0 INFO-VAX	Fri, 30 Jan 2004	Volume 2004 : Issue 59      Contents: $SETUAI() Query/Problem  CHARON-VAX licesning Re: CHARON-VAX licesning RE: CHARON-VAX licesning Re: CHARON-VAX licesning RE: CHARON-VAX licesning Re: CHARON-VAX licesning/ Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving? / Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving? / Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving? / Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving? / Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving? / Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving? / Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving? / Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving? / Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving? / Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving? / Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving?  Re: DCL questions  Re: DCL questions $ Re: Disabling VRFY and EXPN in TCPIP$ Re: Disabling VRFY and EXPN in TCPIP Re: Excursion for Windows 2000# HOW TO CONNECT TO VMS USING TCP-IP? # HOW TO CONNECT TO VMS USING TCP-IP? ' Re: HOW TO CONNECT TO VMS USING TCP-IP? ' Re: HOW TO CONNECT TO VMS USING TCP-IP? ' Re: HOW TO CONNECT TO VMS USING TCP-IP? ( Re: HP to adopt AMD's Opteron in servers( Re: HP to adopt AMD's Opteron in serversP RE: Intel and Microsoft provide higher 32-bit applications performance         oM Intel and Microsoft provide higher 32-bit applications performance on Itanium : Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !! License questions? RE: License questions? RE: License questions?
 RE: New Virus 
 RE: New Virus  Re: PATHWORKS question Renaissance of VAX-VMS ? RE: Renaissance of VAX-VMS ? Re: Renaissance of VAX-VMS ? RE: Renaissance of VAX-VMS ? RE: Renaissance of VAX-VMS ? Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars  Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars  Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars  Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars  Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars  Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars  Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars  Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars  Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars  Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars  Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars  Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars # Re: Searching for DECps information # Re: Searching for DECps information  Semi controlled FTP access Re: SMG$ examples in Pascal... Re: SMG$ examples in Pascal...? Re: Terry, when Palmers involved you seal the deal on the spot! ? Re: Terry, when Palmers involved you seal the deal on the spot! @ Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems/ Re: The VMS Path Not Taken: Now It Can be Told! / Re: The VMS Path Not Taken: Now It Can be Told! / Re: The VMS Path Not Taken: Now It Can be Told! / Re: The VMS Path Not Taken: Now It Can be Told! D Re: Well Andrew, "3" count them "3" security patches for VMS in five( What happend with vmspython.dyndns.org ?  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:38:25 -0000 9 From: "covendotartdottalk21dotcom" <postmaster@127.0.0.1>   Subject: $SETUAI() Query/Problem3 Message-ID: <iZidnUd-geh-54fd4p2dnA@brightview.com>   F I was wondering whether or not anyone might be able to point me in the" direction of the error of my ways?  E I'm writing some software that is intended to run on NODEA and change B passwords on NODEB, but avoiding sending the password in cleartext> form across the network to NODEB (i.e. NOT some kind of remote% submission of MC AUTHORIZE commands).   B When I define SYSUAF locally on NODEA within DCL (making sure I do5 /PROCESS to avoid causing anyone else problems) to be < NODEB::SYS$SYSTEM:SYSUAF.DAT, I can then quite happily do MCD AUTHORIZE, and examine/modify NODEB's UAF (NODEB has a proxy defined% for the account I am using on NODEA).   C From within a program (DEC C), I can quite happily create a logical B name of SYSUAF with a value of NODEB::SYS$SYSTEM:SYSUAF.DAT in the5 process name table, in supervisor mode on NODEA with:   A     SYS$CRELNM() (if I give the account on NODEA the SYSNAM priv) C     LIB$SET_LOGICAL() (if the account on NODEA does not have SYSNAM                         priv)  # or in executive mode on NODEA with:   A     SYS$CRELNM() (if I give the account on NODEA the SYSNAM priv)     ? However, when I attempt to use $SETUAI() or $GETUAI, the system A services always seem to pick up the definition in the SYSTEM name  table, not the PROCESS one.   A Am I trying to achieve the impossible, or is there something that > you need to set up in order to get $SETUAI()/$GETUAI() to play ball?   ? My point is that if you define the logical, then you can use it > with MC AUTHORIZE and it works, but not if you call the system0 services directly - i.e. inconsistent behaviour.  = I've probably missed out some step that I can't see in any of B the documentation I've looked at (specifically system services and< RTL LIB$ manuals, I didn't check if the OVMS Security manual= discusses $SETUAI/$GETUAI calls, and I'm not in a position to 9 check that just now), so I'm quite happy to be corrected!      Regards,     Mark.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 06:13:55 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>  Subject: CHARON-VAX licesning 9 Message-ID: <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIGENKCLAA.tom@kednos.com>    In looking at the following   > http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/sri-charon-vax-emulator.html  A The fees for transferring the license are given.  But what if you G don't have a license to transfer, but need a new one.  Do you buy a new - one?  And how do you do that for an emulator?  --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 07:58:42 -0700 + From: "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@MMaz.com> ! Subject: Re: CHARON-VAX licesning % Message-ID: <401A7122.60007@MMaz.com>    Tom Linden wrote:    >In looking at the following > ? >http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/sri-charon-vax-emulator.html  > B >The fees for transferring the license are given.  But what if youH >don't have a license to transfer, but need a new one.  Do you buy a new. >one?  And how do you do that for an emulator? >    > F VMS sees the system as a VAX 3100/98, so you would purchase a license H and media for that sized system...  Though I haven't done this with HP, + I have done it with third-party software...    Barry    --    > Barry Treahy, Jr                       E-mail: Treahy@MMaz.com> Midwest Microwave                          Phone: 480/314-1320> Vice President & CIO                         FAX: 480/661-7028                            ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 07:17:24 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> ! Subject: RE: CHARON-VAX licesning 9 Message-ID: <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIGENMCLAA.tom@kednos.com>   E For traditional HW, if you lose a pak you can obtain a replacement by < giving the serial number.  I guess that would not work here.  # What does a license for a /98 cost?      -----Original Message-----2   From: Barry Treahy, Jr. [mailto:Treahy@MMaz.com](   Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 6:59 AM   To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com #   Subject: Re: CHARON-VAX licesning          Tom Linden wrote:       >In looking at the following   > A   >http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/sri-charon-vax-emulator.html    > D   >The fees for transferring the license are given.  But what if youJ   >don't have a license to transfer, but need a new one.  Do you buy a new0   >one?  And how do you do that for an emulator?   >      > H   VMS sees the system as a VAX 3100/98, so you would purchase a license J   and media for that sized system...  Though I haven't done this with HP, -   I have done it with third-party software...       Barry       --     @   Barry Treahy, Jr                       E-mail: Treahy@MMaz.com@   Midwest Microwave                          Phone: 480/314-1320@   Vice President & CIO                         FAX: 480/661-7028                                    --- (   Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.<   Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).B   Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004    --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 08:45:07 -0700 + From: "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@MMaz.com> ! Subject: Re: CHARON-VAX licesning % Message-ID: <401A7C03.60906@MMaz.com>    Tom Linden wrote:   F >For traditional HW, if you lose a pak you can obtain a replacement by= >giving the serial number.  I guess that would not work here.  > $ >What does a license for a /98 cost? >    > F There are multiple variations of the license, depending on the memory E model, instruction accelerator, and target platform.  You'll need to  I contact an authorized reseller for those details but we used Stan Quayle   who was very helpful.    Regards,   Barry      --    > Barry Treahy, Jr                       E-mail: Treahy@MMaz.com> Midwest Microwave                          Phone: 480/314-1320> Vice President & CIO                         FAX: 480/661-7028                            ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 07:43:31 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> ! Subject: RE: CHARON-VAX licesning 9 Message-ID: <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECICENOCLAA.tom@kednos.com>   > Sorry, I meant the VMS license.  No such info on the web site.     -----Original Message-----2   From: Barry Treahy, Jr. [mailto:Treahy@MMaz.com](   Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 7:45 AM   To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com #   Subject: Re: CHARON-VAX licesning          Tom Linden wrote:    H   >For traditional HW, if you lose a pak you can obtain a replacement by?   >giving the serial number.  I guess that would not work here.    > &   >What does a license for a /98 cost?   >      > H   There are multiple variations of the license, depending on the memory G   model, instruction accelerator, and target platform.  You'll need to  K   contact an authorized reseller for those details but we used Stan Quayle     who was very helpful.    
