeK requirements are a lot different from my work requirements. (And budget :-)   J > Now, HP doesn't care that VMS's progress will be slowed down by a number ofK > years because resources will be assigned to the porting, but customers do  care? > because features they need will take longer to appear to VMS.   F I will agree that it appears that HP doesn't care.  But I can say thatL improvements/changes that we asked for both prior to and after the HP mergerK have been produced.  The Compaq/DEC folks that we where dealing with before L the merger are still in place.  It's a matter of how big your stick is.  ForJ someone that is just using a hobbiest system, your real chances of gettingJ heard are about nil.  Someone that purchases new hardware by the rack full gets heard a lot more.  K > Secondly, since IA64 is not seen as a winner in the industry, there is no L > motivation to go to IA64 from a customer's point of view, especially since a E > convertion to a new platform, even if the hardware s donated by the  vendor, K > involves significant costs for the customer. And again, the customer will  beJ > busy porting their code and retesting it to certify its operation on the new K > platform instead of spending time making their employer more competitive.   J And what makes you think that business customers/vendors/resellers are notL already working on doing an IA64 port for their apps with HP's co-operation?  H > As a result of this exercise, the lead VMS had over others will narrow because K > meanwhile, AIX andf Solaris and even Windows continue to invest resources  intoL > improving their systems. And from a customer point of view, the time spentH > with the port will allow the customer's competitors to advance faster.  D And AIX and winDOZE will still be fallover clusters.  Only VMS/TRU64K currently allow you to SHARE and access the same disk drive in a cluster at J the same time.  As long as this is true, the rest of the competition has a long way to go!   K > Yes, you can argue that the port will allow the engineers to clean up the K > code, thus making it easier to port to the 8086, but again, that gives no   > benefit to the customer today.  L Not today, but in the future, if I can buy a IA64 home PC from Best Buy, andJ load a hobbiest license on it...   This could potentially kill Billy boy'sL monopoly on the home market.  Why just settle for a home network.  How aboutL a home cluster!!!  a 100 Meg Net is about equivalent to a CI interconnect ifJ that is fast enough for your home cluster.  In that case, I would actually6 run 2 nets.  1 for cluster/decnet.  1 for IP/internet.    I > Again, I ask the question: have the number of resources assigned to the  TCPIP + > product in increased since HP took over ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 01:06:46 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> Subject: Re: Hairdoo Economics) Message-ID: <3FD171E4.8F416B42@istop.com>   E > > SKHPC believes OpenVMS has a very bright future. HP isn't running P > > advertisements for the OS, but the firm is making significant investments inJ > > OpenVMS, especially in the areas of business-critical capabilities and/ > > software that enables eBusiness solutions."     J SKHPC is the VMS marketing medium. A mouthpiece that repaies the marketing damage HP does to VMS.  K VMS management may have they hands tied when it comes to marketing VMS, but % they can "leak"/ stuff through SKHPC.   N SKHPC has been predicting great things for VMS ever since the takeover.  Can'tM bite the hand that feeds you. How much longer must we wait before we see real 	 changes ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 23:03:13 +0800 , From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>C Subject: Re: I wonder if this HP director will resign from HP's BOD - Message-ID: <87r7zjl32m.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   ( Rick Jones <foo@bar.baz.invalid> writes:  6 > What is the definition here of a "modern" cockpit?    C Not able to be flown by a current crew without a conversion course. A (airline) GA is also getting all glass cockpits now as well. Have B a look at the Pilatus PC-12 for a very good one, and also some new ships in the US.  @ > I was under the impression that the cockpit of the 747-400 wasD > reworked as well - cockpit crew of two now, all that fun CRT stuff > etc.  F The 744 got a mostly glass  `old cockpit' plus a lot extra. 74x modelsF tend  to be more  varied than  737s. The  737tng and  BBJ are  less in common with the rest.   < The new Boeing was here a few weeks ago as part of its ETOPSC certification.  The boeing test pilot likes our beaches she said :)    --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076* comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 23:08:18 +0800 , From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>C Subject: Re: I wonder if this HP director will resign from HP's BOD - Message-ID: <87n0a7l2u5.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   , JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> writes:  ? > Qantas, which used to pride itself with being an "all Boeing" D > airline has just ordered 23 Airbus A320, as well as some A380s and > 330s a while back.  F A big part of that is all the ex-Ansett fligh crew with A320 currency.$ Instant crewing!! Plus good pr spin.   --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076* comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------   Date: 05 Dec 2003 23:58:08 GMT% From: ejheller@aol.com.com (EJHeller) $ Subject: Re: New patchkits available: Message-ID: <20031205185808.26331.00000233@mb-m15.aol.com>  J I just received a new DS10 today and being the good integrator went to theO patch site to get the patches to apply to the system. I noticed that the UPDATE N 0200 was available so I downloaded it and apllied it. Upon reboot, I no longerL had the DECWindows interface, had to change the console to the terminal so IL could see what was going on. I seems that the new driver for the Radeon cardH uses a file naming convention that is different from the previous namingL convention and the DECWindows startup cannot find the file it is expecting.   N In going through the Product History, it seems that I already have most of theH patches in the UPDATE - so the question is should I use the UPDATE 0200?   Thanks, 
 Edward Heller  edward.heller-@-transcore-.coml    >From: norm.raphael@metso.com / >Date: 12/5/2003 11:14 AM Eastern Standard Time  >  >  > I >Karl Rohwedder <extern.karl.rohwedder@volkswagen.de> wrote on 12/05/2003 
 >03:32:17 AM:  > J >> On ftp://ftp.itrc.hp.com/openvms_patches/alpha/V7.3-1/ you can find theM >> new SYS V5.0 patchkit, which resolves the memory leak introduced with V4.0 , >> and a new UPDATE V2.0 kit together with a( >> ALPHA_V731_MASTER_ECO_LIST.TXT, which* >> lists all available patches for V7.3-1. >> --  > > >I just looked at the ALPHA_V731_MASTER_ECO_LIST.TXT file, and@ >it says that there are included in the UPDATE V2.0 ECO kit some! >ECO's that are Rated 2 and/or 3.  > B >As usual, I have installed most of the ECO's in this kit, but notB >all of them.  I was about to install another group Rated 1.  Now,E >should I do that, or just install the UPDATE V2.0 kit, getting those H >I was about to install, new ones, a group I have already installed, andA >those Rated 2 and 3 that I don't really need, but will not hurt.  > H >Will UPDATE V2.0 now be a required ECO for follow-on ECO's as is UPDATE >V1.0 C >now, so that the question of whether or not to install it is moot?  > H >Oh, and what about recovery-sets?  I would expect to want to accept the >ECO'sK >that I now have installed, and then produce a recovery-set for only UPDATE  >V2.0 I >and then recovery-sets for subsequent ECO installations.  How do I clear  >theJ >existing recovery-sets before taking my phase-0 backup of my system disk? > E >On, and given these bundled UPDATE ECO's, how does one readily check 
 >whether a >specific ECO has been applied?  >  >-Norm > 2 >> mit freundlichen Gr=FC=DFen | with best regards > 6 >> Karl Rohwedder          | it-ingteam(at)t-online.de+ >> | extern.karl.rohwedder(at)volkswagen.de    ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 06:09:37 +0100# From: edo <nobody@cryptorebels.net> # Subject: nobody <nobody@nobody.com> ? Message-ID: <25cf59b5cde63ab0c2e697f1cd52db42@cryptorebels.net>    Jean-Francois Mezei2 86 Harwood Gate  Beaconsfield, QC H9W3A3: (514) 695-8259   jfmezei@istop.como jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com  jfmezei@videotron.ca jfmezei@vl.videotron.cab nospam.jfmezei@videotron.ca  "jfmezei"@videotron.ca[nospam] nobody <nobody@nobody.com>) Conspiracy Theory <conspiracy@theory.org>e& Lou Raccoon <L.Raccoon@wilderness.org>$ Flapping Labias <flabia@anatomy.org>% Throbbing vulva <t.vulva@anatomy.org>m Twin Gonads <two@gonads.com>% Loose Scrotum <l.scrotum@anatomy.org>n" Raised Organ <R.Organ@anatomy.org>$ Popped Cherry <P.Cherry@anatomy.org>- Monica Lewinski <billclinton@westchester.com>t' Deep Fried Foreskin <dff@mcdonalds.com>c" Aroma of Smegma <aroma@chanel.org> Wet fart <w.Fart@smell.org>n' Pubic dandruff <P.dandruff@anatomy.org>d( Voluptuous Nipple <V.nipple@anatomy.org>& Inserted Finger <I.Finger@anatomy.org> Pubic Nair <shaved@anatomy.org> ' Flatulent Meatus <F.Meatus@anatomy.org>n% Lihk Mhygroin <L.MyGroin@anatomy.org>h Pre Khum <P.Khum@anatomy.org>s! Phi Mosis <Phi.Mosis@anatomy.org>i# Bal Anatis <Bal.Anatis@anatomy.org>,  Fren Ullum <F.Ullum@anatomy.org>$ Ivanna Getlaid <I.Getlaid@onani.org>& Ivanna Wankalot <I.Wankalot@onani.org>$ Ivanna Umpalot <Humpalot@drevil.com>* Wan Tnoneofit <W.Tnoneofit@weirdnames.org> Wan Itbad <W.Itbad@inneed.org>! Wan Towank <W.ToWank@anatomy.org>c Wan Tolik <w.tolik@anatomy.org>f$ Testos Terone <t.terone@anatomy.org>! Upper Gonad <U.Gonad@anatomy.org>n! Right Gonad <R.Gonad@anatomy.org>   Left Gonad <L.Gonad@anatomy.org>$ Tyson's Glands <Tyson.G@anatomy.org> Nose Hair <n.hair@anatomy.org>% Coronal Sulcus <C.Sulcus@anatomy.org>/% Corpus Cavernus <manhood@anatomy.org>T$ Armpit moisture <armpit@anatomy.org> Onani Room <onani@hotels.com>o& Arnie's Banana <weiner@terminator.com>( Raised eyebrows <r.eyebrows@anatomy.org>% Vas Deferens <V.deferens@anatomy.org>P% Naked Canuck <N.canuck@naturists.org>o& Arni's socks <Smelly.Socks@arnold.org>* Notable Exception <N.exception@untied.com>& Unpopped Cherry <U.Cherry@anatomy.org>' Tatooed Ovaries <T.Ovaries@anatomy.org>s' Pierced eyelid <p.eyelid@piercings.org>l( Limp Tomato <limp.tomato@vegetables.org>, Eggplant Earrings <e.earrings@piercings.org>. Banana Underpants <B.Underpants@hillfiger.org> Naval Lint <navel@lint.mil>-' Ingrown Toenail <i.toenail@anatomy.org>o% Empty Stomach <E.Stomach@anatomy.org>d$ Full Stomach <f.stomach@anatomy.org>" Smelly Cat <S.Cat@friends.nbc.com>& Torn Ligament <T.Ligament@anatomy.org># Art Tistic <A.Tistic@modern.museum>m( Furry Raccoon <F.Raccoon@wilderness.org>% Wet Racoon <W.Racoon@wildnerness.org> " Mad Racoon <M.Racoon@wildlife.org>% Lazy Racoon <L.Racoon@wilderness.org>o& Eaten Racoon <E.Raccoon@mcdonalds.com>' Happy Raccoon <H.Racoon@wilderness.org>r) Sleeping Racoon <S.Racoon@wilderness.org>S' Hungry Racoon <H.Racoon@wilderness.org> " Horny Raccoon <H.Racoon@fauna.org>( Smart Raccoon <S.Raccoon@wilderness.org>, George W Raccoon <GW.Raccoon@wilderness.org>+ Ronald McRaccoon <r.raccoon@wilderness.org> * Thirsty Raccoon <T.Raccoon@wilderness.org>( Johnny Raccoon <J.Racoon@wilderness.org>' Oshi Santo <O.Santo@nx01.starfleet.org>(* Oishi Chinko <O.Chinko@nx01.starfleet.org> T.Yellow <T.Yellow@nowhere.com>t Q <queue@continuum.net>l Borg Queen <1of1@borg.org>* Ronald Wilkerson <wilkersonr@sympatico.ca>) John Balterman <j.balterman@sympatico.ca>e   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 05:22:15 GMT%1 From: "   Darrell Larose" <CXotaX348X@rXogers.co>p' Subject: Re: nobody <nobody@nobody.com>OH Message-ID: <bIdAb.78637$Y4R1.5286@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  / "edo" <nobody@crypnoballs.net> wrote in messagei9 news:25cf59b5cde63ab0c2e697f1cd52db42@cryptorebels.net...R > Jean-Francois MezeiP   And your point is???   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 20:10:19 +0100B* From: Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net>C Subject: Re: OpenVMS clusters give Windows, Unix thorough thrashing 0 Message-ID: <3FD0E62B.389F6292@sture.homeip.net>   Andrew Harrison wrote: >    <snip>    C > It is however regretable that by using this tosh in their article 9 > The Register have ended up degrading your acheivements.5 >   ; LOL. Nought out of 10 for accuracy. And more than once too.T  % It was The Inquirer, not The RegisterQ   :-)P   -- 2
