1 INFO-VAX	Tue, 11 Mar 2003	Volume 2003 : Issue 137       Contents:1 Re: $ENQ, blocking/completion AST, race condition P RE: Benchmarketeering (was: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release f Re: Carly's feedback link  Re: CLI question for HP reps RE: CLI question for HP reps Re: CLI question for HP repsD Could HP manage this with former VMS customers if they really tried?H RE: Could HP manage this with former VMS customers if they really tried? Re: DHCP on WE1.P Re: ECC (was IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM  monopo$ HP's Shane Robison holding back VMS?( Re: HP's Shane Robison holding back VMS? LDAP authentication in CSWS < Re: Maximum Record Size Error (BUCKET - CLUSTER SIZE detour)< Re: Maximum Record Size Error (BUCKET - CLUSTER SIZE detour)< Re: Maximum Record Size Error (BUCKET - CLUSTER SIZE detour)< Re: Maximum Record Size Error (BUCKET - CLUSTER SIZE detour)< Re: Maximum Record Size Error (BUCKET - CLUSTER SIZE detour)< Re: Maximum Record Size Error (BUCKET - CLUSTER SIZE detour)A Re: Moving from Multinet to TCP/IP Services (LAT/NTY/TNA devices)  Re: Numeric usernames  RE: Numeric usernames  Re: Numeric usernames  RE: Numeric usernames  Re: Numeric usernames  Re: Numeric usernames * Re: Open VMS Laser Printing and Overlaying  Re: OpenVMS on Itanium QuestionsP Re: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release for Marveland Alpha RetaiP RE: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release for Marveland Alpha Retai1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 RE: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants 1 Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants  OT: About snow... 3 Re: SCSI cluster disk thrashing between connections 3 Re: SCSI cluster disk thrashing between connections 3 Re: SCSI cluster disk thrashing between connections P Re: SIMH 2.10-4 released: major bug fixes to PDP-8, PDP-11, VAX, PDP-15, InterdaP Re: SIMH 2.10-4 released: major bug fixes to PDP-8, PDP-11, VAX, PDP-15, Interda Re: TCPIP: bug or feature  Re: TCPIP: bug or feature  Re: TCPIP: bug or feature  Re: TCPIP: bug or feature  Re: TCPIP: bug or feature  Re: TCPIP: bug or feature 0 RE: UK Hobbyist seeks personality (for BA356-JC)0 RE: UK Hobbyist seeks personality (for BA356-JC) Re: unix Re: unix VAX Shared SCSI anyone?  Re: VAX Shared SCSI anyone? G Re: VAXStation 4000-90 without graphics card will not load VMS licenses  Re: why buy new ?  Re: why buy new ?  Re: why buy new ?  Re: why buy new ?  Re: why buy new ?   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 03:19:35 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) : Subject: Re: $ENQ, blocking/completion AST, race condition/ Message-ID: <bBcba.160$I83.33@news.cpqcorp.net>   b In article <d56d1c2d.0303051025.4b63e6de@posting.google.com>, cstranslations@msn.com (Joe) writes:4 :I'm guessing the answer is yes but I'll ask anyway. : E :Process 1 calls $ENQ and specifies both blocking and completion ast. - :Process 2 calls $ENQ (on the same resource).  : 0 :Assume all that good race condition type stuff. : F :Q: Is it with-in the realm of possibility that process 1 will receive8 :the blocking ast before it receives the completion ast?  F   AFAIK, y'all can't get a BLOCKING AST before you get a GRANTING AST.)   (For the same lock request, of course.)   C   There is an explicit documented prohibition against BLOCKING ASTs D   arriving while a convert is pending -- but the $ENQ condition that>   is posited above may or may not involve a convert operation.  E   In terms of defensive coding, I'd certainly not particularly assume G   ordering of the ASTs here, as I'd tend to assume that there are other )   locking operations running in parallel.   H   Where most folks get into problems is the fully asynchronous nature ofG   $DEQ, and not so much with $ENQ -- you can't be assured when a series E   of $DEQ calls will complete, nor any completion order.  If you have E   code that is sensitive to the ordering of lock availability, you'll 8   want to use an $ENQ down-convert to NL, then the $DEQ.    N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------J       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.comN  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 06:12:32 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) Y Subject: RE: Benchmarketeering (was: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release f 0 Message-ID: <k7fba.168$rf3.147@news.cpqcorp.net>  B   I think I have the attributions correct, but (if not) apologies.  7 > From: Tim Walls [mailto:timwa@stamford.snowgoons.com]  > Sent: March 7, 2003 7:11 PM  ..: > In article <mqnh6vsel43b1vpf9usq1g05nhpc4oc2kb@4ax.com>,, :> 	jlsue <jlsuexxxz@screaminet.com> writes:H :> No offence, but I speak as an independent observer who's been lurkingH :> in this group for quite a while...  And I'm afraid, you just lost the :> argument. :>D :> Jesus, what is it with you guys?  (That is, HP+Cpaq et al.)  As aE :> customer, I'd kinda expect you to jump at the chance to prove your  :> product performs well.       G   Running benchmarks is a significant expensive for any vendor, and the F   larger and more complex the benchmark, the higher the costs.  I haveH   been peripherally involved -- pun entirely intended -- in a very smallF   number of these efforts, and the scale of the boxes and the hardwareD   and the effort involved in benchmarketeering is eye-opening.  (I'dB   certainly like to have part of the typical benchmarking hardware>   available to speed the OpenVMS system builds, for instance.)  F   Given a (personal) choice between working on new features or workingF   on a benchmark, I know what provides more value for the customers --E   the benchmarketeering is certainly a necessary effort, but it is an F   expensive one.  (Is it fun having a screaming-fast benchmark number?C   Sure.  But that's only useful for folks running that benchmark in B   production.  There are few such folks around, in my experience.)  G   Now as for benchmarks, OpenVMS has a lab where we are running and are G   looking at and are benchmarking with customer applications -- various D   third-party applications have been "up on the lift", and engineersG   have crawled around, under, and within the application code, and also G   within the OpenVMS supporting code.  From an engineering and customer E   perspective, it's more interesting to see real application code and ?   work on removing real problems or improving real performance.   F   The new features and the application-specific performance benchmarksF   and application-specific characterization can be of central interest"   to current and to new customers.  H   And as for the results numbers, we can (and likely will) all endlesslyC   discuss the meanings of or the applicability of or the rules and  G   regulations of particular benchmarks -- and most every benchmark ever F   written is eventually "cracked" or "cooked", of course.  (The entireG   benchmark ends up running within the processor cache, or the compiler G   entirely optimized the benchmark code away, or...)  And when the next I   new box ships, run it all over again for a new set of benchmarketeering 
   fodder.   E   Having the fastest box in the industry benchmarks is certainly fun. D   That said, my own personal feeling is that evidence indicates thatD   the benchmarks actually sell few systems -- they're certainly usedE   for benchmarketeering and bragging, and for tasks such as the gross C   scaling of system size(s) necessary.  But having acceptably fast  G   application run-times at an acceptably-affordable price (acquisition, F   maintenance, stability, features, upgrades, etc) sells (more) boxes.  F   Benchmarketeering is like botox.   The results might look pretty (ifF   done right), but the results don't actually alter the underpinnings.D   If the underpinnings are not maintained in good working order, allB   the botox ever made won't help sell the resulting, um, sausage.   N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------J       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.comN  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 19:12:37 -0600 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> " Subject: Re: Carly's feedback link' Message-ID: <3E6D3805.76F20DB2@fsi.net>    Sue Skonetski wrote: > E > Well JF, I have had a chance to speak to both Carly and to Scott. I E > found both of them to be very reasonable and approachable.  I think G > this is just an education process since they had very little exposure  > to VMS prior to the merger.    *CRINGE* *SHRUG*  E Well, wouldn't due dilligence have required them to get familiar with G what they were buying into? ...or did Packard have it right, after all?   G > In my opinion the technical details of VMS, while important to us and B > this newsgroup are not necessarily their top priority.  Customer( > satisfaction is their number one goal.  D All the more reason to listen to the customer then, including Usenet rans about what's missing.  D > And like I tell my daughter, "its not what you say its how you sayG > it". So in writting to either of them I would focus on what they hear  > not what you feel.  @ ...or, focus on putting your feelings into the "language" of theH intended audience. Indeed, we all do this daily with our loved ones, ourE co-workers, etc. *THAT's the hard part! If all they understand is the F "business case", then we gotta express our vision in those terms. "VMS, can be more profitable if..." kind of lingo.   Yes? No?   --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 19:06:37 -0600 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> % Subject: Re: CLI question for HP reps ' Message-ID: <3E6D369D.BC460412@fsi.net>    Dirk Munk wrote: > N > Over the last years we get more and more open source software and other UnixQ > software being ported to VMS by HP engineers. That is nice, that way we can use % > all that stuff too. So far so good.  > K > However what I don't like is the fact that we don't get a VMS commandline U > interface with these products. Instead we have to use Unix style commandline [snip]   G Based on posts at another fork of this thread (or just fork this thread C and be done with it), I was wondering if there might be some way to H write a (freeware?) pre-processor that could map the .CLD options to the+ expectations of individual UN*Xly programs.   F For example, DEFINE a VERB and then map qualifiers to "-option"'s, andH pass that to the program(s) as something could be retrived in a portable way.  F Very raw, undeveloped idea, but didn't want to lose it. So, I recorded  it here for posteriority(sic)...   --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 17:05:00 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> % Subject: RE: CLI question for HP reps 9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIGEHBGMAA.tom@kednos.com>    You mean like...  
 FREJA> zip  Copyright (C) 1990-1999 Info-ZIP% Type 'zip "-L"' for software license. > Zip 2.3 (November 29th 1999). Usage: zip=="$disk:[dir]zip.exe"< zip zipfile[.zip] [list] [/EXCL=(xlist)] /options /modifiersK   The default action is to add or replace zipfile entries from list, except I   those in xlist. The include file list may contain the special name - to E   compress standard input.  If both zipfile and list are omitted, zip    compresses stdin to stdout. #   Type zip -h for Unix style flags.    Major options include:H     /FRESHEN, /UPDATE, /DELETE, /[NO]MOVE, /COMMENTS[={ZIP_FILE|FILES}],@     /LATEST, /TEST, /ADJUST_OFFSETS, /FIX_ARCHIVE[=FULL], /UNSFX   Modifiers include:G     /EXCLUDE=(file list), /INCLUDE=(file list), /SINCE="creation time", @     /QUIET, /VERBOSE[=MORE], /[NO]RECURSE, /[NO]DIRNAMES, /JUNK,H     /[NO]KEEP_VERSION, /[NO]VMS, /[NO]PKZIP, /TRANSLATE_EOL[={LF|CRLF}],L     /[NO]EXTRA_FIELDS /LEVEL=[0-9], /TEMP_PATH=directory, /BATCH[=list file]
 FREJA> zip -h   Copyright (C) 1990-1999 Info-ZIP% Type 'zip "-L"' for software license. > Zip 2.3 (November 29th 1999). Usage: zip=="$disk:[dir]zip.exe"H zip [-options] [-b path] [-t mmddyyyy] [-n suffixes] [zipfile list] [-xi list] J   The default action is to add or replace zipfile entries from list, which<   can include the special name - to compress standard input.B   If zipfile and list are omitted, zip compresses stdin to stdout.J   -f   freshen: only changed files  -u   update: only changed or new filesI   -d   delete entries in zipfile    -m   move into zipfile (delete files) L   -r   recurse into directories     -j   junk (don't record) directory namesJ   -0   store only                   -l   convert LF to CR LF (-ll CR LF to LF) 8   -1   compress faster              -9   compress betterH   -q   quiet operation              -v   verbose operation/print version info<   -c   add one-line comments        -z   add zipfile commentL   -@   read names from stdin        -o   make zipfile as old as latest entryI   -x   exclude the following names  -i   include only the following names G  "-F"  fix zipfile("-FF" try harder) "-D"  do not add directory entries G  "-A"  adjust self-extracting exe  "-J"  junk zipfile prefix (unzipsfx) F  "-T"  test zipfile integrity      "-X"  eXclude eXtra file attributesH  "-V"  save VMS file attributes     -w   append version number to stored name#   -R   PKZIP recursion (see manual) F   -h   show this help               -n   don't compress these suffixes   >-----Original Message----- 7 >From: David J. Dachtera [mailto:djesys.nospam@fsi.net] % >Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 5:07 PM  >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com& >Subject: Re: CLI question for HP reps >  >  >Dirk Munk wrote:  >>@ >> Over the last years we get more and more open source software >and other Unix C >> software being ported to VMS by HP engineers. That is nice, that  >way we can use & >> all that stuff too. So far so good. >>L >> However what I don't like is the fact that we don't get a VMS commandlineC >> interface with these products. Instead we have to use Unix style  >commandline [snip]  > H >Based on posts at another fork of this thread (or just fork this threadD >and be done with it), I was wondering if there might be some way toI >write a (freeware?) pre-processor that could map the .CLD options to the , >expectations of individual UN*Xly programs. > G >For example, DEFINE a VERB and then map qualifiers to "-option"'s, and I >pass that to the program(s) as something could be retrived in a portable  >way.  > G >Very raw, undeveloped idea, but didn't want to lose it. So, I recorded ! >it here for posteriority(sic)...  >  >--  >David J. Dachtera >dba DJE Systems >http://www.djesys.com/  > ) >Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page:   >http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ >  >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. ; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). A >Version: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 1/27/2003  >  --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 1/27/2003   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 22:15:07 -0600 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> % Subject: Re: CLI question for HP reps ' Message-ID: <3E6D62CB.39E3E2A1@fsi.net>    Tom Linden wrote:  >  > You mean like... >  > FREJA> zip" > Copyright (C) 1990-1999 Info-ZIP' > Type 'zip "-L"' for software license. @ > Zip 2.3 (November 29th 1999). Usage: zip=="$disk:[dir]zip.exe"> > zip zipfile[.zip] [list] [/EXCL=(xlist)] /options /modifiersM >   The default action is to add or replace zipfile entries from list, except K >   those in xlist. The include file list may contain the special name - to G >   compress standard input.  If both zipfile and list are omitted, zip  >   compresses stdin to stdout. % >   Type zip -h for Unix style flags.  >   Major options include:J >     /FRESHEN, /UPDATE, /DELETE, /[NO]MOVE, /COMMENTS[={ZIP_FILE|FILES}],B >     /LATEST, /TEST, /ADJUST_OFFSETS, /FIX_ARCHIVE[=FULL], /UNSFX >   Modifiers include:I >     /EXCLUDE=(file list), /INCLUDE=(file list), /SINCE="creation time", B >     /QUIET, /VERBOSE[=MORE], /[NO]RECURSE, /[NO]DIRNAMES, /JUNK,J >     /[NO]KEEP_VERSION, /[NO]VMS, /[NO]PKZIP, /TRANSLATE_EOL[={LF|CRLF}],N >     /[NO]EXTRA_FIELDS /LEVEL=[0-9], /TEMP_PATH=directory, /BATCH[=list file] > FREJA> zip -h " > Copyright (C) 1990-1999 Info-ZIP' > Type 'zip "-L"' for software license. @ > Zip 2.3 (November 29th 1999). Usage: zip=="$disk:[dir]zip.exe"J > zip [-options] [-b path] [-t mmddyyyy] [-n suffixes] [zipfile list] [-xi > list] L >   The default action is to add or replace zipfile entries from list, which> >   can include the special name - to compress standard input.D >   If zipfile and list are omitted, zip compresses stdin to stdout.L >   -f   freshen: only changed files  -u   update: only changed or new filesK >   -d   delete entries in zipfile    -m   move into zipfile (delete files) N >   -r   recurse into directories     -j   junk (don't record) directory namesL >   -0   store only                   -l   convert LF to CR LF (-ll CR LF to > LF) : >   -1   compress faster              -9   compress betterJ >   -q   quiet operation              -v   verbose operation/print version > info> >   -c   add one-line comments        -z   add zipfile commentN >   -@   read names from stdin        -o   make zipfile as old as latest entryK >   -x   exclude the following names  -i   include only the following names I >  "-F"  fix zipfile("-FF" try harder) "-D"  do not add directory entries I >  "-A"  adjust self-extracting exe  "-J"  junk zipfile prefix (unzipsfx) H >  "-T"  test zipfile integrity      "-X"  eXclude eXtra file attributesJ >  "-V"  save VMS file attributes     -w   append version number to stored > name% >   -R   PKZIP recursion (see manual) H >   -h   show this help               -n   don't compress these suffixes   No, I mean like:   define verb gzip" 	image gzip, cliflags(cvt_to_unix)" 	qualifier decompress, unixeq="-d" 	qualifier verbose, unixeq="-v"  	qualifier list, unixeq="-l"  B ...and so on. DISALLOW clauses and such also not shown. Of course,H "unixeq" strings are per qualifier which are, of course, per verb, sinceD "-r" may mean one thing to gzip, and something else entirely to tar.  @ Naturally, when I dreamed this up, it first occurred to me as an extension to DCL.   C Perhaps a freeware utility to wrap around the UN*Xly programs could # likewise accept a .CLD-like syntax:    $ cvu ( _cvu_$ gzip/decompress/verbose myarchive  E Like I said: a very raw, undeveloped idea. I just wanted to record it ) somewhere, and perhaps get some feedback.    --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:06:22 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> M Subject: Could HP manage this with former VMS customers if they really tried? I Message-ID: <2M9ba.207704$UXa.19193@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>   F http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&ncid=1208&e=10&u=/nm/20033 0307/tc_nm/tech_ibm_pricewaterhouse_dc&sid=95573652   . IBM Winning Back Lost Consulting Customers-WSJ Fri Mar 7, 3:34 AM ET   F NEW YORK (Reuters) - International Business Machines Corp. (NYSE:IBM -; news) said it has won back 70 percent of consulting clients F PricewaterhouseCoopers had lost before its consulting arm was acquired@ by the world's leading computer company, the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.   E The newspaper quoted Ginni Rometty, general manager of IBM's Business F Consulting Services, as saying IBM had launched a "winback" program to. recapture old customers of PwC Consulting.....  ? It said in the fourth quarter, PwC Consulting had boosted IBM's D consulting practice by 56 percent, but the company could not provide revenue or earnings figures.  B According to analysts, the newspaper said, IBM Business ConsultingD Services, with annual revenue estimated at more than $15 billion, isE now the largest consulting firm, outpacing Accenture Ltd. (NYSE:ACN - E news) -- split off from Arthur Andersen -- which had $13.1 billion in " revenue in the year ended Aug. 31.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:18:02 -0500 ' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> Q Subject: RE: Could HP manage this with former VMS customers if they really tried? T Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4023D9E0C@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   John,   H To put a more down to earth picture on this - I wonder what the folks in/ former PWC and Rational feel about all of this?   6 http://news.com.com/2100-1001-990471.html?tag=3Dfd_top& "IBM trims jobs in software, services"   Regards   
 Kerry Main Solutions Architect  Hewlett-Packard (Canada) Co.! Consulting & Integration Services  Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax   : 613-591-4477 Email: Kerry.Main@hp.com     -----Original Message-----+ From: John Smith [mailto:a@nonymous.com]=20  Sent: March 10, 2003 7:06 PM To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com F Subject: Could HP manage this with former VMS customers if they really tried?    J http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=3Dstory2&ncid=3D1208&e=3D10&u=3D/nm= /2003 5 0307/tc_nm/tech_ibm_pricewaterhouse_dc&sid=3D95573652   . IBM Winning Back Lost Consulting Customers-WSJ Fri Mar 7, 3:34 AM ET   F NEW YORK (Reuters) - International Business Machines Corp. (NYSE:IBM -; news) said it has won back 70 percent of consulting clients F PricewaterhouseCoopers had lost before its consulting arm was acquired@ by the world's leading computer company, the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.   E The newspaper quoted Ginni Rometty, general manager of IBM's Business F Consulting Services, as saying IBM had launched a "winback" program to. recapture old customers of PwC Consulting.....  ? It said in the fourth quarter, PwC Consulting had boosted IBM's D consulting practice by 56 percent, but the company could not provide revenue or earnings figures.  B According to analysts, the newspaper said, IBM Business ConsultingH Services, with annual revenue estimated at more than $15 billion, is nowA the largest consulting firm, outpacing Accenture Ltd. (NYSE:ACN - E news) -- split off from Arthur Andersen -- which had $13.1 billion in " revenue in the year ended Aug. 31.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 15:11:00 -0400 0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> Subject: Re: DHCP on WE1. / Message-ID: <3E6CE337.A7E4CE66@vl.videotron.ca>    Carl Karcher wrote: H > with a multi-homed host. Unfortunately there's no way to tell the DHCP' > server to use a particular interface.   N Isn't that implicit ? When you define the DHCP server's IP address ranges, youI specify the IP address of the server, the subnet, and the IP_ranges to be L assigned. Wouldn't that implicitely have the DHCP server declare a socket onM the IP address specifiy, and tCPIP services they know that this IP address is G served by a specific interface which itself goes out through a specific  ethernet port ?    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 06:13:22 GMT 4 From: Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@SystematicSw.ab.ca>Y Subject: Re: ECC (was IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM  monopo 8 Message-ID: <ncvq6vovieanvhv7t8tp0gh6bne9ej55qh@4ax.com>  A On Mon, 10 Mar 2003 12:15:53 -0500 in alt.folklore.computers, "J. ' Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> wrote:   6 >On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 16:42:03 +0000, CBFalconer wrote: >  >> "J. Clarke" wrote: < >>> On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 15:57:32 -0500, Julian Thomas wrote:( >>> > J. Clarke <nospam1@nospam.invalid> >>> . >>> > may have used oatmeal boxes, old string,F >>> > and new, used, and recycled electrons to say (at least in part): >>> > H >>> >> Whether a PC has ECC or not is buyer's choice.  Nearly all serverE >>> >> and workstation class machines can support it if the purchaser E >>> >> chooses to put in the appropriate RAM modules.  Some "desktop" E >>> >> and consumer machines can support it as well.  The machine I'm D >>> >> using right now has ECC "from the CPU cache out to memory and >>> >> back again" >>> > E >>> > These days there are very few motherboards for Thunderbird that F >>> > offer ECC. Epox 8k7a seems to be almost the only one, and that's >>> > not widely available.  >>> D >>> Any of the 762 boards will support ECC.  The 761 chipset has theE >>> necessary support however vendors seem to not enable it.  Trouble D >>> with AMD is that most of the vendors are targetting the consumerB >>> market, not the workstation/server market, and in the consumerD >>> market for those who even know that ECC exists, it is consideredC >>> to be undesirable because there is an infinitesimal performance 7 >>> penalty that might cost a tenth of an FPS in Quake.  >>  D >> And also the 'saving' of approximately 10% of the memory cost, toE >> be repaid many times over the first time something is destroyed by  >> any memory failures.  > S >Sometimes.  But remember, some of these are the folks who run RAID 1 and shell out K >700 bucks for a Vapochill or Prometeia phase-change cooler in the hopes of  >running their P4 at 3.5 GHz.   ? And what effect does the extra speed have on the on-chip cache? ? Is the non-trivial benchmark performance increase anything like  the cycle speed increase?   9 Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis 	Calgary, Alberta, Canada  --  F Brian.Inglis@CSi.com 	(Brian dot Inglis at SystematicSw dot ab dot ca),     fake address		use address above to reply@ abuse@aol.com tosspam@aol.com abuse@att.com abuse@earthlink.com ? abuse@hotmail.com abuse@mci.com abuse@msn.com abuse@sprint.com  B abuse@yahoo.com abuse@cadvision.com abuse@shaw.ca abuse@telus.com - abuse@ibsystems.com uce@ftc.gov				spam traps    ------------------------------    Date: 10 Mar 2003 17:29:27 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)- Subject: HP's Shane Robison holding back VMS? < Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0303101729.37b6980@posting.google.com>  / who is in my opinion another Microsoft paid off / crony who has been holding back VMS at HP/Q and " costing the company tons of money?" the inquirer has found out who ...  ( http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8222   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 22:45:30 -0400 0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca>1 Subject: Re: HP's Shane Robison holding back VMS? / Message-ID: <3E6D4DA3.CBB8C350@vl.videotron.ca>    Bob Ceculski wrote:  > * > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8222    M How does one reconcile the above article with all the warm and fuzzy messages  Digits post here about VMS ?  K And on that page, whose picture is on the top left column ? If you click on F it, it brings you to a nice "public service announcement" about BEER !  K And while I am at it, am I the only one concerned about that Blockbuster Ad M that shows the hamster stepping on a mouse and mistreating her ? (he tried to N click on it and drag it). Aren't there laws about CGI animals mistreating eachM other ? And is Blockbuster still a big VMS shop ? Or have they been borgified  with Redmon bloatware ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 16:30:47 +1030 : From: "Barratt, Chris (FMC)" <Chris.Barratt@fmc.sa.gov.au>$ Subject: LDAP authentication in CSWSP Message-ID: <07103702F27FD411ACA30000F8085452044FF2D9@sagemshs001.fmc.sa.gov.au>  G In his highly useful book on VMS webservers, Alan Winston mentions that K "CSWS Engineering has an LDAP authorization module working in the lab now".    F Does anyone have any information on when this might become available ?    Thanks, 