   Regards,      Barry          --     @   Barry Treahy, Jr                       E-mail: Treahy@MMaz.com@   Midwest Microwave                          Phone: 480/314-1320@   Vice President & CIO                         FAX: 480/661-7028                                    --- (   Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.<   Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).B   Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004    --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:07:11 -0700 + From: "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@MMaz.com> ! Subject: Re: CHARON-VAX licesning ' Message-ID: <401A8F3F.3050204@MMaz.com>    Tom Linden wrote:   ? >Sorry, I meant the VMS license.  No such info on the web site.  >    > C Auh, no.  Since HP doesn't sell VAX hardware anymore, except maybe  H refurbs, that is a real good question...  Perhaps Sue @ HP could answer  that?    Barry    --    > Barry Treahy, Jr                       E-mail: Treahy@MMaz.com> Midwest Microwave                          Phone: 480/314-1320> Vice President & CIO                         FAX: 480/661-7028                            ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:13:03 -0600 (CST)  From: sms@antinode.org8 Subject: Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving?) Message-ID: <04013001130349@antinode.org>   ( From: brandon@dalsemi.com (John Brandon)  E > >    Rebooting the first one "fixes" the problem, but that's seldom I > > convenient.  (ALP is an AlpSta 200 4/233 with a DE500.  ALP2 is a PWS 
 > > 500a.) > 
 > Why not: > ' > $ MOUNT /SYSTEM /CLUSTER device label   F    Because you can't mount it if it's not there.  In my start-up stuffH there's a procedure to loop through all the cluster members (F$CSID) andH do exactly this for the disks in the SYS$MANAGER:LOCAL_DISKS.DAT file on, each one.  So, it fails just like this, too:  F ALP $ MOUNT /CLUSTER ALP2$DKA0: VMS073ALP2  !! The default is /SYSTEM., %MOUNT-F-NOSUCHDEV, no such device available   > OR >  > $ MCR SYSMAN IO AUTO  .    Not much good for devices on other systems.   ALP $ sysman io auto ALP $ sh dev dk   P Device                  Device           Error    Volume         Free  Trans MntP  Name                   Status           Count     Label        Blocks Count CntP ALP$DKA0:               Mounted              0  VMS073ALP     13840400   931   2. ALP$DKA400:             Online wrtlck        0  N > Not sure if this helps - do not have a test system to work on at the moment.     Thanks, but trust me.  Next?  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:00:35 +0000 - From: John Laird <nospam@laird-towers.org.uk> 8 Subject: Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving?8 Message-ID: <ifak10531f0dgd96ic0sdbpsthij9fut9b@4ax.com>  A On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:13:03 -0600 (CST), sms@antinode.org wrote:   ) >From: brandon@dalsemi.com (John Brandon)  >> >> $ MCR SYSMAN IO AUTO  > / >   Not much good for devices on other systems.   J Do it on the other system, then !  No, seriously, if ALP cannot see a diskJ on ALP2, then try that command on ALP2.  Before doing so, what does $ SHOWI DEV DK/FUL reveal on ALP2 - does it think it is serving the disk or not ?   B You could also try setting MSCP_SERVE_ALL back to 1 or 2 - the oldJ traditional values for "serve everything".  4 means "serve only the systemE disk", it's possible something is not working properly, although I do K realise it is the system disks that are failing to appear.  Is this what is J preventing the cdroms being served ?  (I dimly recall other ways of hidingH disks.)  It is possible that this might be interfering with the expected3 serving of the hard disks - try serving everything.    --  : To err is human; to blame it on someone else is politics.    Mail john rather than nospam...    ------------------------------   Date: 30 Jan 2004 06:43:48 EST) From: rankin@pactechdata.com (Pat Rankin) 8 Subject: Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving?/ Message-ID: <30JAN200403434809@pactechdata.com>   D In article <04012923133315@antinode.org>, sms@antinode.org writes... [...] G >    Is the second one not announcing the served disk properly?  Is the : > first one not listening?  Any useful suggestions?  [...]  ?      If the first node doesn't have a process named "CONFIGURE"   running then it's not listening.  ! $ @sys$system:startup "CONFIGURE"   > should start it for you, but I don't remember when or why that0 doesn't happen automatically during normal boot.  2                 Pat Rankin, rankin@pactechdata.com   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 06:41:59 -0800# From: axica_nopub@yahoo.com (Safir) 8 Subject: Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving?= Message-ID: <2b49c9e0.0401300641.747c0379@posting.google.com>    At the time of the problem what does a    $ show device /served    says ? (on both nodes)   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:15:31 +0000 (UTC) , From: lewis@mazda.mitre.org (Keith A. Lewis)8 Subject: Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving?. Message-ID: <bvdvv3$bru$1@newslocal.mitre.org>  m sms@antinode.org writes in article <04012923133315@antinode.org> dated Thu, 29 Jan 2004 23:13:33 -0600 (CST): N >MSCP_SERVE_ALL                  4          4         0         15 Bit-Encode   L Unless you're issuing "set device /served" commands, you may need to turn onD some more bits.  Bit 2 (4) means "serve the system disk".  With yourF hardware I'd recommend a value of 2 -- "serve locally attached disks".  . $ MC SYSGEN HELP SYS_PARAMETERS MSCP_SERVE_ALL  J Although I have to say I don't understand why ALP is not seeing ALP2$DKA0.K On my cluster, every node runs a command procedure during startup that does % MOUNT/CLUSTER for each shared disk.     D I hope you're using different values for SCSSYSTEMID on the 2 nodes.  0 --Keith Lewis              klewis {at} mitre.org> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 08:30:33 -0800. From: alexdaniels@themail.co.uk (Alex Daniels)8 Subject: Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving?< Message-ID: <9f7f13a8.0401300830.a10bfdf@posting.google.com>  C >    Rebooting the first one "fixes" the problem, but that's seldom G > convenient.  (ALP is an AlpSta 200 4/233 with a DE500.  ALP2 is a PWS  > 500a.)  1 PWS 500a is NOT a supported platform for OpenVMS.   D The a series are for NT only, the au series support VMS,UNIX and NT.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:41:47 -0000 * From: "Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk>8 Subject: Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving?, Message-ID: <bve1gc$13u2@newton.cc.rl.ac.uk>  G <sms@antinode.org> wrote in message news:04012923133315@antinode.org...   I >    Two Alpha VMS V7.3-1 systems, same software (one loaded from other's I > BACKUP, then suitably adjusted).  First one boots ok.  Second one boots E > ok.  The second one to boot sees the disk of the first one, but the > > first one to boot does _not_ see the disk of the second one.  J Not a cluster licensing problem perhaps? There is a cluster client licence? that doesn't allow disk serving, and LMF is prone to boot order 