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 18:53:02 +0000KO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>pC Subject: Re: OpenVMS clusters give Windows, Unix thorough thrashing 0 Message-ID: <bqqk6f$bak$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   JF Mezei wrote:  > Andrew Harrison wrote: > A >>The problem with the Study is that it acheives its goal (makinga; >>OpenVMS look good) through a totally transparent trick ofl> >>comparing a the costs of downtime for a mid-range HPQ server: >>with the costs of downtime for high end servers from the+ >>vendors the study is designed to rubbish.. >  > L > The size of the machine doesn't necessarily define the cost of downtime. AM > weather office may require huge amounts of CPU, but downtime of an hour maye7 > not be critical at all for regions without tornadoes.d >   @ There should be a pretty close relationship between the capacity@ of the system and the cost of downtime assuming that the systems- being compared are equally business critical.u  B For example the client I work for runs Online Credit Authorisation= on a Sun Cluster. The cluster is designed to meet a specifiedt transaction rate for OLA.e  < If the cluster failed then there would be a fixed charge per; unauthorised transaction payable to each bank involved plus  an exposure to any fraud.D  < If my cluster is half the size and only able to process half; the OLA transactions then my exposure is halved and my cost-9 of downtime is halved. TechWise used what was at the timee; the fastest available Alpha Server the GS320 it had ~1/3 to- 1/4 of the capacity of an F15K.-   regards- Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 16:55:22 +0100 + From: Maarten van Tilburg <mtilburg@wxs.nl>kC Subject: Re: OpenVMS clusters give Windows, Unix thorough thrashingh& Message-ID: <3FD0AA6A.7D2284B4@wxs.nl>   Andrew Harrison wrote: >  > Maarten van Tilburg wrote: > >uG > > I am pretty sure we were the first in the Benelux with a multi siteS  > > cluster (back in 1993/1994)., > > (Public Transport of Amsterdam, aka gvb)  D Perhaps I should have made it more clear that this is _not_ the site mentioned in the article.1   > : > I am not denigrating your acheivements, its the Register; > article and in particular the linkage of your experiencesc& > with the MarketingFoolish TCO study. >e  D In that case, please elaborate on your assesment that it is foolish.C Are you opposing the fact that downtime const money ? I think it is0D a valid assumption, although it may not translate directly to (hoursD lost) times (hourly salary rate). It may be even more if the company; happens to do B2B or some such (you rember e-bay for sure).eB I would not put that long cluster uptimes result in zero downtime.< You have to look  at application availability, including the critical systems, network etc.D However, I feel that the 11 hours yearly downtime for VMS is way tooD high. I don't think we ever exceeded 5 hours a year during almost 105 years, includig planned downtime and real disasters. e  A What I missed in the artice, is other aspects of TCO. Operational1D costs f.ex can be greatly reduced by a properly designed DT cluster,5 sufficient redundant network, automatic failover etc. > By elimination single points of failure, we can safely run our< cluster unattended from 5 Pm to 7 Am, even without a service contract covering those hours.  % > Perhaps you should read the study !l  5 Why do you think I did not? It is almost 2 years old.o   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 17:18:41 +0000 = From: Andrew Harrison <removethisAndrew.snipHarrison@sun.com>bC Subject: Re: OpenVMS clusters give Windows, Unix thorough thrashing 0 Message-ID: <bqqb7d$8gi$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Maarten van Tilburg wrote: > Andrew Harrison wrote: >  >>Maarten van Tilburg wrote: >>F >>>I am pretty sure we were the first in the Benelux with a multi site >>>cluster (back in 1993/1994).t+ >>>(Public Transport of Amsterdam, aka gvb)  >  > F > Perhaps I should have made it more clear that this is _not_ the site > mentioned in the article.a >  > : >>I am not denigrating your acheivements, its the Register; >>article and in particular the linkage of your experiences & >>with the MarketingFoolish TCO study. >> >  > F > In that case, please elaborate on your assesment that it is foolish.E > Are you opposing the fact that downtime const money ? I think it isnF > a valid assumption, although it may not translate directly to (hoursF > lost) times (hourly salary rate). It may be even more if the company= > happens to do B2B or some such (you rember e-bay for sure). D > I would not put that long cluster uptimes result in zero downtime.> > You have to look  at application availability, including the  > critical systems, network etc.   Of course downtime costs money.-  : And ostensible the TechWise study attempts to quantify how much money downtime costs.  ? The problem with the Study is that it acheives its goal (making-9 OpenVMS look good) through a totally transparent trick ofi< comparing a the costs of downtime for a mid-range HPQ server8 with the costs of downtime for high end servers from the) vendors the study is designed to rubbish.C  C The GS320 has less capacity than mid range Sun F6800, IBM P670s etc.4 but is compared with high end Sun F15K/IBM P690 etc.  < And you have to ask the obvious question which is if OpenVMS8 really does save you money on downtime then why on earth9 did the TechWise Study have to resort to such a tried and 6 trusted but entirely obvious method to get the sums to add up in OpenVMS's favour ?  A It is however regretable that by using this tosh in their articlen7 The Register have ended up degrading your acheivements.e   Regardsr Andrew Harrisong   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 12:27:34 -0500-* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>C Subject: Re: OpenVMS clusters give Windows, Unix thorough thrashing-) Message-ID: <3FD0BFF5.EA84251A@istop.com>-   Andrew Harrison wrote:A > The problem with the Study is that it acheives its goal (making ; > OpenVMS look good) through a totally transparent trick of > > comparing a the costs of downtime for a mid-range HPQ server: > with the costs of downtime for high end servers from the+ > vendors the study is designed to rubbish..  J The size of the machine doesn't necessarily define the cost of downtime. AK weather office may require huge amounts of CPU, but downtime of an hour mayi5 not be critical at all for regions without tornadoes.6  M But a small microvax 3600 may have a downtime cost of $100,000 per hour if ita3 processes high value low volume SWIFT transactions.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 17:17:21 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>C Subject: Re: OpenVMS clusters give Windows, Unix thorough thrashing ) Message-ID: <3FD103EF.14FD6497@istop.com>   ( Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote:B > There should be a pretty close relationship between the capacityB > of the system and the cost of downtime assuming that the systems/ > being compared are equally business critical.   ) It is the last asusmption which is wrong.   L Yes, when comparing two systems that have the same application (such as yourM example of credit card authoriozations), the system handling the greater load $ will have the higher downtime costs.  N However, one cannot make a generalisation since a much smaller system handlingH hindred of very high value transactions per day (instead of transactionsN measured in the tens per second) may have downtime costs that are far greater.  K If your credit card authorisation application fails and you blind authorize N transactions, you don't lose customers. But if your SWIFT system goes down andL a 100 million payment from Boeing to some japanese supplier of wings doesn'tJ make it before the deadline, your bank is not only liable to pay the steepK late payment fees in the contract between Boeing and the japanese supplier, L but you also styand to lose Boeing as a customer because Boeing will want toF take its businses to a bank that can transfer payment amounts on time.   ------------------------------   Date: 5 Dec 2003 13:52:20 -0800 ( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) Subject: Re: OpenVMS org= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0312051352.44234195@posting.google.com>e  i "Lee Courtney" <lcourtney@NOSPAM-mvista.com> wrote in message news:<vt1agf34u94a83@corp.supernews.com>... I > I think a possible model of what may/will happen with VMS is how HP hasmG > handled MPE. This is probably a best case as there is some connectioneN > between current management and it was a product developed at HP. Look at the? > long term trend for MPE and you may deduce the future of VMS.u >  > Lee Courtney > HP RTE and MPE Labs 1979-1987e > = > "mist dragon" <mistdragon@zdnetonebox.com> wrote in message 9 > news:7500353b.0312050407.195a04ac@posting.google.com...eJ > > Just imagine: What would happen if HP decided that Itanium would never= > > make it to mainstream and spin OpenVMS off OpenVMS corp ?  > > I > > How many would there be left ? What would be the future of it ? WoulduE > > it bring Alpha back ? Would charon-vax nail it ? Who would be the3 > > competitors ?r > >. > > Mw  @ no way ... there are a LOT more VMS sites out there than mpe ...= they would have to sell it or companies like us would hold HPo* accountable and never buy from them again!   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 07:53:55 -08002 From: "Lee Courtney" <lcourtney@NOSPAM-mvista.com> Subject: Re: OpenVMS org/ Message-ID: <vt1agf34u94a83@corp.supernews.com>e  G I think a possible model of what may/will happen with VMS is how HP hasnE handled MPE. This is probably a best case as there is some connectionuL between current management and it was a product developed at HP. Look at the= long term trend for MPE and you may deduce the future of VMS.s   Lee Courtney HP RTE and MPE Labs 1979-1987e  ; "mist dragon" <mistdragon@zdnetonebox.com> wrote in message 7 news:7500353b.0312050407.195a04ac@posting.google.com...aH > Just imagine: What would happen if HP decided that Itanium would never; > make it to mainstream and spin OpenVMS off OpenVMS corp ?) >eG > How many would there be left ? What would be the future of it ? WouldeC > it bring Alpha back ? Would charon-vax nail it ? Who would be theU > competitors ?t >c > Mr   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 18:07:34 -0500t* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> Subject: Re: OpenVMS org) Message-ID: <3FD10FB1.C160E74D@istop.com>e   Bob Ceculski wrote:rB > no way ... there are a LOT more VMS sites out there than mpe ...? > they would have to sell it or companies like us would hold HP , > accountable and never buy from them again!  L They only need some Stallard guy within HP to produce one study showing thatK sufficient number of VMS customer would remain with HP and that killing VMSnM would free up valuable development money to make HP-UX more ahead even fasterIG and become even more competitive. Carly would have no compunction aboutoH killing VMS. It isn't her baby and she'd have no problem suffocating VMS slowly or quickly.  