 Chris Barratt             ------------------------------    Date: 10 Mar 2003 12:19:41 -08007 From: jones.computer.srv@worldnet.att.net (Daryl Jones) E Subject: Re: Maximum Record Size Error (BUCKET - CLUSTER SIZE detour) = Message-ID: <8a646952.0303101219.132440a0@posting.google.com>   Z "hein" <hein_news@eps.zko.dec.com> wrote in message news:<3e6bec3f@usenet01.boi.hp.com>...H > "Daryl Jones" <jones.computer.srv@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > >  :? > > The maximun record size in a RMS file is as follows (1991):  > J > Thanks for breaking through the heart of this relatively simple question > with the appropriate table.  >  > > One thing to remember isJ > > that the bucket size must be an intergral number of disk cluster size. > L > Ouch, that's all wrong such as Bill Todd and others nicely explained. More > below. > 8 > > This will reduce wasted space inside the RMS bucket. > N > Not true, as others mentioned, and the correction was still not quite right.K > A part question from this thread was recently posted to the 'VMS Wizard'. M > You'll find a sneak preview for the answer there below (official answer may  > well change!)  > M > > One more item, the bucket size can't be less than the longest record size  > in the file. > 5 > Right: max MRS < BKS * 512 - bucket-overhead(=15) -  > single_record_overhead(=11). > > > On the bucket-size versus cluster-size verus waste argument: > H >     While disk file allocation clusters themself are invisible to RMS,L >     their effect on file extents is visible. RMS performs EXPLICIT extents@ >     for indexed files and keeps track of the allocated blocks.K >     RMS will NOT start a new bucket unless it fits in the current extent. G >     RMS will avoid a near certain split IO by allocating a new extent F >     and starting the new bucket in there if it did not entirely fit. > K >     So while normally buckets are tightly packed, for every time the file M >     extented there may be unused space up the bucket size minus one blocks. F >     More than one cluster may go unused if a bucket is larger than a
 > cluster. > L >     The 'waste' of a few block is believed to be a good trade off to avoidC >     near certain split IOs if buckets were to cross file extents.  > 4 >     Yes, there have been cases of excessive waste.M >     For example, the RIGHTLIST.DAT on some systems will waste about a block M >     every two blocks. This wizard sees no problem with that because any VMS D >     person who cares anything about performance will never see theJ >     'negative' side effect of this feature as they will PRE-ALLOCATE all >     important files. > K >     Selecting a bucket size to have 'nice' common factors with the target L >     disk cluster size will reduce the chance of waste and will reduced the? >     chance of split-io for buckets due to fragmented extents. F >     HOWEVER... this choice is really only a last order tweak with anG >     minimal effect. It is MUCH more important and effective to choose D >     decent extents and to base bucket size on INDEX TREE DEPTH andM >     DATA CONTENTION criteria. Only when those suggest a range of acceptable I >     bucket sizes would this wizard allow the clustersize to influence a  >     choice within that range.  > L >     The biggest (performance) problem with RMS INDEXED files, in the spaceK >     of alocations and IOs, is not fragments or split-ios, but is extents. I >     Please be sure to pre-allocate your files  contiguous(-best-try) toeI >     handle initial and near future (a year's worth?) load and give your G >     indexed files a reasonably large extent (65K?) to cover unforseenP	 > growth.l > H >     Note 1, The wizard commends your interest in the internals for RMSH >     indexed files recommends you simply verify those using convert andJ >     analyze/rms procedures such as found below. Dump/reco may also proveE >     useful as it displays the record RFAs (bucket VBN + record ID).sN >     DECram disks are very nice to experiment with cluster sizes and volumes. > L >     Note 2, The first data VBN for and indexed file is NOT 1, as that willN >     be used for the file 'prologue', key descriptor(s) and area descriptors. >  >     Test:d > M > $! Record size =~ approx 4 blocks, choosen to test disk with cluster size =  > 9E6 > $convert/fdl=sys$input/pad/nofast sys$input: tmp.idx > $deckI > file; org indexed;  > record; size 2000; form fixed;. > key 0; seg0_l 4; data_record_compression no; > $eod > 0001 > 0002 > 0003 > 0004 > 0005! > $define/user sys$output tmp.tmpY > $anal/rms/int tmp.idxi > down > down
 > down key > down data  > rest# > $search tmp.tmp "BUCKET HEADER ("e > K >     %ANLRMS-I-RESTDONE, All structures at this level have been displayed.rB >     BUCKET HEADER (VBN 3)       skipping prologue + 1 area blockK >     BUCKET HEADER (VBN 14)      vbn 7,8,9 unused. vbn 10,11,12,13 = indexe > (root)K >     BUCKET HEADER (VBN 19)      vbn 18 unused, default extent = 2 bucketsiC >     BUCKET HEADER (VBN 23)      23,24,25,26 tighly packed next toa
 > 19,20,21,22:2 >     BUCKET HEADER (VBN 28)      vbn 27 not used. >  >  > hth, >      Hein.   Hein,   E I agree that the words, "must be", were too strong of a statement. It A should have been "should be". I apologize to all for not choosingpD appropriate words. The bucket size can be anything you want it to beA as noted. The bucket size determination is one many decision madeaE during a design phase of an Index file. I don't think of it as a lasteF order of tweaking as you have suggested. The design of the file should4 avoid the possibility of problems and not ignore it.  C The file extends can be any size and bigger can be better dependingi@ upon file growth. I have set file sizes to current plus one-year@ growth and it work quite well. I only had to convert the file onC monthly basis to remove internal fragmentation. I have also set theeC file extent size to be very small due to the bucket fill factor andd? the initial or current file size. The file extent size value isnE determined by the history of the file rather than at the design phaseP? of the file. Without actual knowledge of the file, you are only  guessing on what might happen.  F I view bucket size when dealing with Indexed Tree Depth as a matter onA how the data is being accessed (data contention?). If the data isbE sequential, the bucket size may be larger. If the data is random, then> bucket size to be on the smaller size. You don't find out thisF information until you look at the RMS statistics. Again, I try to makeF the bucket size be multiple number of Disk Cluster size. Thus reducingE the possibility of wasted space and Split I/O! Furthermore, I have in D the past reformat a disk to have larger cluster sizes to accommodate@ the larger bucket size of Indexed files. Again, when the file isB copied over to the new disk, the bucket size reflects the new disk
 cluster size.n  F The I/O performance of file is greatly enhanced in orders of magnitudeB by the number of buffers allocated to the file. The programmer canA determine the number of buffers during program creation and in myrF opinion the best place to set the amount of buffering or by the SystemF Manager. There are occasions where no amount of buffering will enhance% the performance of a file or program.e  = Your last bit of explanation using VBN is most interesting. IiA understand it as you have presented it and have done this kind ofvA study before myself. However, you left out the mapping of VirtualeF Block Number (VBN) of a file to Logical Block Number (LBN) of the diskB where the Disk Cluster size comes to play. Granted on a relativelyE empty disk, an Index file could be contiguous. However, seldom have Ih3 found a file to be completely contiguous on a disk.r   Daryl Jones    ------------------------------    Date: 10 Mar 2003 14:08:17 -08007 From: jones.computer.srv@worldnet.att.net (Daryl Jones) E Subject: Re: Maximum Record Size Error (BUCKET - CLUSTER SIZE detour) = Message-ID: <8a646952.0303101408.4316c6f4@posting.google.com>f   Hein,   @ Picking the Bucket size for an Index file is rarely performed onC frequent basis as you have suggested. It is done at the file design > phase of the file and may need to be done at latter time on anB infrequent basis when RMS Statistics deems it's as necessary. I am1 glad to see your not spending your time doing it!-  F You seem to agree with the Integral' number concept stating the lineA up' of Disk Cluster to Bucket does occur when using an Integral'eD number of Disk Cluster! Furthermore, you stated that using different= prime numbers for the Disk Cluster and Bucket would cause the-F alignment not to happen. Maybe I not using the proper word: alignment.  F Why in the world would you use a Stripe Set for an Indexed file? SinceB the Bucket size is usually many times smaller than a chunk size orC maximum transfer size, Stripe sets are primarily for large size IOstF (sorts and sequential file downloads). It is better to use a disk thatB has a Maximum Transfer Size being bigger that the bucket size will work far better.  F Once upon a time, an indexed file could be broken by Area to differentB Volumes of Bound Volume set.  This was supposed to break up the IO across the Volumes.i   Daryl JonesA    p Hein van den Heuvel <hein_netscape@eps.zko.dec.com> wrote in message news:<3E6CAEEF.C495FDE9@eps.zko.dec.com>... > Bill Todd wrote: > 7 > > "hein" <hein_news@eps.zko.dec.com> wrote in messageo >  pL > > > "Daryl Jones" <jones.computer.srv@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > >  r >  ...< > > > > This will reduce wasted space inside the RMS bucket.R > > > Not true, as others mentioned, and the correction was still not quite right. > > N > > Since I wasn't able to find any discrepancy between my correction and your > > explanation, I'm curious...i > R > Hi Bill, I had no problem with your explanations. Much impressed. Right on after > all those years.R > The RMS on-disk structure has basically not changed (it probably should change a > little, but will not).Q > My comment was more towards Daryl, who's correction reply you also commented on- >  > Daryl wrote:< > > Making the RMS bucket an integral number of Disk Cluster6 > > has nothing to do with small extensions of a file! > M > It does. If you make large extentions, as suggested by tuning 101, then thed > cluster sizeM > becomes totally, utterly irrelevant. With small extentions the cluster sizeSL > starts to play a silly role in the form of the wasteage Daryl pointed out. > N > The only time I have been able to measure the effect of clustersize was in a > contrived experiment. Q > I was playing with striped virtual disks on SWXCR controllers where there was aeP > suggestion for very small chunk sizes (locked at 8KB for the initial releases)! > and a relatively slow back-end.aM > I wanted to test a large file convert and actually wanted each bucket to be , > served by 2 (or 3) disk, but not 3 (or 4).K > So I wanted to aligned each bucket to start exactly on a controller chunk Q > boundary and I wanted each bucket to be an exact mutliple (2 or 3) of the chunklN > size. This can be done by using a cluster size being a multiple of the chunkP > size. An other tricky part is the mis-alignement that RMS causes by having theL > prologue in area-0 (as Bill also wrote). I solved that by putting the root/ > bucket in area 0 and the main data in area 1.uN > Anyway, with all those precautions in place a bucket size of 48 with a chunkA > size of 16 (and any cluster size being a mutliple of 16) workediN > better than a cluster size of 50 or 55, but only marginally so and 63 workedR > better still even though it would be severely 'fragemented' at the stripe level. > P > Oh how I wished the max bucket size could have been a nice round 64, but alas. > Q > Also, daryl keeps on mentioning 'integral' multiple. If I had nothing better toaO > do than tweak the bucket size based on the cluster size then I'd be satisfied P > with 'nice big common factors'. A cluster size of 9 and bucket size of 6 or 12Q > will work out fine also as they frequently 'lign up' (ignoring the first bucketrR > skew for now). A chance game. Picking different but 'prime' sizes will garantueeL > they will rarely lign up and increase the odds of waste and split-io after > external file fragmentation. > / > btw... in one of the replies you (Bill) wrotenI > >  if only because there may be multiple bucket sizes in a single area.- > R > This is not correct. areas have a single bucket size. Some might even argue thatF > the sole purpose of multipel areas is to have mutliple bucket sizes. >  > Is the horse dead yet? > 	 > Cheers,f > Hein.e >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  > >  > >- > > ...- > >-B > > > On the bucket-size versus cluster-size verus waste argument: > > >aL > > >     While disk file allocation clusters themself are invisible to RMS,P > > >     their effect on file extents is visible. RMS performs EXPLICIT extentsD > > >     for indexed files and keeps track of the allocated blocks.O > > >     RMS will NOT start a new bucket unless it fits in the current extent.sK > > >     RMS will avoid a near certain split IO by allocating a new extentIJ > > >     and starting the new bucket in there if it did not entirely fit. > >wO > > And as I noted in cases where the next extent is not *virtually* contiguous N > > with the existing one (which would usually occur only in multi-area files,N > > though if you guys ever implemented the 'add an index later' facility thatK > > could cause it as well) it would simply not be possible to so 'split' a * > > bucket across the old and new extents. > > 
 > > - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 16:58:12 -0500n$ From: Hein <hein_cov@eps.zk.dec.com>E Subject: Re: Maximum Record Size Error (BUCKET - CLUSTER SIZE detour)e. Message-ID: <3E6D0A74.984BE2D1@eps.zk.dec.com>   Daryl Jones wrote:  \ > "hein" <hein_news@eps.zko.dec.com> wrote in message news:<3e6bec3f@usenet01.boi.hp.com>... > :i  C > as noted. The bucket size determination is one many decision madesG > during a design phase of an Index file. I don't think of it as a last * > order of tweaking as you have suggested.  [ Thanks for the feedback. I was misinterpreted. The bucket size is absolutely a  first order ^ tuning choice, but it's relation to is the clustersize is a mere tweak in my experience. It isX optional, but like you, I do mostly allow it to play a role. Warning my customer for its\ relative unimportance in the light of a) disks with cluster sizes in the low hundreds and b)D with folsk re-using old FDLs years later for different target disks.  Z >  I have also set the file extent size to be very small due to the bucket fill factor and# > the initial or current file size.   X I don't understand that much. I guess you are saying you know the target file usage wellZ enough to anticipate very little growth as the fill factor will have build in enough emptyY space to take most new records. Still, I would not take any risk and set the extent to bet significant.  H > I view bucket size when dealing with Indexed Tree Depth as a matter onC > how the data is being accessed (data contention?). If the data isuG > sequential, the bucket size may be larger. If the data is random, theu( > bucket size to be on the smaller size.   This is the correct approach.t    K > You don't find out this information until you look at the RMS statistics.   Z The application designers should know, but rarely can express this in RMS terms,a nd oftenT have moved on. You may want to check my RMS_STATS proggie on the VMS freeware als an6 alternative method to display the rms statistics data.   > Again, I try to makeH > the bucket size be multiple number of Disk Cluster size. Thus reducingG > the possibility of wasted space and Split I/O! Furthermore, I have inoF > the past reformat a disk to have larger cluster sizes to accommodate* > the larger bucket size of Indexed files.  M I still think that is rarely worth it. There are always bigger fishes to fry.oY I don't think you can ever recover the IO and time 'wasted' with such convert at runtime. W It is much more effective to just keep good chunks of free space to be used up by largea extents.? Now to get those you might need that re-initialize anyway! :-).y  \ > Again, when the file is copied over to the new disk, the bucket size reflects the new disk > cluster size.   ] Not automatically. You'd need a re-tune and convert. Plain copy will impose the old settings.E  H > The I/O performance of file is greatly enhanced in orders of magnitudeD > by the number of buffers allocated to the file. The programmer canC > determine the number of buffers during program creation and in myAQ > opinion the best place to set the amount of buffering or by the System Manager.y  U Now we are talking. That's where the focus should be. Magnitudes, not onsies-twosies.9V Too often I have seen customers 'worried sick' about cluster sizes while still running@ with default buffer counts and without global buffers. So silly.  ? > There are occasions where no amount of buffering will enhancep' > the performance of a file or program.    Far and few between...  ? > Your last bit of explanation using VBN is most interesting. IgC > understand it as you have presented it and have done this kind ofeC > study before myself. However, you left out the mapping of VirtualeH > Block Number (VBN) of a file to Logical Block Number (LBN) of the diskD > where the Disk Cluster size comes to play. Granted on a relativelyG > empty disk, an Index file could be contiguous. However, seldom have Io5 > found a file to be completely contiguous on a disk.i  ^ See, That's where we differ. I have 'never' seen a file that was not nearly contiguous... onceZ I was through with it. Just make those darn clustersize be 1000 or so and there will be noS more significant fragmentation. clustersize should quite possibly always be set to: Z max-acceptable space wasted divided by the maximum number of files expect on the disk. Max] acceptable space wasted is probably about 1% - 5% of a disk so at least 100MB. With a clusteriZ size of 1000 (500KB) that allows for 200+ files without a significant space loss. Fine for^ production sites with a smallish number of larger files, unacceptable for applications with 10 of thousand of files.D  ] The vbn to lbn mapping is interesting but should be irrelevant if you are seriously concernedf[ about performance because then you will have been able to avoid it from becoming important.>  [ btw... I find DFU FIND/FRAGMENT=... a handly tool to quickly evaluate the current situatione before working on improvements..   Cheers,c Hein.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 19:40:04 -0500w* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>E Subject: Re: Maximum Record Size Error (BUCKET - CLUSTER SIZE detour) 2 Message-ID: <uOSdnYHjlID0rfCjXTWcoQ@metrocast.net>  F "Hein van den Heuvel" <hein_netscape@eps.zko.dec.com> wrote in message) news:3E6CAEEF.C495FDE9@eps.zko.dec.com...i   ...s  / > btw... in one of the replies you (Bill) wrote I > >  if only because there may be multiple bucket sizes in a single area.r >.G > This is not correct. areas have a single bucket size. Some might even 
 argue thatF > the sole purpose of multipel areas is to have mutliple bucket sizes.  J Whoops - really?  So you can't have multiple bucket sizes in a single-areaJ file?  I don't remember any reason in the RMS-11 algorithms why this wouldH not have been feasible:  my main recollection of the reason for multipleL areas was to support placement control (so that you could, for example, keepJ all the upper levels of the index close together on disk and restrict longL seeks only to the data level), but now that you mention it the idea that youJ still needed to use a different area for a different bucket size sounds atF least vaguely familiar (though it's still hard to come with a reason).  J I suppose that using multiple bucket sizes in a single area would fragmentJ its free space after deletion activity occurred, if you handled free spaceJ at the area level rather than by maintaining a free-bucket list.  But thatH would require maintaining a permanent record of all area extents and theI free space within them:  IIRC at least prologue V1 files had no mechanism  for doing that.   1 Oh, well - nice to reminisce a bit, in any event.i   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:00:01 -0500a* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>E Subject: Re: Maximum Record Size Error (BUCKET - CLUSTER SIZE detour) 2 Message-ID: <wd2dnSWG6vWLqPCjXTWc3Q@metrocast.net>  F "Hein van den Heuvel" <hein_netscape@eps.zko.dec.com> wrote in message) news:3E6CAEEF.C495FDE9@eps.zko.dec.com...    ...   L > The only time I have been able to measure the effect of clustersize was in a, > contrived experiment.AK > I was playing with striped virtual disks on SWXCR controllers where thereC was aiF > suggestion for very small chunk sizes (locked at 8KB for the initial	 releases)O! > and a relatively slow back-end.JJ > I wanted to test a large file convert and actually wanted each bucket to be, > served by 2 (or 3) disk, but not 3 (or 4).  L While it's easy to see uses for such an array (e.g., to provide high degreesJ of disk parallelism for random accesses), it's very hard to understand whyH you'd *ever* want to split a single bucket across multiple disks.  UsingF figures for today's disks, and assuming that RMS still doesn't supportL buckets larger than 63.5 KB, transferring a bucket from a single disk shouldL (after head positioning) take 1 - 1.5 ms.:  true, you could halve that if itK were split across two disks, but you'd also have to wait for whichever diskuJ took longer to position its head, and that would likely more than wipe outL any average access time improvement (as well as seriously compromise overallE parallel throughput by making two disks work to access every bucket).    - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:10:43 -0500 * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>E Subject: Re: Maximum Record Size Error (BUCKET - CLUSTER SIZE detour) 2 Message-ID: <osOcnT_EV74FqvCjXTWcoA@metrocast.net>  D "Daryl Jones" <jones.computer.srv@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message7 news:8a646952.0303101408.4316c6f4@posting.google.com...i > Hein,e >lB > Picking the Bucket size for an Index file is rarely performed on' > frequent basis as you have suggested.a  J I don't remember any such suggestion (and it would surprise me if Hein had
 made one).   ...   H > You seem to agree with the 'Integral' number concept stating the 'lineC > up' of Disk Cluster to Bucket does occur when using an 'Integral'rF > number of Disk Cluster! Furthermore, you stated that using different? > prime numbers for the Disk Cluster and Bucket would cause theaH > alignment not to happen. Maybe I not using the proper word: alignment.  G No, you're just misunderstanding what Hein said:  he doesn't agree thatIB worrying about cluster sizes when selecting bucket sizes makes anyL significant difference, unless you've failed to specify a reasonable defaultG extension size (and aren't saved by lower-level defaults in that area).a   >hB > Why in the world would you use a Stripe Set for an Indexed file?  1 To obtain high IOPS for parallel random accesses.     SinceD > the Bucket size is usually many times smaller than a chunk size orE > maximum transfer size, Stripe sets are primarily for large size IOsa( > (sorts and sequential file downloads).  G Nope:  they're at least equally useful for very intense parallel randomw access activity.     It is better to use a disk thatD > has a Maximum Transfer Size being bigger that the bucket size will > work far better.  J Maximum transfer size shouldn't affect access latency as long as the disksL support multiple concurrent requests (CTQing), though too small an MTS would drive up CPU usage somewhat.   >iH > Once upon a time, an indexed file could be broken by Area to differentD > Volumes of Bound Volume set.  This was supposed to break up the IO > across the Volumes.   G You could do that, but usually you'd be better off with a normal stripetI set - with the important proviso that the file should be set up such that G buckets very seldom span multiple disks (the easiest way is to make thes= per-disk stripe chunk size much larger than the bucket size).g   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 19:14:46 -0600t1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> J Subject: Re: Moving from Multinet to TCP/IP Services (LAT/NTY/TNA devices)' Message-ID: <3E6D3886.8810F1BE@fsi.net>.   Francesco Gennai wrote:  > b > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message news:<3E6BF2FE.35DBFF08@fsi.net>... > @ > I continue to prefer Multinet, but I think that UCX is next to > be a good alternative. >  > For example:; > what about UCX IPV6 support and BIND 9.x implementation ?s  2 Try asking over on vmsnet.networks.tcp-ip.multinet   -- N David J. Dachtera- dba DJE Systemsr http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/-   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 03:32:50 GMTy# From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)C Subject: Re: Numeric usernames/ Message-ID: <CNcba.161$I83.41@news.cpqcorp.net>    In article <07103702F27FD411ACA30000F8085452044FF2BE@sagemshs001.fmc.sa.gov.au>, "Barratt, Chris (FMC)" <Chris.Barratt@fmc.sa.gov.au> writes: K :The help for ADD username in authorise states that fully numeric usernames.K :should be avoided because numeric identifiers are not allowed and hence ani/ :identifier for the username cannot be created.c : G :What implications are there in a username not having the corresponding6> :identifier created ?  (and hence in using numeric usernames).     Um, try it and let us know?   H   You'll certainly see only and be able to input only numeric UIC valuesH   for the user ownership of objects and for user-specific entries within   ACLs, as stated.    H   Off-hand, I don't know of anything else that would break, but there isH   enough stuff around that looks for embedded alphabetics within variousH   fields.  (DECnet has some of this with the node name processing, but IH   can't specifically recall anything that explicitly assumes alphabeticsK   in usernames -- other than the identifier processing, already mentioned.)s  G   What might happen with mixed-platform communications, I have no idea.a  -   When you stray afield, weirdness can ensue.e     Are you number 6?h    N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------J       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.comN  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.comu   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 14:21:00 +1030n: From: "Barratt, Chris (FMC)" <Chris.Barratt@fmc.sa.gov.au> Subject: RE: Numeric usernamesP Message-ID: <07103702F27FD411ACA30000F8085452044FF2D5@sagemshs001.fmc.sa.gov.au>   Thanks to all who replied.H I am not in favour of numeric usernames, but there is a chance we may be forced into using them.-J From your replies, it would seem it can be done, but with some workarounds or unforseen problems likely. L If I cannot avert the move to numeric usernames, I guess the next step is to  try it out and see what happens.  