 dependencies.    ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:22:13 -0600 (CST)  From: sms@antinode.org8 Subject: Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving?) Message-ID: <04013010221338@antinode.org>   4    Answers to recent questions, and a few more data:   --------  9    Are you being served?  Yes, for the disks of interest:    ALP $ show device /full dka0  P Disk ALP$DKA0:, device type FUJITSU MAA3182SC, is online, mounted, file-orientedJ     device, shareable, served to cluster via MSCP Server, error logging is     enabled. [...]    ALP2 $ show device /full dka0   P Disk ALP$DKA0:, device type FUJITSU MAA3182SC, is online, mounted, file-orientedF     device, shareable, available to cluster, error logging is enabled. [...]     Volume is also mounted on ALP.  J Disk ALP2$DKA0:, device type SEAGATE ST118202LC, is online, mounted, file-P     oriented device, shareable, served to cluster via MSCP Server, error logging     is enabled.  [...]   @    I chose MSCP_SERVE_ALL = 4 to prevent serving a CD-R/RW driveF (ALP$DKA500) which I like to leave turned off most of the time.  If itE happens to be on at start-up, and if it is MSCP-served, the error log F gains a lot of complaints when it's turned off.  The intent was to useH SET DEVICE /SERVED if/when another hard disk was added, or if any reasonG arose to serve the CD-ROM drive (ALP$DKA400).  Currently the only disks A of interest _are_ the system disks, so "Serve the system disk" is  exactly what I want.  F > I hope you're using different values for SCSSYSTEMID on the 2 nodes.  H    Oh, ye of little confidence.  As I said, "suitably adjusted".  SYSGEN SHOW /SCS differences:  ' ALP $ diff /merged = 0 ALP.SCS ALP2.SCS  ************" File SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]ALP.SCS;1P     4   SCSCONNCNT                     21         40         2      32767 Entrie ******# File SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]ALP2.SCS;1 P     4   SCSCONNCNT                     14         40         2      32767 Entrie ************ ************" File SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]ALP.SCS;1P     8   SCSSYSTEMID                  1119          0        -1         -1 Pure-nP     9   SCSSYSTEMIDH                    0          0        -1         -1 Pure-nO    10   SCSNODE                 "ALP     "    "    "    "    "     "ZZZZ" Ascii  ******# File SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]ALP2.SCS;1 P     8   SCSSYSTEMID                  1118          0        -1         -1 Pure-nP     9   SCSSYSTEMIDH                    0          0        -1         -1 Pure-nO    10   SCSNODE                 "ALP2    "    "    "    "    "     "ZZZZ" Ascii  ************ [...]    --------  3    The consensus is that the disks are MSCP-served:    ALP $ show device /served 9        MSCP-Served Devices on ALP 30-JAN-2004 10:36:28.90   ;                                              Queue Requests E Device:           Status      Total Size     Current    Max     Hosts E     ALP$DKA0      Online        35680750           0      0         1  [...]    ALP2 $ show device /served:        MSCP-Served Devices on ALP2 30-JAN-2004 10:37:49.83  ;                                              Queue Requests E Device:           Status      Total Size     Current    Max     Hosts E     ALP2$DKA0      Avail        35566480           0      0         0  [...]   D    The difference between "Online" and "Avail" could be interesting.   --------  A >      If the first node doesn't have a process named "CONFIGURE" " > running then it's not listening. > # > $ @sys$system:startup "CONFIGURE"   F    Neither system has a process named "CONFIGURE".  One of us seems to= be confused about what to expect from 'SYS$SYSTEM:STARTUP.COM 
 "CONFIGURE"'.    --------  3 > PWS 500a is NOT a supported platform for OpenVMS.   B    Yeah, yeah.  Since I added the Qlogic SCSI card, it says it's aA 500au.  Who ya gonna believe, the firmware or the plastic gewgaw?   E    Also, as reported a long time ago, I have the same problem with my 9 (almost supported) VAXstation 3100 M38, running VMS V7.2. H ("%WBM-I-WBMINFO Deleting all bitmaps mastered by this node."  I suppose I should upgrade.)  ,    Now (WUSS serves everything, by the way):   ALP $ show device dk  P Device                  Device           Error    Volume         Free  Trans MntP  Name                   Status           Count     Label        Blocks Count CntP ALP$DKA0:               Mounted              0  VMS073ALP     13835920   907   3. ALP$DKA400:             Online wrtlck        0   ALP2 $ show device dk   P Device                  Device           Error    Volume         Free  Trans MntP  Name                   Status           Count     Label        Blocks Count CntP ALP$DKA0:               Mounted              0  VMS073ALP     13835780     5   3P ALP2$DKA0:              Mounted              0  VMS073ALP2    13343820   601   2. ALP2$DKA400:            Online wrtlck        0P WUSS$DKA200:            Mounted              0  VMS062WUSS      630252     1   2P WUSS$DKA300:            Mounted              0  WUSS_SCSI_3    2630232     1   2. WUSS$DKA400:            Online               0   WUSS $ show device dk   P Device                  Device           Error    Volume         Free  Trans MntP  Name                   Status           Count     Label        Blocks Count CntP ALP$DKA0:               Mounted              0  VMS073ALP     13835780     2   3P ALP2$DKA0:              Mounted              0  VMS073ALP2    13343820     1   2P WUSS$DKA200:            Mounted              0  VMS062WUSS      630252   341   2P WUSS$DKA300:            Mounted              0  WUSS_SCSI_3    2630232     5   2. WUSS$DKA400:            Online wrtlck        0  C    So, newcomers to the cluster work fine (see everything), but the 4 first one appears to be blind/deaf to the newcomers.   --------  D    For a good time, I tried SET DEVICE /SERVED on the tape drives on# these systems with similar results:    ALP $ show device /full mk  M Magtape ALP$MKA200:, device type EXABYTE EXB-8505SMBANSH2, is online, record- N     oriented device, file-oriented device, served to cluster via TMSCP Server,H     error logging is enabled, controller supports compaction (compaction1     disabled), device supports fastskip (per_io).  [...]    ALP2 $ show device /full mk   K Magtape ALP$MKA200:, device type EXABYTE EXB-8505SMBANSH2, is online, file- D     oriented device, available to cluster, error logging is enabled. [...]   