1 INFO-VAX	Fri, 26 Sep 2003	Volume 2003 : Issue 534       Contents:+ Re: "HP breakup on the way" - Merrill Lynch + Re: "HP breakup on the way" - Merrill Lynch 0 Re: A flood of spams - another virus on the way?0 RE: A flood of spams - another virus on the way?@ Re: All systems are go, except the magical disappearing licenses: Alternatives to SETCIM on (VAX) VMS for PLC Communication? AMD64 sales figures  Re: AMD64 sales figures  Re: AMD64 sales figures  Re: AMD64 sales figures  Re: AMD64 sales figures  Re: AMD64 sales figures / DecServer 900TM Ethernet wiring characteristics  DHCP & Advanced Server question % Re: DSSI disks and allocation classes @ Re: Fee Based Email (From Re: Process's PreciseMail AntiSpam...)@ Re: Fee Based Email (From Re: Process's PreciseMail AntiSpam...)@ Re: Fee Based Email (From Re: Process's PreciseMail AntiSpam...)@ Re: Fee Based Email (From Re: Process's PreciseMail AntiSpam...) Graphics card for AS1000A  HP is top chip buyer Re: HP to drop hpux? Re: HP to drop hpux?7 Re: HP to Linux users: "Go ahead.  I've got your back." 7 Re: HP to Linux users: "Go ahead.  I've got your back." & Job - Senior VMS Systems Administrator* Re: Job - Senior VMS Systems Administrator( Re: Linux is the favourite hacker target( Re: Linux is the favourite hacker target( Re: Linux is the favourite hacker target( Re: Linux is the favourite hacker target/ Re: Memo:  Re: ppp on OpenVMS for remote access  Re: New round of cuts at HP  Re: New round of cuts at HP  Re: New round of cuts at HP  Re: Nice touch, AMD ! Re: non-interactive audio capture @ Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programD Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programD Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programD Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programD Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programD Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programD Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programD Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programD Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programD Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programD Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programD Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programD Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programD Re: Process's PreciseMail AntiSpam Gateway - any experience so far ?D Re: Process's PreciseMail AntiSpam Gateway - any experience so far ? Quorum DIsk Question Re: Quorum DIsk Question Re: Quorum DIsk Question Re: Quorum DIsk Question Re: Quorum DIsk Question6 Re: strangeness with temporary text files used by MAIL6 Re: strangeness with temporary text files used by MAIL8 Re: TCP/IP development (was Re: New round of cuts at HP)7 Re: Update on OpenVMS and Tru64 UNIX Patches in HP ITRC < Re: VMS Cracked! [was: Linux is the favourite hacker target]/ Re: [Bah!] Linux is the favourite hacker target  Re: [HELP] MAIL.MAI deleted ...   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:15:53 +0100 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> 4 Subject: Re: "HP breakup on the way" - Merrill Lynch0 Message-ID: <bl13kp$iml$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   jlsue wrote:G > On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:04:48 +0100, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy 0 > <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote: >  >  >>jlsue wrote: >>H >>>On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 14:20:30 +0100, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy1 >>><Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote:  >>>  >>>  >>>  >>>>jlsue wrote: >>>  >>> M >>>>>The real point is, of course, that your initial statement is wrong.  His P >>>>>counter-example proves that your argument lacks veracity of fact.  Thus, itN >>>>>would not be mis-placed criticism to ask that you back up your statement, >>>>>or withdraw it. >>>>>  >>>>? >>>>The real point is that my origional statement was correct.   >>>  >>> & >>>Please review your statement below: >>>  >>>  >>>  >>>>>>>Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bjni1b$ipu$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>... >>>>>>>  >>>>>>>  >>>>>>>  >>>>>>> @ >>>>>>>>Losing market share in all their markets as HP have done >>>>>>> N >>>Your statement indescriminately used "all there [HP's] markets", which fromC >>>a logic perspective, can be disproven with one single example.    >>>  >>7 >>Your boards letter to your shareholders refers to the 8 >>PC market (as a whole) the Storage market (as a whole) >>etc. >>6 >>http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/18jan02b.htm >>K >>"The merger will enable us to quickly address HP's current challenges in  H >>the personal computer business by reducing costs, improving operating A >>margins and leveraging Compaq's successful direct distribution  / >>capability." (Note no reference to Notebooks)  >  > I > You're kidding, right?  That's the extent of your logical argument?  It M > says "personal computer business", not market, btw.  It's entirely possible K > that a single business unit can provide products and services to multiple 
 > markets. >   ? You are kidding yourself, the letter refers to market share for A each of the units and then refers to the PC business specifically = is it your contention that the boards letter is tlaking about @ something entirely different when it refers to the PC business ?I > But that's just another deflection to a silly side issue, and you still I > don't realize that increases in the notebook market are worthy of note. 3 > You argue such mundane details sometimes, really.  >   > Ohh dear lest just look at the facts rather than your attempts to skirt round them shall we.   ? According to Keith Parris notebooks now take a larger % of HP's 8 PC business's revenues than they did last quarter or the quarter before.   < At the same time PC business margins have declined according to your SEC filings.  ; So how do you conclude that selling more notebooks relative 2 to fixed systems is going to help improve margins.  9 Try to keep your answer as short as possible it will save  you getting confused.   > Your board is measuring the sucess of the merger on the sucess= of the PC division as a whole which plays in the PC market as # a whole (are you following so far).   > Your attempts to subdivide this down into specific segments of; the PC market doesn't detract from the fact that as a whole : HP's PC division has failed to match up to the claims made for it by the board.   Keep wriggling you do it well    regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:22:30 GMT & From: jlsue <jefflsxxxz@sbcglobal.net>4 Subject: Re: "HP breakup on the way" - Merrill Lynch8 Message-ID: <17p8nv8lmhccd1ob71g9p2c8pspspglmm1@4ax.com>  E On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:15:53 +0100, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy . <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote:  
 >jlsue wrote: H >> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:04:48 +0100, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy1 >> <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote:  >>   >>    8 >>>Your boards letter to your shareholders refers to the9 >>>PC market (as a whole) the Storage market (as a whole)  >>>etc.  >>> 7 >>>http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/18jan02b.htm  >>> L >>>"The merger will enable us to quickly address HP's current challenges in I >>>the personal computer business by reducing costs, improving operating  B >>>margins and leveraging Compaq's successful direct distribution 0 >>>capability." (Note no reference to Notebooks) >>   >>  J >> You're kidding, right?  That's the extent of your logical argument?  ItN >> says "personal computer business", not market, btw.  It's entirely possibleL >> that a single business unit can provide products and services to multiple >> markets.  >>   > @ >You are kidding yourself, the letter refers to market share forB >each of the units and then refers to the PC business specifically> >is it your contention that the boards letter is tlaking aboutA >something entirely different when it refers to the PC business ?   D No, I'm saying that one idea does not necessarily exclude the other.  J >> But that's just another deflection to a silly side issue, and you stillJ >> don't realize that increases in the notebook market are worthy of note.4 >> You argue such mundane details sometimes, really. >>   > @ >According to Keith Parris notebooks now take a larger % of HP's9 >PC business's revenues than they did last quarter or the  >quarter before. > = >At the same time PC business margins have declined according  >to your SEC filings.  > < >So how do you conclude that selling more notebooks relative3 >to fixed systems is going to help improve margins.   J Well, certainly it's possible that the decline in PC (desktop) margins canG occur at a faster rate than the increase in PC (laptop) market share... 1 right?  It IS a multi-variable system, after all.    > : >Try to keep your answer as short as possible it will save >you getting confused.  K Tsk tsk.  You just can't help yourself, can you?  Do these little digs help K you maintain precious ego?  Was my answer short enough for you to save from  getting yourself confused?   > ? >Your board is measuring the sucess of the merger on the sucess > >of the PC division as a whole which plays in the PC market as$ >a whole (are you following so far).  K Wrong again.  The PC business is not THE measure of merger success.  It may K be ONE of the measures, but in HP we have many different areas/markets that F we service.  That means that we can measure the overall success of theJ merger with a more complex algorithm than simple addition/subtraction of a single variable.   > ? >Your attempts to subdivide this down into specific segments of < >the PC market doesn't detract from the fact that as a whole; >HP's PC division has failed to match up to the claims made  >for it by the board.   H Interesting how you mis-direct the discussion to a topic that nobody hasJ been arguing... and you still avoid the REAL topic of discussion:  namely,G your claim that HP is losing in ALL markets that we compete.  And, once E again, you fail to back up that claim with nothing more than a single + instance, but nowhere near the "all" claim.   F It's very telling that you ignore the NSS and Industry Standard ServerJ business & markets in your analysis (and completely avoid direct questions on the topic, in fact).    ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 10:29:46 -0700" From: goo_lu1@yahoo.com.hk (goolu)9 Subject: Re: A flood of spams - another virus on the way? = Message-ID: <70aec42e.0309260929.484e0888@posting.google.com>   Z Don Sykes <anonymous@pacbell.net> wrote in message news:<3F6F7D04.AE8599B0@pacbell.net>... > Dean Woodward wrote: > >  > > Don Sykes wrote: > > H > > > Even at .01 / email I'm sure it wouldn't be worth it. I can't evenK > > > figure how spam senders make any money as it is. Who responds to this  > > > stuff? > > L > > It's possible you're looking at it from the wrong angle. The money isn't; > > in selling things via spam, it's in selling spam tools.  > C > Sort of like MLM heh? You don't really make any money selling the < > product, but rather by selling someone ELSE on selling the > product....UGH!  > I > I think I'll just cash in on part of that $28M of Nigerian money I keep  > hearing about:):)   A My yahoo mail & lycos mail account continuously receives email of   below titles since few days ago:  ? 1. "Newest Microsoft Critical Patch", "Current Network Critical F Update", "Net Update", "Newest Network Pack", "Newest Security Patch",% etc - with virus embedded attachment. = 2. "Error Report", "undelivered message: returned to mailer", A "Returned Mail", etc telling me I have sent undelivered e-mail to . address which I haven't sent e-mail to at all.  F Both yahoo & lycos couldn't mark those mail as spam or junk. Now I canC only delete them as I see them but there are tens of them injecting @ into my mail box everyday. The filtering tools available are not? enough to block them all because the spams come in with so much / variations of sender, receiver, subject values.   C How long will I & other victims have to wait (FOREVER?) before such D bombardment ends. What are the ISPs & mail service provider doing to+ stop such flooding continue. Anyone knows ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:32:16 -0700 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> 9 Subject: RE: A flood of spams - another virus on the way? 9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIOEBFICAA.tom@kednos.com>    >-----Original Message----- * >From: goolu [mailto:goo_lu1@yahoo.com.hk]* >Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 10:30 AM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com: >Subject: Re: A flood of spams - another virus on the way? >  > 3 >Don Sykes <anonymous@pacbell.net> wrote in message ( >news:<3F6F7D04.AE8599B0@pacbell.net>... >> Dean Woodward wrote:  >> > >> > Don Sykes wrote:  >> >I >> > > Even at .01 / email I'm sure it wouldn't be worth it. I can't even L >> > > figure how spam senders make any money as it is. Who responds to this