 Thanks again,s Chris.  2 P.S. I am not number 6 - more like number 86 ! :-)   > -----Original Message-----. > From: hoff@hp.nospam [mailto:hoff@hp.nospam]$ > Sent: Tuesday, 11 March 2003 14:03 > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comr  > Subject: Re: Numeric usernames >  > 
 > In article t@ > <07103702F27FD411ACA30000F8085452044FF2BE@sagemshs001.fmc.sa.gF > ov.au>, "Barratt, Chris (FMC)" <Chris.Barratt@fmc.sa.gov.au> writes:< > :The help for ADD username in authorise states that fully  > numeric usernamest9 > :should be avoided because numeric identifiers are not   > allowed and hence an1 > :identifier for the username cannot be created.> > : < > :What implications are there in a username not having the  > correspondingm@ > :identifier created ?  (and hence in using numeric usernames). >   >   Um, try it and let us know?  > @ >   You'll certainly see only and be able to input only numeric  > UIC values< >   for the user ownership of objects and for user-specific  > entries within >   ACLs, as stated.   > > >   Off-hand, I don't know of anything else that would break,  > but there is< >   enough stuff around that looks for embedded alphabetics  > within various9 >   fields.  (DECnet has some of this with the node name r > processing, but Ii? >   can't specifically recall anything that explicitly assumes s
 > alphabeticsu: >   in usernames -- other than the identifier processing,  > already mentioned.)S > < >   What might happen with mixed-platform communications, I  > have no idea.' > / >   When you stray afield, weirdness can ensue.e >  >   Are you number 6?b >  > 3 >  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> r > ----------------------------- 6 >       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ --  www.openvms.compaq.com2  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------sE         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 22:17:35 -0600s1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>, Subject: Re: Numeric usernames' Message-ID: <3E6D635F.FF9E5486@fsi.net>    "Barratt, Chris (FMC)" wrote:i > L > The help for ADD username in authorise states that fully numeric usernamesL > should be avoided because numeric identifiers are not allowed and hence an0 > identifier for the username cannot be created. > H > What implications are there in a username not having the corresponding? > identifier created ?  (and hence in using numeric usernames).R  , Roughly the same as usernames sharing a UIC.   -- m David J. Dachterac dba DJE Systemss http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/e   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Mar 2003 22:11:33 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen), Subject: RE: Numeric usernames3 Message-ID: <uIHPiRKo86IU@eisner.encompasserve.org>i   In article <07103702F27FD411ACA30000F8085452044FF2D5@sagemshs001.fmc.sa.gov.au>, "Barratt, Chris (FMC)" <Chris.Barratt@fmc.sa.gov.au> writes:   J > I am not in favour of numeric usernames, but there is a chance we may be > forced into using them.s  C You could ask your bureaucracy if they would allow V12345 (for Vms)p instead of 12345.-   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Mar 2003 22:13:35 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)o Subject: Re: Numeric usernames3 Message-ID: <bSJM8xotvMAE@eisner.encompasserve.org>>  [ In article <3E6D635F.FF9E5486@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:/ > "Barratt, Chris (FMC)" wrote:o >> eM >> The help for ADD username in authorise states that fully numeric usernames2M >> should be avoided because numeric identifiers are not allowed and hence an 1 >> identifier for the username cannot be created.u >> :I >> What implications are there in a username not having the correspondingv@ >> identifier created ?  (and hence in using numeric usernames). > . > Roughly the same as usernames sharing a UIC.   I disagree strongly.  A Sharing UICs has specific security implications (and there may ben$ cases where it is even appropriate).  < Numeric UICs at most would result in user interface problems2 (particularly in programs not part of VMS itself).   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 05:34:21 GMTt# From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)e Subject: Re: Numeric usernames0 Message-ID: <xzeba.167$rf3.133@news.cpqcorp.net>  c In article <bSJM8xotvMAE@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: \ :In article <3E6D635F.FF9E5486@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:  :> "Barratt, Chris (FMC)" wrote: :>> J :>> What implications are there in a username not having the correspondingA :>> identifier created ?  (and hence in using numeric usernames).. :> a/ :> Roughly the same as usernames sharing a UIC.e :r :I disagree strongly.s  E   Larry is correct.  Sharing UICs is hugely different than not having F   a text-format translation of a UIC value in the RIGHTSLIST (which isC   what AUTHORIZE ADD is referencing here) and sharing UICs can lead-B   to all manner of interesting security problems and exposures andE   accountability issues.  Like a username, a UIC should be issued andc4   maintained and accountable to a single individual.  F   If anyone here feels included to share UICs for application-specificB   reasons or for shared storage or such, please look at the use ofB   identifiers and particularly (for storage) resource identifiers.  D   If you need to share a login, it should be secured -- this usuallyD   means either a restricted or (better) a captive login environment.  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------J       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.comN  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.comR   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 15:07:22 -0400l0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca>3 Subject: Re: Open VMS Laser Printing and Overlaying'/ Message-ID: <3E6CE25E.3D7E223D@vl.videotron.ca>w   Rich Jordan wrote:F > We print MANMAN forms to LaserJets by creating the PCL code to printE > the static form information (boxes, lines, headers, addresses, etc;BC > graphics are only used for logos), putting that PCL into a device C > control library for the specific printer(s) and setting the forms 4 > (f.ex) MMVERTPO to have (f.ex) /PAGE_SETUP=VERTPO   L Having never worked with PCL, it is capable of printing a raw text file "out+ of the box" ? This makes a HUGE difference.   N If you print PCL stuff, does this go through DCPS ? Or just using normal printK symbiont ?  What exactly triggers the inclusion of the /PAGE_SETUP module ?OJ The print symbiont finding a form feed, or after it has exceeded a certain number of line ?    K In the case of exceeding a number of lines, how does it reconcile the fancyeN graphics data in the included module with the number of lines ? Does it ignore2 the number of lines produced by the setup module ?    I In the case of postscript, no print symbiont can really know where in the N postscript code, a page eject will really occur, so it has no way of insertingT some extra code  from some module in the right place inside your postscript program.   Here is an example:t       12  14  16  34  37  47   mise     02  06  10  14  43  47   mise     06  08  12  15  17  43   mise     06  10  15  22  23  28   mise     16  33  40  44  45  46   mise     06  15  25  31  38  48   mise     03  11  28  39  41  49   mise     02  11  18  20  37  40   mise     07  10  11  15  37  46   mise     09  17  20  32  47  48   mise     01  03  12  14  17  38   mise     11  18  22  27  34  45   mise     02  06  08  21  34  37   mise     11  17  27  32  36  42   mise     07  08  19  35  36  46   mise     12  13  28  29  32  39   mise     11  24  29  34  39  40   mise     08  09  15  19  31  32   mise     19  20  25  31  41  49   mise     01  04  26  27  34  42   mise	 printformt    N The above actually generates 3 pages. The "mise" surboutine keeps track of howI many lottery numbers  have been printed. And this goes on a form that canuE include 8 tickets. So after the 8th "mise", an automatic printform isiN executed. And printform does more than a "showpage", it fill out various boxes/ on the ticket for options I want or don't want.   J The symbiont would have absolutely no way of knowing this, nor would DCPS,N unless it were to parse the prologue which contains the definitions for "mise" and "printform".   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 04:23:12 GMT)# From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) ) Subject: Re: OpenVMS on Itanium Questionsr/ Message-ID: <Qwdba.165$I83.16@news.cpqcorp.net>   l In article <vuIaa.7922$s75.4130332@twister.columbus.rr.com>, Jack Patteeuw <jjpatteeuw@peoplepc.com> writes:; :I have had my head buried in "other" OSes for many months  @ :now, but I do know that VMS has "officially" booted on Itanium. :i; :I have 2 technical questions about the port that may have i< :already been answered long ago.  If so just give me a link.  %   Here is one of the requested links:s      http://www.google.com/r  2   Follow the links to the newsgroup search engine.  C   Additionally, this search engine, pointers to newsgroup archives,lC   and other links and other useful information is referenced withineB   the OpenVMS Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document, available2   at various URLs including the following website:  "     http://www.openvms.compaq.com/'     http://www.hp.com/products/openvms/o    = :1) Much of VMS and VMS applications is built around the old C= :VAX CALLG and CALLS instruction.  IIRC, Alpha handled these  > :as PAL code (a multiple instruction sequence that can not be < :interrupted).  I have not heard of anything similar to PAL 9 :in the Itanium architecture, so how are CALLG and CALLS o :being handled ?  @   Both Itanium and Alpha have branch/call and return constructs.  ?   OpenVMS on Alpha saw some extra low-level work to get the VAX >   CALLG support working, but applications using lib$callg willA   port over nicely -- look up the "homed" and "non-homed" details C   in the OpenVMS calling standard (argument passing) documentation,u   in particular.  ?   If you think you know the call stack or the procedure-relatedb?   structures, your code will have to be reworked -- just as VAXt<   code that knew details of the VAX call frame needed to be A   reworked when moved to Alpha, Alpha code that knows the detailsh3   of the Alpha internals will need to be reworked. h  6 :2) VMS has 4 access modes (IIRC), kernel, executive, ; :supervisor and user.  (Again, IIRC) VAX and Alpha are the p= :only architectures that implement 4 modes in hardware.  How  # :is this being handled on Itanium ?   .   In four modes.  Yes, Itanium has four modes.  4   A thought question; something for folks to ponder:  ?   If we (OpenVMS Engineering) didn't have some basic constructsn?   available and working in the hardware, booting OpenVMS -- andm>   the eventual source-level porting of the application code --?   would be far more difficult.  (Please realize that we have no >   desire to rewrite all of our own OpenVMS source code, and we?   have a strong motivation to keep the environment compatible.  =   We want to make the application-level system environment asu=   familiar and as consistent with OpenVMS user and programmerz   expectations as we can.)  B   As for porting code, we expect to be providing details of how toD   port application code -- information and documentation that is andD   will be generated as we proceed with the OpenVMS port -- and theseD   materials will be increasingly complete and increasingly availableE   as the OpenVMS Itanium port continues.  These materials and manuals.C   are not currently available, but will become available over time.e  G   For general information and schedules, please see the OpenVMS Rollinge/   Roadmap, available at the HP OpenVMS website:e  "     http://www.openvms.compaq.com/'     http://www.hp.com/products/openvms/   :   Pointers to the roadmap are included in the OpenVMS FAQ.    N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------J       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.comN  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.come   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Mar 2003 13:19:30 -08001 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) Y Subject: Re: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release for Marveland Alpha Retaid= Message-ID: <cf15391e.0303101319.5d88245a@posting.google.com>i   Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<3E6CB3FF.1070701@nospamn.sun.com>...o7 > Had you forgotten that you used a cluster in a box to: > get decent performance.r  F Vendors use various creative configurations of technologies to get theB best performance, especially for benchmarks.  Unless the benchmarkF rules prohibit a particular optimization, all's fair.  It happens that= clustering is one way to scale.  If Sun can't gain additionald+ performance through clustering, tough luck.b  C NonStop systems don't do SMP at all, yet seem to do quite fine withr7 hundreds, even thousands, of CPUs, and scale very well.i  C But I'm not surprised to see Sun deprecate clustering.  It's an old E habit from years of fighting the excellent clustering technology that  came out of DEC.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:28:46 -0500o' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com>MY Subject: RE: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release for Marveland Alpha Retai T Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF402660E22@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   Andrew,a  G Sigh .. One more time - if you do not agree with the TPC rules, get theaH TPC Council to change them. Don't continue bringing up this old argument7 which has been discussed a few hundred times before.=20   G The TPC says the GS benchmark is fine. You disagree. Fine - so have Sune" lobby to get the rules changed.=20   Regardsh    
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  Hewlett-Packard (Canada) Co.! Consulting & Integration Servicesi Voice: 613-592-4660c Fax   : 613-591-4477 Email: kerryDOTmain@hpDOTcom-     (remove the DOT's and replace with "."'s)i OpenVMS DCL - the original .COMo   -----Original Message-----' From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancya1 [mailto:Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com]=20h Sent: March 10, 2003 10:49 AMi To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComoC Subject: Re: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release foriB Marveland Alpha Retain Trust Alpha Retain Trust Alpha Retain Trust    H Kerry only you could inject a GS1280 performance benchmark result into aG discusion about Compaq/HP's inability to justify the performance claims  they made for the GS160/320.  9 And trust you to try to reintroduce the TPC-C results forn4 the GS320 which if you hadn't forgotten are actually7 evidence for the prosecution not the defense since theyo1 prove that there is a big NUMA performance issue.n  5 Had you forgotten that you used a cluster in a box toi get decent performance.f  3 And had yopu also forgotten that this is one of theu2 reasons why Sun doesn't do TPC-C, because the kind2 of tuning method used by indevidual companies such< as Compaq has degrade the value of the benchmark as a whole.  : You are as always tremendous value but not to your allies.   Regards  Andrew Harrisonh Main, Kerry wrote: > Tim, >=207 > <<< .  And I'm afraid, you just lost the argument.<<<r >=20H > If you have been lurking for awhile, then you know that no matter what  H > evidence HP puts up, Andrew is going to counter with his own fud to=20G > counter it. That's fine - he's a competitor and that is his way of=20 ' > promoting his own companies products.d >=20E > Case in point - he asks where are some performance numbers. Ok -=20  > =cH http://www.sap.com/benchmark/index.asp?content=3Dhttp://www.sap.com/benc > hm > ark/sd2tier.aspl >=20I > Sun - 1,789,000 dialog steps per hr - 72 cpu Sunfire 15K Oracle 9i -=20 H > Feb 10, 2003 HP - 1,393,000 dialog steps per hr - 32 cpu GS1280 Oracle   > 9i - Jan 27/2003 >=20G > Given Oracle charges per cpu, I'd say the GS1280 does ok. Note the=20aH > dates of release. Sun felt they needed to have a bigger number, but=20+ > needed 72 CPUs to get that bigger number.e >=20H > And even his age old argument about the GS320 - still on the top 10=20H > single system TPC, while Sun has 0 entries on the TPC list. Reference:   > = H http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_perf_results.asp?resulttype=3Dnoncl > us > ter&version=3D5t >=20  G > Now, Andrew will respond with but, but, but .. And so it continues...i >=20	 > Regardsm >=20 >=20 > Kerry Main > Senior Consultant  > Hewlett-Packard (Canada) Co.# > Consulting & Integration Services  > Voice: 613-592-4660o > Fax   : 613-591-4477 > Email: kerryDOTmain@hpDOTcom/ >     (remove the DOT's and replace with "."'s)'! > OpenVMS DCL - the original .COMr >=20 > -----Original Message-----7 > From: Tim Walls [mailto:timwa@stamford.snowgoons.com]w > Sent: March 7, 2003 7:11 PM  > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComoE > Subject: Re: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release fori > Marveland Alpha Retain Trust >=20 >=20: > In article <mqnh6vsel43b1vpf9usq1g05nhpc4oc2kb@4ax.com>,+ > 	jlsue <jlsuexxxz@screaminet.com> writes:e >=20G >>On Fri, 07 Mar 2003 17:07:14 +0000, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancyh0 >><Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote: >>E >>Typical Andrew useless response.  Still saying that I have to prove-E >>that the GS160s perform well on some apps, while he still hasn't=20sH >>proven his contention that it won't perform well for any apps.  What a >=20 >=20 >>crock. >=20 >=20J > No offence, but I speak as an independent observer who's been lurking=20J > in this group for quite a while...  And I'm afraid, you just lost the=20 > argument.T >=20F > Jesus, what is it with you guys?  (That is, HP+Cpaq et al.)  As a=20G > customer, I'd kinda expect you to jump at the chance to prove your=20 H > product performs well.  This whole "if you don't think our stuff is=20J > great it's obviously because you're ignorant - go on, prove me wrong"=20H > attitude is just one reason why I won't be spending my company's money  J > on your kit.  Which is a crying shame, because I have a great deal of=205 > respect for DEC and the engineers who produced VMS.  >=20I > I find it depressing because I think competition is a good thing for=20 E > development.  But you aren't competing - you're clinging on to a=20:G > rapidly shrinking customer base while trying to pretend it doesn't=20RH > matter because the people on 'your' side are somehow better, and so=20H > more important, than everyone else on 'their' side.  But eventually=20J > everyone on 'your' side is going to be dead, and by then it'll be too=20 > late.d >=20 > <Sigh> >=20
 > Regards,A > Tim.  (A lurker, who lurks because he respects VMS - but has no  respecth, >        at all for its vendor right now...) >=20   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 18:37:30 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>u: Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease TyrantsI Message-ID: <KX4ba.202500$UXa.98286@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>   5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messageu, news:T6acnd8WRskq2_GjXTWcpw@metrocast.net... > 0 > "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in messageF > news:3rSaa.213650$Zr%.178929@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com... > >e9 > > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messagea0 > > news:iwidnbasiOQAIvajXTWcoQ@metrocast.net... > > > A > > > "Alan E. Feldman" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> wrote in messagel= > > > news:b096a4ee.0303090902.60368320@posting.google.com...l > > > >w? > > > > Uh, the PLO was founded in 1964, three years before thet > > "occupation".k > > > > Can you explain that?o > > >iC > > > Well, their name just *might* provide a clue.  In 1964, theirt > > objective was C > > > still to retake Israel itself - land which was in a very real  sensei? > > > 'occupied' but from which a large portion of the previous  > > inhabitants hadt2 > > > been evicted rather than oppressed in place. > >  > >o	 > > Bill,t > > D > > Arabs living in the pre-partition Palestine either chose to stay inD > > the newly formed Israel, or they chose to leave in 1948-49....in bothC > > cases it was of their own free will. It was not an eviction, asw youl > > seem to suggest. >tF > Mea culpa:  "I'm an engineer, Jim, not a historian."  However, while asF > willingness to embrace the existing Arab population reflects well on the E > Israelis (or it could have been a precondition imposed by the U.N.,r if theyk@ > had an inkling that perhaps this was not quite as much a 'land	 without aeE > people' as they had claimed), it does not erase the wrong, at leasti for thatE > portion of the Arab population which did not care to be so embraced  andsB > wanted their lives to continue as before rather than under a new	 (and very  > different) regime.  F Granted many Arabs living there may not have wanted regime change, butC there was nothing that was preventing  the resident Arab populationsE from staying on their farms, or in their shops. Imagine that tomorrowaE you wake up and the state flag at the local school isn't New HamphirelE any longer but Vermont's. Adminsitratively there will be some changesdC on the forms you use, some different telephone numbers to call, andhF the road signs might look different. Had the Arab nations, all membersC of the U.N. at the time, accepted the vote of the U.N., there wouldnF not have been any war, the border boundaries of Israel would have beenB somewhat different than we know them today, encompassing much lessF land. And the resident Arab population would have been using differentE forms. That's about all it would have amounted to had the Arab League  agreed with the U.N. decision.    ? As a historical lesson, one might say that there may be a large D contingent of Iraqi's who are quite content with the current regime,F but that will not stop the US from attempting to impose regime change.= So US troops on the ground may not necessarily be welcomed ast