L Magtape ALP2$MKA500:, device type EXABYTE EXB-8505SMBANSH2, is online, file-I     oriented device, served to cluster via TMSCP Server, error logging is J     enabled, controller supports compaction (compaction  disabled), device     supports fastskip (per_io).  [...]    WUSS $ show device /full mk   K Magtape ALP$MKA200:, device type EXABYTE EXB-8505SMBANSH2, is online, file- O     oriented device, available to cluster, error logging is enabled, controller /     supports compaction (compaction  disabled).  [...]   L Magtape ALP2$MKA500:, device type EXABYTE EXB-8505SMBANSH2, is online, file-O     oriented device, available to cluster, error logging is enabled, controller /     supports compaction (compaction  disabled).  [...]   A    Again, everyone says he's serving his tape drive, but only the 1 non-first cluster members see remote tape drives.    --------  0 > Not a cluster licensing problem perhaps? [...]  H    Everyone has an active VMSCLUSTER (and/or VAXCLUSTER) license loaded,H and they're not NO_SHARE, so I don't see a problem there.  Aslo, in caseF of conflict, I'd expect the first one up to do better than the others,F but it's the opposite.  Only the first one up seems to be handicapped.   --------      It's still a mystery.  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 10:15:13 -08001 From: bill.hall@nav-international.com (bill Hall) 8 Subject: Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving?= Message-ID: <f04a8177.0401301015.69719b1f@posting.google.com>   G sms@antinode.org wrote in message news:<04012923133315@antinode.org>... F > Two Alpha VMS V7.3-1 systems, same software (one loaded from other'sI > BACKUP, then suitably adjusted).  First one boots ok.  Second one boots E > ok.  The second one to boot sees the disk of the first one, but the G > first one to boot does _not_ see the disk of the second one.  This is I > true irregardful of which one boots first.  (CD-ROM drives, DKA400, are  > not served.) > : > ALP $ show device dk  !!! This is the first one to boot. > R > Device                  Device           Error    Volume         Free  Trans MntR >  Name                   Status           Count     Label        Blocks Count CntR > ALP$DKA0:               Mounted              0  VMS073ALP     13843270   870   20 > ALP$DKA400:             Online wrtlck        0 > < > ALP2 $ show device dk  !!! This is the second one to boot. > R > Device                  Device           Error    Volume         Free  Trans MntR >  Name                   Status           Count     Label        Blocks Count CntR > ALP$DKA0:               Mounted              0  VMS073ALP     13843235     5   2R > ALP2$DKA0:              Mounted              0  VMS073ALP2    13349245   596   10 > ALP2$DKA400:            Online wrtlck        0 > C >    Rebooting the first one "fixes" the problem, but that's seldom G > convenient.  (ALP is an AlpSta 200 4/233 with a DE500.  ALP2 is a PWS  > 500a.) > 8 >    Some software data from PRODUCT SHOW PRODUCT /FULL: >  > DEC AXPVMS VMS V7.3-1   > DEC AXPVMS VMS731_CLUSTER V1.0 > DEC AXPVMS VMS731_F11X V1.0 # > DEC AXPVMS VMS731_FIBRE_SCSI V3.0  > DEC AXPVMS VMS731_MSCP V1.0  > DEC AXPVMS VMS731_SYS V3.0 > DEC AXPVMS VMS731_UPDATE V1.0  > DEC AXPVMS VMS731_XFC V1.0 >   >    SYSGEN SHOW /CLUSTER (ALP): >  > Parameters in use: Active R > Parameter Name           Current    Default     Min.      Max.     Unit  DynamicR > --------------           -------    -------    -------   -------   ----  -------O > VAXCLUSTER                      2          1         0          2 Coded-valu  O > EXPECTED_VOTES                  2          1         1        127 Votes       O > VOTES                           2          1         0        127 Votes       P > DISK_QUORUM     "                "    "    "    "    "     "ZZZZ" Ascii       O > QDSKVOTES                       1          1         0        127 Votes       O > QDSKINTERVAL                   10          3         1      32767 Seconds     O > ALLOCLASS                       0          0         0        255 Pure-numbe  O > LOCKDIRWT                       0          0         0        255 Pure-numbe  O > CLUSTER_CREDITS                10         10        10        128 Credits     O > NISCS_CONV_BOOT                 0          0         0          1 Boolean     O > NISCS_LOAD_PEA0                 1          0         0          1 Boolean     O > NISCS_PORT_SERV                 0          0         0          3 Bitmask     O > MSCP_LOAD                       1          0         0      16384 Coded-valu  O > TMSCP_LOAD                      1          0         0          3 Coded-valu  O > MSCP_SERVE_ALL                  4          4         0         15 Bit-Encode  O > TMSCP_SERVE_ALL                 1          0         0         15 Bit-Encode  O > MSCP_BUFFER                   256       1024       256         -1 Coded-valu  O > MSCP_CREDITS                    8          8         2        128 Coded-valu  O > TAPE_ALLOCLASS                  0          0         0        255 Pure-numbe  O > SD_ALLOCLASS                    0          0         0        255 Pure-numbe  O > NISCS_MAX_PKTSZ              8192       8192       576       9180 Bytes       O > NISCS_LAN_OVRHD                 0          0         0        256 Bytes       O > SERVED_IO                       0          0         0          0 Obsolete    P > CWCREPRC_ENABLE                 1          1         0          1 Bitmask    DP > RECNXINTERVAL                  20         20         1      32767 Seconds    DP > MSCP_CMD_TMO                    0          0         0 2147483647 Seconds    D > ) > ALP $ diff /merged = 0 ALP.CLU ALP2.CLU  > ************$ > File SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]ALP.CLU;2V >     4   VAXCLUSTER                      2          1         0          2 Coded-valuQ >     5   EXPECTED_VOTES                  2          1         1        127 Votes Q >     6   VOTES                           2          1         0        127 Votes  > ******% > File SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]ALP2.CLU;2 V >     4   VAXCLUSTER                      1          1         0          2 Coded-valuQ >     5   EXPECTED_VOTES                  1          1         1        127 Votes Q >     6   VOTES                           1          1         0        127 Votes  > ************ > ************$ > File SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]ALP.CLU;2V >    20   MSCP_BUFFER                   256       1024       256         -1 Coded-valu > ******% > File SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]ALP2.CLU;2 V >    20   MSCP_BUFFER                  1024       1024       256         -1 Coded-valu > ************ > G >    Is the second one not announcing the served disk properly?  Is the I > first one not listening?  Any useful suggestions?  (Please spare me the H > lecture on the EXPECTED_VOTES values, unless you think they contributeI > to _this_ problem.  