 >> > > stuff?  >> >A >> > It's possible you're looking at it from the wrong angle. The  >money isn't< >> > in selling things via spam, it's in selling spam tools. >>D >> Sort of like MLM heh? You don't really make any money selling the= >> product, but rather by selling someone ELSE on selling the  >> product....UGH! >>J >> I think I'll just cash in on part of that $28M of Nigerian money I keep >> hearing about:):) > B >My yahoo mail & lycos mail account continuously receives email of! >below titles since few days ago:  > @ >1. "Newest Microsoft Critical Patch", "Current Network CriticalG >Update", "Net Update", "Newest Network Pack", "Newest Security Patch", & >etc - with virus embedded attachment.> >2. "Error Report", "undelivered message: returned to mailer",B >"Returned Mail", etc telling me I have sent undelivered e-mail to/ >address which I haven't sent e-mail to at all.  > G >Both yahoo & lycos couldn't mark those mail as spam or junk. Now I can D >only delete them as I see them but there are tens of them injectingA >into my mail box everyday. The filtering tools available are not @ >enough to block them all because the spams come in with so much0 >variations of sender, receiver, subject values. > D >How long will I & other victims have to wait (FOREVER?) before suchE >bombardment ends. What are the ISPs & mail service provider doing to , >stop such flooding continue. Anyone knows ?  F I was have the same problems with TCPIP$SMTP (5.1) and replced it withB MX5.3. Now I get none.  It has great anti-spam capabilities.  Well worth the money.     >  >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. ; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). A >Version: 6.0.518 / Virus Database: 316 - Release Date: 9/11/2003  >  --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.518 / Virus Database: 316 - Release Date: 9/11/2003   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 15:30:16 GMT   From: Rob Brown <brown@gmcl.com>I Subject: Re: All systems are go, except the magical disappearing licenses L Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0309260928130.24499-100000@localhost.localdomain>  ) On Fri, 26 Sep 2003, Jeffrey Green wrote:   I > workstation comes back up but says that the license limit was exceeded  G > (thus Decnet, Xwindows Motif and UCX fail to start, and I cannot log    C I suspect that the affected licenses are the ones marked NOSHARE.   A When you install the licenses you have to RESERVE each one for a   particular node.   I think.     --    / Rob Brown                        brown@gmcl.com A G. Michaels Consulting Ltd.      (866)438-2101 (voice) toll free! 6 Edmonton                         (780)438-9343 (voice)4                                  (780)437-3367 (FAX)1                                  http://gmcl.com/    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:13:49 +0100 * From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@[127.0.0.1]>C Subject: Alternatives to SETCIM on (VAX) VMS for PLC Communication? ' Message-ID: <bl13e8$2o8$1@lore.csc.com>   F A straw poll for information to alternative software running under VMSC which is capable of communicating with PLC's on factory floors etc.   G Manufacturing environment, SETCIM is/was the market leader on VMS years > ago, Aspen Technology are believed to be the SETCIM incumbent. --  ? Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciences  nclews at csc dot com    ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 04:42:10 -0700. From: mistdragon@zdnetonebox.com (mist dragon) Subject: AMD64 sales figures= Message-ID: <7500353b.0309260342.1a4b9d7a@posting.google.com>   ) http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11769   F Only 90.000 in Q3, but 448.000 in Q4. With this rate, it will take fewE months to exceed the sales of VMS user base. According AMD, they have C already sold 50% of the 4 years worth of Itaniums units after their  release in April.    M    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:25:57 -0400 $ From: "rob kas" <news@paychoice.com>  Subject: Re: AMD64 sales figures/ Message-ID: <vn8jq04plejc69@corp.supernews.com>   (     I guess history is repeating itself.  5     VMS/IA64   = High Quality ,High Price Low Volume.   @     Solaris/AMD =   Ok Quality ,Free on the low end,  Med Volume  +                                         Rob             ; "mist dragon" <mistdragon@zdnetonebox.com> wrote in message 7 news:7500353b.0309260342.1a4b9d7a@posting.google.com... + > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11769  > H > Only 90.000 in Q3, but 448.000 in Q4. With this rate, it will take fewG > months to exceed the sales of VMS user base. According AMD, they have E > already sold 50% of the 4 years worth of Itaniums units after their  > release in April.  >  > M    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:00:35 +0100 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>   Subject: Re: AMD64 sales figures0 Message-ID: <bl1kaj$ohu$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   rob kas wrote:* >     I guess history is repeating itself. > 7 >     VMS/IA64   = High Quality ,High Price Low Volume.  >   7 IA64 high quality, tell that to the customers who Intel 6 suggested should clock their 1000 GHz units at 800 MHz! to avoid data integrity problems.   % VMS may be high quality Itanium isn't    Regards  Andrew Harrison B >     Solaris/AMD =   Ok Quality ,Free on the low end,  Med Volume > - >                                         Rob  >  >  >  >  >  > = > "mist dragon" <mistdragon@zdnetonebox.com> wrote in message 9 > news:7500353b.0309260342.1a4b9d7a@posting.google.com...  > + >>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11769  >>H >>Only 90.000 in Q3, but 448.000 in Q4. With this rate, it will take fewG >>months to exceed the sales of VMS user base. According AMD, they have E >>already sold 50% of the 4 years worth of Itaniums units after their  >>release in April.  >> >>M  >  >  >    ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:27:38 -0400 (EDT) + From: Lord Isildur <isildur@andrew.cmu.edu>   Subject: Re: AMD64 sales figuresG Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58-035.0309261126450.2751@unix2.andrew.cmu.edu>   C if you rewrite 'VMS/IA64' to read 'VMS/Alpha' , sure. IA64 is crap.    isildur    > * >     I guess history is repeating itself. > 7 >     VMS/IA64   = High Quality ,High Price Low Volume.  > B >     Solaris/AMD =   Ok Quality ,Free on the low end,  Med Volume   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 08:44:18 -0700 1 From: Greg Cagle <news@*removethis*gregcagle.com>   Subject: Re: AMD64 sales figures/ Message-ID: <vn8nmsrslq0977@corp.supernews.com>   ( Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote:    9 > IA64 high quality, tell that to the customers who Intel 8 > suggested should clock their 1000 GHz units at 800 MHz# > to avoid data integrity problems.   $ 1) Do you have a reference for this?  9 2) If I were you I wouldn't be bringing up data integrity 
     problems.  --  
 Greg Cagle gregc at gregcagle dot com   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 17:10:55 +0100 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>   Subject: Re: AMD64 sales figures0 Message-ID: <bl1oef$q3d$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Greg Cagle wrote: * > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote: >  > : >> IA64 high quality, tell that to the customers who Intel9 >> suggested should clock their 1000 GHz units at 800 MHz $ >> to avoid data integrity problems. >  > & > 1) Do you have a reference for this? > ; > 2) If I were you I wouldn't be bringing up data integrity  >    problems.  # If I were you I wouldn't have asked   / http://www.computerweekly.com/Article121736.htm    Regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 02:50:48 -0700& From: happy236@yahoo.com (Matthew Tan)8 Subject: DecServer 900TM Ethernet wiring characteristics= Message-ID: <77a91b88.0309260150.66fdce11@posting.google.com>   G We are currently using this terminal server on a few of our dot matrix  C printers (Epson LQ2180). It has been running with no problems until < recently. A few of users complain that long reports (running= on Digital UNIX on the ERP BAAN application) were truncated - ? about 15 pages out of 92 were printed for one printer. Another  . printer printed only about 50 pages out of 92.  = As I recently just taken over this outfit and like to examine C the wiring, I am not sure of the wiring that links the DecServer to 7 the printer, is it crossed, straight or something else?   ' Any other reason why it stops printing?    Thanks in advance!   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:04:32 -0500 ( From: brandon@dalsemi.com (John Brandon)( Subject: DHCP & Advanced Server question1 Message-ID: <03092611043273@dscis6-0.dalsemi.com>   = I have an AlphaServer VMS V7.3-1 with Advanced Server loaded.   N I want to turn on DHCP and allow Win/x clients to fetch an IP address, connect7 to the Alpha for purposes of mapping a VMS (a/s) share.      Two issues:    1)M I have been having problems configuring DHCP and would like to know if anyone M has done so and could give me some examples or pointers.  I am a bit naive on 	 this one.    2)K In the mean time, I configured the Win/x client with IP address and domain, < etc., and and successfully logged into the VMS setup domain.N From the Win/x client I can FIND the computer and see the shares, however whenN I attempt to access one of the assigned shares I get the following error (from the Win/x client)   F "The local device type and the network recourse type are not the same"      Any help is greatly appreciated.     J*o*h*n B*r*a*n*d*o*n  VMS Systems Administrator * firstname.lastname.spam.me.not@dalsemi.com   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 07:47:14 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) . Subject: Re: DSSI disks and allocation classes3 Message-ID: <o5G7K$9fyvB7@eisner.encompasserve.org>   w In article <bd56fe$lp9$1@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:  > J > I'm not sure how I can change the ALLOCLASS for the DSSI disk.  Several D > folks have posted suggestions, but they don't work out of the box.  E    OK, I just did this Wednesday when we replaced a bad RF35.  I also F    changed the unit number and nodename, so the exact behaviour may be    slightly misremembered.      From the VAX console:      >>> show dssi  E       see a list of DSSI busses amd nodes, note the DSSI bus and node 1       numbers (not unit number), then use one of:          for bus 0:  !    >>> set host/dup/dssi X params            for other busses:        '    >>> set host/dup/dssi/bus=Y X params   8       where X is the node number and Y is the bus number      PARAMS> show /all  @       that will get you a list of all parameters, I'm not sure IA       remember the correct spelling of the alloclass parameter in        the DSSI disk   %    PARAMS> set alloclass <new number>       PARAMS> write  E       At this point, I think you will be prompted that the controller G       needs to be reset, accept this action and you will be returned to F       the chevron prompt.  If I'm wrong about the pompt (it might have4       been for the unit number), then just use exit.      >>>i     >>>show dssi   H       you should still see the disk as before, this display doesn't show       allocation class      >>>b   @       Now VMS should see the disk with the new allocation class.   ------------------------------   Date: 26 Sep 2003 08:01:16 GMT< From: gartmann@non.immunbio.mpg.de.sens (Christoph Gartmann)I Subject: Re: Fee Based Email (From Re: Process's PreciseMail AntiSpam...) 0 Message-ID: <bl0roc$47b$1@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>  U In article <3F738A49.CD1C72A0@pacbell.net>, Don Sykes <anonymous@pacbell.net> writes: G >At this point I'm fairly convinced that the implementation of fees via / >central gateways &/or routers is not workable.   K I don't agree here. From a senders or better a mail gateway manager's point M of view it is very simple to tell whether a mail went trough or not. A modern 7 SMTP server software should be able to log what it did.   J I agree that it is more difficult for network companies. On the other handG a small fee for each connection to port 25 entering their nets would be M sufficient. Some of those connection requests may fail. So it might be better J to count "HELO" statements. Then you reduce the problem to cases where theD connection drops during the communication, either because one of theJ partners goes down or the message is rejected. But then you have a similarN situation to the phone system. Calling a remote site doesn't cost, but as soonN as the recipient lifts the receiver you have to pay. There are cases where youL dialed the wrong number or the party you requested is not present and so on.L But does this really fall into account? I would say that more than 90% of myM phone calls reach their destination immediately and for the 10% useless calls M I don't bother because that doesn't fall into account. The same would be true H for the e-mail billing system, "normal" usage assumed. A spammer, on theF contrary, will suffer heaviliy because it will have to pay for all theL messages even if they were rejected during the communciation. That's exactly what we all would like.   N Again, I suggest that only large network carriers are required to pay the fee.O They will charge the companies that are connected to their networks, these will F charge other carriers and ISPs and so on. But at the same time billingK mechanisms and solutions will evolve. I bet that the most accuarte software J will be found at the level of end-users. I can imagine that large carriersO won't bill each other as long as they have similar traffice in both directions, J or ISPs offering accounts with a message limit of 500 per month and so on.M The amount of man power to implement such scenarios is for sure less than the 3 amount work work currently under way to fight spam.    