L Consider also that between VMS and Tandem, Tandem wins because it has highlyH visible customers. So HP could kill VMS and tell those VMS customers whoJ absolutely need availability to switch to Tandem, and tell other customers/ that HP-UX will do the job just as well as VMS.e  J Yes, they know that killing VMS would cause a certain number of very loyalI customers to never again buy from HP. But if VMS loyalists as seen as oldhJ grumpy men nearing returement, then they figure that the boycott by ex VMSI customers would only last a few years and when new blood comes on stream,aF they'd all be pro-Unix anyways and those customers would return to HP.  J The fact that HP takes great steps to avoid mentioning/marketing VMS is an5 indication that HP has not yet ruled out killing VMS.7   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 14:47:39 -0600e2 From: "-Andy-" <see2go4me@spamdelicious.yahoo.com>> Subject: Re: OT Very scary: Cars running on Microsoft software6 Message-ID: <Xns9448A0AA75395see2go4me@216.196.97.132>  > Paul Anderson <paul.anderson@hp.com> enlightened us on 03 Dec  2003 with:   4 > In article <3FCD35BC.836E30AC@istop.com>, JF Mezei$ > <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote: > 9 >> The Microsoft platform already is in 23 different car  ' >> models, including the BMW 7 series,    < Hmmm... my understanding ( could be wrong of course) is that9 the "iDrive" in other BMW models (new 5 series, etc) willa: not be using that version of software ( ie. no Microsoft) 9 because they've had so many problems with it in the more t" expensive cars. Many recalls, etc.  9 Can you even make a computer that'll run VMS "car worthy"c; so you could use it instead of one of the more traditional s6 embedded OS's ? Something small with no moving parts ?   -Andy-   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 17:33:20 -0500:* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>> Subject: Re: OT Very scary: Cars running on Microsoft software) Message-ID: <3FD107AD.6345324E@istop.com>u  
 -Andy- wrote:c; > Can you even make a computer that'll run VMS "car worthy"n< > so you could use it instead of one of the more traditional8 > embedded OS's ? Something small with no moving parts ?  K VMS lacks features such as "instant on" which are suported by PDA operating-; systems (Palm, PSION/Symbian and WindowsCE (aka PocketPC). -  J Linux was able to be scaled into PDAs so I see no reason why VMS couldn't.= PDAs today have as much memory as Microvax IIs had back then.4   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:52:25 -0800E/ From: Greg Cagle <news@removethisgregcagle.com>m> Subject: Re: OT Very scary: Cars running on Microsoft software/ Message-ID: <vt26i1b705r12e@corp.supernews.com>i  
 -Andy- wrote:e  > > Hmmm... my understanding ( could be wrong of course) is that; > the "iDrive" in other BMW models (new 5 series, etc) wille< > not be using that version of software ( ie. no Microsoft) ; > because they've had so many problems with it in the more  $ > expensive cars. Many recalls, etc.  : I don't believe this to be true - the new 5 series and the9 X5 have the same iDrive software and interface, only with4) less features and more secondary options.h   - Greg -- i
 Greg Cagle gregc at gregcagle dot com   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 04:37:07 GMTh# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> > Subject: Re: OT Very scary: Cars running on Microsoft softwareE Message-ID: <T1dAb.712$VEd1.560@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>p   William Webb wrote:t2 > Dean Woodward <deanw@rdrop.com> wrote in message& > news:<3FCE2243.5050705@rdrop.com>... >> JF Mezei wrote: >>3 >>> Unfortunatly, this is NOT an April Fool's joke.a >>>oG >>> http://wired.com/news/autotech/0,2554,61412,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_6  >>H >> Yesterday, a friend from the Seattle area reported seeing a Hummer H2D >> with www.microsoft.com/automotive emblazoned all over it. ShortlyD >> after, he saw it again- pulled over for abusing the HOV (carpool) >> lane. >>E >> I'm not sure what's scarier- that brake "software" (ABS?) would bes; >> able to upgrade itself (buggy patch? virus? system crash G >> mid-upgrade?) or that it would _need_ an upgrade in the first place. ' >> Which is the lesser of evils? Eek...a > D > All these posts and nobody came up with "Blue Dashboard of Death?" >> > I'm disappointed.o    K Don't be...when the software fails  and the airbag doesn't deploy, it'll be D the "Bloody Red Dashboard and Windshield of Death"....but don't bothE Microsoft with complaints filed by your executors....you accepted thef* license agreement when you bought the car.   ------------------------------   Date: 5 Dec 2003 11:49:51 -0800i1 From: susan_skonetski@hotmail.com (Sue Skonetski)t/ Subject: Re: Pictures from the OpenVMS bootcamp < Message-ID: <857e9e41.0312051149.bf050b2@posting.google.com>   Martin,i  E I like the pictures and thank you very much for doing them.  I do notcA know anyone that has complained and we did announce that you wereo- taking pictures and they would be on the web.   ? And the VMS crowd is a pretty laid back group of people anyway.   
 Warm Regards,u suei  [ JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message news:<3FD02DB9.60B3C603@istop.com>...m > "Martin P.J. Zinser" wrote:pK > > complaints about privacy violations. I obviously grossly misjudged thisf
 > > issue. > F > I think you misjudged the reaction.  i don't think that the "lawyer"O > threathened to sue you for those pictures, but more just wanted to let you beeO > aware of the issue. Since none of the pictures you had posted were degrading,tN > since none involved showings omeone with a mistress, I really doubt you'd be! > getting any negative reactions.  > N > Furthermore, if anyone objected to having their photo there, they would have > told you by now. > K > What you could have done is call them all "John Smith" and ask people whopP > agree to have their name attached to their picture to contact you. Then, afterA > a while, you'd remove any images that are still not identified.  > P > I understand your reaction of pulling the images. But I deplore it since it isP > an attack to basic freedom of expression. This was for good clean fun, without3 > any pretense of you profiting from such pictures.s   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 12:32:51 -0500% From: "John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com>a/ Subject: Re: Pictures from the OpenVMS bootcamps/ Message-ID: <vt1ga51v35r37e@news.supernews.com>>  J > All I wanted (and still) want to do is to share the good memories of theH > bootcamp with the other attendees and the community at large. I do notI > want to harm/cause discomfort/rip off anybody at all. As Barts reaction.I > clearly shows there are people with serious misgivings about what I didnE > with their pictures and who think I stepped way out of bounds. I docG > sincerely apologize to everybody who feels this way. >>All<< pictures H > from the bootcamp showing any person at all have been removed from the > server as of now!!!n  J It's a shame that such a sincere effort or share the OpenVMS Bootcamp withK the rest of the OpenVMS community has been squashed by a single misinformedC2 (although well intentioned) piece of legal advice.  K Barbra Streisand (who many of you have heard of) sued Ken Adelman (who many L of you know) because he flew over her house in a helicopter taking pictures.H A judge just ruled in Ken's favor (hooray!!!) and even went so far as to" tell Babs to pay Ken's legal fees.   Details are available here:k  " http://www.californiacoastline.org  C http://www.bayarea.com/mld/montereyherald/news/politics/7407582.htm-  H Any lawsuit over Martin's pictures and postings would be (and should be) thrown out of court.   John Vottero   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 12:02:46 -0500l( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>/ Subject: Re: Pictures from the OpenVMS bootcamp , Message-ID: <3FD0BA36.8080809@tsoft-inc.com>   JF Mezei wrote:    > "Bart Z. Lederman" wrote:  > G >>For example, everyone who attends an awards ceremony can expect theircI >>picture to be taken entering or leaving.  If someone took their picturepC >>in the rest room, publishing it without permission would be iffy.  >> > P > One would then have to define exactly what sort of event that Bootcamp was. ItK > was in a hotel/conference facility, simular to an awards show. The peopletO > attending knew that were be seen in public, not only by conference attendees,p- > but also hotel staff and anyone walking by.a > L > Unless the photographs were taken with a hidden camera, I think that it isM > fair to assume that attendees knew that they were being photographed duringh8 > this event, as has been the case in most DECUS events. >  > E >>of cases recently where photographers obtained pictures of "public"gB >>figures (such as actors) at private events such as weddings, andB >>published them.  The courts have ruled against the photographers >>in a number of cases.y >> > N > I think that it hinges on whether the picture is considered degrading by theH > victim or not. Consider lady Di. She didn't sue for someone publishingP > apicture of her walking on the streets, but she did when she found out her GymG > had installed hidden cameras to photographs her during her exercises.u > I > In fairness, she was a public figure so the line was different from her ] > compared to a private citizen who doesn't expect to be constantly hounded by photographers.u >  >  > @ >>a face.  If someone could be identified by a particular uniqueD >>item of clothing, or outline, or way of walking, then you couldn'tH >>make that image visible to the general public without their permission: >>(unless it's covered by one of the specific exemptions). >> > J > I think that there are exceptions to this. For instance, if they shoot aJ > commercial in Times Square, they wouldn't have to get permission and payI > everyone who happens to be visible in the shot. They would only get theyN > paperwork and cheques done for those who are the primary people who actuallyP > play a role.  Someone might be recognizable in the background, but if they areD > lost in the crowd, they don't actually "figure" in the commercial. >   O Forgetting all the legalities and the exemptions and such, having the courtesy aM to ask a person if they minded having their picture and name published as an  O attendee at the boot camp should have happened.  The world doesn't always have n5 to be so complex if some simple courtesy is observed.o   Dave   -- m4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 12:54:55 -0500e* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>/ Subject: Re: Pictures from the OpenVMS bootcamp ) Message-ID: <3FD0C65C.B5CF22DD@istop.com>-   John Vottero wrote: M > Barbra Streisand (who many of you have heard of) sued Ken Adelman (who manyHN > of you know) because he flew over her house in a helicopter taking pictures.J > A judge just ruled in Ken's favor (hooray!!!) and even went so far as to$ > tell Babs to pay Ken's legal fees.   Wow ! I am impressed.   D Adelman is a guy who photographed the whole coast line as part of an/ environmental project if I remember correctly.    H I can see a star taking down the registration number of a helicopter andK automaticlally slapping a lawsuit before any photos are published. ConsideriM what helicopters do at star weddings. However, Bab's lawyer, upon finding out @ this guy was legit, should have simply let the whole thing drop.