This is a temporary arrangement.)  More information  > is available on request. > E >    As I recall, I've seen this before, when the second system was a I > VAXstation 3138 running VMS V7.2 (possibly when ALP was running V7.2 as  > well, but no bets).  > J > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > 6 >    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98185 >    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org  >    Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547     E I believe your problem is due to having an ALLOCLASS of zero.  Review F the OpenVMS Cluster Systems Guide for details on the current ALLOCLASSA use and options including using DEVICE_NAMING and port allocation  classes.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 13:09:04 -0500  From: norm.raphael@metso.com8 Subject: Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving?Q Message-ID: <OFCE591756.C8B57EF9-ON85256E2B.0063B1E5-85256E2B.0063F97F@metso.com>   # Could this be related to ALLOCLASS?   1 sms@antinode.org wrote on 01/30/2004 11:22:13 AM:   6 >    Answers to recent questions, and a few more data: >X
 > -------- >0; >    Are you being served?  Yes, for the disks of interest:b >  > ALP $ show device /full dka0 >VD > Disk ALP$DKA0:, device type FUJITSU MAA3182SC, is online, mounted, > file-orientediI >     device, shareable, served to cluster via MSCP Server, error loggingg is >     enabled. > [...]w >M > ALP2 $ show device /full dka0y >rD > Disk ALP$DKA0:, device type FUJITSU MAA3182SC, is online, mounted, > file-orientedlH >     device, shareable, available to cluster, error logging is enabled. > [...]s" >   Volume is also mounted on ALP. >MF > Disk ALP2$DKA0:, device type SEAGATE ST118202LC, is online, mounted, file-eD >     oriented device, shareable, served to cluster via MSCP Server, > error logging  >     is enabled.r > [...]y >CB >    I chose MSCP_SERVE_ALL = 4 to prevent serving a CD-R/RW driveH > (ALP$DKA500) which I like to leave turned off most of the time.  If itG > happens to be on at start-up, and if it is MSCP-served, the error logEH > gains a lot of complaints when it's turned off.  The intent was to useJ > SET DEVICE /SERVED if/when another hard disk was added, or if any reasonI > arose to serve the CD-ROM drive (ALP$DKA400).  Currently the only disksnC > of interest _are_ the system disks, so "Serve the system disk" isp > exactly what I want. > H > > I hope you're using different values for SCSSYSTEMID on the 2 nodes. > J >    Oh, ye of little confidence.  As I said, "suitably adjusted".  SYSGEN > SHOW /SCS differences: >i) > ALP $ diff /merged = 0 ALP.SCS ALP2.SCSE > ************$ > File SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]ALP.SCS;1@ >     4   SCSCONNCNT                     21         40         2 > 32767 Entrie > ******% > File SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]ALP2.SCS;1l@ >     4   SCSCONNCNT                     14         40         2 > 32767 Entrie > ************ > ************$ > File SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]ALP.SCS;1H >     8   SCSSYSTEMID                  1119          0        -1      -1 Pure-nH >     9   SCSSYSTEMIDH                    0          0        -1      -1 Pure-n@ >    10   SCSNODE                 "ALP     "    "    "    "    " > "ZZZZ" Ascii > ******% > File SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]ALP2.SCS;1PH >     8   SCSSYSTEMID                  1118          0        -1      -1 Pure-nH >     9   SCSSYSTEMIDH                    0          0        -1      -1 Pure-n@ >    10   SCSNODE                 "ALP2    "    "    "    "    " > "ZZZZ" Ascii > ************ > [...]T >c
 > -------- >e5 >    The consensus is that the disks are MSCP-served:e >e > ALP $ show device /servedu; >        MSCP-Served Devices on ALP 30-JAN-2004 10:36:28.90d >u= >                                              Queue RequestsoG > Device:           Status      Total Size     Current    Max     Hosts G >     ALP$DKA0      Online        35680750           0      0         1h > [...]n >o > ALP2 $ show device /served< >        MSCP-Served Devices on ALP2 30-JAN-2004 10:37:49.83 >t= >                                              Queue RequestsmG > Device:           Status      Total Size     Current    Max     Hosts-G >     ALP2$DKA0      Avail        35566480           0      0         0v > [...]o >lF >    The difference between "Online" and "Avail" could be interesting. >g
 > -------- >gC > >      If the first node doesn't have a process named "CONFIGURE"n$ > > running then it's not listening. > >o% > > $ @sys$system:startup "CONFIGURE"n >oH >    Neither system has a process named "CONFIGURE".  One of us seems to? > be confused about what to expect from 'SYS$SYSTEM:STARTUP.COMh > "CONFIGURE"'.B >.
 > -------- >d5 > > PWS 500a is NOT a supported platform for OpenVMS.h >ID >    Yeah, yeah.  Since I added the Qlogic SCSI card, it says it's aC > 500au.  Who ya gonna believe, the firmware or the plastic gewgaw?U >DG >    Also, as reported a long time ago, I have the same problem with my ; > (almost supported) VAXstation 3100 M38, running VMS V7.2. J > ("%WBM-I-WBMINFO Deleting all bitmaps mastered by this node."  I suppose > I should upgrade.) > . >    Now (WUSS serves everything, by the way): >c > ALP $ show device dk >o: > Device                  Device           Error    Volume > Free  Trans MntS: >  Name                   Status           Count     Label > Blocks Count Cnt; > ALP$DKA0:               Mounted              0  VMS073ALPO > 13835920   907   30 > ALP$DKA400:             Online wrtlck        0 >r > ALP2 $ show device dk  >e: > Device                  Device           Error    Volume > Free  Trans Mnth: >  Name                   Status           Count     Label > Blocks Count Cnt; > ALP$DKA0:               Mounted              0  VMS073ALPd > 13835780     5   3< > ALP2$DKA0:              Mounted              0  VMS073ALP2 > 13343820   601   20 > ALP2$DKA400:            Online wrtlck        0< > WUSS$DKA200:            Mounted              0  VMS062WUSS > 630252     1   2= > WUSS$DKA300:            Mounted              0  WUSS_SCSI_3n > 2630232     1   2t0 > WUSS$DKA400:            Online               0 >d > WUSS $ show device dkn >c: > Device                  Device           Error    Volume > Free  Trans Mnti: >  Name                   Status           Count     Label > Blocks Count Cnt; > ALP$DKA0:               Mounted              0  VMS073ALPa > 13835780     2   3< > ALP2$DKA0:              Mounted              0  VMS073ALP2 > 13343820     1   2< > WUSS$DKA200:            Mounted              0  VMS062WUSS > 630252   341   2= > WUSS$DKA300:            Mounted              0  WUSS_SCSI_3e > 2630232     5   2e0 > WUSS$DKA400:            Online wrtlck        0 >iE >    So, newcomers to the cluster work fine (see everything), but theu6 > first one appears to be blind/deaf to the newcomers. >-