F >So I have come up with a protocol that implements e-mail in 2 phases:H >a meta phase and a data phase. In phase 1, all the info about the emailO >is sent to the open, listening port of the receiver. Then the link is dropped, L >by both. Phase 2 must be initiated by the receiver, so they are in completeF >control of the transmission and final delivery and at that point they >can also charge a fee.   G This won't solve the problem for long. Modern spam uses familiar e-mail L addresses, familiar subjects, real destinations and so on. More and more youO will have to look at the real content of the mail in order to decide whether it N is spam. I vote for the fee: no new protocol required, easy to implement (mostH routers are already capable of counting or accounting traffic in variousM directions. Of course here are at the point of "cum grano salis" but we won't I need to bother. If Cisco produced a router that could disitnguish between O completely transmitted mails and other SMTP connects, I doub't that I would buy M it. Only if the price difference to a normal router is small enough, e.g. the  10% from above.    Regards,    Christoph Gartmann    --  E  Max-Planck-Institut fuer      Phone   : +49-761-5108-464   Fax: -452   ImmunbiologieI  Postfach 1169                 Internet: gartmann@immunbio dot mpg dot de   D-79011  Freiburg, Germany 9                http://www.immunbio.mpg.de/home/menue.html    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:15:13 -0400 % From: "John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com> I Subject: Re: Fee Based Email (From Re: Process's PreciseMail AntiSpam...) / Message-ID: <vn8pgikktp1qde@news.supernews.com>   I "Christoph Gartmann" <gartmann@non.immunbio.mpg.de.sens> wrote in message * news:bl0roc$47b$1@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de...7 > In article <3F738A49.CD1C72A0@pacbell.net>, Don Sykes  <anonymous@pacbell.net> writes: I > >At this point I'm fairly convinced that the implementation of fees via 1 > >central gateways &/or routers is not workable.  > G > I don't agree here. From a senders or better a mail gateway manager's  point H > of view it is very simple to tell whether a mail went trough or not. A modern9 > SMTP server software should be able to log what it did.  >   J Yes, my SMTP server can log what it did.  Are you suggesting that I shouldK send myself a bill?  Or do you know of a way that I can send the spammers a 4 bill based upon what my SMTP server was able to log?  L > I agree that it is more difficult for network companies. On the other handI > a small fee for each connection to port 25 entering their nets would be H > sufficient. Some of those connection requests may fail. So it might be betterL > to count "HELO" statements. Then you reduce the problem to cases where theF > connection drops during the communication, either because one of theL > partners goes down or the message is rejected. But then you have a similar  J How is a router supposed to know that a connection was accepted?  A routerK could see a packet that is asking to open a connection to port 25 but never + see the packet that accepts the connection.   K > situation to the phone system. Calling a remote site doesn't cost, but as  soonL > as the recipient lifts the receiver you have to pay. There are cases where you J > dialed the wrong number or the party you requested is not present and so on. K > But does this really fall into account? I would say that more than 90% of  myI > phone calls reach their destination immediately and for the 10% useless  calls J > I don't bother because that doesn't fall into account. The same would be trueJ > for the e-mail billing system, "normal" usage assumed. A spammer, on theH > contrary, will suffer heaviliy because it will have to pay for all theF > messages even if they were rejected during the communciation. That's exactly  > what we all would like.  > K > Again, I suggest that only large network carriers are required to pay the  fee.  = Large network carriers don't send e-mail, they route packets.   L > They will charge the companies that are connected to their networks, these willH > charge other carriers and ISPs and so on. But at the same time billingD > mechanisms and solutions will evolve. I bet that the most accuarte softwareL > will be found at the level of end-users. I can imagine that large carriersE > won't bill each other as long as they have similar traffice in both  directions, L > or ISPs offering accounts with a message limit of 500 per month and so on.K > The amount of man power to implement such scenarios is for sure less than  the 5 > amount work work currently under way to fight spam.  > H > >So I have come up with a protocol that implements e-mail in 2 phases:J > >a meta phase and a data phase. In phase 1, all the info about the emailH > >is sent to the open, listening port of the receiver. Then the link is dropped,E > >by both. Phase 2 must be initiated by the receiver, so they are in  completeH > >control of the transmission and final delivery and at that point they > >can also charge a fee.  > I > This won't solve the problem for long. Modern spam uses familiar e-mail J > addresses, familiar subjects, real destinations and so on. More and more you F > will have to look at the real content of the mail in order to decide
 whether itJ > is spam. I vote for the fee: no new protocol required, easy to implement (mostlJ > routers are already capable of counting or accounting traffic in variousI > directions. Of course here are at the point of "cum grano salis" but wee won'tlK > need to bother. If Cisco produced a router that could disitnguish between G > completely transmitted mails and other SMTP connects, I doub't that Iu	 would buyMK > it. Only if the price difference to a normal router is small enough, e.g.  thec > 10% from above.A  H The best part of a two phase e-mail protocol is that you can't spoof theL from domain.  If phase 1 tells me that I have mail from joe@hp.com, my phaseK two is going to connect to hp.com to retrieve the mail.  If the mail didn'tcK actually originate from HP, then their e-mail servers will tell me that thes message doesn't exist.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:38:52 -0400t% From: "John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com>oI Subject: Re: Fee Based Email (From Re: Process's PreciseMail AntiSpam...) / Message-ID: <vn8qsslp2m7i41@news.supernews.com>t  4 "Don Sykes" <anonymous@pacbell.net> wrote in message% news:3F738A49.CD1C72A0@pacbell.net...i* > Reposting to give this its own thread... >s >[snip]u >eH > At this point I'm fairly convinced that the implementation of fees viaI > central gateways &/or routers is not workable. So I have come up with anF > protocol that implements e-mail in 2 phases: a meta phase and a dataF > phase. In phase 1, all the info about the email is sent to the open,D > listening port of the receiver. Then the link is dropped, by both.D > Phase 2 must be initiated by the receiver, so they are in completeG > control of the transmission and final delivery and at that point theyc > can also charge a fee. >rG > A first draft is available at http://alphase.com/vms/FBEProtocol.htmln >gG > Serious suggestions are more than welcome, but please no nit-picking.u9 > This is a early, early draft. A suggestion, if you willv >i  J I like this idea A LOT!  After thinking about it, the fee based part isn'tI even the best part.  It's the transfer of control to the receiver.  PhasenE one should be expanded to include a list of attachments in the e-mailnK message and the format of the e-mail message.  Then the receiver can rejectpK (or ignore) messages because they contain MS Word documents or they're HTMLa instead of plain text.  G Two phases can also eliminate the ability to spoof sending domains.  If J phase one says "I have mail for you at blah.hp.com", I know it's not faked6 because my DNS server is going to look up blah.hp.com.  L The fee based part could also work but I think it needs a lot of effort.  IfI the sender is willing to pay a fee, they should offer it in phase 1.  TheeJ receiver can somehow verify that it's a valid offer.  Whatever happened toG Digital's Millicent idea?  We need a cheap, secure way to transfer very[ small amounts of money.t   John Vottero   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:49:30 -0700e' From: David Mathog <mathog@caltech.edu>-I Subject: Re: Fee Based Email (From Re: Process's PreciseMail AntiSpam...) 8 Message-ID: <20030926104930.5fb732aa.mathog@caltech.edu>    On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 00:34:31 GMT( Don Sykes <anonymous@pacbell.net> wrote:    H > At this point I'm fairly convinced that the implementation of fees via0 > central gateways &/or routers is not workable.   Me too.l  B I thought about this a lot a while back and came to the conclusionH that the payment should be checked/delivered at the final email machine.I The other alternative is to try to do it at the first machine, but that's>I a big mess in that it requires you to trust the first machine not to havetB lied about payment.  You'd need just a few really trustworthy mailE acceptors for that to function (see below.) Safer I think to have thetC last machine, your machine, verify that financially all is in order> before accepting the mail.  = This requires a complex handshake to work out though, and the.; participation of at least one third party machine to handle 8 the financial transaction, plus layers of encryption notC shown below, and it works best if email vaporizes if not delivered.1? There is no charge RELAY->RELAY, although probably there should G be a check that the transaction authorization isn't forged (not shown.)>   TARGET = final mail recipienta RELAY  = last mail relay BANK   = handles the chargel  2 1.   RELAY->TARGET = mail for "user" from "sender"P 2.   TARGET looks up what "user" charges to receive a mail message (you set your9        own postage rate!) and the associated BANK number,.F        generates a very large random number, here represented by 12345A      TARGET->RELAY = will accept for 20cents as transaction 12345n6        (alternatively a more complex acceptance offer::            will accept all but .doc and .exe at 1 cent/kb)U 3.   RELAY examines message, sees if it contains authorization for at least 20 cents.       NO:5        RELAY->TARGET = Insufficient funds, never mindeR        RELAY  ->BANK = cancel "sender" authorization XXXXX (part of email message)R        sender can determine that the email associated with authorization XXXXX wasM          not delivered because the authorization was canceled.  A status codeo=          indicates why:  no such user, not enough funds, etc.i	      YES:i%        RELAY->TARGET = offer acceptedrR 4.   TARGET ->BANK  = accept from RELAY transaction 12345 for 20 cents and confirmU 5.   BANK ->TARGET  = accepting from RELAY transaction 12345 for 20 cents and confirme< 6.   TARGET->RELAY  = pay to BANK 20 cents transaction 12345Y 7.   RELAY  ->BANK  = release 20 cents per "sender" authorization XXXXX transaction 12345t1 8.   BANK ->TARGET  = transaction 12345 completedt1 9.   BANK  ->RELAY  = transaction 12345 completedk# 10.  RELAY ->TARGET = delivers mails  L The beauty of this is that if somebody wants to send YOU mail you can finely$ control what they must pay to do so.  K The ugly part is that the BANK must handle tremendous transaction overheadse1 over a network, and if it fails there's no mail. h  K All sorts of critical details are not worked out.  Especially regarding thev/ security aspects of the financial transactions.r  H It's easier to imagine this all working if there were a couple of truly G monstrous mail exchange systems (not MS EXCHANGE!) which handled all ofoJ the financial stuff internally, and then just used regular SMTP to deliverP the checked mail. The SMTP systems would then be configured to accept mail like:   ACCEPT:e   local mail (you define) :   USPS monster server  (Hey, maybe they do have a future!)   ATT/Visa monster server-   SBC/Mastercard monster server    (short list follows) REJECT:u   all others  J So existing mail systems could still receive mail as they do now, but spam$ free.  And local mail is still free.  F Outgoing email would require a new financially based transport, routed# through one of the monster servers.s  J What's any of this this got to do with VMS?  See "monster servers", above.   Regards,   David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu> Manager, Sequence Analysis Facility, Biology Division, Caltech   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 10:03:24 -0700. From: Jack.Trachtman@vmmc.org (Jack Trachtman)" Subject: Graphics card for AS1000A< Message-ID: <69d784c4.0309260903.fb76f05@posting.google.com>   AS1000A, VMS V7.3-1'  2 I've got this old box in my office to use as a VMS1 workstation.  It has an S3 Trio64/Trio32 graphicsm card, which I want to upgrade.  . Can anyone recommend any graphics cards to use with this?  Thanks   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 10:17:06 -07001 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris)p Subject: HP is top chip buyer.= Message-ID: <cf15391e.0309260917.147428cf@posting.google.com>o  # From HP World News, Sept. 25, 2003:    HP top chip buyer   K HP was the top purchaser of semiconductors in 2002, buying chips worth moreeL than $10.7 billion.  HP was also the largest buyer of DRAM, microprocessors,L logic and application specific integrated circuits, according to a report by% market intelligence provider iSuppli.'  S http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story.asp?StoryId=Cp2_fqeiendqYneHLD2XLDhrqywnRyxjKsqo  E I'm sure HP gets some good discounts with all that purchasing volume.a   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 07:27:33 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)t Subject: Re: HP to drop hpux?k3 Message-ID: <2GLuhnsB2MT4@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  n In article <BwHKa.23098$O31.20015@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> writes: > D > When Linux capabilities and robustness is where Solaris is today,   B    Why would it want to move that far backward?  On the many LinuxC    and SOlaris systems we've had Linux has far outshined Solaris ini