 'liberators'.    >a > > E > > The majority of those that left did so under the premise that the @ > > surrounding Arab nations would re-mount an offensive against	 Israel in D > > short order and that many of those that left wanted to take part inD > > that offensive. That those who left Israel were 'disenfranchised or> > > shortchanged' by the surrounding Arab nations by not again mounting an F > > offensive against Israel for many years has nothing to do with the( > > actions of the government of Israel. > @ > Agreed:  that disappointment was certainly not Israel's fault. >s > >wB > > I don't know the full extent of the political situation within Israel,bF > > but it is my understanding that Arbs living inside of Israel carryE > > Israeli passports and have the right to vote, the right to attend @ > > schools, and conduct business, exactly the same as any other Israeli D > > citizen, Jewish or otherwise. That hardly constitutes oppression of > > those that remained. >gB > That portion of my comment referred to (and contrasted with) the	 plight of A > those in the Occupied Territories, who are indeed 'oppressed ine place'.  ButB > if indeed the Arabs who elected to remain in Israel in 1948 were accordedB > full citizenship, then they were certainly not oppressed in that sense,F > though they still were forced to choose between living under the new > circumstances or leaving.t  C Which was the wrong decision - leaving or staying? Without a war inUF 1948 they probably would have stayed, but they still had a choice they> *could have made*. With a war they had a choice - the decisionD regarding which was more immediate in their thinking process, but toD leave or stay was a decision that they could choose to make, same asD if there wasn't a war. In 1968, those who were in territory that wasC captured could have chosen to stay or to leave. Those that chose to D stay had 20 years of history of Arabs within Israel as a guide as to how they would be treated.  F The excesses on both sides that have been demonstrated over the past 5C years were not known in 1968 or in 1973, so they cannot be factoredeF into a discussion as they are ex post to the decisions that would have been made in 1968 and 1973.t  = Also note that the Gaza strip and the West Bank were nationale? territory of Egypt and Jordan respectively. Both countries haveaF effectively cut the people living in them adrift, Egypt when it signedC the peace accord with Israel during Carter's presidency, and JordanuF has a de facto peace agreement with Israel if not a de jure one. ThereF was considerable cross-border trade in goods between Jordan and IsraelD prior to the intifada - not exactly what one would expect with one's enemy.  C Had the intifada not been fomented by Palestinian leaders for theiroC own purposes, there almost certainly been a peace settlement by nowe= that all parties could have lived with, perhaps not with wildnD enthusiasm, but with the knowledge that it was acceptable. People onE both sides wouldn't still be dying unnecessarily and the economies of," all concerned would be better off.  E But as far sharper tongues than I have noted, "Arafat never misses anrD opportunity to miss an opportunity." - Which rather reminds me aboutF ChumpHaq and OpenVMS advertising and marketing.  [there you go...we're% back within the newsgroup charter...]D   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Mar 2003 15:16:50 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)e: Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants3 Message-ID: <SRyB77MZVOQ7@eisner.encompasserve.org>v  n In article <b096a4ee.0303100754.5420e13e@posting.google.com>, spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman) writes:f > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message news:<4WGdnVnFsczv7PGjXTWcoA@metrocast.net>...> >> "Alan E. Feldman" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> wrote in message: >> news:b096a4ee.0303092143.5b734c0e@posting.google.com...: >> > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message2 >>  news:<iwidnbasiOQAIvajXTWcoQ@metrocast.net>...B >> > > "Alan E. Feldman" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> wrote in message> >> > > news:b096a4ee.0303090902.60368320@posting.google.com...> >> > > > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message2 >>  news:<9tSdnaaN1qrxAfSjXTWcog@metrocast.net>...F >> > > > > "Alan E. Feldman" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> wrote in messageB >> > > > > news:b096a4ee.0303070733.4e2ec2e2@posting.google.com...B >> > > > > > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message2 >>  news:<a5idnRM8DszJYvqjXTWcqg@metrocast.net>...J >> > > > > > > "Alan E. Feldman" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> wrote in messageF >> > > > > > > news:b096a4ee.0303061429.13ad17fc@posting.google.com... >> e >> ...      More fun than this thread:r  6    http://www.confound.com/games/squoosh_terrorist.php   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 22:53:21 GMTaL From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr"): Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants6 Message-ID: <00A1CA9D.4213A61C@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>   In article <3E6C9018.8030703@nospamn.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: >i >t >Rob Young wrote:re >> In article <3E6A0D64.5345873B@vl.videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> writes:b >>   >>>Bill Todd wrote:m >>>yH >>>>You're really stretching on this one.  The show is aimed at the U.S.B >>>>audience, and is therefore about the FBI rather than the RCMP. >>>pP >>>Which comes back to the original point that US audiences do not consume stuffM >>>that originates from abroad in terms of TV/movies. They'll consume foreignsI >>>music as long as it is in english, with a few exceptions now and then.d >>>tO >>>Elsewhere in the world, folks have no problems consuming programming that is Q >>>set in various locations in the world. But the insular nature of the USA meanshM >>>that a self-perpetuated "only in the USA" mentality exists, and because itnP >>>exists, the big media outlets don't risk putting on foreign shows and becauseG >>>they don't take that risk, the insular nature strenghtens even more.o >>>tG >>>Did you know that many of the most popular shows in the USA actuallyaQ >>>originated abroad (Three's company, Who wants to be a millionaire etc etc) butiQ >>>the USA decided to make their own copy instead of buying the existing show (in'# >>>the above cases, from england) ?e >> s >> p+ >> 	You are spinning in several directions.o >> oB >> 	First, it makes no sense to produce an American show overseas.; >> 	Production costs would be unacceptable.  So if Americant@ >> 	producers find something that works overseas, sure they will9 >> 	buy the rights and produce it here, or where it makesl- >> 	sense to produce it.  That is why TorontoeD >> 	is becoming such a hot spot for production, costs are very good!B >> 	Us insular arrogant Americans know about business, it appears: >> h >  >Hummk >r< >Xena Warrior Princess or whatever the title is and Hercules8 >are both made in New Zealand but for a US audience. New: >Zealand isn't exactly a bus journey away from Los Angeles  >were the shows are commisioned.  L You're certainly correct here.  It certainly makes sense to produce certain M kinds of shows overseas, for the right (cheap) values of "overseas."  If you pJ can find a place with favorable exchange rates, a real film industry, goodO weather for shooting, and appropriate exteriors, it makes sense to produce bothv movies and TV there.  H However, it doesn't make a lot of sense to make movies and TV set in theG _contemporary_ US there.  It made sense to shoot _Gangs of New York_ at N Cinecitta because they had to build New York.  It made sense to shoot HerculesO and Xena in New Zealand because they were set in a fantastic ancient Greece and,M weren't going to be using any urban locations; they require construction for NN any buildings they'd use, and they didn't need an explanation for kiwi accentsN from supporting players.  (And it similarly makes enormous sense to shoot LOTR there.)M  M (Jackie Chan's _Rumble in the Bronx_ was shot in Vancouver, incidentally, ands, the Bronx setting isn't remotely plausible.)  N I don't know of an American science fiction TV series shot overseas - or do I;O where is _Farscape_ shot? - but the same economics would apply.  If you have torF build everything you see, you might as well do it where it's cheapest.  O The point of X Files is that the weird stuff happens in the contemporary US, sos- these economics could only push it to Canada.a   -- Alan   O ===============================================================================e0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056lM  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025eO ===============================================================================a   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 22:57:02 GMTdL From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr"): Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants6 Message-ID: <00A1CA9D.C56ECECE@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>   In article <3E6C95E5.6010600@nospamn.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: >- >- >Paddy O'Brien wrote:r >> s >> o+ >> Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote:o >> tG >> A nice and, to my knowledge, reasonably accurate description of the -I >> events that Andrew mentioned ... there were many others where (not to hI >> put down US, but as a European they do try to tell everyone that they eK >> won WWII unaided.  My father's cynical remarks were that they travelled >F >> around the liberated countries in trucks dishing out chocolate and J >> nylons for the obvious remuneration.  He did add, not all, but most of D >> the allied forces had warred for about 6 years with little break. >> o >m@ >Hollywood helps a lot. I cannot remember the name of the recent@ >film U something or other, which had heroic Americans capturingF >a German Enigma machine and thus winning the war. Looked historicallyC >accurate but was in fact based in real life on heroic Britains whop1 >captured an Enigma machine thus winning the war.o >n  ' U-571, a movie which annoyed me deeply.c  O The only remote excuse is that Americans did (much later) board and capture theeK U-505, with (if memory serves) a set of codebooks aboard.  But it's a lousya excuse.:   -- Alanl    O ===============================================================================e0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056 M  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025 O ===============================================================================    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:06:52 GMTpL From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr"): Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants6 Message-ID: <00A1CA9F.2517EE98@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  q In article <7P3j49gkLpKu@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: c >In article <3E6A9154.226A4A44@vl.videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> writes:n >> Don Sykes wrote:yI >>> But, I think this discussion is getting way off the mark. I don't seer> >>> how this supports the position of the myopic left on Iraq. >> xO >> Actually it doesn't. The insular nature of Americans means that because theywJ >> only ever hear one side of the story, especially when any opposition isK >> silenced because any dissention would be labeled as "non-patriotic".  it I >> become extremely easy for that one side to manipulate enough of the US-J >> population that polls will show support for a rogue government's plans. > F >   If that were true, I don't think we'd have heard so much about theE >   "damn liberal press" when the elder Bush was in office, nor wouldsE >   there be so much debate and demonstrations in the US now over ther >   impending war.  K We're hearing a whole lot about the liberal press now, most of it extremely L bogus. Check out Bernard Goldberg's _Bias_, Ann Coulter's _Slander_, and, as: a useful corrective, Eric Alterman's _What Liberal Media?_  M There really are people who think Fox News actually _is_ "Fair and Balanced",iK people who get much of their news from talk radio (where the fact-checking dM standard is somewhat lower than at, say, _The New Yorker_), and who read onlyhM the websites that agree with their prejudices.  My girlfriend's mother is oneo@ of them.  It's very, very easy for the RNC to spin those people.  K I don't know if that group is anything like a majority.  But there are also-L people who trust implicitly in _Mother Jones_, listen to Pacifica Radio (NPRK actually makes an effort to be fair and balanced, so doesn't succeed as any7M kind of an advocate for the left, in my view; Pacifica does so advocate), andrF read websites that agree with _their_ prejudices.  I don't think theseM left-liberal voices are anywhere near so well-organized or well-funded as themM conservative media, but there's enough out there that if that's the only kindt, of news you want to hear, you can manage it.  K Although this issue doesn't at all divide along conservative/liberal lines.aO Brent Scowcroft's not a liberal; he's been quoted as thinking war with Iraq wassO a bad idea, as have other conservatives.  But the conservative/liberal channels.3 of communications are where this discussion occurs.o   > G >   We would not have folks telling me they are bothered by the French, I >   our friends, trying to tell us we're doing the wrong thing, nor wouldd@ >   we see Americans travelling to Iraq to act as human shields.  K This certainly shows that the public  is divided on the issue, but doesn't n contradict what JF said.  
 To reclip:  I >> become extremely easy for that one side to manipulate enough of the USIJ >> population that polls will show support for a rogue government's plans.  G Yup, at least for a while.  The trick is "manipulate _enough_ of the USa population".   -- Alane  O ===============================================================================-0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056mM  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025EO ===============================================================================    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:08:29 GMTsL From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr"): Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants6 Message-ID: <00A1CA9F.5EF848BA@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  a In article <5x$YIag4sl2m@eisner.encompasserve.org>, young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) writes:s quoted Andrew quoting him:  , >>> 	You are spinning in several directions. >>> C >>> 	First, it makes no sense to produce an American show overseas.A< >>> 	Production costs would be unacceptable.  So if AmericanA >>> 	producers find something that works overseas, sure they willa: >>> 	buy the rights and produce it here, or where it makes. >>> 	sense to produce it.  That is why TorontoE >>> 	is becoming such a hot spot for production, costs are very good!-C >>> 	Us insular arrogant Americans know about business, it appears:  >>>  >> d >> Humm  >> a> >> Xena Warrior Princess or whatever the title is and Hercules: >> are both made in New Zealand but for a US audience. New< >> Zealand isn't exactly a bus journey away from Los Angeles" >> were the shows are commisioned. >> u ><? >	Right.  Makes sense to produce them there I guess.  Sorry foraA >	the obvious contradictions.  Point of course is that production-> >	costs are very high in LA and NYC hence Toronto is a hotbed.@ >	A better clarification might include if using American actors,: >	it makes little sense to produce overseas as you greatlyB >	increase travel and housing costs.  I'm sure many NYC producers,> >	and actors shuttle to Toronto for production saving a ton on >	labor costs.  M Nope, Kevin Sorbo certainly isn't a Kiwi.  Try "American casts" or "primarilyeN American actors" or, better yet, "American casts and crews."  That can produce economic infeasibility.c   -- Alani    O ===============================================================================h0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056LM  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025GO ===============================================================================n   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 18:58:05 -0500E* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>: Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants2 Message-ID: <upGdnYQ4UNoPu_CjXTWcog@metrocast.net>  H ""Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr"" <winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>A wrote in message news:00A1CA9F.2517EE98@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU...c   ...h  F > Although this issue doesn't at all divide along conservative/liberal lines.H > Brent Scowcroft's not a liberal; he's been quoted as thinking war with Iraq was* > a bad idea, as have other conservatives.   Indeed.g  J I got pointed to http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq/ a fewF days ago:  it's a Frontline program describing the history of the IraqI policy.  Turns out that it is in no way a response to 9/11, nor even to a F dozen years of partially-frustrated U.N. resolutions:   the policy wasK articulated by Paul Wolfowitz shortlly after the end of the Gulf War, while L Bush Sr. was still in office - and that Administration (including Scowcroft)L found it so antithetical to the principles of international cooperation that* they valued that it got soundly renounced.  K Later, the policy resurfaced in 1997 with the creation of the Project for a L New American Century (www.newamericancentury.org, as noted by John Vottero),D a neo-Reaganite group of hawks which included as founders Wolfowitz,D Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Jeb Bush (lots of the talking heads we've seenF recently sagely proclaiming its virtues came on board soon thereafter,L including James Woolsey, Richard Perle, and Bill Kristol).  Their premise isK simple:  the U.S. should use its military power (and the implicit threat itaL carries, even without actual engagement) to create a world-wide hegemony andJ promote U.S. interests, rather than work through cooperative organizations such as the U.N.  H Lots of Bush Sr.'s associates (including Colin Powell, at least until heK seemed to swallow the same advice being given to the U.N.:  "Join up or getVI left out") do not subscribe to that approach.  But apparently Dubya does.    - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:14:37 GMTt# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>a: Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease TyrantsI Message-ID: <NT9ba.207783$UXa.66456@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>h  5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messageb, news:upGdnYQ4UNoPu_CjXTWcog@metrocast.net... >.) > ""Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr""   <winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>C > wrote in message news:00A1CA9F.2517EE98@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU...h >s > ...n >e3 > > Although this issue doesn't at all divide along  conservative/liberal > lines.E > > Brent Scowcroft's not a liberal; he's been quoted as thinking warm with
 > Iraq was, > > a bad idea, as have other conservatives. > 	 > Indeed./ >wF > I got pointed to http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq/ a few C > days ago:  it's a Frontline program describing the history of theL IraqF > policy.  Turns out that it is in no way a response to 9/11, nor even to aD > dozen years of partially-frustrated U.N. resolutions:   the policy waslB > articulated by Paul Wolfowitz shortlly after the end of the Gulf
 War, whileC > Bush Sr. was still in office - and that Administration (includingt
 Scowcroft)= > found it so antithetical to the principles of international  cooperation that, > they valued that it got soundly renounced. >o? > Later, the policy resurfaced in 1997 with the creation of the 
 Project for acD > New American Century (www.newamericancentury.org, as noted by John	 Vottero),tF > a neo-Reaganite group of hawks which included as founders Wolfowitz,F > Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Jeb Bush (lots of the talking heads we've seen< > recently sagely proclaiming its virtues came on board soon thereafter,hC > including James Woolsey, Richard Perle, and Bill Kristol).  Their 
 premise isC > simple:  the U.S. should use its military power (and the impliciti	 threat itrA > carries, even without actual engagement) to create a world-widei hegemony and> > promote U.S. interests, rather than work through cooperative
 organizations. > such as the U.N. > A > Lots of Bush Sr.'s associates (including Colin Powell, at least  until heF > seemed to swallow the same advice being given to the U.N.:  "Join up or getE > left out") do not subscribe to that approach.  But apparently Dubyat does.t    > It's really too bad Powell didn't choose to run, or McCain getB nominated for president in 2000. Mind you it's doubtful they would< have made it to the winner's circle on the final RNC ballot.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 18:44:09 -0500n* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>: Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants2 Message-ID: <8GOdnZj7rLDTvvCjXTWcqQ@metrocast.net>  ; "Alan E. Feldman" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> wrote in messagem7 news:b096a4ee.0303100754.5420e13e@posting.google.com...i   ...O  H > > > > > I have a feeling that we'd have this Islamic fundamentalism to dealI > > > > > with even if the U.S. didn't do all the bad things you claim it  did. I? > > > > > can't prove it, but you can't prove otherwise either.i > > > > L > > > > However, since proof *does* exist (and not only in the form of 9/11) > >  that aeH > > > > lot of people around the world hate us, and since there are some prettyK > > > > clear reasons for this which have been advanced, the onus is on youp toJ > > > > provide credible alternative reasons rather than just claim "Well, you-
 > >  can't? > > > > *prove* it" like the tobacco companies did for so long.p > > > L > > > A lot of people believe a lot of silly things. Sorry, being a majority > > > doesn't make them right. > >eL > > Sorry, but your comment indicates that you need to reread the discussionG > > that you were responding to:  it had nothing to do with any kind ofrJ > > 'majority', and you completely failed to address the issue of relative) > > evidence (which you yourself raised).. >3F > You said "a lot of people hate us". OK, maybe it's not the majority,. > but the "a lot" doesn't mean they are right.  L Your continuing irrelevant responses indicate that you still completely failH to understand the above part of the discussion:  try again from the top.  L As I said, I appreciate your sincerity (I wouldn't have spent this much timeI talking with you otherwise), but just don't have enough time to deal withaL some of the wilder excursions you've been embarking upon.  So I'll be paring down this response a lot.a   ...f  . > >  BTW, I am against the death penalty, even* > > > though I believe some do deserve it. > >tE > > That's in no way sufficient to justify it, if only because of the  radical I > > differences in opinions about who 'deserves' it.  I think the pair ina the  >hE > I'm sorry, but I don't see your point here. My opinion is that some-% > deserve it. That's all I am saying.,  L OK.  It seemed to me that you were suggesting that it would be acceptable ifK only there weren't practical problems in applying it.  If instead you agreeeL with me that there remain ethical reasons why it wouldn't be acceptable evenF if those problems were eliminated, then I can agree with you that someA people *do* deserve it (but still should not have it applied as at state-sponsored punishment).   > K > > White House deserves it more than most and possibly all people on deathG row, > > for example. > >g$ > >  I am against it because I thinkH > > > there is too much of a chance that innocent people will or alreadyL > > > have been killed. And it causes too much trouble. Life without parole,F > > > maybe in solitary confinement in extreme cases, would be better. > >OJ > > Indeed it would.  A major additional problem IMO with the state taking livessK > > *as a punishment* is that there's always another option available (suchn asK > > life without parole) that can protect society every bit as much.  Giveno thatJ > > there's always an alternative, electing to put someone to death anyway setsJ > > a rather bad example for individuals, who are encouraged by law not to kill > > when an alternative exists.k > >l > > >aK > > > So you're saying that if someone steals your land, you have the righth > > > to go and kill them? > > K > > I'd say you have the right to use whatever force is necessary to get ituI > > back, though of course in civilized situations you just appeal to thee properL > > authorities and they get it back for you via the legal process (i.e., noE > > force on your part is necessary).  Unfortunately, the options theaG > > Palestinians have for force (let alone legal remedies) are severelyo limited. >sH > So vigilante killing is okay, but killing a mass murderer convicted in > a court of law is not. OK.  J Somehow I don't think that 'OK' implies agreement this time.  And if I hadC said what you seem to think I did, I wouldn't agree with it either.   K 'Vigilantism' is defined as taking the law into one's own hands, when thereeE the alternative of having the duly-constituted authorities handle theHF problem exists but you just don't have the patience to do so.  I don't> support vigilantism.  But in the case we're talking about, theL duly-constituted authorities (the U.N.) have tried to handle the problem andF failed (funny how little we have to say about the 30+ U.N. resolutionsF Israel has ignored for several decades, but are champing at the bit toJ invade Iraq for its flouting of far fewer resolutions for far less time) -I and all that's left is (guerilla) warfare, which is not the same thing as  vigilantism at all.2   ...   $ > > > > > > > > > That's not enough? > > > > > > > >dK > > > > > > > > No, it's not.  Not after decades of supporting regimes thate > >  oppress
 > >  theirH > > > > > > > > citizenry (because doing so suits our own interests) and > >  propping up
 > > > > > > >tD > > > > > > > So you're saying that the 9/11 attacks were justified? > > > > > > G > > > > > > I'm saying they were understandable:  there were causes for3 them,  > >  and
 > >  thoseD > > > > > > causes would not have existed had our behavior been more > >  considerate.0J > > > > > > Whether they were justified is a subjective judgement and much more > >  subject > > > > > > to debate.	 > > > > > J > > > > > Let's see, we protected Osama's homeland from Iraq. Yes, I think that. > > > > > deserves a retailiatory attack! NOT. > > > > E > > > > Iraq's threat to Saudi Arabia was hypothetical.  Our militaryi presence
 > >  there > > > > was real.c > > > L > > > And wasn't one of the, if not the, major complaint of Osama, that holyL > > > land was defiled by the mere presence of American troops? For this, weA > > > are to somehow see justification for the 9/11 attacks? Huh?b > >cI > > Religious reasons can be very strong ones in the faithful.  You don't2 haveK > > to agree with their importance, but it's clearly unwise to minimize it.s >n@ > It's perfectly legitimate to criticize it for what it is: evil > silliness.  L Perhaps from your viewpoint.  From the viewpoint of the terrorists, it's theD legitimate defense of their most precious locations.  From a neutralG viewpoint, it's a problem which should have been recognized and avoideda before violence occurred.s   >  > >n > > >  > > > > > >  Are you for > > > > > > > real?a > > > > > >lK > > > > > > Indeed I am.  And the terrorists are even more real:  despising  them
 > >  won'tB > > > > > > make them go away, but understanding their motives and eliminating, > >  to  > >  theH > > > > > > degree we can reasonably do so, the causes for them would at leastu
 > >  help.	 > > > > > G > > > > > I didn't say despising them will make them go away. DON'T PUTd WORDS IN > > > > > MY MOUTH.y > > > > I > > > > Perhaps 'despising' was not the best word to use.  By asking "AreE you  > >  forJ > > > > real?" you suggested that my position was so far out on the fringe that > >  ittJ > > > > didn't matter.  My point is that the very real attacks of 9/11 and > >  elsewhereI > > > > prove that such positions *do* matter, regardless of what you mayr thinke > >  oflG > > > > them:  you may not agree with them, but you ignore them at youre peril. > > >t@ > > > Who said to ignore them? Their motives? They hate America. > >e. > > And, as noted, with understandable reason. >   > So why don't you go join them?  G While I may understand and even sympathize with them, I'm not only in a I position to be able to view their problems more dispassionately (i.e., my-L objections are abstract rather than personal) but also as a U.S. citizen I'mJ in a position to try to do something to help eliminate the problems ratherK than just attack those responsible.  Which is part of what I'm trying to dod here.t   ...r  I > > > > > > > > Israel's occupation and, worse, settlement activities for  threeh > >  decades@ > > > > > > > > despite the condemnation of the world community.