 > -------- >iF >    For a good time, I tried SET DEVICE /SERVED on the tape drives on% > these systems with similar results:s >t > ALP $ show device /full mk >0G > Magtape ALP$MKA200:, device type EXABYTE EXB-8505SMBANSH2, is online,0 record-mH >     oriented device, file-oriented device, served to cluster via TMSCP Server,gJ >     error logging is enabled, controller supports compaction (compaction3 >     disabled), device supports fastskip (per_io).i > [...]a >m > ALP2 $ show device /full mk  >nG > Magtape ALP$MKA200:, device type EXABYTE EXB-8505SMBANSH2, is online,o file-eF >     oriented device, available to cluster, error logging is enabled. > [...]u >oH > Magtape ALP2$MKA500:, device type EXABYTE EXB-8505SMBANSH2, is online, file-sK >     oriented device, served to cluster via TMSCP Server, error logging is E >     enabled, controller supports compaction (compaction  disabled),  device! >     supports fastskip (per_io).e > [...]c >  > WUSS $ show device /full mk  > G > Magtape ALP$MKA200:, device type EXABYTE EXB-8505SMBANSH2, is online,F file-/= >     oriented device, available to cluster, error logging is- enabled,controller1 >     supports compaction (compaction  disabled).@ > [...]m > H > Magtape ALP2$MKA500:, device type EXABYTE EXB-8505SMBANSH2, is online, file-@= >     oriented device, available to cluster, error logging isb enabled,controller1 >     supports compaction (compaction  disabled).o > [...]r > C >    Again, everyone says he's serving his tape drive, but only the-3 > non-first cluster members see remote tape drives.  >e
 > -------- >u2 > > Not a cluster licensing problem perhaps? [...] >uJ >    Everyone has an active VMSCLUSTER (and/or VAXCLUSTER) license loaded,J > and they're not NO_SHARE, so I don't see a problem there.  Aslo, in caseH > of conflict, I'd expect the first one up to do better than the others,H > but it's the opposite.  Only the first one up seems to be handicapped. >n
 > -------- >a >    It's still a mystery. >oJ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >o6 >    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98185 >    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org  >    Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547t   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:35:22 -0600 (CST)E From: sms@antinode.org8 Subject: Re: Cluster mystery: one-way MSCP disk serving?) Message-ID: <04013012352222@antinode.org>    From: norm.raphael@metso.com  % > Could this be related to ALLOCLASS?   G    I don't see how.  Every disk is strictly local, and two out of threem! systems are as happy as bivalves.o  1 From: bill.hall@nav-international.com (bill Hall)/  G > I believe your problem is due to having an ALLOCLASS of zero.  Review-H > the OpenVMS Cluster Systems Guide for details on the current ALLOCLASSC > use and options including using DEVICE_NAMING and port allocationa
 > classes.  E "Each system attached to a SCSI interconnect must have a nonzero nodeu@ disk allocation class value."  No one here is attached to a SCSI
 interconnect.i  H    Once upon a time at work, on a system with RF-series (DSSI) disks, weH had a non-zero ALLOCLASS there, but it was never needed on anything withA one-path disks (or tapes).  There's not much chance for confusiont8 between ALP$DKA0 and ALP2$DKA0 (for a computer, anyway).  *    But I'm always open to a good argument.  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547z   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 02:30:03 -0800P, From: Ken Fairfield <My.Full.Name@intel.com> Subject: Re: DCL questions+ Message-ID: <bvdbne$r9j$1@news01.intel.com>    AMIT wrote:a   > hello all,F > I am tryin to write two DCL scripts. I have some problems, and would > appreciate any help I get.   Second question first:  A  > SCRIPT2: We use CA's CONSOLE application to check controllers.w@  > Using CONSOLE CONNECT xxxx, I generally check the controller,  > then press Ctrl/E to exit.e3  > if I need to do this using DCL, how can I do it?M  > $console connect xxyyzz  > show failed  > show this_controllerd>  > ctrl/E<<<<---------- This doesn't work. I need to send the  applicationl	  > Ctrl-E   > $exit  ; You need to use the right tool for the job, CONSOLE DIALOG. 9 Read the manuals.  For your example above, first create a - dialog script that looks something like this:n   SEND ""m WAIT 15 ">", SEND "SHOW FAILED" WAIT 15 ">"g SEND "SHOW THIS_CONTROLLER"   9 The angle-bracket in the WAIT commands aobove is the lasts< character in the prompt string as we've configured our HSG80; controllers.  Use something appropriate for your site.  You , can use the entire prompt if you like, e.g.,   WAIT 15 "CONTROLLER1$"  0 if that's the prompt string for your controller.  ; To use the script, do the following (where I've assumed the % file name of the script is SHOW.DIA):   & $ Console Dialog /File=SHOW.DIA xxyyzz  9 Note you _may_ need to add the "dev:[dir]" of the file...5  : If you want to capture the output, put the CONSOLE DIAGLOG9 command in a DCL procedure and execute the procedure with-= /OUT=log_file, or submit it to batch and you have the resultss in the batch job's log file.    C > SCRIPT1: I would like to read a log file which contains a list of:? > events with timestamps. Only events from yestartday should bec: > extracted into another text file, which would be mailed. >   27-jan-2004 14:00:02 >        fsdfsdfdsfdfdfdfs >   28-jan-2004 12:00:00 >        sample2,sample2H >   Only entries from yesterday need to be extracted. How can I do this?    ? The first hint I'd give is to use the lexical function F$CVTIMEs to give you yesterday's date:   1 $date = F$CvTime("YESTERDAY", "ABSOLUTE", "DATE")h  ? will return the string "29-JAN-2004" today (Jan 30th).  If your1A time stamps are actually in lower case as yo've shown (that would0= be unusual, eh?), you'll need to lower case this string using + F$Edit.  Combined with the above, you have:   A $date=F$Edit(F$CvTime("YESTERDAY","ABSOLUTE","DATE"),"LOWERCASE")d  > Now you just need to write a procedure that opens the log fileB for read, reads a line at a time, and for each, does the following comparison:p  	 $ READ_1:h $ READ the_file line< $ If F$Locate(date, line).Eq.F$Length(line) Then Goto READ_1  : When you finally reach a line containing "29-jan-2004" (or< whatever is in the symbol "date", you fall through and start; writing the lines you read into your output file, somethingo line:   	 $ READ_2:e $ Read/End=Fin the_file line $ Write out_file linet
 $ Goto READ_2L $L $ FIN: $ Close the_file $ Close out_file   ... etc. ...    9 That's DCL...  If you want something more direct, look atu; $ HELP SEARCH, the try this (with "date" defined as above):   8 $ Search the_log_file 'date' /Remaining /Out=output.file     	-Kent -- y6 I don't speak for Intel, Intel doesn't speak for me...  