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 18:44:29 GMT 9 From: Hein van den Heuvel <hein_netscape@eps.zko.dec.com> / Subject: Re: Pictures from the OpenVMS bootcampa/ Message-ID: <3FD0D0BB.18E7DA93@eps.zko.dec.com>:   David Froble wrote:r  P > Forgetting all the legalities and the exemptions and such, having the courtesyN > to ask a person if they minded having their picture and name published as anP > attendee at the boot camp should have happened.  The world doesn't always have7 > to be so complex if some simple courtesy is observed.   ) Agreed, but there is a variation on this.1S Martin was very open, visible, even remarkable with his camera during the bootcamp.s- I expected those picutures to show up online.oM Admittedly I do not recall him mentioingin that, but it seemed obvious to me.4  * Looks like Vaxman found the right balance.^ He was also colleting pics of c.o.v faces and clearly mentioned is was to put up on a website.   fwiw,h Hein.                        >r >  > Dave >g > --6 > David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04506 > Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596@ > DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com > 170 Grimplin Road  > Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 11:42:17 -0800l3 From: Alan Frisbie <Usenet01REMOVE@Flying-Disk.com>s/ Subject: Re: Pictures from the OpenVMS bootcampu. Message-ID: <3FD0DF99.1040808@Flying-Disk.com>   Martin P.J. Zinser wrote:a  K > All I wanted (and still) want to do is to share the good memories of the oI > bootcamp with the other attendees and the community at large. I do not e7 > want to harm/cause discomfort/rip off anybody at all.<  < I am quite unhappy at the negative reaction you got to this.< While the photo of me is not particularly flattering, I have: no objection to it being posted as part of the collection.  ; It is sad that some people raise such a fuss that it spoilswA the fun for everyone.   I predict that all sorts of rationalizinga; will now follow.   But the soup has already been pissed in.6   Alan   ------------------------------   Date: 5 Dec 2003 15:08:56 -0800 - From: contracer11@uol.com.br (Shiva MahaDeva)p) Subject: REPLY/STATUS in another VMS node,= Message-ID: <ddf392ea.0312051508.3ec4155c@posting.google.com>u  ? I need issue a REPLY/STATUS in another VMS machine (in network)-? to see if there is any pending request; How could I make this ?r   Thanks.m   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 18:34:11 -06005( From: brandon@dalsemi.com (John Brandon)- Subject: Re: REPLY/STATUS in another VMS node 1 Message-ID: <03120518341187@dscis6-0.dalsemi.com>e  A > I need issue a REPLY/STATUS in another VMS machine (in network)bA > to see if there is any pending request; How could I make this ?  > 	 > Thanks.i   I assume a non-clustered node.  , $ rsh /user= /pass=  remnode  "reply/status"   or  . $ rsh /user= /pass=  remnode "@get_status.com;   or  & you can use DECnet objects to do this.         J*o*h*n B*r*a*n*d*o*ni VMS Systems Administratoru* firstname.lastname.spam.me.not@dalsemi.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 19:46:27 -0500t* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>- Subject: Re: REPLY/STATUS in another VMS noded) Message-ID: <3FD126DA.C2C1B8DA@istop.com>m   Shiva MahaDeva wrote:@ > A > I need issue a REPLY/STATUS in another VMS machine (in network) A > to see if there is any pending request; How could I make this ?/  	 MC SYSMAN:& SYSMAN> SET ENV/NODE=other/USER=SYSTEM <enter password> DO REPLY/STATUSo  7 SYSMAN uses DECNET when talking to a non clustred node.e   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 15:38:14 -0600/ From: "Stuart, Ed" <Ed.Stuart@austinenergy.com> - Subject: RE: Routable Protocol for Clustering-T Message-ID: <92EFB80E551BD511B39500D0B7B0CDCC11053539@ohms.electric.ci.austin.tx.us>   > -----Original Message-----4 > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com] ) > Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 8:42 AMh > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Co/ > Subject: Re: Routable Protocol for Clusteringr >  >  > "Stuart, Ed" wrote:oG > > Standardize on one protocol.  We have already removed IPX, DECnet, t1 > > LAT, Appletalk, and NetBeui from the network.e > 9 > For the nodes that are "remote", what functionality of  ( > clustering do you absolutely require ? > ? > COuld you achieve the same results with simpler DECNET links  = > between machines ? Or do you make heavy use of distributed ,% > lock manager, shadowed drives etc ? H Yes we shadow drives between the sites.  An idea is to split the clusterK into two clusters put Oracle's 9i RAC on both and use Oracle's DataGuard to   enable the data to stay synched. > > > You can route DECNET over IP networks (either with th ereal ? > decnet and Multinet, or with DECnet-5 which can appear to be T > IP to routers) >    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:10:24 -0800 0 From: Mark Berryman <Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com>- Subject: Re: Routable Protocol for Clustering(' Message-ID: <3fd09fe1$1@cpns1.saic.com>r   Stuart, Ed wrote: 9 > Here's some specific info from our network engineers...0  H What ... an ... absolute ... crock... (sorry, whatever else this person " is, a network engineer he is not).  H Whoever wrote this knows nothing of what (s)he is speaking.  Let's take  a look at each item.  L > The only limitations to the Proprietary VMS cluster are self imposed by HPK > due to the fact that they will not support IP clustering. All other majorj > OSs support IP clustering.  F First failure.  This person obviously has no idea what clustering is. C  From the point of view of what a VMS cluster does, NOBODY does IP .A clustering.  The closest matches to "clustering" that use IP are dD external load balancers, hot standby configurations, and individual < applications running something specific to that application.  H VMS clusters bring far more to the table than this, far more than I can D reply specifically to here.  You should gather up specifically what E cluster features you are using then we can compare them to these "ip n
 clusters".  + > There were good reasons for the other OSsaI > vendors to do this. A good reason for us is the fact we do not have theyH > fiber resources to dedicate paths for Proprietary VMS use exclusively.  A And whoever said this was a requirement?  Multiple protocols, at UB multiple layers, can ride the same media without difficulty.  For I example, my cluster traffic rides the exact same fiber between buildings  G that the IP, DECnet, Appletalk, IPX, and LAT traffic uses (we know how >. to run networks with multiple protocols here).  H Now, what if someone tries to argue that one protocol takes too much of F the fiber bandwidth to share with other protocols?  This is rare, but I does happen; especially if the only fiber links available are also trunk @G links and there is a lot of inter-site traffic.  When fiber is at that nE much of a premium, one solution is to use wave division multiplexing nF (which is not cheap but is usually quite a bit cheaper than new fiber G runs).  With WDM, you get multiple paths of high bandwidth through the  C same fiber and one does not interfere with the other.  However, in rG practice, the fiber usually has more than enough headroom to accomdate @+ everything unless you are heavy into video.o   > ThisL > fact was made apparent 3 years ago when we made the decision to go IP onlyL > on the network, and the resource limitations were a major consideration in > the decision.   I The question to ask here is what resource limitation dictated an IP only mF   network?  I am trying to think of a resource shortage that could be G addressed by the answer of going IP only and the only ones I can think .C of are knowledge and experience.  Even layer-3 switches whose only w, layer-3 support is IP wouldn't dictate this.  @ > Other considerations include the fact that MOST modern systems' > require fast failovers of <2 seconds.@  C I'll bite.  Name one.  I'll bet cluster failover is not what he is o thinking of.   > To run the ancient  flat lanN > architecture which  Proprietary VMS requires, means fail over times up to 45 > seconds.    I Not even close to true.  VMS clusters do not require a flat LAN and they cG   don't "failover".  They detect loss of a node and adjust accordingly RE and no VMS cluster I've ever managed has taken 45 seconds to do that g" (granted, I also keep them tuned).  H Perhaps the author is thinking of LAN spanning tree failover times?  If C so, then the author needs to take his "modern" argument to his LAN oE equipment.  The old 802.1d spanning tree algorithm can take nearly a -A minute to complete but the new 802.1w operates in 2 or 3 seconds.e  ? > This is unacceptable for all of the critical service systems,OM > which by the way are high availability, which have to share the same pipes.e  D What makes them high availability?  Why are they allowed to use the G pipes and VMS isn't?  Is it because they only use IP.  VMS can use the i0 same pipes as IP users.  What is the issue here?  M > I don't see why we are even wasting time on this discussion, because it wasuL > known well in advance that the network was to be all IP by the end of this > year.2  F Was it?  Why was this decided?  Why (and by whom) was it decided that I business functions needed to conform to a limited network instead of the  D network must conform to business requirements?  The network already G supports the VMS clusters.  What do you need to take out that is going ,! to cause that support to go away?   @ > My understanding was that we were speaking with HP to see whatK > solutions were available as far as IP clustering from them. If a solutionoM > couldn't be provided by HP, then Proprietary Clustering VMS wasn't going tog > be the system of choice.    H His understanding is as flawed here as everywhere else in this missive. B   There is no way HP was ever talking about IP clustering for VMS.  / > The SANs, and all other recent purchases havesI > revolved around the fact they were IP capable to meet our goals for thee > network backbone.s  F IP-based SANs?  Sounds more like an NAS.  What is the real story with H your storage architecture?  Are they really IP-based (which is NOT high H performing) or are they perhaps using Fibrechannel?  NAS storage is not F only limited in performance but also in the platforms that can use it.  G I am aware of investigations into such things as IP-based SCSI but was eE unaware that it was ready for primetime, as it were.  So find out if eI this assesment of your storage architecture is accurate and, if so, what  5 is being implemented.  Then we can address specifics.a  9 >  You are asking us to take a step backward because HP'srL > VMS team doesn't want to deal with the realities of WANs and budgets today > for most customers.   B And your response should be something like "We are not asking for F something to be taken backwards.  We do, however, object to arbitrary C limits.  Please show me what it is about your WAN that prevents my t$ cluster traffic from traversing it."  4 > We are being asked to change a business process toG > match a vendors product, instead of the vendor producing a product toH! > enhance our business process.  -  I No, you are asking the business process to change to reflect your desire mF to limit the network environment.  Again we ask, what it is about the D network that prevents the VMS Cluster traffic from using it?  We've G already told you we don't need dedicated fibers.  What else do you see w
 as a problem?t  , I'm not saying HP/VMS is not a good OS, just/ > not a good OS for us under the circumstances.s  A I think that this message indicates that the author doesn't even sG understand what he is complaining about.  The key, I think, is to find iI out why he believes that the network can or should only carry IP packets k4 and why he believes it cannot carry the SCS traffic.  