 > > > > > > >cF > > > > > > > It was the Arabs fault that there even is an occupation. > > > > > > K > > > > > > Really?  Their fault for attempting to retake the land that wasm
 > >  taken	 > >  from.K > > > > > > them in 1948?  I'm afraid you have a bit of a blind spot there.e	 > > > > > I > > > > > Uh, remember the, uh, UN? That organization you seem to find so I > > > > > important? It was they who divided the land into a Jewish state  and as > > > > > Palestinian state. > > > >iJ > > > > So they erred in that case:  nobody's perfect, but it doesn't mean > >  they'reL > > > > generally useless either.  And after an additional half-century they > >  shouldtG > > > > have learned at least a bit more about how to handle the world.  > > >t- > > > So maybe they erred in this case, also.a > >nI > > Ah, but their inaction - even if it is in fact not the ideal course -e doesI > > not in any way give the U.S. the right to step in in their stead:  wen onlyH > > have the right to self-defense (which our intelligence agencies have clearlyaL > > stated is not apparently at issue here), or the defense of other nations ifB > > they're attacked, or (IMO) the defense of internal populations
 threatened- > > with genocide - none of which apply here.g >a? > True, but you are implying that UN action *would* justify it.e  L Nope:  I'm saying that U.N. approval would *legitimize* it, which is not the same thing at all.  F There are two questions that should be answered before we invade Iraq:   1.  Do we have the right to?  " 2.  Do we have adequate reason to?  K Under some circumstances (those I listed above), we would have the right tobI invade with or without U.N. approval (i.e., we would have adequate reasonr: to) - but these circumstances do not obtain at the moment.  K If the U.N. approved an invasion, we would have the (internationally legal)lI *right* to invade Iraq, period (though we might still choose not to if wen7 felt that the U.N.'s reasons were not sufficient ones).a  I My current objection is that without U.N. approval we lack the *right* toeJ invade, so all the garbage reasons Dubya and his thugs are throwing aroundK in attempt to make it sound like a good idea are wholly irrelevant (becausetI none of them rise to the level that justifies unilateral action).  If theeF U.N. approved an invasion that wouldn't *necessarily* make it a 'just'K invasion (though U.N. support would seriously blunt my personal inclinationdD to oppose it), but it would remove the very basic problem of lack of legitimacy.t    And ifrA > you argue that, then you can't conveninetly put down the UN for  > creating Israel.  J Yes, I can:  the U.N. decision *legitimized* that action, but it was still= an *unjust* action in the manner in which it was carried out.o   >o > >s > > >l > > > >oI > > > > *Who* was responsible for the land-grab really doesn't change then fact	 > >  thattJ > > > > trying to get it back was understandable and defensible, which was my > >  point.h > > >nK > > > I don't know the full history of that stupid piece of land. I do know H > > > that the Jews have been probably the most persecuted people on theK > > > planet. And after WWII they said ENOUGH! Is it so terrible for such agJ > > > people to obtain, via the UN, a small parcel of land that was once aI > > > very small part of their ancient homeland, after what the world has  > > > done to the Jews?b > > G > > Yes, it is - if that act involves taking it from someone else.  Thes Jews, ofD > > all people, should understand this, and in fact many of them do. >cF > So, you want to screw the Jews yet again. They could have shared the > land in two states.t  F I'm going to stop talking with you unless you pay attention this time.  J Taking land from someone else to create Israel (rather than either findingJ either truly unoccupied land or finding someone *willing* to give up theirE land for appropriate compensation) was wrong.  Period.  The option ofoG 'sharing the land in two states' would have been reasonable only if the K people already living there found it acceptable, but they did not; the factwF that the Jews had just been thoroughly screwed by someone else did not* somehow make screwing the Arabs all right.  H But at no time have I suggested 'screwing the Jews yet again'.  Instead,H I've made it clear that I believe that, improperly created though it mayG have been, Israel is now one of the fait accomplis of history and has at right to continued existence.s  K What the hard-line Israelis (and people like you) should appreciate is thataJ while you have some legitimate reasons to feel paranoid about persecution,K the Arabs haven't historically been your persecutors and in this particularbH case are instead the persecutees.  And their attempts to retake the land= that was taken from them don't constitute persecution either.n  F Difficult as it must be for them, the Palestinians have finally becomeJ willing to accept the original fait accompli and to let bygones be bygonesE if you'll end the occupation of the *additional* lands occupied sincecK 1967/1973 (which occupation was *never* legitimized by the U.N. and in facttI has been strongly criticized by it).  Most of the world seems to considereH this a pretty reasonable compromise, and the fact that post-Rabin Israel% does not has not won you any friends.b   ...r  I > > > > They chose to try to take back what had been theirs.  Who won theh ware	 > >  doescH > > > > not affect the legitimacy of that goal, nor legitimize permanent > >  occupationo# > > > > of *more* land as a result.y > > > 2 > > > It wasn't theirs, it was under British rule. > >eF > > So your house isn't yours, it's under American rule?  And if Dubya decidescD > > to give it to someone else you won't have any problem with that? >tD > It's called eminent domain. Check out what Robert Moses did to NewG > York. Should the displaced people there have taken up arms and foughtm > the NYC police, etc.?i  H I have major problems with the way in which eminent domain is applied asL well:  IMO it should not be applied for economic convenience but only out ofL true necessity, and when applied should err on the side of generosity in itsJ compensation.  But at least it nominally attempts to compensate those whom
 it displaces.T   ...   D > Why should anyone bargain while being attacked by suicide bombers?  J For exactly the same reasons that negotiations continue even during a war,$ if that war can't be decisively won.   ...r  K > > Beats me - I just remember that Israel started the shooting war, though" as IL > > said there wasn't much doubt that shooting would have begun soon anyway. >. > You're talking about 1967?  I I think so, but as I noted elsewhere I'm not a historian but relying uponb3 memory of the event itself (at least in this case).e   ...<   > >  The intifadam) > > > doesn't seem to have done any good.0 > >0( > > Give it time:  it's only just begun. >iD > We shall see. It's certainly been a disaster in the short run. TheD > result was to switch from Ehud to Sharon. Please explain to me howE > that does any good for the Palestinians. At least Sharon is keeping. > the bombers under control.  3 I don't think you've been watching the news lately.t   ...s  L > > > > Relinquishing their claim to Israel proper (i.e., to a great deal of	 > >  what<K > > > > was *their* land) is a *major* concession that reflects the reality1 of	 > >  oversG > > > > a half-century of use and development by Israel.  Demanding theh return > >  ofdG > > > > the rest of *their* land, which in no comparable way has Israele invested > >  in, > > > > is hardly unreasonable.S > > >NL > > > I haven't heard of this relinquishing. And if they did, I suspect it's
 > > > a ruse.A > >e, > > Fine attitude:  get used to the bombers. >C > Get used to the retaliations.C  H Don't count on it:  keep them up, and you may find yourself without your  single major ally (and its aid).   ...   + > > > > > Uh, the status quo is any better?. > > > >vJ > > > > That's their decision to make.  And it's pretty clear that they're > >  willingF > > > > to continue the status quo until they feel that they have been	 offered a. > > > > just alternative.e > > >aA > > > If everyone insisted on total justice, it would be mutuallyeI > > > incompatible and there would be constant war resulting in even lessf5 > > > justice. Sometimes you just have to compromise.g > >>K > > They're more than willing to:  Israel can keep the land within its 1948tJ > > borders rather than give it *all* back.  And since it's not clear that the J > > OTs are of any real importance to Israel as a nation, that's not a bad' > > compromise from Israel's viewpoint.y > ' > So just give them whatever they want?n  6 Read this again, very slowly, until you understand it:  G What they would ideally *want* (with considerable justification) is thesJ return of all of Israel.  But they're willing to accept just the return of> the OTs to put an end to the cycle of violence and repression.   >oG > Frankly, I'd be thrilled if Israel would withdraw from most or all ofrD > the OT's, set up the best barrier they can, and say, "OK, you have6 > your country. Leave us alone!" and see what happens.  J Then that's something we agree on (as long as it's *all* of the OTs) - andH while I'm not as pessimistic as you seem to be, I also agree that IsraelK would be foolish not to remain extremely vigilant until it indeed sees whatu happens.   >d > But that candidate lost.  I The same thing happened here in 2000.  Both do not reflect at all well onhG our respective populations - but they both will have the opportunity to D rectify their errors (and whether they do so will be a much stronger reflection upon them).   ...t  L > > > > > > up that goal if Israel would give up its occupation, which is in > >  fact aiK > > > > > > *major* concession (i.e., they're finally willing to relinquisho
 > >  their
 > >  claimH > > > > > > to the land taken in 1948, as long as they get back the land takens > >  later).	 > > > > >)F > > > > > Isn't this what was offered by Ehud? And they responded with	 violence.  > > > > I > > > > If that were the case, I'd have to reevaluate my feelings on thise > >  matter.J > > > > But I don't believe that Barak offered more than partial return of theo	 > >  land  > > > > taken after 1948.U > > >.I > > > Again you insist on 100% justice for Palestinians without regard todG > > > anything else. Why do you focus on them? What about all the otherl. > > > cases? The American Indian, for example. > >cJ > > *If* the American Indians sought specific reparations for identifiableH > > injustices and resorted to terrorism if they failed to get them, I'dK > > sympathize with them as well:  even though most of those injustices aresL > > older than any living memory, our government should still be responsible fornK > > correcting them.  Giving back most of our country is clearly infeasible K > > (some other reasonable reparations would have to be found), but I'm not J > > suggesting that Israel give back *any* of the 1948 land, just the OTs. >r? > What exactly do you mean by 1948 land? Pre-1967 or pre war ofe > independence?n  J Pre-1967, I suspect.  Again, my knowledge of history is far from adequate,D especially going back to about the time I was born:  did the 'war ofG independence' significantly change the boundaries originally set by theaG U.N.?  (I'm not sure my answer would change even if it did - I'm mostlyo	 curious.)o   ...o  G > > > > > > importance.  But even large portions of the American Jewisha > > population
 > > > >  (and2K > > > > > > for that matter many liberal Israelis) are torn between loyalty= to > > the-
 > > > >  idea-L > > > > > > of a Jewish state and horror at some of the things that state is
 > > doing.	 > > > > >oK > > > > > True, but for every bad Israeli deed there are hundereds of worseeG > > > > > Palestinian deeds. No country is perfect, but people like yout always: > > > > > hold Israel, and Israel alone, to that standard. > > > >nH > > > > The Palestinians are not a country, but an oppressed people.  As such,s > > theyC > > > > take what actions they can and many people around the worldy
 understandL > > > > though deplore the necessity.  Israel, by contrast, is a country, anJ > > > > occupying power, and a military powerhouse:  it has the *capacity* toL > > > > respond in a far more civilized and measured manner, and its failure to > > do' > > > > so is the cause of the censure.e >e( > Were they not oppressed before Israel?  K Excellent point:  my impression is that indeed they were, though that comesoJ more from "Lawrence of Arabia" than anything.  Another reason why the JewsJ should sympathize with them (and, as I've said before, I realize that many do).  K Regardless of earlier history, however, these days it's Israel that's doingi the oppressing.n  D Even after having 'pared down' this response, I may have to cut thisJ discussion short simply due to time pressure.  If so, it's not because I'm1 fed up:  it has been interesting and informative.c   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:35:27 GMTe# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>t: Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease TyrantsI Message-ID: <jbaba.207959$UXa.39786@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>=  5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messageD, news:8GOdnZj7rLDTvvCjXTWcqQ@metrocast.net... >L= > "Alan E. Feldman" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> wrote in messageC9 > news:b096a4ee.0303100754.5420e13e@posting.google.com...= >= > ...= > >== > > So vigilante killing is okay, but killing a mass murderer- convicted in > > a court of law is not. OK. >3F > Somehow I don't think that 'OK' implies agreement this time.  And if I hadnE > said what you seem to think I did, I wouldn't agree with it either.s >eB > 'Vigilantism' is defined as taking the law into one's own hands,
 when thereC > the alternative of having the duly-constituted authorities handleB theeB > problem exists but you just don't have the patience to do so.  I don'tj@ > support vigilantism.  But in the case we're talking about, theB > duly-constituted authorities (the U.N.) have tried to handle the problem and < > failed (funny how little we have to say about the 30+ U.N. resolutionstE > Israel has ignored for several decades, but are champing at the bito toD > invade Iraq for its flouting of far fewer resolutions for far less time) - B > and all that's left is (guerilla) warfare, which is not the same thing as > vigilantism at all.n     Bill,a   Back up a second here...  D Israel was constituted under valid resolutions of the U.N.. From its< formation in 1948 until relatively recently, Israel has beenF surrounded on all sides (except the Mediterranean side) by nations who> swore that they were going to obliterate Israel and its Jewish? residents from the face of the earth - not the Arab (Muslim andh: non-Muslims) and Jewish citizens of Israel, just the Jews.  C In view of these indisputable facts, and the history of events thatdB occurred to the Jews during WWII courtesy of a regime with similarD objectives, I wouldn't give you a pitcher of warm spit for those 30+ U.N. resolutions.o  B The U.S. has not yet signed a peace treaty with North Korean for aE conflict that dates from the same era. The North Koreans, even beforeoF their latest fit of pique, had a policy of forced reunification. Would3 you have advocated not having troops along the DMZ?R  B Don't forget that only Egypt has signed a peace treaty with IsraelB thus far, and issues of territory and borders were settled in thatE treaty. Currently a 'formal', but not 'hot' state of war still existstD between Israel and the other Arab nations. Should Israel not protectD its borders and citizens until such time as a formal peace treaty isF signed with each of the interested Arab states, Palestinians included?D When the Arab nations are serious enough about negotiating a seriousB peace treaty with Israel, the Israeli's will be at the peace tableC prepared to settle things as amicably as these things are typicallyh settled between nations.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 16:32:01 -0800;$ From: Shane Smith <ssmith@icius.com>: Subject: RE: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants0 Message-ID: <01C2E722.ADC18380@sulfer.icius.com>  H One enigma was captured from a submarine, by three British surface shipsE led by the Bulldog. I think (but am far from sure) it was the U101 orlG the U110. It was not sailed back though, IIRC the enigma was taken, andl the sub scuppered.   Shaneh   -----Original Message-----$ From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU' [mailto:winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU]i$ Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 2:57 PM To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com : Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants    D In article <3E6C95E5.6010600@nospamn.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK; Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes:  >- >a >Paddy O'Brien wrote:= >> = >> =+ >> Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote:= >>  G >> A nice and, to my knowledge, reasonably accurate description of the lI >> events that Andrew mentioned ... there were many others where (not to LI >> put down US, but as a European they do try to tell everyone that they =K >> won WWII unaided.  My father's cynical remarks were that they travelled -F >> around the liberated countries in trucks dishing out chocolate and J >> nylons for the obvious remuneration.  He did add, not all, but most of D >> the allied forces had warred for about 6 years with little break. >> E >8@ >Hollywood helps a lot. I cannot remember the name of the recent@ >film U something or other, which had heroic Americans capturingF >a German Enigma machine and thus winning the war. Looked historicallyC >accurate but was in fact based in real life on heroic Britains whor1 >captured an Enigma machine thus winning the war.. >o  ' U-571, a movie which annoyed me deeply.   C The only remote excuse is that Americans did (much later) board andt capture therE U-505, with (if memory serves) a set of codebooks aboard.  But it's ao lousyc excuse.p   -- Alanu    H ======================================================================== =======t0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU?  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056E  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CAy 94025rH ======================================================================== =======    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 19:46:21 -0400P0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca>: Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants/ Message-ID: <3E6D23B0.BE15C09C@vl.videotron.ca>t  * Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote:P > I don't know of an American science fiction TV series shot overseas - or do I; > where is _Farscape_ shot?   1 farscape was one of the few ones shot in the USA..   Stargate SG1 : Vancouver.l Dark Realm: Vancouverm Earth Final Conflict: TorontomO Adventure Inc and the similar one with the lovely Tia Carerre: shot in Toronto.n  ( Enterprise/Voyager/TNG/DS9: Los Angeles.  M And of course, all the Anderson titles were shot in England (Space 1999 etc).    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:20:20 -0500y* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>: Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants2 Message-ID: <DpmdnQowraJEpPCjXTWcoA@metrocast.net>  . "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in messageC news:KX4ba.202500$UXa.98286@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...0   ...E  D > Granted many Arabs living there may not have wanted regime change,  G That pretty much says it all:  it doesn't matter whether you agree withcK them, or would yourself have found the proposed changes acceptable:  *they*R) clearly did not consider them acceptable.E   ...L  E > Had the intifada not been fomented by Palestinian leaders for theirv > own purposes,a  E That statement requires some explanation - what I ask for below might  suffice.  6  there almost certainly been a peace settlement by now? > that all parties could have lived with, perhaps not with wildgF > enthusiasm, but with the knowledge that it was acceptable. People onG > both sides wouldn't still be dying unnecessarily and the economies of $ > all concerned would be better off.  L So:  Are you suggesting that complete return of the Occupied Territories wasH offered and rejected, or something less than that?  Also, the details ofL what Rabin was proposing before he was killed and what differences the BarakJ proposal entailed would be helpful:  I'd like to understand such details a lot better than I do.l   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 22:36:31 -0500 * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>: Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants2 Message-ID: <t86dnQIBYPddxPCjXTWcrg@metrocast.net>  . "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in messageC news:NT9ba.207783$UXa.66456@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...o   ...n  @ > It's really too bad Powell didn't choose to run, or McCain getD > nominated for president in 2000. Mind you it's doubtful they would> > have made it to the winner's circle on the final RNC ballot.  J I agree with you about Powell.  But while McCain would certainly have beenJ several cuts above Dubya in many ways, on this particular issue he's quite, close to the Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz view.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 22:54:19 -0500o* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>: Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants2 Message-ID: <2AydnSZCEepwwPCjXTWcow@metrocast.net>  . "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in messageC news:jbaba.207959$UXa.39786@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...D   ...a  F > Israel was constituted under valid resolutions of the U.N.. From its> > formation in 1948 until relatively recently, Israel has beenH > surrounded on all sides (except the Mediterranean side) by nations who@ > swore that they were going to obliterate Israel and its JewishA > residents from the face of the earth - not the Arab (Muslim andi< > non-Muslims) and Jewish citizens of Israel, just the Jews.  J And not without some reason - a testament to the ham-handedness with whichC Israel was formed.  That of course was the U.N.'s fault rather than I Israel's, and as I've said once Israel had become a fait accompli rollingsK back the clock is not something I'd advocate - but the desire to obliterateoD the continuing physical manifestation of the humiliation is entirely understandable.n   >aE > In view of these indisputable facts, and the history of events that D > occurred to the Jews during WWII courtesy of a regime with similarF > objectives, I wouldn't give you a pitcher of warm spit for those 30+ > U.N. resolutions.f  & You missed both points of the comment:  G 1.  The double U.S. standard of asserting that Iraq must be invaded forlJ failure to comply with U.N. resolutions while vigorously supporting Israel! despite non-compliance with same.c  J 2.  The fact that the Palestinians were acting not as vigilantes unwillingF to submit their concerns to duly-constituted authority but as guerillaC warriors of last resort because that duly-constituted authority wase% powerless to deal with the situation.e  D The propriety or lack thereof in Israel's failure to comply with the# resolutions is relevant to neither.s   ...p  D > Don't forget that only Egypt has signed a peace treaty with IsraelD > thus far, and issues of territory and borders were settled in thatG > treaty. Currently a 'formal', but not 'hot' state of war still existsaF > between Israel and the other Arab nations. Should Israel not protectF > its borders and citizens until such time as a formal peace treaty isH > signed with each of the interested Arab states, Palestinians included?  K Have I said one word to suggest otherwise?  What I find unacceptable is thelJ descent to criminal retaliation rather than the police methods which it isL fully capable of using, plus the continuing refusal to follow the path Rabin laid down so promisingly..  F > When the Arab nations are serious enough about negotiating a seriousD > peace treaty with Israel, the Israeli's will be at the peace tableE > prepared to settle things as amicably as these things are typicallyq > settled between nations.  I Israel's main current problem is not with its Arab neighbors but with the4K Palestinians in the lands it is occupying.  And if it could bring itself toeL addressing the Palestinian problem appropriately, its neighbors would become much closer to being friends.u   - bill   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Mar 2003 20:37:01 -0800. From: spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman): Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants= Message-ID: <b096a4ee.0303102037.3179e482@posting.google.com>   d "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message news:<8GOdnZj7rLDTvvCjXTWcqQ@metrocast.net>...= > "Alan E. Feldman" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> wrote in message 9 > news:b096a4ee.0303100754.5420e13e@posting.google.com...c >  > ...s [...]r > N > As I said, I appreciate your sincerity (I wouldn't have spent this much timeK > talking with you otherwise), but just don't have enough time to deal withnN > some of the wilder excursions you've been embarking upon.  So I'll be paring > down this response a lot.t  0 Yes, it's been getting to be a lit-tle too long.   >  > ...e > 0 > > >  BTW, I am against the death penalty, even, > > > > though I believe some do deserve it. > > >uG > > > That's in no way sufficient to justify it, if only because of the 