    all areas.t   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 07:31:51 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)  Subject: Re: HP to drop hpux?s3 Message-ID: <39tCTTYtZ$NJ@eisner.encompasserve.org>.  V In article <3EFC9532.327D971D@istop.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> writes: > J > If, on the other hand, Linus spend months navigating through the DigitalP > management maze to find someone who would finally agree to lend a alphastationN > because Linus really wanted to make a 64 bit version of Linux, then TorvaldsN > deserves 200% of the credit since he would have ported it *despite* Digital.  <    I cannot imaging Linus Torvalds operating in that manner.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:56:33 +0100 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>t@ Subject: Re: HP to Linux users: "Go ahead.  I've got your back."0 Message-ID: <bl12gi$i7v$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Simon Clubley wrote: > In article <bkupkb$o2c$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: >  >>Simon Clubley wrote: >>P >>>As for Sun, the left hand does not seem to know what the right hand is doing.N >>>First they finance SCO in the form of license deals (read SCO's latest 10-QK >>>for details; you will find it on the SEC's website), and then they startn >>>promoting Linux...u >>>h >>9 >>My comiserations, not being able to tell the difference ; >>between a technology licensing agreement and a conspiracyo( >>theory must be very difficult for you. >> >  > O > Ignoring the personal comments, and concentrating on the issue, there seem to2L > be two main positions. The first one, mainly taken by Sun, is that the SCOK > licensing offered an opportunity for Sun to just sort out some technologyn, > licensing issues as Andrew mentions above. >   > Sun has an operating system called Solaris x86, SCO also has a> commercial OS that runs on x86. SCO has a whole load of driverA source/IP one big drawback to Solaris x86 has been its relatively  small device driver portfolio.  K > The other position is that the SCO license offered Sun a way to finance aoL > campaign against Linux without Sun having to get directly involved in that > campaign.t >    Ok.n  ? So who is the largest contributor to the OpenSource community ?n  < It isn't HP, it isn't despite all the noise IBM its Sun by a rather wide margin.   @ So Sun's corporate policy is to release our a huge raft of IP toA the OpenSource community that totally dwarfs any other commercial  contributor.  ? Java, OpenOffice, Grid, Chillsoft, CubicSpline, chunks of Gnome , IP for Apache, OpenSLL, NFS, LinCat etc etc.  @ The fact that no one is suing us for doing this is just an added bonus.  ? Take one donation Java without it most of the x86/linux servers"0 in investment banking would have nothing to run.  @ At the same time we have developed a desktop environment working> with SuSE which relies on Linux as the OS if its hosted on x86 which it mostly will be.  = And you think that despite all this we are actively trying toe kill OpenSource/Linux !!!!  ? Most people mistake HP and IBM's certainty about Linux support,a< its a certainty based on not having any other alternative to= offer. If you like and respect that fine but it is their onlyu+ option in the small 2-4 way systems market.t  = If you want a sub 7K dual CPU server that doesn't run windowsP= and this is a very price sensitive market then neither HP nor.< IBM can touch that space with anything other than Linux/x86.  A Both PA and Power based systems are too expensive, PA for example  2 CPU >20K.A  ) If you want a sub 30K 4 CPU server ditto.   = Sun is the only vendor that can offer a RISC/UNIX server that-> competes at these price points so we have an alternative don't@ mistake that for a relative dislike of Linux vs Solaris compared@ with HP and IBM because if either vendors could build HP-PA/HPUXE or AIX/Power based boxes at these price points than it is an absolutewE certainty that they would be offering them as an alternative as well.>    O > I happen to currently believe in the latter position. However, when the trialiM > starts (or sooner, if SCO collapses before the trial) then everything abouteH > SCO will be examined in every small detail, so then we will know which > position is the correct one. >   ! You are entitled to your opinion.s   Regardsn Andrew Harrisonl > Simon. >    ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 07:40:05 -0700. From: spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman)@ Subject: Re: HP to Linux users: "Go ahead.  I've got your back."= Message-ID: <b096a4ee.0309260640.34b0be0e@posting.google.com>)   Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bl12gi$i7v$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...t > Simon Clubley wrote: > > In article <bkupkb$o2c$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: > >  > >>Simon Clubley wrote: > >> [...]t > @ > Sun has an operating system called Solaris x86, SCO also has a@ > commercial OS that runs on x86. SCO has a whole load of driverC > source/IP one big drawback to Solaris x86 has been its relatively   > small device driver portfolio.   Andrew,r  D Please pay attention to punctuation. I had to read the last sentenceB above several times just to figure out what you are trying to say.  $ Punctuation *is* important. Example:  & Caesar, when judging a defendant, said       Execute not, liberate.  % But it was mistakenly trasnscribed ase       Execute, not liberate.   Well.   C Actually, maybe it's better if you keep posting cryptic prose as it ; will reduce the number of people reading your FUD attempts.i  i [...]. > A > Take one donation Java without it most of the x86/linux serversh2 > in investment banking would have nothing to run.  8 Again, needless re-reading is needed to understand this.   > B > At the same time we have developed a desktop environment working@ > with SuSE which relies on Linux as the OS if its hosted on x86 > which it mostly will be.  0 'Can't figure this one out. Why should I bother?  E Actually, on my final proofreading, I did get the jist of it. In this E case, more an example of poor writing than lack of punctuation. Well,>) "its" should be "it's". That didn't help.h   >  [...]a > + > If you want a sub 30K 4 CPU server ditto.0  , Another re-read is needed for this sentence.  ? > Sun is the only vendor that can offer a RISC/UNIX server that @ > competes at these price points so we have an alternative don'tB > mistake that for a relative dislike of Linux vs Solaris comparedB > with HP and IBM because if either vendors could build HP-PA/HPUXG > or AIX/Power based boxes at these price points than it is an absolutecG > certainty that they would be offering them as an alternative as well.n >    A re-read is needed yet again!   [...]6 > 	 > Regardsc > Andrew Harrisono
 > > Simon. > >    Alan E. Feldman-   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 06:16:45 -0700% From: yi-1@medctr.osu.edu (Ung Ho Yi)m/ Subject: Job - Senior VMS Systems Administratore= Message-ID: <9ec5144c.0309260516.50ddffbc@posting.google.com>r   Hello,  D we are looking for a Senior VMS Systems Administrator with 5-7 years experience.DD Applicant will maintain VMS OS on several Alpha Servers.  Experience@ with Mumps/Cache and PMDF are highly desired.  Unix knowledge is helpful.  E The job is located at Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus,t Ohio.e  5 If you are interested in the position, please contactd" rubin-1@medctr.osu.edu or my self.  
 Thank you. Yi   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 08:56:10 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)S3 Subject: Re: Job - Senior VMS Systems Administratorc3 Message-ID: <FFwV0T$0JRSG@eisner.encompasserve.org>g  e In article <9ec5144c.0309260516.50ddffbc@posting.google.com>, yi-1@medctr.osu.edu (Ung Ho Yi) writes:   F > we are looking for a Senior VMS Systems Administrator with 5-7 years
 > experience.tF > Applicant will maintain VMS OS on several Alpha Servers.  ExperienceB > with Mumps/Cache and PMDF are highly desired.  Unix knowledge is
 > helpful. > G > The job is located at Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus,m > Ohio.s > 7 > If you are interested in the position, please contacts$ > rubin-1@medctr.osu.edu or my self.  ' You might also consider posting this ati  + 	http://www.openvms.org/phorum/list.php?f=2r   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:59:52 +0100eO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>n1 Subject: Re: Linux is the favourite hacker targete0 Message-ID: <bl12mp$i9d$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Bob Ceculski wrote:ns > ian.burgess@start.com.au (Ian Burgess) wrote in message news:<6b63fc08.0309241536.1b84f230@posting.google.com>...  > 8 >>See globe technology's "The Globe and Mail" article... >>W >>www.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030911.gtlinuxsep11/BNStory/Technology/  >>H >>Surprising that Linux rates above Microsoft (67% of successful attacks >>in August vs 23% for M/S). >># >>The complacency of the statement,n= >>"Just 360 ? less than 2 per cent ? of BSD Unix servers were # >>successfully breached in August."  >>does boggle the mind, though!i >> >>Ianp >  > < > and we are being told windoze is a big security risk while> > linux is even more so ... of course we just laugh at all the? > dopes who try to run their business on windoze/linux garbage!o  7 Bob why are you posting rude things about windows/linux 6 when you should be posting an apology for all the CERT- TCPWARE/Multinet mistakes that you have made.e   Get on with it.    Regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:24:12 -0600.6 From: "Michael D. Ober" <obermd-@-alum-mit-edu-nospam>1 Subject: Re: Linux is the favourite hacker targetu. Message-ID: <06Xcb.5$1A2.4964@news.uswest.net>  7 "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in messageo# news:3F734861.D56A1FA5@istop.com...b > "Michael D. Ober" wrote:K > > huge attack surface.  The Globe Technology article normalize the attack>H > > surface and reported the percentage of systems based on each OS that wereJ > > breached.  This tells me that as "joe user", if I have a linux system, I'muK > > more likely to be breached than with a MS-Windows system, and the least2K > > likely would be the BSD Unix systems.  (VMS systems appear to be nearlyS- > > immune if they are correctly configured.)  > G > No. I think that it may be possible that Linux gets more "attempts atl writing K > a virus" than Microsoft. The thing is that Microsoft gets more "succesful,* > attempts at writing a virus" than Linux.  I That's because there are multiple virus toolkits for Windows, which giveshL "script kiddies" the ability to write Windows viri.  (MS - get your hands on9 these kits and fix Windows to stop the "script kiddies".)c   >tJ > Consider that there are many people who thinker with Linux source, so it is aC > given that there would be more attempts to find a fault in Linux.  >bK > Yes, there are regular patches/CERT notifications of some deficiency in a  UnixH > system that needs a patch. But those are not "virus" or "trojan horse"K > related, they are denial of service/bug related. It isn't something which0 willJ > result in self replication and worldwide distribution of the problem, as is# > the case with Microsoft products.r  C I receive all the alert notificatations from CERT.  There are many,eH unattacked, vulnerabilities in various flavors of Unix.  The reason theyH don't get attacked is that Unix simply isn't a widespread as MS-Windows.L Virus writers want to spread as much havoc as possible, so they ignore small market share OS's.   >fH > And a Unix/Linux machine, when vulnerable, doesn't also bring down theL > internet by scanning all possible IP adresses to find another machine thatG > could be infected, nor does it scann the sdick for all possible email- adresses > to spam them with itself.0  E Windows doesn't do this - the virus or worm does.  You have obviouslyvK forgotten Robert Morris' virus that brought a large part of the internet tofK its knees.  It was written on Unix and attacked SunOS and early versions ofaL Solaris, which at the time had the bulk of the servers on the internet.  TheK few windows machines on the net at the time weren't affected.  Morris' wormgD propagated through the debug mode of sendmail, which was the defaultK configuration at the time from almost all vendors.  It could just as easily D scanned for open ports and propagated on any port.  The point is, anI improperly configured server, wether it be Windows, Unix, Linux, and yes,nL VMS, is vulnerable to a port scanning virus that is written for that OS.  ByH the way, the latest MS targeting virus is propagating via NNTP, which is! almost univerally hosted on Unix.    ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 08:21:06 -0700( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)1 Subject: Re: Linux is the favourite hacker targetc= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0309260721.1c118f91@posting.google.com>o   Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bl12mp$i9d$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...s > Bob Ceculski wrote: u > > ian.burgess@start.com.au (Ian Burgess) wrote in message news:<6b63fc08.0309241536.1b84f230@posting.google.com>...o > > : > >>See globe technology's "The Globe and Mail" article... > >>Y > >>www.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030911.gtlinuxsep11/BNStory/Technology/s > >>J > >>Surprising that Linux rates above Microsoft (67% of successful attacks > >>in August vs 23% for M/S). > >>% > >>The complacency of the statement,e? > >>"Just 360 ? less than 2 per cent ? of BSD Unix servers wereT% > >>successfully breached in August."c! > >>does boggle the mind, though!n > >> > >>Ianl > >  > > > > > and we are being told windoze is a big security risk while@ > > linux is even more so ... of course we just laugh at all theA > > dopes who try to run their business on windoze/linux garbage!s > 9 > Bob why are you posting rude things about windows/linuxn8 > when you should be posting an apology for all the CERT/ > TCPWARE/Multinet mistakes that you have made.n >  > Get on with it.t > 	 > Regards( > Andrew Harrisonm  > why don't you apologize for being such a dope yourself and not: reading your own postings because the cert you posted just? validated my claims ... "ACCESS VIOLATION" ... and that is goodI> that that particular process died because I will take that any< day instead of thing allowing you in and do what you want in@ the system ... that is called SECURITY Andrew, of course you andA all the other brain dead unix/linux/windoze users are conditionedt< to reboots and the patch of the day club bit so you wouldn't understand the concept ... :)    ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:46:58 -0400 (EDT) + From: Lord Isildur <isildur@andrew.cmu.edu> 1 Subject: Re: Linux is the favourite hacker targetrG Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58-035.0309261128550.2751@unix2.andrew.cmu.edu>e  @ > why don't you apologize for being such a dope yourself and not< > reading your own postings because the cert you posted justA > validated my claims ... "ACCESS VIOLATION" ... and that is goodt@ > that that particular process died because I will take that any> > day instead of thing allowing you in and do what you want inB > the system ... that is called SECURITY Andrew, of course you andC > all the other brain dead unix/linux/windoze users are conditionedh> > to reboots and the patch of the day club bit so you wouldn't > understand the concept ... :)a >n  D One of the things which has never ceased to impress me about so many@ VMS people is how closely they resemble micro$oft users in theirE vitriolic attitude toward _anything_ else. I have watched through therD 90s as VMS slowly disappeared, and at almost every turn in the road,F where VMS people might have found an ally in the un*x community (sinceH by and large, un*x is not like most VMS people imagine it to be, and theE things VMS people tend to boast about endlessly are pretty common andfF expected in the un*x world as well), instead of taking the opportunityG to be friendly with the un*x people and join efforts, so to speak, theyeC almost invariably visit the most arrogant, usually misinformed, andrA affrontive flames at the very people who _do_ know and appreciategA what theyre talking about, as opposed to the legions of microsoftaJ weenies (and nowadays often linux weenies too) who have no clue and reallyI _could_ use some education about what a real computing environment is andtI what to demand of it. I've been impressed with how well the VMS communityeA has done at alienating themselves completely from the rest of the E community of people who use and demand 'real computers' over the paste# decade that I've been on the scene.s   Isildurg   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 08:43:14 -0700, From: JimStrehlow@data911.com (Jim Strehlow)8 Subject: Re: Memo:  Re: ppp on OpenVMS for remote access= Message-ID: <4b6ec350.0309260743.6e4c57a5@posting.google.com>t  ( paul.beaudoin@hsbc.com wrote in message I > I have a DCL procedure and dialer program that somewhat emulated the MS M > 'easy dial' screen. It is however based on a SLIP connection but with a bit K > of tweeking may be helpful in your problem. I did not want to presume andtK > send it unannounced so if you are interested, let me know and I'll zip ite > up and send it.j >  I appreciate your help.nF I have learned by experience that I get too much spam after posting to> forums and newsgroups; so that e-mail address was deactivated.E We will first test a PPP enabled terminal server suggested by others.   D If you have code that you want to share with the forum, you may postD it and we may test it later; but I will decline your offer, for now,& for a personal copy of your procedure.   Thank you for your offer.a   Jim Strehlow   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:01:35 +0000 (UTC)r From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk$ Subject: Re: New round of cuts at HP) Message-ID: <bl12pv$cv1$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>c  V In article <3F7293F4.99EA4CEB@istop.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> writes:* >http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11738 >##mN >AS WE'VE REPORTED earlier, a fresh set of cuts is looming at Hewlett Packard. >nO > Staff on the wrong side of the 35% line were told last Monday that their jobse= >are in danger,  and layoffs will take place in late October.r >iO > But just so that everyone feels a bit happier, the people in Tru64 stronghold O >Nashua, for  example, are getting a visit from Rich Marcello on September 26thl >between 9.30 to 11. >iQ > He will buy them a cup of coffee and chat about things like walruses and kings.o >##u >i >hM >Does anyone know what impact those cuts have had and are expected to have onsL >VMS and its software (especially with respect to TCPIP which needs a lot of" >work to get it up to snuff) ?????  O Thinking about TCPIP. DEC TCPIP services is based on the same code as the TCPIP"K stack for Tru64. Since Tru64 is becoming an organ donor for HP-UX on Intel aC what is happening about future developments of DEC TCPIP services ?SG Is the same code for DEC TCPIP services being used on Itanium for VMS ?eM Will it continue to be developed for VMS or are we going to see another major K rewrite (as we had from UCX 4.x to Dec TCPIP services 5.x) with support for1J older versions of VMS being dropped in an attempt to get a common codebase! for TCPIP between VMS and HP-UX ?d  
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:07:07 +0200 : From: Karl Rohwedder <extern.karl.rohwedder@volkswagen.de>$ Subject: Re: New round of cuts at HP, Message-ID: <bl16fk$ijc9@doiweb4.wob.vw.vwg>   david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote:rX > In article <3F7293F4.99EA4CEB@istop.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> writes: > + >>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11738a >>##O >>AS WE'VE REPORTED earlier, a fresh set of cuts is looming at Hewlett Packard.  >>O >>Staff on the wrong side of the 35% line were told last Monday that their jobsg> >>are in danger,  and layoffs will take place in late October. >>O >>But just so that everyone feels a bit happier, the people in Tru64 strongholdmP >>Nashua, for  example, are getting a visit from Rich Marcello on September 26th >>between 9.30 to 11.a >>Q >>He will buy them a cup of coffee and chat about things like walruses and kings.h >>## >> >>N >>Does anyone know what impact those cuts have had and are expected to have onM >>VMS and its software (especially with respect to TCPIP which needs a lot ofl# >>work to get it up to snuff) ?????  >  > Q > Thinking about TCPIP. DEC TCPIP services is based on the same code as the TCPIPeM > stack for Tru64. Since Tru64 is becoming an organ donor for HP-UX on Intel uE > what is happening about future developments of DEC TCPIP services ? I > Is the same code for DEC TCPIP services being used on Itanium for VMS ?tO > Will it continue to be developed for VMS or are we going to see another majoraM > rewrite (as we had from UCX 4.x to Dec TCPIP services 5.x) with support for L > older versions of VMS being dropped in an attempt to get a common codebase# > for TCPIP between VMS and HP-UX ?  >  > David Webb > VMS and Unix team leader > CCSS > Middlesex University > T If my memory serves me right, during the recent german TUD meeting an engineer said,_ that VMS and NSK will share a common TCPIP codebase, HP-UX and Tru64/VMS are totally different.e  B I hopefully will receive the presentation CD soon, so I can check.   --    + mit freundlichen Gren | with best regards     Karl Rohwedder		iT-Ingenieurteam$ Ellernbruch 11		D-38112 Braunschweig  E mailto:it-ingteam(at)t-online.de | mailto:rohwedder(at)decus.decus.des- mailto:extern.karl.rohwedder(at)volkswagen.del   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 08:16:22 -0700( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)$ Subject: Re: New round of cuts at HP= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0309260716.7b0474c8@posting.google.com>k  O david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote in message news:<bl12pv$cv1$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>...lX > In article <3F7293F4.99EA4CEB@istop.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> writes:, > >http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11738 > >##aP > >AS WE'VE REPORTED earlier, a fresh set of cuts is looming at Hewlett Packard. > >hQ > > Staff on the wrong side of the 35% line were told last Monday that their jobsa? > >are in danger,  and layoffs will take place in late October.  > >sQ > > But just so that everyone feels a bit happier, the people in Tru64 strongholdlQ > >Nashua, for  example, are getting a visit from Rich Marcello on September 26thr > >between 9.30 to 11. > >hS > > He will buy them a cup of coffee and chat about things like walruses and kings.w > >##r > >l > > O > >Does anyone know what impact those cuts have had and are expected to have on N > >VMS and its software (especially with respect to TCPIP which needs a lot of$ > >work to get it up to snuff) ????? > Q > Thinking about TCPIP. DEC TCPIP services is based on the same code as the TCPIP M > stack for Tru64. Since Tru64 is becoming an organ donor for HP-UX on Intel aE > what is happening about future developments of DEC TCPIP services ?aI > Is the same code for DEC TCPIP services being used on Itanium for VMS ?.O > Will it continue to be developed for VMS or are we going to see another majorrM > rewrite (as we had from UCX 4.x to Dec TCPIP services 5.x) with support for,L > older versions of VMS being dropped in an attempt to get a common codebase# > for TCPIP between VMS and HP-UX ?s >  > David Webb > VMS and Unix team leader > CCSS > Middlesex University  E if they were smart they would buy TCPware which is still based on the 7 VMS kernel and runs crisper and replace UCX with it ...o   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:47:29 +0100uO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>a Subject: Re: Nice touch, AMD0 Message-ID: <bl15g1$jdc$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   David Mathog wrote: $ > On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 06:31:18 -0400- > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote:  >  > M >>I think you're confused.  While AMD64 allows a 64-bit OS to run both 64-bithM >>and 32-bit programs (the latter in a backward-compatible 32-bit environmenteN >>that allows existing IA32 binaries to run unchanged), I don't think it wouldK >>allow a 32-bit OS to run 64-bit applications (if for no other reason thansE >>that the 32-bit OS execution environment may well not be capable ofrB >>executing the required processor instructions to support that).  >  > I > Perhaps not.  But if the OS is bright enough, and the hardware supportscF > it, it should allow multiple 32 bit applications to all run at once,3 > whereas on a pure 32 bit OS they could not do so.lC > While individual 32 bit applications would still be restricted to.D > <2^32 bits the cumulative memory usage of all running applicationsG > could be more than 2^32.  This only requires that the OS and hardware F > present (map) swaths of the 2^64 space into the 2^32 space the olderD > applications expect.  This would allow a machine, for instance, toC > run 3 or 4 "big" in memory databases, with sufficiently light CPUcF > utilization, simultaneously without requiring recoding.  ConceivablyH > it could allow consolidation of such applications from multiple 32 bit > servers onto a single server.i >   C I may be missing a point here but most 32 bit OS's support multipleb? 32 bit apps each using ~4GB RAM but with total available memory  of >4GB.  C Linux x86, Solaris x86, multiple variants of Windows, Dynix FreeBSDn etc all support this.a  A Older 32 bit versions of RISC/UNIX OE's also do the same, Solarisu 2.x, AIX, HP-UX 10 etc.o  A The x86 platforms extend to systems that have support 64GB of RAMs7 using one OE (IBM x455, Sequent NUMA_Q Unisys x86 etc).h   Regardss Andrew Harrison 