 Mark Berryman    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 10:39:16 -0500o* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>- Subject: Re: Routable Protocol for Clusteringh) Message-ID: <3FD0A69B.49E272AD@istop.com>o   "Stuart, Ed" wrote:y> > Right, but other operating systems are supposedly doing it.   M Other operating systems have clustering as an application. Not as a core parteG of the OS like VMS. Think of Unix clusters as glorified DECNET network.,   > The issue comescE > down to which one of the existing clustering technologies support at > multi-site cluster.   L More importantly: which of the existing technologies allow multiple nodes toI function simultaneously and access the same databases in read-write mode.,    J Microsoft is shared nothing, essentially good only for failover. In othertN words, you have one node "frozen" waiting to lose the signal from the other toL wake up and start processing. Other clusters allow multiple nodes to work atM the same time as long as it is read-only or as long as they are certain theiro& operatiosn won't touch the same files.  L Some of the mail servers on Unix run in clusters. How do they get around theJ lack of DLM ? When you access your mailbox via POP, it creates a temporaryM "lock" file in your directory that tells the SMTP receiver not to deposit any M message into your mailbox. And you need a sweeper process to delete any stray.L "lock files" if you session is abornmally disconnected before the lock could be deleted.   B Do your nodes run some home-grown software or some packaged OracleL applications ?  If the apps make extensive use of VMS clustering facililtiesL so that multiple instances of an application work together well, then movingQ to a lesser clueter woudl require fairly significant changes to your application.   L If you have shrinkwrapped software such as Oracle, it is possible that theirM version on a lesser Unix might be just good enough to do the job since Oraclee: has implemented at the application level some form of DLM.  K Another way for Unix to get around the lack of DLM is to have a file server L serve multiple nodes. That file server node is then aware of all locks takenN by everybody. But then you have single point of failure as well as performance7 issues of going NFS versus direct access to the drives.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 13:27:01 -0500a* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>- Subject: Re: Routable Protocol for Clusteringi) Message-ID: <3FD0CDDF.65AD01BD@istop.com>W   David Froble wrote:uP > 1) The network is a physical link, which can support any protocol.  If routers> > are involved, then it should support any routable protocol.   X SCS , like LAT, is not routable. It is an ethernet address to ethernet address protocol.  N Network people don't stoop so low, they only want to deal with network-address- to network-address prottocols (one layer up).m  H Routers discard the ethernet address and analyse content of the ethernetH packet to determine which network protocol it is, and if it is a networkK protocol it understands, will then extract the network address at the knowneT location and format inside the packet and then determine how to deliver that packet.   > If a network link B > is robust enough, there is no reason to restrict the protocols.   I There is a big difference between a bridged LAN and a routed network. YoueI could have a very robust routed network but such network won't be able tor5 handle many protocols which operate at a lower level..   ------------------------------   Date: 5 Dec 2003 13:21:53 -0600t- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)5- Subject: RE: Routable Protocol for Clustering 3 Message-ID: <fNuVI61PN$MI@eisner.encompasserve.org>m   In article <92EFB80E551BD511B39500D0B7B0CDCC11053509@ohms.electric.ci.austin.tx.us>, "Stuart, Ed" <Ed.Stuart@austinenergy.com> writes:M > Thanks for your feedback.  I'm using it to help build my case.  Here's somed > answers to your questions. >  >>  < >> > Here's some specific info from our network engineers... >> > f= >> > The only limitations to the Proprietary VMS cluster are a >> self imposed D >> > by HP due to the fact that they will not support IP clustering. >> a@ >>     I think that was already covered by Hoff. VMS clustering > >> is much more tightly integrated with the kernel than those @ >> other clustering solutions and must be available long before  >> the IP stack is running.j= > Right, but other operating systems are supposedly doing it.   > Descriptions previously posted here indicate that "clustering"? on other operating systems is often at a much higher level thans in VMS.e   ------------------------------   Date: 5 Dec 2003 13:23:59 -0600t- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)n- Subject: Re: Routable Protocol for Clusteringc3 Message-ID: <aIVPc8ax8clx@eisner.encompasserve.org>h  E If IP is the answer to all problems, then the network folks should betF able to emulate an ordinary 802.3 network over IP with hardware boxes, right ?.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 19:28:52 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)t- Subject: RE: Routable Protocol for Clusteringe2 Message-ID: <U%4Ab.10235$sQ.1710@news.cpqcorp.net>   In article <92EFB80E551BD511B39500D0B7B0CDCC110534E6@ohms.electric.ci.austin.tx.us>, "Stuart, Ed" <Ed.Stuart@austinenergy.com> writes:8 :Here's some specific info from our network engineers... : K :The only limitations to the Proprietary VMS cluster are self imposed by HPeJ :due to the fact that they will not support IP clustering. All other major :OSs support IP clustering.  i  G   Yes, we can provide the (comparatively limited) "IP Clustering", too.t   NFS, for instance.  D   You'll lose the coordination, the distributed synchronization, andE   the record-level shared access that you expect to have with OpenVMS2#   Cluster configurations, however. B  I :                               There were good reasons for the other OSs4H :vendors to do this. A good reason for us is the fact we do not have theI :fiber resources to dedicate paths for Proprietary VMS use exclusively.  o  A   The cited network is apparently using IP routers, not switches.eA   (I'm guessing there are details around this choice that are not    included in the discussion.)  L :This fact was made apparent 3 years ago when we made the decision to go IP N :only on the network, and the resource limitations were a major consideration  :in the decision.   7   I assume business requirements have been factored in?s  I   OpenVMS cluster configurations operate nicely over switched and bridgedw$   network connections, as mentioned.  L :             Other considerations include the fact that MOST modern systemsD :require fast failovers of <2 seconds.  To run the ancient  flat lanM :architecture which  Proprietary VMS requires, means fail over times up to 453
 :seconds.   C   Failover?  How quaint.  We prefer to provide shared access to all D   storage resources, and to not only avoid the need for failover butD   avoid the need for hot-standby hardware.  OpenVMS Clusters provideE   for graceful degradation, as hardware and network connections fail.e2   You can use all the hardware you've purchased...  F   While OpenVMS Cluster configurations do (rarely) fail, I've not seenE   anything remotely approaching those times using OpenVMS -- save fordF   degenerate configurations with long ride-over times.  (I *have* seenD   long ride-over times configured when the network is unstable.  :-)C   Typical cluster connectivity intervals are set for a few seconds.   G :         This is unacceptable for all of the critical service systems,dL :which by the way are high availability, which have to share the same pipes.  ;   These folks do not appear to be familiar with clustering.h  L :I don't see why we are even wasting time on this discussion, because it wasK :known well in advance that the network was to be all IP by the end of thisoF :year.  My understanding was that we were speaking with HP to see whatJ :solutions were available as far as IP clustering from them. If a solutionL :couldn't be provided by HP, then Proprietary Clustering VMS wasn't going to :be the system of choice.  g  D;   What would be an example of "non-proprietary clustering?"o  I   I assume the network folks are aware that the level of traffic typical hK   and the speed of the I/O responses would be hugely slowed by an IP stack,uJ   and that -- even if we ran using IP headers -- we'd really hammer on theI   IP routers?   (A shadow merge is huge traffic, I'm not sure I'd want to G   see a shadow merge over a pair of routers and a point-to-point link.)e  I :                           The SANs, and all other recent purchases have H :revolved around the fact they were IP capable to meet our goals for theJ :network backbone.  You are asking us to take a step backward because HP'sK :VMS team doesn't want to deal with the realities of WANs and budgets todaycH :for most customers.  We are being asked to change a business process toF :match a vendors product, instead of the vendor producing a product toL :enhance our business process.  I'm not saying HP/VMS is not a good OS, just. :not a good OS for us under the circumstances.  F   OpenVMS is working on clustering over Fibre Channel -- I haven't yetH   seen widespread IP over Fibre on any platform, however.  As we provideH   for SCS over FC, I'm not entirely certain we'll be running over FC IP.J   (The first-generation FC controllers I'm familiar with were not actuallyJ   capable of host-to-host communications, so this particular capability is   comparatively new.)t    N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faqeN  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.comd   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 17:41:21 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>- Subject: Re: Routable Protocol for Clustering ) Message-ID: <3FD1098E.3DD68878@istop.com>e   "Stuart, Ed" wrote:mJ > Yes we shadow drives between the sites.  An idea is to split the clusterM > into two clusters put Oracle's 9i RAC on both and use Oracle's DataGuard to " > enable the data to stay synched.  J Well then, you need to do your homerwork (and bill it to the network folksK since they are the ones forcing the issue on you). How much will it cost todG convert yoru systems to Oracle, and without real volume shadowing, whatnM functionality will you lose, how much more will it cost to manage the systemsaL per year and more importantly, when failure occurs, how much robustness will	 you lose.:  K You may point to a certain Ohio utility that had computer problems that got32 niticed by tens of millions of poeple last summer.  G If data integrity is very important, you need to seriously consider allaK aspects of possible failure in your degraded IP custer. When an ApplicationoN does its own clustering, does it have the exact same quorum behaviour with theN exact same timing ? Might a few transactions slip through before your "system"B (as a whole) decides to take one node out of the virtual cluster ?  K Without clustering, if the link is broken, how will node A know that it has-H been separated and no longer has quorum and thus freeze all activities ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 07:36:23 +0100r* From: Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net>- Subject: Re: Routable Protocol for Clusteringo0 Message-ID: <3FD186F7.364D15DE@sture.homeip.net>   Stuart, Ed wrote:  >   7 4 mentions of "Proprietary" and "VMS" in the same post.   C Please tell me how VMS is any more "Proprietary" than the "Industryh= Standard" FAT disk format which has now all of a sudden beomeaA PROPRIETARY, to the tune of 0.25 USD per device or a quarter of a ! million dollars per manufacturer?i    D http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/tech/fat.asp for details on that.   Enquiring minds wish to know...g   -- g
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 22:32:38 GMT:) From: Alfred Falk <falk@arc.REMOVE.ab.ca>c: Subject: Re: setting password with external authentication9 Message-ID: <Xns94489E1F26012falkarcabca@198.161.157.145>e  , "Rick Barry" <richard.barry@hp.com> wrote in, news:w6Nzb.10169$KW7.7759@news.cpqcorp.net:    > Try turning on tracing:r > . > $ define/sys/exec sys$single_signon 80000001 > $ reply/enable > H > Then issue the SET PASSWORD command. The operator terminal should giveG > you a trace of events. Post them here if you can't interpret them andr > I'll take a look.e  = Okay, here it is.  I admit that I don't know what this means..