 Ken Fairfield ! D1C Automation VMS System Support " who:   kenneth dot h dot fairfield where: intel dot com   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 08:25:54 -0600 From: briggs@encompasserve.org Subject: Re: DCL questions3 Message-ID: <00NjD2w24imo@eisner.encompasserve.org>o  b In article <7e127df6.0401292207.1d007404@posting.google.com>, thick_guy_9@yahoo.com (AMIT) writes: > hello all,F > I am tryin to write two DCL scripts. I have some problems, and would > appreciate any help I get. > C > SCRIPT1: I would like to read a log file which contains a list ofr? > events with timestamps. Only events from yestartday should be-: > extracted into another text file, which would be mailed. >   27-jan-2004 14:00:02 >        fsdfsdfdsfdfdfdfs >   28-jan-2004 12:00:00 >        sample2,sample2H >   Only entries from yesterday need to be extracted. How can I do this?  8 $ yesterday = f$cvtime("YESTERDAY", "ABSOLUTE", "DATE" )F $ search mylogfile.log "''yesterday'" /window=(0,1) /out=yesterday.log' $ mail yesterday.log some-email-addresso $ delete yesterday.log;*   Tested.  Worked.  B If the log file syntax is more complicated than what is shown, youD may have to go with a solution along the lines of what Ken Fairfield? has already posted (using DCL OPENs, READs and WRITEs) instead.i   	John Briggs   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:55:53 +0000 (UTC)s, From: lewis@mazda.mitre.org (Keith A. Lewis)- Subject: Re: Disabling VRFY and EXPN in TCPIP . Message-ID: <bvduq9$baa$1@newslocal.mitre.org>   "Gareth V. Williams" <graff@cfa0.cfa.harvard.edu> writes in article <4019805f@cfanews.cfa.harvard.edu> dated 29 Jan 2004 16:51:27 -0500:@ >Is it possible to disable the SMTP commands VRFY and EXPN?  OurC >Computation Facility has asked us (in a manner which suggests theyo? >will be less than pleased if we tell them we can't) to disable-F >these commands as they may be "used by spammers to obtain information# >about users on the target system".u  F As in giving out alias info?  I asked about this a few months back and0 received a very helpful note from a HP engineer.  F >We are currently running TCPIP V5.1-ECO 4 (on VMS 7.2-1), but will beD >upgrading to TCPIP V5.4 within two weeks when we move to VMS 7.3-2.  K The engineer said that feature you request is present in TCPIP V5.4, but ite5 is not documented.  Here are the secret instructions.'  K         The solution I chose was to create four new SMTP.CONFIG fields. TheoK         Allow-* fields govern whether the commands are accepted or not. The K         *-Text fields are the optional user-defined text strings to send to-.         the client when we reject the command.                   Allow-EXPN                 Allow-VRFY                 EXPN-Used-Text                 VRFY-Used-Text  C         The new configurable items are implemented as fields in thepG         SMTP.CONFIG file. Not logicals. I chose the CONFIG file because J         it's the new way we want SMTP configured whereas logical names areJ         deprecated. I didn't want to introduce a new pair of logicals onlyK         to force myself to have to migrate them over to config fields a fewr         releases down the line.a    K         Rather than make Allow-EXPN and Allow-VRFY straight switches I made K         them enumerated with legal configurable values of "NEVER", "ALWAYS"dJ         and "LOCALLY". A value of NEVER means don't ever honor the commandK         (EXPN or VRFY). A value of "ALWAYS" means always honor the command. I         A value of "LOCALLY" is where anti-SPAM comes in. If the value is C         "LOCALLY" then we honor the command only if the remote SMTPyG         client's IP address matches the Good-Clients list. Note that asyI         with most other .CONFIG fields the values are not case sensitive. 0         EG. "LocAllY" is quivalent to "locally".  *           The switches default to LOCALLY.       E         The solution also supports the following anti-SPAM semantics:s             - Client failure text   F             The failure text sent to the client is controlable as withK             other anti-SPAM responses. If the SMTP.CONFIG Security field isaK             "secure" then we issue the usual "Closing transmission channel".C             text. If Security is "friendly" then we issue a messagesK             indicating that the command has been administratively disabled.WF             I also introduced a configurable failure text reply config?             field for each of the commands - EXPN-Used-Text and.F             VRFY-Used-Text. These work like the existing *-Text fieldsJ             allowing specific client failure message text to be configured7             for each different type of SMTP SPAM event.n  .           - Local notification of a SPAM event  G             When we receive an EXPN or VRFY command when the command isyH             disabled we report a SPAM event as any other SPAM event. HowJ             the event is reported is based, like all other SPAM events, on1             the SPAM-Action config field setting.s  F >I've dug through the on-line documentation for both V5.1 and V5.4 andE >see nothing even remotely close to what we need to be able to do.  AnH >trawl through the comp.os.vms archive on Google groups didn't enlighten6 >me further, except to suggest that it isn't possible.  L The feature is in 5.4 but not documented (disclaimer: I haven't had a chance0 to try it myself).  It is not in 5.3 or earlier.  0 --Keith Lewis              klewis {at} mitre.org> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 11:20:34 -05007 From: "Gareth V. Williams" <graff@cfa0.cfa.harvard.edu>o- Subject: Re: Disabling VRFY and EXPN in TCPIPr. Message-ID: <401a8452@cfanews.cfa.harvard.edu>  - Keith A. Lewis <lewis@mazda.mitre.org> wrote:lM : The engineer said that feature you request is present in TCPIP V5.4, but itl7 : is not documented.  Here are the secret instructions.e   <snip very useful details>  H   Brilliant!  This looks to be exactly what we need.  I'll test this outH on four of our machines which are already at VMS 7.3-2 and TCPIP V5.4 onH Monday.  Hopefully this will be documented in the next version of TCPIP.