 >  radicalK > > > differences in opinions about who 'deserves' it.  I think the pair inl >  the > >nG > > I'm sorry, but I don't see your point here. My opinion is that some,' > > deserve it. That's all I am saying.h > N > OK.  It seemed to me that you were suggesting that it would be acceptable ifM > only there weren't practical problems in applying it.  If instead you agree N > with me that there remain ethical reasons why it wouldn't be acceptable evenH > if those problems were eliminated, then I can agree with you that someC > people *do* deserve it (but still should not have it applied as a  > state-sponsored punishment).  ) I think we're actually in agreement here.a  M > > > White House deserves it more than most and possibly all people on deatht >  row,  > > > for example. > > > & > > >  I am against it because I thinkJ > > > > there is too much of a chance that innocent people will or alreadyN > > > > have been killed. And it causes too much trouble. Life without parole,H > > > > maybe in solitary confinement in extreme cases, would be better. > > >eL > > > Indeed it would.  A major additional problem IMO with the state taking >  livesM > > > *as a punishment* is that there's always another option available (suchs >  aseM > > > life without parole) that can protect society every bit as much.  Given  >  thatiL > > > there's always an alternative, electing to put someone to death anyway >  setsrL > > > a rather bad example for individuals, who are encouraged by law not to >  kill ! > > > when an alternative exists.  > > >e > > > > M > > > > So you're saying that if someone steals your land, you have the rightt > > > > to go and kill them? > > > M > > > I'd say you have the right to use whatever force is necessary to get iteK > > > back, though of course in civilized situations you just appeal to the 	 >  properlN > > > authorities and they get it back for you via the legal process (i.e., noG > > > force on your part is necessary).  Unfortunately, the options the I > > > Palestinians have for force (let alone legal remedies) are severelys >  limited.  > >lJ > > So vigilante killing is okay, but killing a mass murderer convicted in > > a court of law is not. OK. > L > Somehow I don't think that 'OK' implies agreement this time.  And if I hadE > said what you seem to think I did, I wouldn't agree with it either.r > M > 'Vigilantism' is defined as taking the law into one's own hands, when thereuG > the alternative of having the duly-constituted authorities handle thelH > problem exists but you just don't have the patience to do so.  I don't@ > support vigilantism.  But in the case we're talking about, theN > duly-constituted authorities (the U.N.) have tried to handle the problem andH > failed (funny how little we have to say about the 30+ U.N. resolutionsH > Israel has ignored for several decades, but are champing at the bit toL > invade Iraq for its flouting of far fewer resolutions for far less time) -  2 Exactly why I prefer to leave the U.N. out of it.   K > and all that's left is (guerilla) warfare, which is not the same thing as  > vigilantism at all.i  4 OK. But I still think what they are doing is wrong.   D A friend recently pointed out that the Jews had a longer presence inC this area than anyone. I don't know if that's true, but I know they C were there for quite a while at least before A.D. 70. So that meansmB that the Palestinians probably "stole" the land. How did they come9 upon this land? I don't really know. No one brings it up.   C What happened in 1967? Why didn't Egypt and Jordan want Gaza and WB 6 back? No one has ever been able to answer this for me.   >  > ...e [...]  > > > > > >iL > > > > > > Let's see, we protected Osama's homeland from Iraq. Yes, I think >  thatt0 > > > > > > deserves a retailiatory attack! NOT.	 > > > > >uG > > > > > Iraq's threat to Saudi Arabia was hypothetical.  Our military  >  presenceu >  there > > > > > was real.  > > > > N > > > > And wasn't one of the, if not the, major complaint of Osama, that holyN > > > > land was defiled by the mere presence of American troops? For this, weC > > > > are to somehow see justification for the 9/11 attacks? Huh?  > > >eK > > > Religious reasons can be very strong ones in the faithful.  You don'te >  havetM > > > to agree with their importance, but it's clearly unwise to minimize it.o > >cB > > It's perfectly legitimate to criticize it for what it is: evil > > silliness. > N > Perhaps from your viewpoint.  From the viewpoint of the terrorists, it's theF > legitimate defense of their most precious locations.  From a neutralI > viewpoint, it's a problem which should have been recognized and avoidede > before violence occurred.   A But from a sane perspective, it's silly to get so upset over sucheC things. From a dumb ass's point of view, the earth is flat. Doesn'tt@ make it right or respectable. That's my opinion. I don't have toC respect it. I have to acknowledge it, and deal with it, but I don'teE have to repsect it. (By respect I mean not view it as silly.) I don't ! think we're in disagreement here.u   [...]eB > > > > Who said to ignore them? Their motives? They hate America. > > > 0 > > > And, as noted, with understandable reason. > > " > > So why don't you go join them? > I > While I may understand and even sympathize with them, I'm not only in aaK > position to be able to view their problems more dispassionately (i.e., my N > objections are abstract rather than personal) but also as a U.S. citizen I'mL > in a position to try to do something to help eliminate the problems ratherM > than just attack those responsible.  Which is part of what I'm trying to do  > here.   B So why not try to help someone else once in a while? It seems thatC nothing is right if even the slightest harm comes to a Palestinian. , You seem to be very one-sided on this issue.   >  > ...t > K > > > > > > > > > Israel's occupation and, worse, settlement activities forc >  three
 >  decadesB > > > > > > > > > despite the condemnation of the world community.  F I am against the settlements. That still doesn't justify Intifada part two.   > > > > > > > >eH > > > > > > > > It was the Arabs fault that there even is an occupation.
 > > > > > > >.M > > > > > > > Really?  Their fault for attempting to retake the land that wast > > >  taken > > >  fromyM > > > > > > > them in 1948?  I'm afraid you have a bit of a blind spot there.m > > > > > >sK > > > > > > Uh, remember the, uh, UN? That organization you seem to find sotK > > > > > > important? It was they who divided the land into a Jewish statet >  and a > > > > > > Palestinian state.	 > > > > >yL > > > > > So they erred in that case:  nobody's perfect, but it doesn't mean
 >  they'reN > > > > > generally useless either.  And after an additional half-century they	 >  should I > > > > > have learned at least a bit more about how to handle the world.  > > > >n/ > > > > So maybe they erred in this case, also.T > > >uK > > > Ah, but their inaction - even if it is in fact not the ideal course -  >  doesmK > > > not in any way give the U.S. the right to step in in their stead:  we  >  only J > > > have the right to self-defense (which our intelligence agencies have
 >  clearlyN > > > stated is not apparently at issue here), or the defense of other nations >  if D > > > they're attacked, or (IMO) the defense of internal populations
 >  threatened / > > > with genocide - none of which apply here.A > >tA > > True, but you are implying that UN action *would* justify it.n > N > Nope:  I'm saying that U.N. approval would *legitimize* it, which is not the > same thing at all. > H > There are two questions that should be answered before we invade Iraq: >  > 1.  Do we have the right to? > $ > 2.  Do we have adequate reason to? > M > Under some circumstances (those I listed above), we would have the right tocK > invade with or without U.N. approval (i.e., we would have adequate reasons< > to) - but these circumstances do not obtain at the moment. > M > If the U.N. approved an invasion, we would have the (internationally legal)eK > *right* to invade Iraq, period (though we might still choose not to if we 9 > felt that the U.N.'s reasons were not sufficient ones).  > K > My current objection is that without U.N. approval we lack the *right* tosL > invade, so all the garbage reasons Dubya and his thugs are throwing around  8 But you admitted that they (the UN) could make mistakes!  @ You're really dancing with words here. You're trying to spin the7 U.N.'s actions both then and now to support your views.u      M > in attempt to make it sound like a good idea are wholly irrelevant (becausenK > none of them rise to the level that justifies unilateral action).  If the(H > U.N. approved an invasion that wouldn't *necessarily* make it a 'just'M > invasion (though U.N. support would seriously blunt my personal inclinationlF > to oppose it), but it would remove the very basic problem of lack of
 > legitimacy.r  " Fine, your opinion has been noted.   > 	 >  And ifdC > > you argue that, then you can't conveninetly put down the UN fora > > creating Israel. > L > Yes, I can:  the U.N. decision *legitimized* that action, but it was still? > an *unjust* action in the manner in which it was carried out.p  C The Jews have a better historical claim to the land. There is a lot D more Jewish history there, I think. How did the Pal.'s get the land?: Maybe they obtained it unjustly. So why not split it then?   >  > >I > > >t > > > >e	 > > > > >iK > > > > > *Who* was responsible for the land-grab really doesn't change theh >  facts >  thatoL > > > > > trying to get it back was understandable and defensible, which was >  mye	 >  point.t > > > >hM > > > > I don't know the full history of that stupid piece of land. I do knownJ > > > > that the Jews have been probably the most persecuted people on theM > > > > planet. And after WWII they said ENOUGH! Is it so terrible for such abL > > > > people to obtain, via the UN, a small parcel of land that was once aK > > > > very small part of their ancient homeland, after what the world has  > > > > done to the Jews?a > > >aI > > > Yes, it is - if that act involves taking it from someone else.  The  >  Jews, oftF > > > all people, should understand this, and in fact many of them do. > >oH > > So, you want to screw the Jews yet again. They could have shared the > > land in two states.  > H > I'm going to stop talking with you unless you pay attention this time.   Fine. Don't do me any favors.s  L > Taking land from someone else to create Israel (rather than either findingL > either truly unoccupied land or finding someone *willing* to give up theirG > land for appropriate compensation) was wrong.  Period.  The option ofe  A Uh, they got it from the British who double crossed them. Another F poster claimed that those Arabs who wanted to stay, could. Since that,B I've now heard everything from that to the Arabs being shoved out.@ Obviously there is some controversy about this so you can't justE assume they got pushed out. If they all got pushed out, where did theg  current Israeli Arabs come from?  I > 'sharing the land in two states' would have been reasonable only if thegM > people already living there found it acceptable, but they did not; the fact H > that the Jews had just been thoroughly screwed by someone else did not, > somehow make screwing the Arabs all right.  B You only worry about what's fair for one people. You don't seem toD give a damn about any others at all, except the Al Qaeda terrorists,+ actually. It strikes me as being one-sided.A   > J > But at no time have I suggested 'screwing the Jews yet again'.  Instead,J > I've made it clear that I believe that, improperly created though it mayI > have been, Israel is now one of the fait accomplis of history and has ay > right to continued existence.h       > M > What the hard-line Israelis (and people like you) should appreciate is thatnL > while you have some legitimate reasons to feel paranoid about persecution,M > the Arabs haven't historically been your persecutors and in this particularaJ > case are instead the persecutees.  And their attempts to retake the land? > that was taken from them don't constitute persecution either.e  B They'd do themselves a favor if they worked to better their livingF conditions instead of focusing all there energies on ousting the Jews.   > H > Difficult as it must be for them, the Palestinians have finally becomeL > willing to accept the original fait accompli and to let bygones be bygonesG > if you'll end the occupation of the *additional* lands occupied since  > 1967/1973   > I'm not convinced of that. It's just propaganda on their part.  C > (which occupation was *never* legitimized by the U.N. and in factfK > has been strongly criticized by it).  Most of the world seems to considercJ > this a pretty reasonable compromise, and the fact that post-Rabin Israel' > does not has not won you any friends.c  C They were offered a country, 95% of the OT's. In my opinion, that'soC enough. If you don't like that, you can go write a TPU program! :-)h    > ...l > K > > > > > They chose to try to take back what had been theirs.  Who won theb >  war >  doeslJ > > > > > not affect the legitimacy of that goal, nor legitimize permanent
 >  occupations% > > > > > of *more* land as a result.j > > > >b4 > > > > It wasn't theirs, it was under British rule. > > >aH > > > So your house isn't yours, it's under American rule?  And if Dubya
 >  decidesF > > > to give it to someone else you won't have any problem with that? > >nF > > It's called eminent domain. Check out what Robert Moses did to NewI > > York. Should the displaced people there have taken up arms and fought  > > the NYC police, etc.?' > J > I have major problems with the way in which eminent domain is applied asN > well:  IMO it should not be applied for economic convenience but only out ofN > true necessity, and when applied should err on the side of generosity in itsL > compensation.  But at least it nominally attempts to compensate those whom > it displaces.  >  > ...i > F > > Why should anyone bargain while being attacked by suicide bombers? > L > For exactly the same reasons that negotiations continue even during a war,& > if that war can't be decisively won.  F But the difference is that this new violence was a reaction to a quiteC reasonable offer. It was not an offer made in the middle of ongoingd hostilities.  C Let's see. Do nothing. No intifada. Offer land for peace. Intifada.eB Israeli doves who once supported giving the Palestinians a countryC turn into hawks. Sharon replaced Ehud. Sucicde bombers. "reoccupy".eA Suicide bombers are mostly stopped. Slowly withdraw. More suicideyE bombers. Reoccupy. The bombers recede. This is a formula for success?  This is madness.   >  > ...e > M > > > Beats me - I just remember that Israel started the shooting war, thought >  as I N > > > said there wasn't much doubt that shooting would have begun soon anyway. > >  > > You're talking about 1967? > K > I think so, but as I noted elsewhere I'm not a historian but relying upone5 > memory of the event itself (at least in this case).s  D In 1947 it was agreed that there's be a Jewish state and a P. state.D both small. In 1948, when the partition was to begin, 5 Arabs states@ attacked the just-born Israel. Israel won the war. It gained theC familiar shape with the large "plow", or V, the Negev desert to thee@ south, and a thin strip north of that, with an extension towardsD Jerusalem, and a wider area near the top. In 1967 this was extenededE to all of the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza strip, the west bank, and thedB Golan Heights. When Egypt made peace with Israel, they got all theC post-1967 land except the Gaza strip, which they didn't want (maybeTB they didn't want the Palestinians!). For some reason I still don'tC understand, Jordan didn't want the west bank back. But having won a F war, you don't really want to give up tgerritory wihtout some benefit.  C When Arabs ruled Jerusalem, Jewish things were destroyed. Jews weree@ not allowed to worship there. When Jews rule Jerusalem, Muslims,E Christians, and Jews can all worship in Jerusalem. I think the latterl
 is better.   >  > ...n >  > > >  The intifada + > > > > doesn't seem to have done any good.h > > >i* > > > Give it time:  it's only just begun. > >0F > > We shall see. It's certainly been a disaster in the short run. TheF > > result was to switch from Ehud to Sharon. Please explain to me howG > > that does any good for the Palestinians. At least Sharon is keeping  > > the bombers under control. > 5 > I don't think you've been watching the news lately.   C Okay, there was one more bombing. Nothing's perfect. But it's A LOTu@ quieter now than before the crackdown. Every time Israeli forces2 withdraw, there are more bombings. So they return.  D But the intifada is clearly a disaster as I've written twice now. So= dig yourself into an even deeper hole for the long run. Yeah.t   >  > ...h > N > > > > > Relinquishing their claim to Israel proper (i.e., to a great deal of >  whatoM > > > > > was *their* land) is a *major* concession that reflects the realityU >  of. >  overgI > > > > > a half-century of use and development by Israel.  Demanding then	 >  return. >  of I > > > > > the rest of *their* land, which in no comparable way has Israeli >  investedl >  in,! > > > > > is hardly unreasonable.g > > > >iN > > > > I haven't heard of this relinquishing. And if they did, I suspect it's > > > > a ruse.e > > > . > > > Fine attitude:  get used to the bombers. > >f! > > Get used to the retaliations.h > J > Don't count on it:  keep them up, and you may find yourself without your" > single major ally (and its aid).  F I doubt it. Remeber, these people danced in the streets in celebration@ of the 9/11 attacks. I really don't think that raises Americans' opinions of them much at all.,   >  > .... > - > > > > > > Uh, the status quo is any better?1	 > > > > >wL > > > > > That's their decision to make.  And it's pretty clear that they're
 >  willingH > > > > > to continue the status quo until they feel that they have been >  offered a > > > > > just alternative.e > > > >dC > > > > If everyone insisted on total justice, it would be mutuallyaK > > > > incompatible and there would be constant war resulting in even lesse7 > > > > justice. Sometimes you just have to compromise.o > > >nM > > > They're more than willing to:  Israel can keep the land within its 1948eL > > > borders rather than give it *all* back.  And since it's not clear that >  theL > > > OTs are of any real importance to Israel as a nation, that's not a bad) > > > compromise from Israel's viewpoint.n > >s) > > So just give them whatever they want?  > 8 > Read this again, very slowly, until you understand it: > I > What they would ideally *want* (with considerable justification) is theaL > return of all of Israel.  But they're willing to accept just the return of@ > the OTs to put an end to the cycle of violence and repression. >  > > I > > Frankly, I'd be thrilled if Israel would withdraw from most or all of F > > the OT's, set up the best barrier they can, and say, "OK, you have8 > > your country. Leave us alone!" and see what happens. > L > Then that's something we agree on (as long as it's *all* of the OTs) - andJ > while I'm not as pessimistic as you seem to be, I also agree that IsraelM > would be foolish not to remain extremely vigilant until it indeed sees what"
 > happens.   95% was more than enough.e   [...]d   >  forM > > > correcting them.  Giving back most of our country is clearly infeasibleoM > > > (some other reasonable reparations would have to be found), but I'm notgL > > > suggesting that Israel give back *any* of the 1948 land, just the OTs. > >iA > > What exactly do you mean by 1948 land? Pre-1967 or pre war of  > > independence?n > L > Pre-1967, I suspect.  Again, my knowledge of history is far from adequate,F > especially going back to about the time I was born:  did the 'war ofI > independence' significantly change the boundaries originally set by theaI > U.N.?  (I'm not sure my answer would change even if it did - I'm mostlyb > curious.)c  
 see above.  F AT some point you just have to be practical. 95% is pretty good. Is it0 really worth all this bloodshed for a measly 5%?   >  > ...9 > I > > > > > > > importance.  But even large portions of the American Jewishl