 =============t" Message from user <login> on MIMAS  / 15:17:00.73: SYS$LOGONW - ACME state = 80000005t- 15:17:00.75: Function = ACME$_MAP_TO_USERNAMES0 15:17:00.75: Attempting to map Userid "Z_TESTER"# 15:17:00.76: Userid found in SYSUAFa$ 15:17:00.76: ExtAuth is set for user9 15:17:00.84: Return status from ACME map routine follows:k9 15:17:00.85: %ACME-S-NORMAL, normal successful completiona! 15:17:00.85: ACME reason code = 0p' 15:17:00.85: Mapped username = Z_TESTERe  15:17:00.85: Username = Z_TESTER! 15:17:00.90: IOSB status follows:hB 15:17:00.90: %SYSTEM-S-REMOTE, assignment completed on remote node$ 15:17:00.90: IOSB devdepend follows:5 15:17:00.90: %NONAME-W-NOMSG, Message number 00000000a   miSY$-8 %%%%%%%%%%%  OPCOM   5-DEC-2003 15:17:04.26  %%%%%%%%%%%" Message from user <login> on MIMAS  / 15:17:04.20: SYS$LOGONW - ACME state = 80000005e) 15:17:04.20: Domain specified as "LANMAN"32 15:17:04.20: Function = ACME$_VERIFY_PASSWORD_ONLY2 15:17:04.24: Return status from ACME authenticate:9 15:17:04.24: %ACME-S-NORMAL, normal successful completiond! 15:17:04.24: ACME reason code = 0p! 15:17:04.26: IOSB status follows:b; 15:17:04.26: %SYSTEM-S-NORMAL, normal successful completion $ 15:17:04.26: IOSB devdepend follows:5 15:17:04.26: %NONAME-W-NOMSG, Message number 00000000s   miSY$98 %%%%%%%%%%%  OPCOM   5-DEC-2003 15:17:23.49  %%%%%%%%%%%# Message from user Z_TESTER on MIMASn  ( 15:17:23.49: Start of SET$PASSWORD debug 15:17:23.49: Calling GET_USERd 15:17:23.49: Entered GET_USERk   miSY$ 8 %%%%%%%%%%%  OPCOM   5-DEC-2003 15:17:40.76  %%%%%%%%%%%# Message from user Z_TESTER on MIMASw   15:17:39.69: SYS$SET_PASSWORDW! 15:17:39.69: Validating item lista' 15:17:39.69: Calling CHECK_ITEM status:e; 15:17:39.69: %SYSTEM-S-NORMAL, normal successful completione' 15:17:39.69: Calling CHECK_ITEM status: ; 15:17:39.69: %SYSTEM-S-NORMAL, normal successful completion ' 15:17:39.69: Calling CHECK_ITEM status:h; 15:17:39.69: %SYSTEM-S-NORMAL, normal successful completion ' 15:17:39.69: Calling CHECK_ITEM status:r; 15:17:39.69: %SYSTEM-S-NORMAL, normal successful completion   15:17:39.69: Validating password 15:17:39.69: Checking userid$ 15:17:39.69: Userid was specified as 15:17:39.69: Z_TESTER & 15:17:39.69: Calling ACME Set Password0 15:17:40.76: ACME Set Password failure - status:   miSY$e8 %%%%%%%%%%%  OPCOM   5-DEC-2003 15:17:40.76  %%%%%%%%%%%# Message from user Z_TESTER on MIMAS09 #### ACME Debug Message for PID 24C09FD7 (continued) ####uE 15:17:40.76: %ACME-E-FAILURE, operation failure - details are in the r ACME$SERVERr	  log file ! 15:17:40.76: ACME reason code = 5o# 15:17:40.76: Leaving $SET_PASSWORDWt   miSY$t8 %%%%%%%%%%%  OPCOM   5-DEC-2003 15:17:40.77  %%%%%%%%%%%# Message from user Z_TESTER on MIMASfA %SYSTEM-F-AUTHFAIL, authorization failureetion:17:23.49: Calling r GET_USER 15:17:23.49: Entered GET_USERt( 15:17:39.69: Entered GET_USERSWORD debug( 15:17:39.69: Entered GET_USERSWORD debug" 15:17:39.69: Entered GET_USERSWORD( 15:17:40.77: Entered GET_USERSWORD debug) 15:17:40.77: Entered GET_USERSWORD debug` ( 15:17:40.77: Entered GET_USERSWORD debug   miSY$ 8 %%%%%%%%%%%  OPCOM   5-DEC-2003 15:17:40.77  %%%%%%%%%%%# Message from user Z_TESTER on MIMASp8 NOSYNCH set - will not synch UAF not be set by external  authenticatorUSERt 15:17:23.49: Entered GET_USER.( 15:17:39.69: Entered GET_USERSWORD debug( 15:17:39.69: Entered GET_USERSWORD debug" 15:17:39.69: Entered GET_USERSWORD( 15:17:40.77: Entered GET_USERSWORD debug) 15:17:40.77: Entered GET_USERSWORD debug` ( 15:17:40.77: Entered GET_USERSWORD debug( 15:17:40.77: Entered GET_USERSWORD debug  15:17:40.77: Entered GET_USERSWO* 15:17:40.77: Entered GET_USERSWORD debug`( ===========================/H Curious: the operator terminal freezes at the last message.  A ^C frees . it up.  (Using a DECterm, if that's relevant.)   --  @ ----------------------------------------------------------------A   A L B E R T A         Alfred Falk               falk@arc.ab.ca u@ R E S E A R C H         Information Systems Dept   (780)450-5185+   C O U N C I L         250 Karl Clark RoadL1                         Edmonton, Alberta, Canadat http://www.arc.ab.ca/   T6N 1E4c  http://www.arc.ab.ca/staff/falk/   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 16:37:55 +0000l= From: Andrew Harrison <removethisAndrew.snipHarrison@sun.com>lB Subject: Re: Sun to use AMD Opteron - announcement expected Monday0 Message-ID: <bqq8qu$7lo$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   jlsue wrote:G > On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 14:29:40 +0000, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy 0 > <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote: >  >  >>jlsue wrote: >>H >>>On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 17:42:14 +0000, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy1 >>><Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote:r >  > G >>>>2 SPARC is the market leader in the 64bit general purpose processoreG >>>>space, by units, by revenues by ISV support so whatever your pointsfH >>>>are about non delivery the market doesn't agree with you. The market/ >>>>never agreed with your assessment of Alpha.a >>>t >>>oJ >>>What assessment of Alpha are you referring to?  And why bring in marketJ >>>presence - yet again - when that's not the point being discussed?  It'sN >>>about business commitment to the platform - and unless it actually deliversL >>>a system based on the research investments, it's tough to tell how strong >>>the real commitment is. >>I >>Why bring the market in ?? Well because in an unconstrained market withfI >>competing products the leaders are normally the ones that deliver what c >>the market wants.p >  > I > But we weren't talking about market.  We were talking about a specific,a8 > narrow, instance of business decisions and investment. >    Cause -------------- Effect.  : You are arguing about the cause I am measuring the effect.J > I will grant you, and everyone else in here, that OpenVMS marketing fellG > very short of what DEC/CPQ needed if they wanted it to compete in ther	 > market.e > L > But we're talking about chip investment, and whether/how-much the business( > managers (BOD) have decided to invest. > > Well even if we only consider this measure Compaq/HP comes out badly.  = There are 3 separate SPARC processor families all with fundedb2 teams developing a number of different processors.  < We currently have UltraSPARC IV and V and V's followon under development for large servers.  B In the mid range we have the Ultra IIIi family and followons under developmenti  ? At the Blade level we have the CMT SPARC processors (Gemini andh Niagara under development.  B Compaq/HP only ever had one family of processors under development  after the demise of the AlphaPC.  A Sun currently has the second largest processor design team behindc? Intel hardly a good example of a vendor that isn't investing ini its core platform.  E In addition its also clear that Compaq/Digital woefully underinvested-C in the infrastructure required to support the CPU's being developedeC by their CPU teams. You only need to compare the 8400 and GS160/320m; with what was available from other vendors to realise that.o   > D >>And in the datacenter server market one of the key things that the? >>market wants is delivery against commitments, consistency andh >>investment preservation. >  > K > And, again, there appear to be many (at least, in here) who don't believebI > that Sun delivered much in quite awhile to keep performance leadership.oK > It's been called everything from abysmal, to "good enough"; none of whichr > is a resounding "yay". >   A Sun delivers and historically delivered balanced performance, theuC backplanes on a E10K and E6500 were way ahead of the best availablei< system from Compaq/Digital at the time the 8400 for example.  @ This allowed them to trash 8400's on anything except a very tinyB subset of tha available workloads that these servers were designed to host.  ; Concentrating on CPU performance alone was always the Alphaz@ Disease its a shame that this Disease appears to be so resistantE to death by a thousand facts that you are apparently still afflicted.   E > Except where customers need higher performance.  And then they went  > elsewhere.  A Sure if they were interested in single CPU performance they mighta> have but again its harldly measurable is it, it didn't have an= impact on the market that was big enough to keep Alpha alive.e   Regardsv Andrew Harrisonu   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 18:50:00 +0000k= From: Andrew Harrison <removethisAndrew.snipHarrison@sun.com>cB Subject: Re: Sun to use AMD Opteron - announcement expected Monday0 Message-ID: <bqqgik$a84$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Greg Cagle wrote:i > Andrew Harrison wrote: > @ >> There are 3 separate SPARC processor families all with funded5 >> teams developing a number of different processors.r >  > 
 > So you say.  > ? >> We currently have UltraSPARC IV and V and V's followon under ! >> development for large servers.- >  > 
 > So you say., > E >> In the mid range we have the Ultra IIIi family and followons underd >> development >  > 
 > So you say.- > B >> At the Blade level we have the CMT SPARC processors (Gemini and >> Niagara under development.c >  > 
 > So you say.u > D >> Sun currently has the second largest processor design team behindB >> Intel hardly a good example of a vendor that isn't investing in >> its core platform.  >  > 
 > So you say.  >  > Can you prove ANY of this? >   4 Well the first question you need to answer is do Sun need to prove this ?  6 Sun has never announced a processor and then cancelled4 it nor have we trailed processors at things like Hot, Chips and then never intended to build them.  9 We are at one end of the spectrum where roadmaps actuallyt8 turn into products, Compaq/HP are at the other we have a track record HPQ doesn't.t  9 So one has to ask why do you need proof, you have the Sun  roadmap that should be enough ?l  9 Of course sensitised as you are to vendors not delivering85 on their roadmaps I can understand why you might feela2 you need proof.  You have been missled in the pastA so its understandable that you would view all vendors roadmaps asd6 worthless documents after all the Alpha roadmaps were.   Howeveri
 Processors< Ultra III and Ultra IIIi based systems exist now you can buy? and touch them. Thats one more processor family than in reality0= Alpha ever had so the basic point about Sun putting more intoP0 SPARC than compaq/HPQ did/does is easy to prove.  ; If you want to touch and feel Gemini/Ultra IV based systemsU; which given you experiences with Alpha would I guess be thea8 only sure fire proof you should look for then you should  apply to be on the Beta program.   People; The number of people developing SPARC processor is a matter=? of record as is Sun's continued investment in the ifrastructurej= that these enginneers required. (Our financials also show howd& our R&D budgets have been protected ).  0 http://www.sun.com/processors/feature/ranch.html     Regards0 Andrew Harrison2   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 10:21:06 -0800A/ From: Greg Cagle <news@removethisgregcagle.com>2B Subject: Re: Sun to use AMD Opteron - announcement expected Monday/ Message-ID: <vt1j4jdqttip27@corp.supernews.com>    Andrew Harrison wrote:  6 > Well the first question you need to answer is do Sun > need to prove this ? > 8 > Sun has never announced a processor and then cancelled6 > it nor have we trailed processors at things like Hot. > Chips and then never intended to build them. > ; > We are at one end of the spectrum where roadmaps actually : > turn into products, Compaq/HP are at the other we have a > track record HPQ doesn't.B > ; > So one has to ask why do you need proof, you have the Sune! > roadmap that should be enough ?o  6 I don't trust Sun and I don't trust you personally. To) repeat - can you back up your assertions?    - Greg -- R
 Greg Cagle gregc at gregcagle dot com   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 17:57:21 -0500* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>B Subject: Re: Sun to use AMD Opteron - announcement expected Monday2 Message-ID: <eOqdnXgNMbPQkEyi4p2dnA@metrocast.net>  < "Greg Cagle" <news@removethisgregcagle.com> wrote in message) news:vt1j4jdqttip27@corp.supernews.com...s   ...o  8 > I don't trust Sun and I don't trust you personally. To+ > repeat - can you back up your assertions?n  J While I can understand your not trusting Andrew, Sun's record in followingK through on its plans doesn't seem that bad to me (save for problems meeting.J target dates).  Its purchase of Afara (and the Niagara technology) a whileI ago was covered by the industry press, its intent to manufacture products)F based on this technology is fully public, Fujitsu's SPARC64 technologyI already exists (along with a future roadmap), and USIV, while late, seemsuH fairly close to the sampling stage.  USV may be more like vaporware, andK whether it will ever incorporate some of the technologies that Sun has been.L actively pursuing for a long time now (asynchronous cooperation on the chip,G SMT, I forget what else) may be questionable, but the rest seems prettyo	 credible.e   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 18:47:42 +0100p2 From: Wilm Boerhout <w.boerhoutOLD@PAINTplanet.nl>4 Subject: Re: Telnet session with fixed TNAnnn: name?* Message-ID: <bqqglk$s2o$1@reader11.wxs.nl>  H I just returned from another experiment. Turns out that the system runs H UCX 4.1 ECO 10. I reconfigured the BIND stuff and the rest of the core, C go the VAX a new name and address that is in the central DNS store.n  ) Result: TT_ACCPORNAM still is filled with,    	"Host: node.dom.ain Port: 1234"  H so no luck with ALF. I've not been able to find terminal emulators that I allow me to specify the local (outgoing) port number. SYSMAN ALF doesn't u allow wildcarding.  I BTW I would consider upgrading to UCX 4.2, but I already know that TCPIP t0 SVCS 5.1 and onwards exhibit the same behaviour.  @ Still looking for a way to autologin terminal sessions based on , IP-address / DNS name using UCX / TCPIP SVCS  