 > Regards, >  > David Mathog > mathog@caltech.edu@ > Manager, Sequence Analysis Facility, Biology Division, Caltech   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:48:30 +0000 (UTC) , From: lewis@PROBE.mitre.org (Keith A. Lewis)* Subject: Re: non-interactive audio capture. Message-ID: <bl1g3e$p9n$1@newslocal.mitre.org>   Jonathan Boswell <jsb@ost.cdrh.fda.gov> writes in article <3F7312FB.641EA029@ost.cdrh.fda.gov> dated Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:08:27 -0400:-N >I claim you want to run the text utility called mmov$audiorecord with variousJ >command line parameters to create a WAV file.  Of course you must installN >Multimedia Services for OpenVMS Alpha for this to exist, and you must have atI >least an MMOV-RT license which was usually supplied with your model PWS.i  J Excellent!  Thanks for the pointer, Jonathan.  I was preparing to write myI own using my hobbyist license for MMOV-DV and the examples in the manual.l  K I found mmov$audiorecord.exe does everything I need from the command line. dH One limitation (of the PWS built-in audio device, probably) is that if I; have it open for simultaneous playback (mpg123) and capture 5 (mmov$audiorecord), the sample rates have to match.  i  I No biggie, LAME can adjust.  Since playback is from my CD collection it'soI all 44100 Hz, but recording is from FM radio so there's not much point inoK going over 22050.  I'm capturing at 44100 and then telling LAME to resamplei
 at half that.i  G My PWS audio projects are coming out so well that I'm thinking of videoeJ capture.  Is there a reason DEC never wrote a video capture driver for theJ Elsa Gloria Synergy?  The card itself has the capability; I wonder if ElsaH would give me the necessary documentation.  Would I have to re-write theJ video display driver for the card, or is the capture driver separate under DECwindows?T  % --Thundermaker$yahoo.com (Spud Demon)a> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:53:36 +0100e- From: "Neil Bush" <neilNOSPAM@bush.clara.net>pI Subject: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programg* Message-ID: <AxXcb.1$yM6.328@psinet-eu-nl>  G I've Googled, but I can't find anything which quite answers my problem.(  K I want, from within Fortran preferably, to only allow users to only run one.L instance of a particular program. That is, many users may run the program at* any one time, but not the same user twice.G Is there a way of seeing if a user is already running the program he is  attempting to (re-)run?a   Many thanks,  	 Neil Bushm   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:10:36 +0000 (UTC)a, From: lewis@PROBE.mitre.org (Keith A. Lewis)M Subject: Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programu. Message-ID: <bl1hcs$s06$1@newslocal.mitre.org>   "Neil Bush" <neilNOSPAM@bush.clara.net> writes in article <AxXcb.1$yM6.328@psinet-eu-nl> dated Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:53:36 +0100: L >I want, from within Fortran preferably, to only allow users to only run oneM >instance of a particular program. That is, many users may run the program atK+ >any one time, but not the same user twice.oH >Is there a way of seeing if a user is already running the program he is >attempting to (re-)run?  K Locks.  See the $ENQ system service (or $ENQW).  You can set the program upuJ to request a lock called "ThisFortranProgram", and be guaranteed that onlyB one process (per UIC) will get it.  If the lock is not immediately, available, you can either wait or terminate.  + --Keith Lewis              klewis$mitre.orgh> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 09:13:53 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)eM Subject: Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programi3 Message-ID: <KpBhkNfC15$p@eisner.encompasserve.org>n  Z In article <AxXcb.1$yM6.328@psinet-eu-nl>, "Neil Bush" <neilNOSPAM@bush.clara.net> writes:  M > I want, from within Fortran preferably, to only allow users to only run onetN > instance of a particular program. That is, many users may run the program at, > any one time, but not the same user twice.  D I would suggest taking out an exclusive mode lock which includes theB username in the lock name.  Make the program fail if it cannot get	 the lock.u   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 15:22:14 +0100g- From: "Neil Bush" <neil@NOSPAMbush.clara.net> M Subject: Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programi* Message-ID: <rYXcb.2$yM6.340@psinet-eu-nl>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:8 > In article <AxXcb.1$yM6.328@psinet-eu-nl>, "Neil Bush"% > <neilNOSPAM@bush.clara.net> writes:m >aF >> I want, from within Fortran preferably, to only allow users to only
 >> run oneD >> instance of a particular program. That is, many users may run the
 >> program atg- >> any one time, but not the same user twice.o >tF > I would suggest taking out an exclusive mode lock which includes theD > username in the lock name.  Make the program fail if it cannot get > the lock.-  K Thanks for the replies, but I was more hoping to be able to say to the user_I "You are already running this program, sod off", or words to that effect,D9 rather than simply preventing the program running at all.m   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:53:07 +0000 (UTC)r, From: lewis@PROBE.mitre.org (Keith A. Lewis)M Subject: Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programs. Message-ID: <bl1jsj$2a6$1@newslocal.mitre.org>   "Neil Bush" <neil@NOSPAMbush.clara.net> writes in article <rYXcb.2$yM6.340@psinet-eu-nl> dated Fri, 26 Sep 2003 15:22:14 +0100:q >Larry Kilgallen wrote:j9 >> In article <AxXcb.1$yM6.328@psinet-eu-nl>, "Neil Bush"p& >> <neilNOSPAM@bush.clara.net> writes: >>G >>> I want, from within Fortran preferably, to only allow users to only. >>> run one.E >>> instance of a particular program. That is, many users may run thes >>> program at. >>> any one time, but not the same user twice. >>G >> I would suggest taking out an exclusive mode lock which includes theiE >> username in the lock name.  Make the program fail if it cannot gett >> the lock.  L Why include the username, Larry?  Unless you specify it's a system-wide lockL (which requires the SYSLCK privilege), it will already separate them by UIC.  J I actually got bit by this once when I modified mpg123 to "lock" the audioK output device.  In testing I was only using one account, but when I got the I web interface working, jobs were coming from APACHE$WWW in addition to my2H own account.  Playing 2 songs at the same time works fine but it doesn't sound all that great.  :^)  L >Thanks for the replies, but I was more hoping to be able to say to the userJ >"You are already running this program, sod off", or words to that effect,: >rather than simply preventing the program running at all.  J Don't be scared away from the feature just because it's called "locking". J It doesn't actually lock anything except for an abstract name you make up.L The program *can* still run.  Your Fortran program calls $ENQ, and depending2 on the results, you could make it say "sod off".    + --Keith Lewis              klewis$mitre.orgh> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:02:37 +0100.- From: "Neil Bush" <neil@NOSPAMbush.clara.net><M Subject: Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same program * Message-ID: <kyYcb.3$yM6.386@psinet-eu-nl>   Keith A. Lewis wrote:d; > "Neil Bush" <neil@NOSPAMbush.clara.net> writes in articledG > <rYXcb.2$yM6.340@psinet-eu-nl> dated Fri, 26 Sep 2003 15:22:14 +0100:' >> Larry Kilgallen wrote:t: >>> In article <AxXcb.1$yM6.328@psinet-eu-nl>, "Neil Bush"' >>> <neilNOSPAM@bush.clara.net> writes:> >>>eH >>>> I want, from within Fortran preferably, to only allow users to only >>>> run oneF >>>> instance of a particular program. That is, many users may run the >>>> program atr/ >>>> any one time, but not the same user twice.e >>>nH >>> I would suggest taking out an exclusive mode lock which includes theF >>> username in the lock name.  Make the program fail if it cannot get
 >>> the lock.  >u= > Why include the username, Larry?  Unless you specify it's aoA > system-wide lock (which requires the SYSLCK privilege), it wille > already separate them by UIC.8 >aF > I actually got bit by this once when I modified mpg123 to "lock" the > audio E > output device.  In testing I was only using one account, but when It	 > got theoE > web interface working, jobs were coming from APACHE$WWW in additionn > to myoB > own account.  Playing 2 songs at the same time works fine but it	 > doesn'ts > sound all that great.  :^) > E >> Thanks for the replies, but I was more hoping to be able to say tosE >> the user "You are already running this program, sod off", or wordss >> to that effect,< >> rather than simply preventing the program running at all. >e@ > Don't be scared away from the feature just because it's called > "locking".C > It doesn't actually lock anything except for an abstract name youo
 > make up.D > The program *can* still run.  Your Fortran program calls $ENQ, and > dependingt2 > on the results, you could make it say "sod off".   Ah, sorry, my mistake. I'll look it up.   Thanks.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:07:57 +0100h* From: "Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk>M Subject: Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programn+ Message-ID: <bl1koe$pjq@newton.cc.rl.ac.uk>e  b "Keith A. Lewis" <lewis@PROBE.mitre.org> wrote in message news:bl1jsj$2a6$1@newslocal.mitre.org...  N > Why include the username, Larry?  Unless you specify it's a system-wide lockN > (which requires the SYSLCK privilege), it will already separate them by UIC.   Only by UIC *group* by default.t   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 17:20:00 +0000 (UTC) , From: lewis@PROBE.mitre.org (Keith A. Lewis)M Subject: Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same program . Message-ID: <bl1sfv$lev$1@newslocal.mitre.org>  } "Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk> writes in article <bl1koe$pjq@newton.cc.rl.ac.uk> dated Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:07:57 +0100:  >ac >"Keith A. Lewis" <lewis@PROBE.mitre.org> wrote in message news:bl1jsj$2a6$1@newslocal.mitre.org...i >nO >> Why include the username, Larry?  Unless you specify it's a system-wide lock>O >> (which requires the SYSLCK privilege), it will already separate them by UIC.r >i  >Only by UIC *group* by default.  D Whoa, checked the doc and you're right.  Putting the username in theE lockname is important, unless all your users are in different groups.r  + --Keith Lewis              klewis$mitre.orgn> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 11:48:47 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)sM Subject: Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programo3 Message-ID: <PhBYok3Z4Lzq@eisner.encompasserve.org>c  Z In article <AxXcb.1$yM6.328@psinet-eu-nl>, "Neil Bush" <neilNOSPAM@bush.clara.net> writes:I > I've Googled, but I can't find anything which quite answers my problem.. > M > I want, from within Fortran preferably, to only allow users to only run oneoN > instance of a particular program. That is, many users may run the program at, > any one time, but not the same user twice.I > Is there a way of seeing if a user is already running the program he ise > attempting to (re-)run?a  G    The easiest way would be to have the program enqueue a lock based onw    the username.   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 11:49:40 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)cM Subject: Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same program 3 Message-ID: <V+RgSGvjUW8w@eisner.encompasserve.org>s  Z In article <rYXcb.2$yM6.340@psinet-eu-nl>, "Neil Bush" <neil@NOSPAMbush.clara.net> writes:  M > Thanks for the replies, but I was more hoping to be able to say to the user K > "You are already running this program, sod off", or words to that effect,8; > rather than simply preventing the program running at all.t  @    What your program does in response a to lock failure is up to    your program.   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 11:51:53 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)xM Subject: Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programe3 Message-ID: <75dSq4tA9CiS@eisner.encompasserve.org>h  Z In article <rYXcb.2$yM6.340@psinet-eu-nl>, "Neil Bush" <neil@NOSPAMbush.clara.net> writes:  M > Thanks for the replies, but I was more hoping to be able to say to the useruK > "You are already running this program, sod off", or words to that effect, ; > rather than simply preventing the program running at all.a  E What action is taken if the lock is not granted is entirely up to theiE programmer.  You could say that the second execution displays all theH windows in mauve, for example.   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 11:53:41 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)tM Subject: Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programe3 Message-ID: <b4KL7rYAkJap@eisner.encompasserve.org>r  X In article <bl1koe$pjq@newton.cc.rl.ac.uk>, "Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk> writes: > d > "Keith A. Lewis" <lewis@PROBE.mitre.org> wrote in message news:bl1jsj$2a6$1@newslocal.mitre.org... > O >> Why include the username, Larry?  Unless you specify it's a system-wide lockeO >> (which requires the SYSLCK privilege), it will already separate them by UIC.  > ! > Only by UIC *group* by default.a  5 I stand corrected (on my previous response to Keith).r   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 11:52:58 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)sM Subject: Re: Preventing a user running multiple instances of the same programe3 Message-ID: <V6mRnuURiSPG@eisner.encompasserve.org>-  ] In article <bl1jsj$2a6$1@newslocal.mitre.org>, lewis@PROBE.mitre.org (Keith A. Lewis) writes:l > "Neil Bush" <neil@NOSPAMbush.clara.net> writes in article <rYXcb.2$yM6.340@psinet-eu-nl> dated Fri, 26 Sep 2003 15:22:14 +0100:< >>Larry Kilgallen wrote:: >>> In article <AxXcb.1$yM6.328@psinet-eu-nl>, "Neil Bush"' >>> <neilNOSPAM@bush.clara.net> writes:  >>>mH >>>> I want, from within Fortran preferably, to only allow users to only >>>> run oneF >>>> instance of a particular program. That is, many users may run the >>>> program atw/ >>>> any one time, but not the same user twice.  >>>SH >>> I would suggest taking out an exclusive mode lock which includes theF >>> username in the lock name.  Make the program fail if it cannot get