 >  population  >  (and M > > > > > > > for that matter many liberal Israelis) are torn between loyaltyo >  to  >  the >  idea'N > > > > > > > of a Jewish state and horror at some of the things that state is	 >  doing.u > > > > > >iM > > > > > > True, but for every bad Israeli deed there are hundereds of worse I > > > > > > Palestinian deeds. No country is perfect, but people like youi	 >  alwaysB< > > > > > > hold Israel, and Israel alone, to that standard.	 > > > > >IJ > > > > > The Palestinians are not a country, but an oppressed people.  As >  such, >  theyaE > > > > > take what actions they can and many people around the world(
 >  understandeN > > > > > though deplore the necessity.  Israel, by contrast, is a country, anL > > > > > occupying power, and a military powerhouse:  it has the *capacity* >  toeN > > > > > respond in a far more civilized and measured manner, and its failure >  toi >  doo) > > > > > so is the cause of the censure.n > > * > > Were they not oppressed before Israel? > M > Excellent point:  my impression is that indeed they were, though that comesnL > more from "Lawrence of Arabia" than anything.  Another reason why the JewsL > should sympathize with them (and, as I've said before, I realize that many > do).  $ Many Jews *did* before Intifada II.    > M > Regardless of earlier history, however, these days it's Israel that's doingu > the oppressing.v  A Israel offered an end to the occupation, but it was turned down. u   > F > Even after having 'pared down' this response, I may have to cut thisL > discussion short simply due to time pressure.  If so, it's not because I'm3 > fed up:  it has been interesting and informative.  >  > - bill       Alan E. Feldmanm   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Mar 2003 22:39:57 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)u: Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants3 Message-ID: <gnhjgYzbPCcS@eisner.encompasserve.org>y   In article <00A1CA9F.2517EE98@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr") writes:rs > In article <7P3j49gkLpKu@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:sd >>In article <3E6A9154.226A4A44@vl.videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> writes: >>> Don Sykes wrote:J >>>> But, I think this discussion is getting way off the mark. I don't see? >>>> how this supports the position of the myopic left on Iraq.e >>> P >>> Actually it doesn't. The insular nature of Americans means that because theyK >>> only ever hear one side of the story, especially when any opposition is L >>> silenced because any dissention would be labeled as "non-patriotic".  itJ >>> become extremely easy for that one side to manipulate enough of the USK >>> population that polls will show support for a rogue government's plans.  >>G >>   If that were true, I don't think we'd have heard so much about theeF >>   "damn liberal press" when the elder Bush was in office, nor wouldF >>   there be so much debate and demonstrations in the US now over the >>   impending war.L > M > We're hearing a whole lot about the liberal press now, most of it extremelyoN > bogus. Check out Bernard Goldberg's _Bias_, Ann Coulter's _Slander_, and, as< > a useful corrective, Eric Alterman's _What Liberal Media?_ > O > There really are people who think Fox News actually _is_ "Fair and Balanced",eM > people who get much of their news from talk radio (where the fact-checking nO > standard is somewhat lower than at, say, _The New Yorker_), and who read onlyeO > the websites that agree with their prejudices.  My girlfriend's mother is oneEB > of them.  It's very, very easy for the RNC to spin those people. >   @ 	Goldberg is a self-proclaimed liberal which makes his tome that@ 	much sweeter.  Sort of like when BAH "must have voted for Bush"0 	because she is in favor of action against Iraq:  H http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=b4iaru%24313%245%40bob.news.rcn.net   >You must have voted for Bush.  & You are an asshole.  The answer is no.   ---e  < 	To proclaim Fox News "fair and balanced" could be defended.G 	Half their hosts proclaim themselves liberal, the others conservative.c: 	And yes, there is probably more of a conservative bent inC 	their presentation.  But it sells.  If a more liberal bent worked,oG 	Phil Donahue wouldn't have recently been canceled.  After all, he had  C 	some top rated liberals on that program and yet he still sunk (I'm D 	thinking of guests I flicked past.  Matt and Katie, Peter Jennings,D 	etc.)  Sad fact was he thought he could compete with Bill O'Reilly.= 	You see, the message isn't selling, the content is weak and @C 	ineffectual.  Did anyone really think Donahue would last?  PerhapsCD 	like "a website that only agrees with your prejudices" there aren't# 	enough folks that agree with Phil?4  = 	Now the question to you.  Of the major networks, how many of=B 	their hosts are self-proclaimed conservatives?  I'll make a deal.? 	For every conservative you can trot out on the major networks,l= 	(newsdesk, hosts ... not just actors.  That wouldn't be faira$ 	at all.)  I'll trot out 5 liberals.     > To reclip: > J >>> become extremely easy for that one side to manipulate enough of the USK >>> population that polls will show support for a rogue government's plans.h > I > Yup, at least for a while.  The trick is "manipulate _enough_ of the USn > population". >   ? 	Yep.  Us po' insular Merikuns are sooooooo easy to manipulate. = 	More so than any other country.  Funny how we are accidentlyn6 	so successful.  Success must equate with gullability.  @ 	"I have some land in Florida and a bridge in Brooklyn for sale, 	which would you prefer?"-   				Rob    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 05:34:01 GMTeL From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr"): Subject: Re: OT Re: National Moratorium to Appease Tyrants6 Message-ID: <00A1CAD5.3AC64DD5@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  a In article <gnhjgYzbPCcS@eisner.encompasserve.org>, young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) writes:n >In article <00A1CA9F.2517EE98@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr") writes:t >> In article <7P3j49gkLpKu@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:e >>>In article <3E6A9154.226A4A44@vl.videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> writes:i >>>> Don Sykes wrote:oK >>>>> But, I think this discussion is getting way off the mark. I don't see @ >>>>> how this supports the position of the myopic left on Iraq. >>>> sQ >>>> Actually it doesn't. The insular nature of Americans means that because they'L >>>> only ever hear one side of the story, especially when any opposition isM >>>> silenced because any dissention would be labeled as "non-patriotic".  itrK >>>> become extremely easy for that one side to manipulate enough of the USeL >>>> population that polls will show support for a rogue government's plans. >>>rH >>>   If that were true, I don't think we'd have heard so much about theG >>>   "damn liberal press" when the elder Bush was in office, nor would G >>>   there be so much debate and demonstrations in the US now over ther >>>   impending war. >>  N >> We're hearing a whole lot about the liberal press now, most of it extremelyO >> bogus. Check out Bernard Goldberg's _Bias_, Ann Coulter's _Slander_, and, as8= >> a useful corrective, Eric Alterman's _What Liberal Media?_  >> sP >> There really are people who think Fox News actually _is_ "Fair and Balanced",N >> people who get much of their news from talk radio (where the fact-checking P >> standard is somewhat lower than at, say, _The New Yorker_), and who read onlyP >> the websites that agree with their prejudices.  My girlfriend's mother is oneC >> of them.  It's very, very easy for the RNC to spin those people.  >> l > A >	Goldberg is a self-proclaimed liberal which makes his tome that0A >	much sweeter.  Sort of like when BAH "must have voted for Bush"e1 >	because she is in favor of action against Iraq:D >2I >http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=b4iaru%24313%245%40bob.news.rcn.net  >m >>You must have voted for Bush.8 >e' >You are an asshole.  The answer is no.  >a  L Goldberg complains about having been discriminated against at CBS because ofL his conservative opinions.  I don't know how that jibes with your claim thatC he claims he's a liberal.  His tome may be sweet to you, but it's atL poorly-researched pile of crap to me.  (His cases don't actually support hisK argument.)  However, it looks far better than Ann Coulter's book, where heroJ footnotes go to sources that don't say what she says they say, and largelyK reveal that she doesn't know how to use Nexis effectively, or doesn't care. L I have been unable to form an opinion, reading her columns, on whether she'sO actually delusional or just thinks that it doesn't matter whether she tells theo9 truth or not, so long as she's bashing the evil liberals.h  M Why are you responding to a post in which I mention that the sentiment on theaN war on Iraq doesn't divide cleanly on liberal/conservative lines by telling me3 that BAH supports the war and didn't vote for Bush.g         >--- > = >	To proclaim Fox News "fair and balanced" could be defended.b  L If you never, ever, watch the channel, or if you never, ever, watch anything else.b    H >	Half their hosts proclaim themselves liberal, the others conservative.; >	And yes, there is probably more of a conservative bent ina >	their presentation.  w  K What an admission!  This is an understatement approximately on the scale oft  calling WWII "a spot of bother."    6 >        But it sells.  If a more liberal bent worked,H >	Phil Donahue wouldn't have recently been canceled.  After all, he had D >	some top rated liberals on that program and yet he still sunk (I'mE >	thinking of guests I flicked past.  Matt and Katie, Peter Jennings,cE >	etc.)  Sad fact was he thought he could compete with Bill O'Reilly.e> >	You see, the message isn't selling, the content is weak and D >	ineffectual.  Did anyone really think Donahue would last?  PerhapsE >	like "a website that only agrees with your prejudices" there aren'ti$ >	enough folks that agree with Phil?  M First off, what does "But it sells" have to do with whether it's in fact fair > and balanced?  (Other than indicating that it probably isn't.)  N The deal with Fox is that they figured out they could do something they call aK news channel a lot cheaper than CNN if they filled most of their hours withdJ entertaining opinion shows rather than spending their resources on putting0 reporters in the field to collect actual news.    J Second off, Donahue got cancelled despite being the highest-rated show on J MSNBC.  His show was the thing that worked best on that network, which wasM admittedly a network in trouble.  (The actual cable news viewership is prettyiL small compared to any broadcast network, and that pie doesn't divide up veryM well in three ways.  CNBC and MSNBC both used to have a lot of finance shows,bI which worked, but lost quite a lot of viewership after the market crash.)2L Fox and CNN are top two in viewership.  Fox entertains most effectively; CNNL reports the news best.   MSNBC management, which is completely floundering, N apparently decided that they were going to try to compete on Fox's turf, whichL is why they cancelled Donahue at the same time they hired Michael Savage andI Jesse Ventura.  I think they're still going to be number three and in big2 trouble a year from now.  N But can you tell whether the problem is that Donahue was liberal, that DonahueL was dull, or that nobody watches MSNBC anyway?  I can't.  Bill Maher has hisL own idiosyncratic mix of views, many of which are breathtakingly leftist; heA gets viewership because he's _not dull_, and because he's on HBO.'   >n> >	Now the question to you.  Of the major networks, how many ofC >	their hosts are self-proclaimed conservatives?  I'll make a deal. @ >	For every conservative you can trot out on the major networks,> >	(newsdesk, hosts ... not just actors.  That wouldn't be fair% >	at all.)  I'll trot out 5 liberals.h  N First off, most of the RNC spin comes out through the pundits, not through theO news anchors (which I assume is who you're talking about when you say "hosts.")eL The anchor's/reporter's personal opinions are considerably less relevant, if1 they're doing their jobs, than you seem to think.n  K (And, in fact, you're vaguely contradicting yourself when you suggest that eL leaning conservative is what sells and then that all the major networks mustH lean left because the telejournalists whose opinions we know are largelyK 'liberal' themselves.  And yet NBC News is making money, CBS News is makingn money.  What's up with that?)e  J Second, when you look at newspapers, you often find that the reporters andN editorial staff lean a lot further left than the _paper_ does; what influencesN it is what the owner/publisher's opinions and policies are.   (Some publishersN have "hands off the editorial page" policies; some sure don't.)  Most networksJ try to appear fair and balanced.  Fox makes, as far as I can tell, no such% attempt other than to make the claim.t    
 >> To reclip:  >> vK >>>> become extremely easy for that one side to manipulate enough of the USsL >>>> population that polls will show support for a rogue government's plans. >> .J >> Yup, at least for a while.  The trick is "manipulate _enough_ of the US >> population".w >>   >t@ >	Yep.  Us po' insular Merikuns are sooooooo easy to manipulate.> >	More so than any other country.  Funny how we are accidently7 >	so successful.  Success must equate with gullability.s >lA >	"I have some land in Florida and a bridge in Brooklyn for sale,  >	which would you prefer?"  K Dude, a lot of Merikuns are against the war with Iraq.  You evidently thinkoF they're wrong.  How did they get that incorrect opinion?  Did somebodyI manipulate them? Did somebody lie to them?  Are they gullible?  No?  What 	 happened?n   -- Alani  O ===============================================================================l0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056eM  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025lO ===============================================================================u   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 22:57:52 -0400l0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> Subject: OT: About snow.../ Message-ID: <3E6D5088.6F61494F@vl.videotron.ca>s  K Some time ago, Sue asked how everyone was doing, with regards the the small.* snowfalls that covered the north east USA.  * http://northernpen.hypermart.net/storm.htm  H will give you a good idea of what a REAL canadian winter is like (ok, so# newfoundland gets a LOT of snow :-)a   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Mar 2003 13:32:53 -0800# From: wmarsh@etrade.com (Wil Marsh)e< Subject: Re: SCSI cluster disk thrashing between connections< Message-ID: <36f52bd6.0303101332.17375f6@posting.google.com>  R brandon@dalsemi.com wrote in message news:<03030314503439@dscis6-0.dalsemi.com>...# > >> What is/check the value of ???g > >> QDSKINTERVALnM > > QDSKINTERVAL is 10 on all nodes.  But I don't think it has anything to doIP > > with anything because I have never set up a quorum disk.  (Though I might if  > > I solve this problem first.) >  > OK - s >  > Some thoughts here - > S > Why not create a quorum disk on a private SCSI path?   The QDSKINTERVAL set to 2.h > f > Why not create two or more system disks rather than one common for all nodes?  Especially with SCSI. > \ > There is a note about this from HP, specifically dealing with SCSI bus resets during boot. >  > K > > There's a "set device /noenable/path=" command, but that sounds like it L > > would disable the alternate path completely.  I could have done the sameN > > thing in hardware by only connecting the SCSI bus to one of the two hosts, > > but I want failover. >  > I was thinking about the Set/Force - however the MACRO was for VAX and I am not sure if it will work on Alpha much less SCSI.r >  > ) > What is your VMS cluster interface, NI?? > 2 > Look up pertinenet information about this on WIS > 4 > Alpha Shared SCSI Cluster Configuration Guidelines >  > John Brandon > VMS Systems Administrators > Dallas Semiconductor > john.brandon@dalsemi.com > 972.371.4172 wk  > 972.371.4003 fxl    8 We have found that setting mscp_buffers=5000 is ample...   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 15:36:57 -0600p From: brandon@dalsemi.comn< Subject: Re: SCSI cluster disk thrashing between connections1 Message-ID: <03031015365777@dscis6-0.dalsemi.com>   ' >>> > >> What is/check the value of ???o >>> > >> QDSKINTERVALeQ >>> > > QDSKINTERVAL is 10 on all nodes.  But I don't think it has anything to dohQ >>> > > with anything because I have never set up a quorum disk.  (Though I mighte   BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAHt" AND STILL SOME MORE BLAH BLAH BLAH  < >>> We have found that setting mscp_buffers=5000 is ample...  L I will keep that in mind - I am building an Alpha Cluster using lots of SCSIJ disk drives.  Since it is a TEST environment it really will not matter too much.   J The system drives are internal and individual whereas the cluster drive is external and shared.   Thanks for the post...   John Brandon VMS Systems Administratori Dallas Semiconductor john.brandon@dalsemi.com 972.371.4172 wke 972.371.4003 fxa   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Mar 2003 15:13:37 -08001 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris)o< Subject: Re: SCSI cluster disk thrashing between connections= Message-ID: <cf15391e.0303101513.74f7366a@posting.google.com>   b lewis@PROBE.mitre.org (Keith A. Lewis) wrote in message news:<b40dna$918$1@newslocal.mitre.org>...R > Parameter Name           Current    Default     Min.      Max.     Unit  DynamicR > --------------           -------    -------    -------   -------   ----  -------N > MSCP_BUFFER                  1024       1024       256         -1 Coded-valuN > MSCP_CREDITS                    8          8         2        128 Coded-valu  F As pointed out in a previous reply, $MONITOR MSCP is good for spottingF shortages of MSCP_BUFFER space.  $SHOW DEVICE/SERVED/RESOURCE may also= be helpful.  Handling of this parameter is made easier in any B moderately-recent version of VMS because MSCP_BUFFER is one of theD parameters handled by FEEDBACK in AUTOGEN.  But this also means that9 if you set a value, you might want to set it as a minimumnF (MIN_MSCP_BUFFER=nnn in MODPARAMS.DAT) instead of as a fixed value, so5 AUTOGEN can raise it further if it wants to sometime.e  @ MSCP_CREDITS is not adjusted by AUTOGEN with FEEDBACK.  Do $SHOWB CLUSTER/CONTINUOUS with ADD CONNECTIONS,REM_PROC_NAME,CR_WAITS_ onF client nodes and watch for SCS credit waits on the remote process nameC (SYSAP) MSCP$DISK in a connection with a VMS MSCP-serving node, and A raise MSCP_CREDITS on the MSCP-serving node if you observe creditu waits on a client node.o   ------------------------------   Date: 10 Mar 2003 23:41:07 GMT2 From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@shell1.aracnet.com>Y Subject: Re: SIMH 2.10-4 released: major bug fixes to PDP-8, PDP-11, VAX, PDP-15, Interdae, Message-ID: <b4j7qj01vdu@enews4.newsguy.com>  9 In alt.sys.pdp10 John Sauter <J_Sauter@empire.net> wrote:t" > IBM hardware.  What is Hercules?  D Hercules is an IBM System/370, ESA/390, and z/Architecture Emulator.  http://www.conmicro.cx/hercules/   		Zane   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:19:15 -0500e' From: John Sauter <J_Sauter@Empire.Net>wY Subject: Re: SIMH 2.10-4 released: major bug fixes to PDP-8, PDP-11, VAX, PDP-15, Interdat8 Message-ID: <ejoq6vs88tfc1ips2mlnriq8mat81oeqvc@4ax.com>   Mark Hittinger wrote:   D We had some DN87 boxes on our KL and they did have ANF-10 support on DMC-11 devices but not DECnet.  D There are also several other configurations of the -11 stuff that weB can build for the simulators.  Everything has been recovered so weB could build the other configurations (except perhaps WIZARD!). :-)  ) In chk11.p11 there are some symbols like:a  3         ND      FT.D75,0        ; NO DC75 IN SYSTEM 3         ND      FT.D80,0        ; NO DN80 IN SYSTEM 3         ND      FT.D81,0        ; NO DN81 IN SYSTEMa3         ND      FT.D82,0        ; NO DN82 IN SYSTEMo3         ND      FT.D85,0        ; NO DN85 IN SYSTEM 3         ND      FT.D87,0        ; NO DN87 IN SYSTEMt4         ND      FT.87S,0        ; NO DN87S IN SYSTEM3         ND      FT.D20,0        ; NO DN20 IN SYSTEMi3         ND      FT.D22,0        ; NO DN22 IN SYSTEMe4         ND      FT.200,0        ; NO DN200 IN SYSTEM   John Sauter responded:  6 I think the DN20 was the DECnet front end, but I could4 be misremembering this also.  Was the DN200 a remote6 PDP-11-based concentrator, with printer and terminals?  ; I am disappointed that the DN60 is not on the list.  It wasr9 a separate product, but I tried to arrange to include the , PDP-11 assembly language sources on the kit.%     John Sauter (J_Sauter@Empire.Net)e   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:08:31 +0100 (MET)i9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>i" Subject: Re: TCPIP: bug or feature; Message-ID: <01KTDE432QTS9H1MPS@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>t  K > > then the connection doesn't work since the return traffic goes through jH > > the default gateway, EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT AN OUTGOING CONNECTION I L > > ORIGINATED, BUT RATHER RETURN TRAFFIC FOR AN INCOMING CONNECTION.  This  > 9 > This is the right behaviour of a standard TCP/IP stack.s > H > No matther where the connection cames from, when the stack has to sendE > out a packet it looks in the routing table. If there is no specific E > entry for the destination IP or its subnet, then it sends it to the  > default gateway.  G If true, then this would mean that the only point of a pseudointerface tH is to allow connections from some networks which however cannot connect H via the interface on which the default gateway is.  This could have its B uses in that a machine could thus be reachable via a public and a  private IP address.e  F > To do asymmetric routing within the same subnet you could try with aF > router, or a ROUTED daemon, and check if they can keep traffic path.  F I don't have dynamic routing switched on at the moment (I think).  Do . you really think this would make a difference?  < > BTW, what the hell of a URL http://h71000.www7.hp.com/ is?  E It is the page to which http://www.openvms.compaq.com/ is redirected.r  G It's like a secret masonic handshake; only those in the know know what dI h71000.www7 is.  Now, had they called it http://www.openvms.compaq.com/, hF that would have made sense and actually made it possible for folks to H guess where to find VMS information.  Instead, one has to know where to 3 look or hangle one's way through the main HP pages..   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 14:33:01 -0500t# From: sol gongola <sol@adldata.com>u" Subject: Re: TCPIP: bug or feature+ Message-ID: <3E6CE86D.E39CE4FA@adldata.com>    Phillip Helbig wrote:  > I > > TCPIP does not remember the route an incoming message took to arrive.,M > > Therefore it does not know a specific route to take to send back a reply.b > D > That makes sense in that it would explain why incoming traffic andD > outgoing return traffic are on different interfaces if it comes in' > through a non-default interface, but:h > . >    o  this isn't always the case (see below) > I >    o  what is the point in having more than one interface in this case?t  E This is what a router does. You specify what network destinations go c through what gateways.   > E > > Outgoing messages (new or replies) go through the default gatewayiE > > unless another route is specified for that tcpip address/network.a >  > OK.i > F > > How do you set an incoming route? I though route settings were forG > > outgoing messages. Incoming messages arrive at an interface and aree > > processed. > B > Either you are asking a rhetorical question, or you are seeing a  > different behaviour than I am. >  > Let me expand a bit. > C > The system in question is a hobbyist system at home.  I am in theyF > process of moving from one public, static IP address per machine viaB > ISDN to private, static addresses on the LAN and via NAT/PAT one/ > publicly visible, dynamic IP address via DSL.l > J > For a transitionary time, I want to have BOTH working.  (It is necessaryF > to have a transitionary time with both, rather than switching all atF > once; I just discovered that my Linksys router is blocking X-windowsF > connections, though it shouldn't be.  If anyone has a Linksys router? > which works with port forwarding for X-windows, let me know.)  > J > I thus created a pseudointerface on the VMS machine.  Since my public IPD > addresses are x.y.z.200---x.y.z.208, I used the same range for theH > 192.168.1.xxx pseudointerface, i.e. a /29 subnet.  (I don't know if itJ > is a bug or feature that SET INTERFACE won't accept another network mask$ > than what the real interface has.) > 4 > There is only one network card in the VMS machine. > C > On the x.y.z network I have the ISDN router, which is the defaultpI > gateway.  On the 192.168.1 network, I have a DSL router.  Obviously, if I > I want to connect to somewhere else via the DSL router, I have to set a,J > specific route.  The connection then works OK.  However, if I connect toG > the VMS machine from outside via the DSL router on the other network,mH > then the connection doesn't work since the return traffic goes throughE > the default gateway, EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT AN OUTGOING CONNECTION IiI > ORIGINATED, BUT RATHER RETURN TRAFFIC FOR AN INCOMING CONNECTION.  ThisnJ > is where I think the bug is.  Now, if I have a specific route set up forF > the address from where the incoming connection comes, return trafficG > will go through that route, so in this case the connection will work.tG > That is what I meant by "setting a route for an incoming connection". D > However, if I do this, then incoming connections via ISDN from theJ > remote address for which there is an explicit route will no longer work,H > since the return traffic will then follow the explicit route, which is > not via the ISDN router. > G > Thus, "Incoming messages arrive at an interface and are processed" isnC > not what I see, if "processed" means that a working connection isr > established.  E If the acknowledgement for the incoming connection goes out the wronguB way, it may not get there and you won't have a working connection.   > G > (ON THE LAN, I have no problem with the pseudointerface.  Thus, I canoH > telnet back and forth between two VMS machines on the LAN (in the caseE > of the other VMS machine, its REAL interface is 192.168.1.x).  ThistJ > makes sense since there is a route to the 192.168.1.200 network with the! > machine itself as the gateway.)a > D > It seems to me that if a connection comes in via interface A, thenC > return traffic should also be via that interface, and NOT via the H > default gateway.  If it is via another interface, then connections areI > established (i.e. TCPIP SHOW DEVICE will see them, and my phone companyoJ > will charge the ISDN costs to me), but they are not usable since the two, > data streams are via different interfaces. > E > Of course, if I set the default gateway to the DSL router, then all G > works fine, as expected.  So there is no problem with the DSL router,t > NAT/PAT etc per se.t  G I had a similar problem. I was told it is called a multi-homed network.h  F Your machine has two different IP addresses. The ISDN related address F should not go through the dsl side since the dsl provider may not let G anything go through accept your assigned dsl address. The fact that youdG are using nat on the DSL side complicates things since your nat router tG may not know what to do with the non-natted address (the isdn address).l  H If a machine tries to use the 192 address to get out from the isdn side,J it will (should) be blocked by the isdn provider since the private (192..)$ addres is not legal on the internet.  G I did not solve it except by assigning different network addresses and mH routings (default) gateways to each machine based on it network address.  	 goos luck  sola   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 15:34:43 -0400s0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca>" Subject: Re: TCPIP: bug or feature/ Message-ID: <3E6CE8C5.CB2DA19E@vl.videotron.ca>    sol gongola wrote:G > TCPIP does not remember the route an incoming message took to arrive. K > Therefore it does not know a specific route to take to send back a reply.h  M Large ISPs use this "feature" extensively to distribute their traffic. When aiM sprint customer sents a http request to an AT&T hosted server, sprint choosestI the route it wants to reach AT&T. But when the server responds, AT&T willtK choose the route IT wants. The route Sprint chose may be very ligtly loaded.X for outbound traffic (small http requests) but very loaded for inbound (http responses).  M So AT&T knows this from experience and has tuned its network to send its longo> responses back to sprint via another link that is less loaded.  I http://nitrous.digex.net has some BGP tools (Border Gateway Protocol). ItlZ shows how ISPs tune their router to distribute traffic depending on its final destination.  L What you could do is to find out what block of IPs your ISP #2 has. You thenN build a route for all those IPs via the interface going to ISP #2's router. AtO least customers of your #2 ISP would be able to talk to you via that interface.   N NAT isn't a perfect solution. It is a stop-gap measure to circumvent the sillyH restrictions imposed by ISPs to differenciate from residential customersL (competitive) and business customers (milked with very high internet costs).   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 15:57:06 -0400c0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca>" Subject: Re: TCPIP: bug or feature/ Message-ID: <3E6CEE03.AD227A1B@vl.videotron.ca>n   Cthulhu wrote:I > Oh, well, you could try to NAT all packets goings out on one interface, - > so they seems to came from the other one...t  D The problem with NAT is that it keeps a table of active connections.    E lets say you have 2 distinct external, IP adresses  64.128.128.34 andt< 24.128.12.35 assigned respectively to router 1 and router 2.  C John doe at 149.38.34.56 connects from port 3770 to 24.128.12.35:80h  N Ruter 2 gets the requests, and forwards it to host 10.0.0.1:80 on your lan andN keeps this information on the call in a table of active commections. Normally,N all packets sent back in response go through that router who then reconstructsL the packets with the external IP address and port numbers to reach John Doe.  N But of the vax sends the response to router1, route1 is totally unaware of theL existing connection and doesn't know what to do with it. And even if router1K were to take the packet and send it out (such as UDP) it woudl be signed by M 64.128.128.34  when it reaches John Doe who would then cry foul because he iscD getting data back from an IP address to which he did not connect to.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 16:20:39 -0400 0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca>" Subject: Re: TCPIP: bug or feature/ Message-ID: <3E6CF386.D813612E@vl.videotron.ca>a   Phillip Helbig wrote: H > If true, then this would mean that the only point of a pseudointerfaceI > is to allow connections from some networks which however cannot connectr5 > via the interface on which the default gateway is.    J Or to have multiple subnets on your LAN. Your vax can then talk to all the machines on the LAN.   My use of pseudo interface:r   10.0.0.10 is my lan web serverD 10.0.0.15 is the "external" web server, connect requests are treated differently by the web server.  P Both point to the same vax. But OSU is configured to listen on both IP adresses.  K In a normal comemrcial environment, it is perfectly natural to have inbounduK requests come in via router1 and come out via router2, but with the same IP  address for your host.  L NAT makes things difficult because the IP address gets changed by the router? so you don't appear to be the same host from the internet side.a   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:53:04 +0000 (UTC) ) From: Dan Foster <dsf@globalcrossing.net> " Subject: Re: TCPIP: bug or feature5 Message-ID: <slrnb6q9ar.go5.dsf@gaia.tf.roc.gblx.net>o  a In article <3E6CEE03.AD227A1B@vl.videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> wrote:  > Cthulhu wrote:J >> Oh, well, you could try to NAT all packets goings out on one interface,. >> so they seems to came from the other one... >eF > The problem with NAT is that it keeps a table of active connections.  H The other problem(s) with NAT is that it also breaks certain IPSec modesF if that's important to you, and it also breaks certain poorly designedE protocols such as H.323 unless you deploy a H.323 proxy server at thetE edge of your network. And in a large NAT'd network, the table size ishJ finite, implying an upper boundary on connections that can pass through itM but that usually isn't a problem for mere mortals with small home networks ;)aD (I do know an enterprise network architect that bumped into this...)  @ I've made use of NAT at home before - it isn't bad, although its3 limitations makes things get interesting sometimes.a   -Dan   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 10:59:42 -0800v$ From: Shane Smith <ssmith@icius.com>9 Subject: RE: UK Hobbyist seeks personality (for BA356-JC)d0 Message-ID: <01C2E6F4.349F50A0@sulfer.icius.com>  E I bet it cost a fortune. If you'd just come over to my place, I couldo@ have done it for a fraction of the cost using my lump hammer....   Shane'   -----Original Message-----1 From: David Turner [mailto:dbturner@islandco.com]s% Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 10:53 AMe To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comi9 Subject: Re: UK Hobbyist seeks personality (for BA356-JC)     # The Codeine made it "tolerable" :0)    DT< "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message! news:3E6A92EA.EA40CFD2@fsi.net...M > David Turner wrote:r
 > > [snip]; > > (I was in hospital actually having my wrist rebroken !)<
 > > [snip] >9
 > *CRINGE* >N > -- > David J. DachteraC > dba DJE Systemsn > http://www.djesys.com/ >g* > Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page:! > http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/n   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Mar 2003 14:18:47 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)e9 Subject: RE: UK Hobbyist seeks personality (for BA356-JC)>3 Message-ID: <VSqhphxEI2JV@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  W In article <01C2E6F4.349F50A0@sulfer.icius.com>, Shane Smith <ssmith@icius.com> writes: G > I bet it cost a fortune. If you'd just come over to my place, I couldsB > have done it for a fraction of the cost using my lump hammer....  K But your fraction of the cost might not have been covered by his insurance.p   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 21:48:29 +0000 (UTC)o8 From: hawk@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) Subject: Re: unixs- Message-ID: <b4j17d$9ic$1@f04n12.cac.psu.edu>h  G In article <b4ibsd$313$8@bob.news.rcn.net>,  <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:e. >In article <b4iam6$nqo$3@f04n12.cac.psu.edu>,= >   hawk@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) wrote:   > >>>Sigh!  I understand this.  None of these people will sign a> >>>contract with an interested user site to guarantee support.  B >>Just off the cuff, IBM, Oracle, and Red Hat sell such contracts.  . >But I didn't think their code is open source.  E Which code?  IBM has gone for open source in a *big* way, and I'm note? sure that Red Hat even *has* any code any more that isn't open.t   >Or are they trying & >to be in the software services biz?    H Oh, yes.  Definitely.  All three actively seek to sell support contracts for open source software.   = IBM even dumped their own web servers in favor of Apache, andp contributes massively.  < It makes economic sense--contributing to open source for theH "commodity" portions of what they sell is much less expensive than going	 it alone.n  H Anyway, those three large companies, and many others, will sell you 24/7+ support for all kinds of open source stuff.a  F I've got a paper under review on the economics involved at the moment; you can find it at9 http://slytherin.ds.psu.edu/hawk/research/Open_Source.pdfr   hawk -- lK Richard E. Hawkins, Asst. Prof. of Economics    /"\   ASCII ribbon campaign G dochawk@psu.edu  Smeal 178  (814) 375-4700      \ /   against HTML mailrD These opinions will not be those of              X    and postings. 6 Penn State until it pays my retainer.           / \      ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 02:18:27 +0000t- From: David Powell <ddotpowell@icuknet.co.uk>w Subject: Re: unixu8 Message-ID: <h1hq6v0bbtb3mrfcn73jk4s4p0p4479ib0@4ax.com>  . In article <b4i2t5$9u2$12@bob.news.rcn.net>,  4  jmfbahciv@aol.com  in alt.folklore.computers wrote:  = Oops, I've snipped too much here, but bandwidth costs money.    B >>>That's the only one I can think of that makes sense; especiallyH >>>with the RT-11 guys....unless they got a VMS-shoulder-chip infection.D >>>I think the only guys who were saner than the RT-11s were the IAS >>>guys. >>>a >>  (My words)(6 >>I've always found RT11 guys a pretty sane bunch. :-) >a= ><grin> ;-)  The IAS guys won points because I didn't have to>= >"prove" that, even though I sounded like a girl, I knew whato@ >I was doing.  Those IAS guys also had a knack for understanding@ >my question and answering it immediately without a very lengthy
 >explanation._ >u  A The IAS guys were good. They understood "Real Time" insofar as ita& could be applied to an "RSX like" O/S.   >>G >>DEC shipped sources with RT to allow resolution of hardware / monitore@ >>specific conditional assembly pseudo-ops, and for source levelG >>bug-fixes.  Why give away the commentary, when you can sell commented  >>sources separately?  - >-  >That smells like VMS-infection.  ; 'Twas done in those halcyon days before DEC was VAXinated.     >L, >> ..Just save a couple of DECtapes in every >>distribution kit,  >T: >OOooooohhhhhhh....RT-11 shipped on DECtapes.  Oho!  There >was a shortage of that media.  ! Which remains to this day. :-(   o   >e4 >> ...and make life easier for guys with entry-levelG >>systems to actually edit sources when needed.  It can be real fun andsH >>games to TECO a 250 block commented source on just a pair of 578 block >m >578 doesn't sound right.e >o  F Nevertheless it is. The 18 and 36 bit format was for 1102(8) blocks ofF 400(8) 18(10) bit words.  Throw away two bits per word (3 bit nybbles)B and you get 578(10) * 512(10) bytes for a 16bitter.  AlternativelyC 2702(8) blocks of 201(8)  12(10) bit words. Surely you remember thei$ label on a "certified" DECtape, :-)   F >>that's about as big as they came; I don't think that's an accident.  >> >>Just my 2d's worth.r >a" >I consider my hand slapped.  ;-)   E You misunderstand. I would never, ever, hit a woman. Well, not on thee bits that show.  :-(   > It never occurred to me that< >there was a maximum filesize limit to editing.  I bet RT-11 >didn't have buffering I/O.p  E KISS was the order of the day. Contiguous files. .ENTER , by default,nF allocated the larger of either the second largest empty space, or half? of the largest to a tentative file. Gets complicated because ofuC TECF00.TMP, and a bug that opened tentatives at halfway through the F largest empty.  With care, you can edit a file nearly half the size ofA the medium; get it wrong, then TECO goes into PANIC MODE, best toAD ^C^C^C^C out and start over; but if there's an investment of time in? the edit, open MACRO.SAV etc on SY:  with EI$, and delete them,t< closeout to SY:. Then tidy up.  You get what you pay for.      > = >So now we have three very good technical reasons without the>" >developers having to be bastards. >y  C I score it: Accountants 2, Techies 1. Sadly, the accountants always E win. I got out!  In my new existence, I find it "advantageous" to payy an accountant. :-(    Regards,   David P.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 01:50:49 GMTt, From: "Frank Sapienza" <sapienza@noesys.com>  Subject: VAX Shared SCSI anyone?? Message-ID: <Zhbba.101194$gf7.22162767@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>g  J Has anyone attempted to share SCSI devices between a VAX and Alpha system?C Running VMS, naturally.  Everything I've found so far says it's not ; supported, but that doesn't mean someone hasn't tried!  :-)a  K The thought was to use a DWZZA-AA (standalone) and connect the SE side to ayK VAX (4106) SCSI bus, then connect the FWD side to an Alpha differential busiH (KZPSA), with an HSZ40 in between.  The VAX and Alpha are clustered over DSSI (and LAN).e  L Would that behave correctly, and would the lock manager figure it out, or is it just asking for trouble?y     Thanks in advance.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 05:28:14 GMTo# From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)t$ Subject: Re: VAX Shared SCSI anyone?/ Message-ID: <Oteba.166$rf3.71@news.cpqcorp.net>h  n In article <Zhbba.101194$gf7.22162767@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>, "Frank Sapienza" <sapienza@noesys.com> writes:K :Has anyone attempted to share SCSI devices between a VAX and Alpha system?a ..M :Would that behave correctly, and would the lock manager figure it out, or ish :it just asking for trouble?  "   I vote for "asking for trouble".  H   We performed extensive engineering work around the addition of support'   for multi-host SCSI on OpenVMS Alpha.n  D   As I expect you know, this configuration -- VAX and Alpha systems B   on the same SCSI bus, sharing disk accesses -- is not supported.  A   As I also expect you know, "not supported" means "we don't havea6   to explain why", and reasons can and do vary widely.  D   If you feel inclined to try this, please make sure you have a good@   BACKUP/IMAGE of all of your disks before you proceed with this   particular experiment.    N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------J       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.comN  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 03:41:54 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)"P Subject: Re: VAXStation 4000-90 without graphics card will not load VMS licenses/ Message-ID: <6Wcba.163$I83.60@news.cpqcorp.net>i  i In article <4f886957.0303070634.3c205e92@posting.google.com>, gary.morin@emergis.com (Gary Morin) writes:oB :I have a VAXStation 4000-90 that I use without the display tube. B :Every time I boot the box it reports a console level error on theG :graphics board.  Since I was tired of geeting the errors I removed theeD :graphics card and when I rebooted all of the VMS licenses failed to< :load.  When I selected the "license requirements" option inD :vmslicense.com it came back with a list that showed that no license :group is valid.    A   The following command is faster than using VMSLICENSE for this:r  $     $ SHOW LICENSE/UNIT_REQUIREMENTS  5 : When I put the card back in everything loaded but Ie2 :still got the hardware boot error on the console. :oC :Is there any switch or jumper that will tell this box that it is ar6 :valid VAX system without the graphics card installed?  F   Other than inserting a graphics controller in the box, not as far asE   I know.  The VAXstation 4000 model 90 firmware assumes that the boxnD   is a workstation -- not a server -- and it configures itself, it's1   testing, and the system licensing accordingly.      N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------J       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.comN  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 13:57:25 -0800n" From: GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> Subject: Re: why buy new ?' Message-ID: <3E6D0A45.4B59D32@mist.com>r  
 Island wrote:k >  > yes... >  > www.hpaq.net  7 I'm curious... how much to have the hobbyist license CDs, installed on an Alpha personal workstation??  ; Also,  do you know if the SCSI Seagate 7200 RPM drives maket" a loud hum when they are running??   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 17:33:41 -0500a, From: "David Turner" <dbturner@islandco.com> Subject: Re: why buy new ?/ Message-ID: <v6q4suphe8l8d7@news.supernews.com>h  L Well, it would be installed for free... as long as you provide it, and buy a
 system... :0)      DT  / "GreyCloud" <cumulus@mist.com> wrote in messaget! news:3E6D0A45.4B59D32@mist.com...t > Island wrote:s > > 
 > > yes... > >h > > www.hpaq.net >a9 > I'm curious... how much to have the hobbyist license CDn. > installed on an Alpha personal workstation?? >h= > Also,  do you know if the SCSI Seagate 7200 RPM drives make $ > a loud hum when they are running??   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 17:34:34 -0500t, From: "David Turner" <dbturner@islandco.com> Subject: Re: why buy new ?/ Message-ID: <v6q4ujngim70ec@news.supernews.com>r   Seagate disks run fairly quiet.pJ We install the Compaq 10KRPM Fujitsu based disks in these now (9.1GB) dead quietn   DT/ "GreyCloud" <cumulus@mist.com> wrote in messagec! news:3E6D0A45.4B59D32@mist.com...e > Island wrote:o > >f
 > > yes... > >p > > www.hpaq.net >l9 > I'm curious... how much to have the hobbyist license CDp. > installed on an Alpha personal workstation?? >e= > Also,  do you know if the SCSI Seagate 7200 RPM drives makes$ > a loud hum when they are running??   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 17:04:28 -0800	" From: GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> Subject: Re: why buy new ?( Message-ID: <3E6D361C.12BA1000@mist.com>   David Turner wrote:	 > ! > Seagate disks run fairly quiet. L > We install the Compaq 10KRPM Fujitsu based disks in these now (9.1GB) dead > quieti >   < Rats!  I'll have to buy another one then.  This one is quite	 a hummer.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 17:05:27 -0800=" From: GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> Subject: Re: why buy new ?( Message-ID: <3E6D3657.3A5C635C@mist.com>   David Turner wrote:D > N > Well, it would be installed for free... as long as you provide it, and buy a > system... :0)  >   6 If I do get a CD with the Alpha version?  Sounds good. I currently run a 4000 vlc.=   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2003.137 ************************