 $WITS_END: $ GOTO WITS_ENDt   Wilm   Chris Moore wrote:M > Putting them in HOSTS. wasn't enough to get this working.  They would stillrM > be identified uniquely by the system as "node.domain.com;nn" where 'nn' wasiK > the port # connected to (and couldn't be counted on to be constant)  OnceaH > the source was resolved from DNS, the port # didn't interfere. I don'tJ > explain 'em, just report 'em.  I did try this successfully with UCX (4.2F > ECO10 iirc) a few years back, but we avoid that product (UCX, TCP/IP= > Services .... call it what you will) like the plague it is.i > N > (btw Peter just needed to look in the right place for the replacement drive,F > it was at SOMEBODY's desk --- perfect spares filing system......lol) >  > A > "Wilm Boerhout" <w.boerhoutOLD@PAINTplanet.nl> wrote in messager& > news:bqdfo6$c5b$1@reader10.wxs.nl... >  >>Peter Weaver wrote:b >> >>A >>>While I'm sitting here on a sunny Sunday afternoon waiting forr> >>>a 3rd party hardware supplier to bring in a disk to replace> >>>the one that died 3:00 this morning because SOMEBODY DIDN'T< >>>REPLACE THE SPARE AFTER THE LAST DISK FAILED! I thought I@ >>>would throw in my two cents. You did not mention the IP stack >># >>I know what you're feeling Peter.o >> >>? >>>you are running, but we had this problem using TCPWare untila> >>>we put the PC names into DNS. Once the PC names were in DNS> >>>the TT_ACCPORNAM showed the fully qualified PC name without< >>>the Port. SYSMAN ALF had no problem dealing with it then.A >>>Maybe your IP stack will do the same thing if the PC is listedr
 >>>in DNS? >>>d >>C >>I run the Compaq/HP TCPIP Services 5.1 stack. I know I can switchsI >>between TELNET reporting the IP address or the host name, but as far asIH >>I can see the port is always included in TT_ACCPORNAM. Do you expect aJ >>difference between specifying the PC host names in DNS and entering themI >>in the local "hosts" database (via TCPIP SET HOST xxxx /ADDR=n.n.n.x) ?r >> >>-- q >>Wilm Boerhoutn >> >>w.boerhoutOLD@PAINTplanet.nl* >>   (remove OLD PAINT from reply address) >> >  >  >    -- I
 Wilm Boerhoutd   w.boerhoutOLD@PAINTplanet.nl(    (remove OLD PAINT from reply address)   ------------------------------   Date: 5 Dec 2003 13:50:52 -0600I- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)r4 Subject: Re: Telnet session with fixed TNAnnn: name?3 Message-ID: <esnLvqgX9cRT@eisner.encompasserve.org>   _ In article <bqqglk$s2o$1@reader11.wxs.nl>, Wilm Boerhout <w.boerhoutOLD@PAINTplanet.nl> writes:rJ > I just returned from another experiment. Turns out that the system runs J > UCX 4.1 ECO 10. I reconfigured the BIND stuff and the rest of the core, E > go the VAX a new name and address that is in the central DNS store.  > + > Result: TT_ACCPORNAM still is filled withs > " > 	"Host: node.dom.ain Port: 1234" > J > so no luck with ALF. I've not been able to find terminal emulators that K > allow me to specify the local (outgoing) port number. SYSMAN ALF doesn't   > allow wildcarding. > K > BTW I would consider upgrading to UCX 4.2, but I already know that TCPIP c2 > SVCS 5.1 and onwards exhibit the same behaviour.  = Would you consider upgrading to Multinet/PMDF, which exhibitsu# your desired behavior on EISNER:: ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:46:19 -0600y/ From: Chris Scheers <chris@applied-synergy.com>t$ Subject: Re: Unknown memory modules.3 Message-ID: <3FD0FCAB.18474C8B@applied-synergy.com>    Jan-Erik Sderholm wrote:h >  > Hi.a: > I have a couple of modules that I think has been mounted6 > in a "Jensen" box. They are marked "MT36D436M-7" and > "Micron Tech USA".  E Well, if it is out of a Jensen, then it is a 72 pin SIMM with parity.    The -7 says it is a 70ns part.  H This is pretty generic and should work in any of the boxes that will useG such memory.  This includes many 486/Pentium (pre DIMM) class machines,aB Multias, Alphastation 200s and 255s, AXP 150s (obviously! they are	 Jensens).l   Does this help?s  G -----------------------------------------------------------------------e$ Chris Scheers, Applied Synergy, Inc.  C Voice: 817-237-3360            Internet: chris@applied-synergy.com o   Fax: 817-237-3074s   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 23:19:28 +0100r9 From: Jan-Erik =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F6derholm?= <aaa@aaa.com>e$ Subject: Re: Unknown memory modules.' Message-ID: <3FD10470.4319287A@aaa.com>s   Yes, thanks. Next question... Is there *any* value in these ?e4 I think they are 16 Mb modules and I have 8 of them.5 I had 128 Mb in the Jensen, so that seems reasonable.    Any offers ?  	 Jan-Erik.    Chris Scheers wrote: >  > Jan-Erik Sderholm wrote:a > >a > > Hi. < > > I have a couple of modules that I think has been mounted8 > > in a "Jensen" box. They are marked "MT36D436M-7" and > > "Micron Tech USA". > G > Well, if it is out of a Jensen, then it is a 72 pin SIMM with parity.r >   > The -7 says it is a 70ns part. > J > This is pretty generic and should work in any of the boxes that will useI > such memory.  This includes many 486/Pentium (pre DIMM) class machines,rD > Multias, Alphastation 200s and 255s, AXP 150s (obviously! they are > Jensens).  >  > Does this help?  > I > -----------------------------------------------------------------------w& > Chris Scheers, Applied Synergy, Inc. > D > Voice: 817-237-3360            Internet: chris@applied-synergy.com >   Fax: 817-237-3074e   ------------------------------   Date: 5 Dec 2003 17:33:27 -0800 ( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)F Subject: Re: VMS clusters prove they are the best - Sun comes in last!< Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0312051733.650ebe5@posting.google.com>   Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bqkvef$aie$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...o > Bob Ceculski wrote:l- > > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=130029 >  >  > More old BS Bob. > 6 > Sorry but this is the same TechWise or should we say6 > MarketingFoolish TCO study sponsored by HPQ that did: > the rounds last year and was well an truly trashed then. > 9 > If you compare a GS320 with a P690 or Sun F15K then its ; > hardly suprising that your cost of downtime for the GS320s > is lower.l > $ > Can you remember why that was ???? > 8 > I will help you, the GS320 has about 1/3 to 1/4 of the9 > capacity of the F15K. The GS is in fact only comparablem7 > with the F6800 (which beats it on Oracle applications  > throughput). > 6 > Now care to compare the cost of downtime of an F6800" > with a GS320. I didn't think so. > & > Can I ask you a serious question Bob >  > What are you good at.w > > > System Security clearly isn't a forte, you trumpet a serious9 > Linux security violation on this newsgroup when HP haveu; > just released a mandatory security patch for OpenVMS that : > is so serious that they won't even hint at what its for. > ? > You misslead people about TCPWARE etc alledged invunerabilityyF > to various CERT exploits and get conradicted by their documentation. > : > Perimeter security isn't a forte, remember you ludicrous9 > Firewall discussions that were contradicted by HP's ownt > technical staff. > 1 > TCO analysis clearly isn't a forte (see above).  > 9 > Performance isn't a forte you keep talking about 80,000a > SPARCs vs 1 Alpha. >  > So what can you do well ?  > 	 > regardsc > Andrew Harrisonn  : I am smarter than you Andrew in that I run my platforms on0 OpenVMS and you don't ... CERT COUNTS DON'T LIE!   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 17:10:59 -0500h* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>F Subject: Re: VMS clusters prove they are the best - Sun comes in last!) Message-ID: <3FD10271.2244DEEB@istop.com>    Paul Repacholi wrote:dH > The inq has a very wide readership. Not as big as /. perhaps. Mike wasH > one of the founders of The Register, and left it a few years ago to goB > his own way. It was the inq that scooped the alphacide remember.    N I long suspected some link between inquirer and register... (from the look and feel of the web site)7  K And yes, the Inquirer has excellent coverage for c.o.v. readers. A bit likerI Digital Review in years past. But is it preaching to the choir, or is its M readership wide enough that it does reach people who have no association witho* VMS and its vendors (former and current) ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 07:45:51 +0100 * From: Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net>F Subject: Re: VMS clusters prove they are the best - Sun comes in last!0 Message-ID: <3FD1892F.633023BF@sture.homeip.net>  ( Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote: >  > Nic Clews wrote:, > > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote: > >  > >>Bob Ceculski wrote:n > >>. > >>>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13002 > >> > >>More old BS Bob. > >  > >n0 > > Did you *bother* to read the actual article? > >t > 5 > Yes I was refering to the attempt to link the Dutch 8 > example to the MarketingFoolish TCO study for OpenVMS. > 5 > The MarketingFoolish TCO study is such tosh that it 3 > places the whole Register article in the suitabler > for chip paper category. > A So write 'em a snotty letter then Andrew. I've seen more than onev/ contributor here who has had letters published.   H Let's see how you fare with what I suspect is a somewhat larger audience than you have here.r   -- f
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 19:10:29 GMT2; From: Charlie McCutcheon <charlie.mccutcheonspam@nothp.com>n Subject: Re: VMS on PDP-10?a) Message-ID: <3FD0D824.A24D28D7@nothp.com>y  2 Yes, but Tops-20 was different, more like VMS/DCL.  Z I had to translate command files from Tops-20 to Tops-10.  Used TV editor macros (bleah!).   Charliee     grant@rigel.cc.wmich.edu wrote:i  H > As far as the command languages went, Tops-10 commands tended to go in/ > the opposite direction from VMS and that ilk.n >  > On Tops-10 you might say:  >e > COPY output=inputV >c > where, of course, VMS says >l > COPY input output  >ni > In article <3FCCB7C7.EED692DF@nothp.com>, Charlie McCutcheon <charlie.mccutcheonspam@nothp.com> writes:g > >>R > >> > Gary, and his students, wrote a small control program, which he called CP/MQ > >> > (Control Program/Microcomputer). It enabled him to read and write files toaS > >> > and from the disk. Gary copied the commands and file-naming conventions from0+ > >> > the DEC PDP-10 VMS operating system.e > >> > >lT > > PDP-10 was a machine architecture, not an operating system.  Tops-10 and Tops-20" > > were the o/s for the machines. > >aR > > Tops-20 had some simlar commands and directory specs to VMS/DCL, but also manyN > > differences.  And Tops-20 had features VMS didn't, like command completion; > > (escape), and help in the middle of a command with "?".h > >pL > > I'd guess the text clip is missing some details of what they did...  ;-) > >4 > > Charlie7 > >w   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 14:18:00 -05005 From: "Bochnik, William J" <William_Bochnik@acml.com>s9 Subject: RE: Will VMS contribute to Microsoft's profits ? Q Message-ID: <2D75787AAF09C64481BDFD89113BE6D502D06BC6@ac2kama0102.ac.lp.acml.com>s  L the link mentions something I didnt think of - flash cards - so do the flashL card manufacturers pay or do the camera manufactureres (who format the flash as fat) pay.    I This stinks all the way around.  If they had insisted on licencing FAT itiJ wouldnt have become ubiquitous.  Now that it's ubuquitous, they have their hand out.  Dirty  pool.e   -----Original Message-----< From: Marty Kuhrt [mailto:kuhrt@nospammy.encompasserve.org] ( Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 12:38 PM To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Come9 Subject: Re: Will VMS contribute to Microsoft's profits ?s    E In article <3FD047BA.D55E094E@nobody.com>, nobody <nobody@nobody.com>e writes:a1 > http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/tech/fat.aspg > F > Essentially, Microsoft wants $0.25 for every device built that uses I > the FAT file storage design which Microsoft claims to have copyrighted  4 > in 1976 (didn't know Microsoft existed back then). > ' > (There is a cap of $250,000 dollars).  > F > Does this mean that ever IA64 based VMS system will have to pay the H > royalty twice ? Once for the IA64 hardware which understands FAT, and D > one for the VMS system which will store the boot media into a FAT & > partition enclosed into a VMS file ?  D Or do like Micro$quish does.  