 >>> the lock.i > N > Why include the username, Larry?  Unless you specify it's a system-wide lockN > (which requires the SYSLCK privilege), it will already separate them by UIC.  D Shared UICs are perfectly legal on VMS, and in rare cases desirable.   ------------------------------   Date: 26 Sep 03 08:34:37 +0200) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)oM Subject: Re: Process's PreciseMail AntiSpam Gateway - any experience so far ?e) Message-ID: <tvAVcoGNPsQC@elias.decus.ch>o  V In article <3F7336E0.4E539F00@istop.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> writes: > John Vottero wrote:/N >> There is no need to be concerned about NAT.  This proposal is a replacementL >> for SMTP servers.  They already need special consideration when used with$ >> NAT, as do all listening servers. > O > Yes, there is need to be concerned with NAT.  The sending server doesn't knowlM > what its real IP is, and thus is unable in the SMTP discussions to tell the D > receiving SMTP server "call me back at nn.nn.nn.nn on port xxxxx". >   E But it does know the IP of the mail gateway(s). Would that be enough?nE Since we are talking about a new protocol, new fields could be added,u9 such as "this is the IP address at which I can be found".a  I Then there's the problem of proxy servers. I honestly don't know how they E work for SMTP, but as an example of the potential problem here I once-D came across a website which wouldn't allow me to register my detailsE because the IP address at the end of the transaction didn't match thet one it started with.    J > Furthermore, the whole concept of changing SMTP the way you propose willN > simply fail. In any upgrade, you must maintain upward compatibility. So yourH > fancy SMTP server will require to continue to support the conventional' > standard for many many years to come.e  F Without trawling back through the rest of the thread, I would envisage7 both protocols running in parallel for quite some time.u   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:50:36 +0000 (UTC)  From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.ukM Subject: Re: Process's PreciseMail AntiSpam Gateway - any experience so far ?n) Message-ID: <bl196c$f78$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>e  W In article <vn5s22g2nrds0e@news.supernews.com>, "John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com> writes:g, ><david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk> wrote in message$ >news:bkuhsq$dk3$1@news.mdx.ac.uk...8 >> In article <3F71D664.D92AAC37@pacbell.net>, Don Sykes  ><anonymous@pacbell.net> writes: >> ># >> >david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote:S >> >>y; >> >> In article <3F70934A.3C36DD45@pacbell.net>, Don Sykesk  ><anonymous@pacbell.net> writes: >> >> >  >> >J >> >At this point I'm fairly convinced that the implementation of fees viaK >> >central gateways &/or routers is not workable. So I have come up with ahH >> >protocol that implements e-mail in 2 phases: a meta phase and a dataH >> >phase. In phase 1, all the info about the email is sent to the open,F >> >listening port of the receiver. Then the link is dropped, by both.F >> >Phase 2 must be initiated by the receiver, so they are in completeI >> >control of the transmission and final delivery and at that point theyi >> >can also charge a fee. >> >I >> >A first draft is available at http://alphase.com/vms/FBEProtocol.htmlo >> >I >> >Serious suggestions are more than welcome, but please no nit-picking.t; >> >This is a early, early draft. A suggestion, if you wills >> > >>K >> I haven't had a chance to look at your link yet but one thing strikes mes >aboutG >> your suggestion straight away. How are you going to deal with Natt'd 
 >clients ?H >> If you drop the connection then there is no guarantee that the public >addressL >> that the sender first used will still be valid when the receiver tries to >> reopen the connection.  >> >eL >There is no need to be concerned about NAT.  This proposal is a replacementJ >for SMTP servers.  They already need special consideration when used with" >NAT, as do all listening servers. >e >r  O It does matter because your example which uses a client on the 10 address spaceeO (10.11.12.1) contacting a server on the 21.22 network will not work in general.e  K (As an aside the address of the receiver 21.22.0.0 is invalid since it is aeF network address - you should never use .0 or .255 in the final octet).  L The 10 address is a private address hence must use NAT to contact systems on the public internet.  P So in the real world you have a client on a small home network connecting to an , ISP using dynamic NAT with port overloading.  P 10.11.12.1  is the clients real address and it opens a connection from its port M 32100 this is mapped to  21.22.5.20 port 7521  on the public side of his homeLP NAT/firewall. (21.22.5.20 is the single public address given out to this user by	 his ISP).e  N This connection connects to the IPS's receiver on 21.22.0.10 (10 rather than 0- to make it a valid address) for your phase 1.t  P Negotiation proceeds as you describe on your link and the receiver sends back toF say it will contact the sender on port 1398. Then the link is dropped.    10.11.12.1 listens on port 1398.  N Receiver (21.22.0.10) attempts to open connection to  21.22.5.20 on port 1398.E Attempt fails. There is  either no entry in the NAT mapping table forgN 21.22.5.20 port 1398  or if there is it would be accidental and might point at3 another machine or port on the user's home network.e The connection is dropped.  L With dynamic NAT with port overloading (which is the most common form of NATM used on home networks where the home user has multiple machines hiding behindaN one external address) there is no preservation of port numbers - unless a portJ number has been placed in the NAT mapping table by an internally initiatedM connection to an external machine having been made or by the user explicitly iK setting up a manual mapping then an externally initiated connection cannot W be made to it.   Your system falls apart.    
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:53:03 +0000 (UTC) ) From: "Jeff" <dirkdiggler@totalise.co.uk>  Subject: Quorum DIsk Question"/ Message-ID: <bl0r8v$3g6$1@titan.btinternet.com>e  I Does a quorum disk have to be a JBOD, or can it be a RAID1 volume on yourd I/O Subsystem ?      Many Thanks,   J    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 09:49:14 +0100/* From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@[127.0.0.1]>! Subject: Re: Quorum DIsk Questionb& Message-ID: <bl0ufk$t5$1@lore.csc.com>   Jeff wrote:- > K > Does a quorum disk have to be a JBOD, or can it be a RAID1 volume on yourm > I/O Subsystem ?l  ? The quorum disk is a virtual voting member of your cluster. ItsrD objective is to maintain quorum when its contents are trusted by the system(s) it is connected to.l  ? Volume shadowing is RAID1. As you know, volume shadowing is notsE supported. As well as the fact that the cluster low level drivers areSE loaded before shadowing (and DSA's cannot exist), imagine a situation D with (say) DSA5 as your quorum disk, and this comprises two physicalG disk units (detail not important). The question needed to be decided byoH the system, is how would a system "know" if a mirror of the quorum disk,< was providing a virtual vote to a (now) partitioned cluster?  F Effectively, you're defeating the purpose of having a quorum disk, whyC not set expected votes at 1 and have done with corrupting your data  right there :->m  G Now, with that explanation, hopefully you'll understand the implicationhH of the question you are asking, and similarly, important questions about! a controller-based RAID-1 volume.p  ? If, at any time, that mirrored disk could be split, and has therB potential to be seen independently by disk serving systems in yourH cluster (and therefore the potential of being a virtual voting member of@ the cluster) you stand the risk of having a partitioned cluster.  F This may sound like a restriction, and I've had people before claimingG that a JBOD as a quorum disk is a single point of failure. Does it haverG to be RAID-1? Why not a RAID5? Do you have to be dependent on the votesrH of a quorum disk, what are the chances of losing a system and the quorumD disk? It is always useful to draw out possible failure scenarios and 'calculate' what would happen.  G So, the answer to your question is really based on what that RAID-1 is, C and how it can be accessed, and the worst case failure mode you areo trying to protect against.    H SOme folks decide to have a quorum node, it is not unknown for a DS10 to0 serve as a casting vote for GS based clusters...   -- -? Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciences  nclews at csc dot com    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:08:52 +0200e: From: Karl Rohwedder <extern.karl.rohwedder@volkswagen.de>! Subject: Re: Quorum DIsk Question - Message-ID: <bl16it$ijc10@doiweb4.wob.vw.vwg>r   Nic Clews wrote:  
 > Jeff wrote:  > K >>Does a quorum disk have to be a JBOD, or can it be a RAID1 volume on your  >>I/O Subsystem ?h >  > A > The quorum disk is a virtual voting member of your cluster. ItseF > objective is to maintain quorum when its contents are trusted by the > system(s) it is connected to.n > A > Volume shadowing is RAID1. As you know, volume shadowing is notoG > supported. As well as the fact that the cluster low level drivers are G > loaded before shadowing (and DSA's cannot exist), imagine a situationhF > with (say) DSA5 as your quorum disk, and this comprises two physicalI > disk units (detail not important). The question needed to be decided bycJ > the system, is how would a system "know" if a mirror of the quorum disk,> > was providing a virtual vote to a (now) partitioned cluster? > H > Effectively, you're defeating the purpose of having a quorum disk, whyE > not set expected votes at 1 and have done with corrupting your data9 > right there :->  > I > Now, with that explanation, hopefully you'll understand the implicationcJ > of the question you are asking, and similarly, important questions about# > a controller-based RAID-1 volume.e > A > If, at any time, that mirrored disk could be split, and has theeD > potential to be seen independently by disk serving systems in yourJ > cluster (and therefore the potential of being a virtual voting member ofB > the cluster) you stand the risk of having a partitioned cluster. > H > This may sound like a restriction, and I've had people before claimingI > that a JBOD as a quorum disk is a single point of failure. Does it haveoI > to be RAID-1? Why not a RAID5? Do you have to be dependent on the votessJ > of a quorum disk, what are the chances of losing a system and the quorumF > disk? It is always useful to draw out possible failure scenarios and  > 'calculate' what would happen. > I > So, the answer to your question is really based on what that RAID-1 is,aE > and how it can be accessed, and the worst case failure mode you are  > trying to protect against. s > J > SOme folks decide to have a quorum node, it is not unknown for a DS10 to2 > serve as a casting vote for GS based clusters... >   H The quorumdisk should be a JBOD seen from VMS, I think a controllerbased quorumdisk should work.n   -- e  + mit freundlichen Gren | with best regards     Karl Rohwedder		iT-Ingenieurteam$ Ellernbruch 11		D-38112 Braunschweig  E mailto:it-ingteam(at)t-online.de | mailto:rohwedder(at)decus.decus.de:- mailto:extern.karl.rohwedder(at)volkswagen.de.   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 07:54:47 -0500+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)i! Subject: Re: Quorum DIsk Questiona3 Message-ID: <PhaTeler$b7t@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  S In article <bl0ufk$t5$1@lore.csc.com>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@[127.0.0.1]> writes:>
 > Jeff wrote:E >> lL >> Does a quorum disk have to be a JBOD, or can it be a RAID1 volume on your >> I/O Subsystem ? > A > The quorum disk is a virtual voting member of your cluster. ItsoF > objective is to maintain quorum when its contents are trusted by the > system(s) it is connected to.T > A > Volume shadowing is RAID1. As you know, volume shadowing is not G > supported. As well as the fact that the cluster low level drivers aremG > loaded before shadowing (and DSA's cannot exist), imagine a situation>F > with (say) DSA5 as your quorum disk, and this comprises two physicalI > disk units (detail not important). The question needed to be decided byhJ > the system, is how would a system "know" if a mirror of the quorum disk,> > was providing a virtual vote to a (now) partitioned cluster? > H > Effectively, you're defeating the purpose of having a quorum disk, whyE > not set expected votes at 1 and have done with corrupting your datar > right there :->s > I > Now, with that explanation, hopefully you'll understand the implicationtJ > of the question you are asking, and similarly, important questions about# > a controller-based RAID-1 volume.P > A > If, at any time, that mirrored disk could be split, and has the D > potential to be seen independently by disk serving systems in yourJ > cluster (and therefore the potential of being a virtual voting member ofB > the cluster) you stand the risk of having a partitioned cluster. > H > This may sound like a restriction, and I've had people before claimingI > that a JBOD as a quorum disk is a single point of failure. Does it haveiI > to be RAID-1? Why not a RAID5? Do you have to be dependent on the votesJ > of a quorum disk, what are the chances of losing a system and the quorumF > disk? It is always useful to draw out possible failure scenarios and  > 'calculate' what would happen. > I > So, the answer to your question is really based on what that RAID-1 is,eE > and how it can be accessed, and the worst case failure mode you are  > trying to protect against. a > J > SOme folks decide to have a quorum node, it is not unknown for a DS10 to2 > serve as a casting vote for GS based clusters... >   : 	To add and give a different perspective to what Nic says.  G 	We don't know about your hardware configuration nor environment.  But /H 	if storage is common to both nodes (assuming 2 node cluster as anything? 	more than 2 nodes and a quorum disk can be mostly irrelevant)  A 	- whether CI attached or on a SAN - a hardware RAID1 quorum diska? 	makes sense.  If the quorum disk tanked, your cluster is stillu? 	up.  However, you are now at risk for a total outage if a nodesE 	tanks and you haven't rebooted to bring the replacement quorum disk e> 	back online.  The odds of that heppening?  Well, how often do; 	you schedule downtime to do mainteance?  I like to performsA 	maintenance every 6 months.  So availability/uptime always playshE 	a big part in configuration decisions.  You wouldn't want to wait 6  5 	months to bring a quorum disk back online would you?      				Robt    K "The assumption that we must become irrational in order to become believersnO  is the language of infidelity; for faith in the irrational is of necessity     N  irrational.  Faith is not a blind, irrational conviction.  We must know what 3  we believe and the ground upon which faith rests."s         -- Gordon H. Clark   o   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 09:35:46 -07001 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) ! Subject: Re: Quorum DIsk Question = Message-ID: <cf15391e.0309260835.4e2f2b39@posting.google.com>p  ` "Jeff" <dirkdiggler@totalise.co.uk> wrote in message news:<bl0r8v$3g6$1@titan.btinternet.com>...K > Does a quorum disk have to be a JBOD, or can it be a RAID1 volume on youru > I/O Subsystem ?s  G A quorum disk can indeed be a controller-based mirrorset (RAID1 array).o   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:25:21 -0400u< From: "Peter Weaver" <WeaverConsultingServices@sympatico.ca>? Subject: Re: strangeness with temporary text files used by MAILb9 Message-ID: <bl1i8i$721gi$1@ID-141708.news.uni-berlin.de>   / Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:  >...< > Is there any thing OTHER than SET NOSUMMARY which could be causingM > this?s   $ ASSIGN NL: SYS$OUTPUT /USER    Would cause the same symptoms.  < Also both MAIL and MAIL/OLD pay attention to the page length= (SET TERM/PAGE) but EDT does not. Is it possible that the EDT>= message is going to line 24 (or is it 23???) but the terminale< does not have  that many lines? (Now I'm really reaching for8 straws, I thought for sure it was the MAIL$EDT logical.)   -- i Peter Weaver Weaver Consulting Services Inc.  Canadian VAR for CHARON-VAXh www.weaverconsulting.cat   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 07:17:47 -0700. From: spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman)? Subject: Re: strangeness with temporary text files used by MAIL = Message-ID: <b096a4ee.0309260617.2376b10a@posting.google.com>   | helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) wrote in message news:<bkvtdu$f9c$2@online.de>...J > In article <bkv159$68e7r$1@ID-141708.news.uni-berlin.de>, "Peter Weaver"2 > <WeaverConsultingServices@sympatico.ca> writes:  > ? > > OK, no *EDT* logicals, but what about the logical MAIL$EDITm> > > and how are you checking to see what the user's editor is? > ; > %SHOW-S-NOTRAN, no translation for logical name MAIL$EDIT  > I > I personally use MAIL/OLD instead of MAIL.  But that's not the problem.  > J > I've done some experimenting and found both behaviours---all with my ownI > accounts, which are always set up the same way with respect to MAIL andoF > EDT (hey, I've spent a substantial fraction of my life in EDT calledH > from MAIL!).  I'll have to make a table of where the behaviour occurs:? > version of VMS, architecture, ownership and protection of allsG > directories involved, MAIL vs. MAIL_OLD etc.  Lots of combinations tow
 > check out. e > J > Is there any thing OTHER than SET NOSUMMARY which could be causing this?  F Well, if SYS$OUTPUT is redefined to be NL:, that will do it. Of courseE I can't imagine that this is the cause of your problem as there would F be other obvious side effects. But you did ask, and who knows -- maybe2 it will jog someone's memory to produce an answer!   But then again, maybe not.   Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldmant   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 10:01:45 -07001 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) A Subject: Re: TCP/IP development (was Re: New round of cuts at HP)u= Message-ID: <cf15391e.0309260901.12297d41@posting.google.com>r  O david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote in message news:<bl12pv$cv1$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>...uQ > Thinking about TCPIP. DEC TCPIP services is based on the same code as the TCPIPsM > stack for Tru64. Since Tru64 is becoming an organ donor for HP-UX on Intel lE > what is happening about future developments of DEC TCPIP services ?e  A Development will continue.  Even with Tru64 eventually out of the ; picture, both VMS and NonStop now depend on this code base.   C While there will eventually be fewer engineers contributing code tovB that code base (as Tru64 new-code development ramps down), we willB still have both the VMS and NonStop engineers (plus some number of> Tru64 engineers still doing remedial support -- remember, that> continues for a number of years after last sale) contributing.  D The engineers have discussed the option of finding another BSD-basedE source, but concluded that for the forseeable future they have plentyf' of mileage left in the Tru64 code base.s  I > Is the same code for DEC TCPIP services being used on Itanium for VMS ?t   Yes.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:55:21 GMTe4 From: brad@.gateway.2wire.net (Bradford J. Hamilton)@ Subject: Re: Update on OpenVMS and Tru64 UNIX Patches in HP ITRC/ Message-ID: <VGWcb.587942$o%2.268061@sccrnsc02>-  f In article <6aLcb.578861$YN5.414782@sccrnsc01>, brad@.gateway.2wire.net (Bradford J. Hamilton) writes:p !!In article <E0Icb.110023$hd6.1207489@news.chello.at>, peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes: !snip!N !!>It seems, that the old page of this mailling list will eventually take over !!>the ITRC mailst !!>r9 !!>	http://www.support.compaq.com/patches/mail-list.shtml  !aJ !I registered at this web site, but I think that this is the service whichN !will go away as of 31-OCT.  There is a separate page at ITRC, which I suspect% !is the "correct" page (wrapped URL):r !r@ !http://us-support3.external.hp.com/wps/bin/doc.pl/screen=pnHome !/sid=f2af52df0583660d40 !1P !I will have to wait until I am back at work tomorrow to sign up at *this* site,: !since one needs to be "logged in" to request the service.  J I've had a closer look - the ITRC notification only works for folks with a> valid support contract (*NOT GOOD* - hp, are you listening???)  L I would follow up via the e-mail links at ITRC, but two of my recent queriesI have gone unanswered by humans (**NOT GOOD** - hp, are you listening????).  J I know some folks here seem to have the ear of Mark Gorham, et. al.; can ID impose on one of you kind folks to forward this post "up the chain"?  H To summaraize: The existing patch notification mechanism will go away onN 31-OCT, to be replaced with a customer-specific mechanism, tied into a supportM contract.  This mechanism effectively leaves hobbyists and self-support folks H without a proactive notification mechanism (***NOT GOOD*** - hp, are you listening?????)i  J __________________________________________________________________________A Bradford J. Hamilton                    "All opinions are my own"pK bMradAhamiPltSon-at-coMmcAast.nPeSt     "Lose the MAPS, and replace '-at-' :0                                          with @"   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Sep 2003 09:31:13 -07001 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris)"E Subject: Re: VMS Cracked! [was: Linux is the favourite hacker target] = Message-ID: <cf15391e.0309260831.24c1bfdf@posting.google.com>t  [ JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message news:<3F738074.8B62407A@istop.com>...o< > When Airbus started to make jetplanes in the 1970s, do youM > think for a minute that they started from a blank sheet of paper ? No. TheyfL > carefully studied how Boeing, Douglas and Lockheed had built their planes,S > what sort of pitfalls, defects etc those had and set out to build a better plane.c > O > When Microsoft set out to build an OS, it had no excuse not taking in all the  > experiences of previous OSs.   I agree.  > But Airbus started out with an airliner as their product goal.  B Microsoft's target market was much different early on from that ofE mainstream OS's, and their early choices have adversely affected thema ever since.i  ? Microsoft DOS was analogous to a hang glider -- very simple andaC inexpensive, yet actually capable of flight with one person.  SinceiF then, they've scaled it up to a larger size and added engines, but too@ much of the design still reflects the original crude single-seatE focus.  They claim it's an airliner now, but most people can tell thee difference.a   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:20:48 +0000 (UTC)p From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk8 Subject: Re: [Bah!] Linux is the favourite hacker target) Message-ID: <bl1av0$fj9$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>e  U In article <3F732C4C.4040907@MMaz.com>, "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@MMaz.com> writes:t >Ian Burgess wrote:g >s8 >>See globe technology's "The Globe and Mail" article... >>W >>www.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030911.gtlinuxsep11/BNStory/Technology/  >>H >>Surprising that Linux rates above Microsoft (67% of successful attacks >>in August vs 23% for M/S). >>   >>H >For ANYONE to claim the Microsoft is not the king of the exploit hill, I >regardless of who they put in at second, third, or forth, sounds like a aF >mouth-piece for MS.  This author obviously has been oblivious to the E >viruses, worms, and trojan horses that have been eating Microsoft's n0 >lunch!  Not just these past months, but years!  >uC >Look, I'm not saying that this is the case, but even suppose that >G >numerically there were less documented exploits announced for MS than  G >all other OS's, how does that actually compare to actual systems that sH >have been compromised?  There is no way that anyone can claim that any ? >other operating system has been exploited more than Windoze...s > H >The way I see it, either way, this author, the stats, and article have J >no credibility; Microshaft, soft, wins for releasing the most vulnerable  >and exploitable software... >  >Barry >h  L There have been worms on Linux utilising security holes in a similar way to H the original Morris worm. However I am not aware of any viruses/worms on+ Linux which are spread primarily by email. i  
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   >u   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 08:58:27 +0200t! From: BAVAY Marc <mbavay@slb.com> ( Subject: Re: [HELP] MAIL.MAI deleted ...' Message-ID: <3F73E393.1BAE6627@slb.com>e  1 Il s'agit d'un message multivolet au format MIME.t& --------------867D8293E2AAD73B323F8E71, Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit-    2 it took some tuning but it works now, thanks a lot marc   Jean-Luc a crit :   > BAVAY Marc wrote:  > >c= > > and I cannot find information on how to create a new one.  > >a0 > > what can I do to get a new mailbox working ? > > ....$ > > thanks a lot for any information > >h > > marc >r > Try ar >l( > MAIL> SET MAIL_DIRECTORY [mydirectory] >i, > (I am at home and I can't test if it work) >n > Good luck  >a
 > Jean-luc >$  & --------------867D8293E2AAD73B323F8E71- Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;I  name="mbavay.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bitu* Content-Description: Carte pour BAVAY Marc  Content-Disposition: attachment;  filename="mbavay.vcf"   begin:vcard  n:Marc;BAVAY tel;work:+33 4 7641 6745 x-mozilla-html:FALSE: org:SchlumbergerSema;Grenoble Technology & Projects Center version:2.1s email;internet:mbavay@slb.comt note:0` adr;quoted-printable:;;36, Chemin du vieux ch=EAne,    BP 104=0D=0A38243  MEYLAN,   FRANCE  ;;;;
 fn:BAVAY Marcy	 end:vcardo  ( --------------867D8293E2AAD73B323F8E71--   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2003.534 ************************