Modify FAT slightly, call it somethingH slightly different, like RAT.  Get sued, lose, and then refuse to pay.    H Plus, I doubt M$ developed FAT in the first place.  Back then all Billy = did was steal code from dumpsters and remarket it as his own.y  ) -----------------------------------------  The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information and is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of  the original message. Please note that we do not accept account orders and/or instructions by e-mail, and therefore will not be responsible for carrying out such orders and/or instructions.o   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 20:46:14 +0100r* From: Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net>9 Subject: Re: Will VMS contribute to Microsoft's profits ?b0 Message-ID: <3FD0EE95.7AD1A463@sture.homeip.net>   Bochnik, William J wrote:g > N > the link mentions something I didnt think of - flash cards - so do the flashN > card manufacturers pay or do the camera manufactureres (who format the flash > as fat) pay.  6 http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/tech/fat.asp again:   The card manufacturers:n  ; "A license for removable solid state media manufacturers tof? preformat the media, such as compact flash memory cards, to the ? Microsoft FAT file system format, and to preload data onto suchg> preformatted media using the Microsoft FAT file system format.@ Pricing for this license is US$0.25 per unit with a cap on total( royalties of $250,000 per manufacturer."  E But it is unclear to me what they mean by "per unit" here. Per device 6 which preformats and preloads data, or per flash card?    < "A license for manufacturers of certain consumer electronicsA devices. Pricing for this license is US$0.25 per unit for each of'= the following types of devices that use removable solid statef= media to store data: portable digital still cameras; portablec< digital video cameras; portable digital still/video cameras;? portable digital audio players; portable digital video players;H= portable digital audio/video players; multifunction printers;i< electronic photo frames; electronic musical instruments; and= standard televisions. Pricing for this license is US$0.25 pery< unit with a cap on total royalties of $250,000 per licensee.A Pricing for other device types can be negotiated with Microsoft."t  D Per consumer device for the items mentioned. I rather wonder what isA lurking in the "other device types" category. To tie it back intor1 another thread, car systems? Even toasters maybe?i     OK, time to resurrect this one:-  2 http://www.decus.de:8080/www/vms/fun/toaster.htmlx   "If SAP made toasters ..."    K > This stinks all the way around.  If they had insisted on licencing FAT it-L > wouldnt have become ubiquitous.  Now that it's ubuquitous, they have their > hand out.  Dirty  pool.- >    -- r
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 15:51:37 -0500% From: "John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com>e9 Subject: Re: Will VMS contribute to Microsoft's profits ?o/ Message-ID: <vt1ruqeo8plaa3@news.supernews.com>A  7 "Paul Sture" <nospam@sture.homeip.net> wrote in messagec* news:3FD0EE95.7AD1A463@sture.homeip.net... > Bochnik, William J wrote:s > >yJ > > the link mentions something I didnt think of - flash cards - so do the flashsJ > > card manufacturers pay or do the camera manufactureres (who format the flashv > > as fat) pay. >r8 > http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/tech/fat.asp again: >  > The card manufacturers:e >l= > "A license for removable solid state media manufacturers to,A > preformat the media, such as compact flash memory cards, to theaA > Microsoft FAT file system format, and to preload data onto sucho@ > preformatted media using the Microsoft FAT file system format.B > Pricing for this license is US$0.25 per unit with a cap on total* > royalties of $250,000 per manufacturer." >u  K I take it to mean that MS wants $0.25 for each preformatted flash card.  IteI seems unfair that a flash card manufacturer has to pay $0.25 to preformati1 the media but a floppy disk manufacturer doesn't.s  7 I predict that lots of lawyers will make lots of money.l   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 17:35:23 -0500p* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>9 Subject: Re: Will VMS contribute to Microsoft's profits ?a) Message-ID: <3FD10828.D00CB45A@istop.com>    John Vottero wrote:eJ > I take it to mean that MS wants $0.25 for each preformatted flash card.   K I would think that it would be 0.25 for each device sold that has the logicP- inside to format a drive in the "FAT" format.a  K Do the flash card manufacturer would pay $0.25 for the one device it ahs to K pre-format flash cards, and each PC/PDA/Camera manufacturer woudl pay $0.25 R per unit produced for the FAT file logic in the device. That is the way I read it.   ------------------------------   Date: 5 Dec 2003 19:10:45 -0600n4 From: kuhrt@nospammy.encompasserve.org (Marty Kuhrt)9 Subject: Re: Will VMS contribute to Microsoft's profits ?:3 Message-ID: <eVtLp2JbgTwa@eisner.encompasserve.org>c  W In article <vt1ruqeo8plaa3@news.supernews.com>, "John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com> writes:f9 > "Paul Sture" <nospam@sture.homeip.net> wrote in message@, > news:3FD0EE95.7AD1A463@sture.homeip.net... >> Bochnik, William J wrote: >> >K >> > the link mentions something I didnt think of - flash cards - so do theb > flash K >> > card manufacturers pay or do the camera manufactureres (who format the  > flashf >> > as fat) pay.h >>9 >> http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/tech/fat.asp again:k >> >> The card manufacturers: >>> >> "A license for removable solid state media manufacturers toB >> preformat the media, such as compact flash memory cards, to theB >> Microsoft FAT file system format, and to preload data onto suchA >> preformatted media using the Microsoft FAT file system format.5C >> Pricing for this license is US$0.25 per unit with a cap on totalC+ >> royalties of $250,000 per manufacturer."S >> > M > I take it to mean that MS wants $0.25 for each preformatted flash card.  It:K > seems unfair that a flash card manufacturer has to pay $0.25 to preformatI3 > the media but a floppy disk manufacturer doesn't.a > 9 > I predict that lots of lawyers will make lots of money.   9 Lawyers?  Making money?  When did that start happening?  0   ;^{   8 (a wink and a grimace (or a Snidley Whiplash moustache))   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 07:22:24 +0100a* From: Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net>9 Subject: Re: Will VMS contribute to Microsoft's profits ?R0 Message-ID: <3FD183B0.72EB5860@sture.homeip.net>   John Vottero wrote:% > 9 > "Paul Sture" <nospam@sture.homeip.net> wrote in message , > news:3FD0EE95.7AD1A463@sture.homeip.net... > > Bochnik, William J wrote:N > > >nL > > > the link mentions something I didnt think of - flash cards - so do the > flashEL > > > card manufacturers pay or do the camera manufactureres (who format the > flash4 > > > as fat) pay. > >r: > > http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/tech/fat.asp again: > >d > > The card manufacturers:T > >d? > > "A license for removable solid state media manufacturers to5C > > preformat the media, such as compact flash memory cards, to theAC > > Microsoft FAT file system format, and to preload data onto suchsB > > preformatted media using the Microsoft FAT file system format.D > > Pricing for this license is US$0.25 per unit with a cap on total, > > royalties of $250,000 per manufacturer." > >u > M > I take it to mean that MS wants $0.25 for each preformatted flash card.  ItMK > seems unfair that a flash card manufacturer has to pay $0.25 to preformatt3 > the media but a floppy disk manufacturer doesn't.l > 9 > I predict that lots of lawyers will make lots of money.e   No doubt you are correct there.a  7 But wait a minute. Let's drag back the bit you snipped:g  MB "Pricing for other device types can be negotiated with Microsoft."  E Yes, I know this paragraph is lumped under the title of manufacturing C consumer devices, but doesn't Itanium use a FAT device for booting?7  G And I also wonder about Linux here. It can read and write FAT disks (aslH can MGPCX for that matter, and no doubt a whole host of other products).  G Is this possibly the most serious attack on the Open Source movement weD have so far seen?       % --  
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------   Date: 5 Dec 2003 17:27:28 -0800i  From: wmr282@hotmail.com (w m r)= Subject: Re: Will VMS have to pay royalties Microsoft ? (FAT)O= Message-ID: <398c9ca7.0312051727.34b682ce@posting.google.com>:  p "Michael D. Ober" <obermd-.@.-alum-mit-edu-nospam> wrote in message news:<q_0Ab.595$o_.17091@news.uswest.net>...  K > Microsoft got its start by writing BASIC for the M.I.T.S. Altair personal5M > computer.  Bill Gates and Paul Allen demo'd BASIC for this machine in earlylN > 1975.  The biggest impact of Altair-BASIC was the file system, which used anL > allocation table to bring the concept of scattered (cluster based) storageM > to the files.  This was the first FAT file system and it was the first timeUL > .  Prior to this, microcomputer (and many mini-computer) files were always( > stored as a single, contiguous, block.  C What about good ol' DOS-11?  I don't remember it much (early 70's),E> but I think you could have more than one file open for writingC (contrast with RT-11).  Maybe DEC->Compaq->HP should be going after  M$..   (An other) Mike.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 04:26:13 GMT-# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> = Subject: Re: Will VMS have to pay royalties Microsoft ? (FAT) E Message-ID: <FTcAb.659$VEd1.567@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>    w m r wrote:E > "Michael D. Ober" <obermd-.@.-alum-mit-edu-nospam> wrote in messagew. > news:<q_0Ab.595$o_.17091@news.uswest.net>... >fC >> Microsoft got its start by writing BASIC for the M.I.T.S. Altair:F >> personal computer.  Bill Gates and Paul Allen demo'd BASIC for thisE >> machine in early 1975.  The biggest impact of Altair-BASIC was theyF >> file system, which used an allocation table to bring the concept ofF >> scattered (cluster based) storage to the files.  This was the first> >> FAT file system and it was the first time .  Prior to this,G >> microcomputer (and many mini-computer) files were always stored as aC >> single, contiguous, block.s >NE > What about good ol' DOS-11?  I don't remember it much (early 70's), @ > but I think you could have more than one file open for writingE > (contrast with RT-11).  Maybe DEC->Compaq->HP should be going aftery > M$.r    H The last time Digital could have absolutely raped Microsoft financially,, Digital got $24 worth of trinkets and beads.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 07:24:51 +0100i* From: Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net>= Subject: Re: Will VMS have to pay royalties Microsoft ? (FAT)l0 Message-ID: <3FD18443.5D621119@sture.homeip.net>   w m r wrote: > r > "Michael D. Ober" <obermd-.@.-alum-mit-edu-nospam> wrote in message news:<q_0Ab.595$o_.17091@news.uswest.net>... > M > > Microsoft got its start by writing BASIC for the M.I.T.S. Altair personalaO > > computer.  Bill Gates and Paul Allen demo'd BASIC for this machine in earlyrP > > 1975.  The biggest impact of Altair-BASIC was the file system, which used anN > > allocation table to bring the concept of scattered (cluster based) storageO > > to the files.  This was the first FAT file system and it was the first time,N > > .  Prior to this, microcomputer (and many mini-computer) files were always* > > stored as a single, contiguous, block. > E > What about good ol' DOS-11?  I don't remember it much (early 70's), @ > but I think you could have more than one file open for writingE > (contrast with RT-11).  Maybe DEC->Compaq->HP should be going aftere > M$.p > H Eh? What contrast with RT-11? Definitely not restricted to only one file open...    -- r
 Paul Sture   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 03:53:39 GMT. From: notValid@yahoo.comW Subject: [SURVEY] Do you still code programs in Cobol? Ingres? On vax/vms/alpha/itaniumt8 Message-ID: <1ek2tv0tf8e9e0o54ttlcuo7utcbl25vmk@4ax.com>  8 [SURVEY] Do you still code programs in Cobol? Ingres? On vax/vms/alpha/itanium A                            See BOTTOM of this page if you want topC respond directly to my personal email address instead of posting to 	 the net!!i    $ Do you still code programs in Cobol?  % Do you still code programs in Ingres?w   Do you still use vax/vms?e Alpha? Itanium?  < Have you been involved in a migration from vax/vms to alpha?  What problems did you encounter?  
 ---------- Employment question:   Since I am looking for work...A Do you have a need for a full time or part time (20 hours a week)y. cobol and or Ingres on a vax/alpha programmer?  @ if so, please email me at    schiffkey_removethisspam@cfl.rr.com   jerrolda   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2003.674 ************************