 Much obliged.C     -- LH ------------------------------------------------------------------------H Gareth V. Williams, MS 18, 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.+ Associate Director, IAU Minor Planet Center H gwilliams@cfa.harvard.edu        http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/iau/mpc.html7 OpenVMS & RISC OS: refined choices in operating systemse   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:46:50 +0000k8 From: David McKenzie <david.mckenzie@paradigm-shift.biz>' Subject: Re: Excursion for Windows 2000 B Message-ID: <401a534a$0$4265$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net>   Hoff Hoffman wrote:o  K > In article <eQVRb.537$jH6.111@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net>, "WilliamL- > Hymen" <t18_pilot@hotmail.spam.com> writes:* > 9 > :I have excursion for NT, and I need the newest version " > :which will run on Windows 2000. > : > > :The CD I have is "DIGITAL PATHWORKS 32 Version 7.0A" , 19973 > :It is fine for NT, but will not install on 2000. ' > :Where is the newest version located?  > F >   If you have not already done so, you will want to purchase the kitC >   and a license for this and for other similar software packages.S > B >   Folks with licenses and such have access to a (restricted) FTP: >   download site at HP, where various kits can be pulled. > B >   Any PATHWORKS 32 client release V7.2 or later should work withC >   Microsoft Windows 2000 -- circa V7.3 or later is current, IIRC.e > ? >   The direct (and subject to change) URL for PATHWORKS 32 is:  > , >     http://h71000.www7.hp.com/pathworks32/ > C >   Licensing and ordering information is available at the website.- > 2 >  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h>  >  -----------------------------3 >     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ --3 >     www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq 4 >  --------------------------- pure personal opinion >  ---------------------------G >         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com     $ or you could install cygwin for free   -- i David McKenzie  remove rugby  - Web:            http://www.paradigm-shift.biz 7 Mail            David.McKenzie@paradigm-shift.rugby.bize   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 02:07:39 -0800 From: t_pantel@yahoo.com, Subject: HOW TO CONNECT TO VMS USING TCP-IP?= Message-ID: <7b80c3dc.0401300207.4f2c7a46@posting.google.com>b  B In my company we use DECnet Pathworks socket libraries in order toF open links to VMS. The client side application running on Windows 2000A opens links to the server side application running in VMS using a D special Pathworks function named SktDnetConn providing as parametersD the login name, password, host and the appropriate command procedureD name that it loads on VMS. What is going to be implemented now is toA use the TCP-IP protocol instead of Pathworks in order to run thisa
 procedure.  D Does anyone know how to do this? Are there any corresponding package6 libraries or functions doing the same thing on TCP-IP?   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 02:47:00 -0800 From: t_pantel@yahoo.com, Subject: HOW TO CONNECT TO VMS USING TCP-IP?= Message-ID: <7b80c3dc.0401300247.3bd28c70@posting.google.com>k  B Does anyone know how to use an NT application to connect and run aE command procedure on VMS? At this time the implementation is based onl@ DECnet Pathworks socket library routines to do the job. Is thereA somewhere a corresponding library for TCP/IP? Both the NT and VMSn applications are written in C.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 06:13:14 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>0 Subject: Re: HOW TO CONNECT TO VMS USING TCP-IP?) Message-ID: <401A3C43.435CBF05@istop.com>    t_pantel@yahoo.com wrote: G > command procedure on VMS? At this time the implementation is based on3B > DECnet Pathworks socket library routines to do the job. Is thereC > somewhere a corresponding library for TCP/IP? Both the NT and VMS   > applications are written in C.  K On the VMS side, assuming you have the product called "TCPIP Services", you: have access to the following:   N The TCP/IP Services software includes client and server implementations of theF Berkeley Remote (R) command applications: RCP, RLOGIN, RSH, REXEC, andN RMT/RCD. These applications provide end users with the following capabilities:3 RCP Allows files to be copied between remote hosts.:3 RLOGIN Provides interactive access to remote hosts.34 RSH Passes a command to a remote host for execution.8 REXEC Authenticates and executes RCP and other commands.B RMT/RCD Provides remote access to magnetic tape and CD-ROM drives.    ; If you run other TCPIP stacks, you are likely to have more.e  H And there is also telnet which you could use to connect to the VMS host.  M Now, you will have to find the windows "peer" software that allows you to actEJ as a client to the above services. The one you are probably most likely toN need is RSH. Now the security modem over TCPIP is quite different from that ofM DECNET, so you will need to coordinate with your VMS system administrator how  to setup the connections.,   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 07:28:28 -0800 From: t_pantel@yahoo.com0 Subject: Re: HOW TO CONNECT TO VMS USING TCP-IP?= Message-ID: <7b80c3dc.0401300728.349280b7@posting.google.com>E   TCP IP services?  ? Could you be more specific? Where do I have to search for thesel! services and how to install them?p   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:04:06 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>0 Subject: Re: HOW TO CONNECT TO VMS USING TCP-IP?) Message-ID: <401A8074.6E35662E@istop.com>)   t_pantel@yahoo.com wrote:i >  > TCP IP services? > A > Could you be more specific? Where do I have to search for theseE# > services and how to install them?   N VMS does not come with a TCPIP stack incorporated. The TCPIP stack provided byL the owner of VMS is called TCPIP Services (formerly known as UCX). There are% competing stancks, notably Multinet. 2  L If you type TCPIP at the $ sign and get a TCPIP> prompt, then TCPIP ServicesJ has been installed (whether it is configured or not is another question).   ? if you go to the VMS web site (http://www.openvms.compaq.com or L http://www.hp.com/go/openvms , you can look at the on-line documentation for the TCPIP Services product.e   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 13:14:46 GMTl2 From: "Robert Boers" <Robert.boers@softresint.com>1 Subject: Re: HP to adopt AMD's Opteron in serversI( Message-ID: <401a58c4@news.deckpoint.ch>  I It would be good news for the CHARON-VAX emulator to have an HP supporteddF Opteron platform, as CHARON-VAX runs much faster on AMD64 than on XeonH servers. The AMD64 3400+ demo system runs a VAX 3100-98 at 71 VUPS vs 58 VUPS on a dual 3 GHz Xeon. See:83 http://www.softresint.com/charon-vax/login_demo.htm    Regards, Robert   ; "Fabio Cardoso" <fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br> wrote in message27 news:f30679fb.0401270223.32a290ff@posting.google.com... # > What mess ! In Who can we trust ?s >y? > These IT companies are lost and  making the customers crazy !7< > We cannot have long time planning anymore. Because of this> > lack of vision/planning ! These IT companies think the money" > of the customers grow in farms ! >m >h; > http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-5147619.html?tag=nefd_top  >c > 	 > Regards  >k > FC   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 14:54:29 +0100o3 From: Michael Unger <spam.to.unger@spamgourmet.com>s1 Subject: Re: HP to adopt AMD's Opteron in servers 9 Message-ID: <bvdobh$rijkc$1@ID-152801.news.uni-berlin.de>h  * On 2004-01-30 14:14, "Robert Boers" wrote:  K > It would be good news for the CHARON-VAX emulator to have an HP supported H > Opteron platform, as CHARON-VAX runs much faster on AMD64 than on XeonJ > servers. The AMD64 3400+ demo system runs a VAX 3100-98 at 71 VUPS vs 58! > VUPS on a dual 3 GHz Xeon. See:$5 > http://www.softresint.com/charon-vax/login_demo.htm$  F That would make Charon-Alpha running on Opteron an additional option I
 guess. ;-)   Michael    -- r; Real names enhance the probability of getting real answers. @ Please do *not* send "Security Patch Notifications" or "SecurityA Updates"; this system isn't running a Micro$oft operating system. 5 My e-mail account at DECUS Munich is no longer valid.0   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:47:17 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>tY Subject: RE: Intel and Microsoft provide higher 32-bit applications performance         ot9 Message-ID: <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIEEOECLAA.tom@kednos.com>e  E No offense inteded, Keith, but I fail to see what this has to do withEF VMS.  Moreover, If I want to run W2K, why spend the extra $s for IA64?     -----Original Message-----:   From: Keith Parris [mailto:keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com])   Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 10:43 AMS   To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComSA   Subject: Intel and Microsoft provide higher 32-bit applicationse   performance on Itanium    E   Intel and Microsoft release new technology for HP Integrity servers    by Jeff Kyle  F   Intel and Microsoft have released the IA-32 Execution Layer (EL) 4.3H   software driver for systems powered by the Intel Itanium 2 processorB   running Microsoft Windows Server 2003. The IA-32 EL technologyF   provides greater flexibility for customers migrating applications toC   the 64-bit Windows operating system on Itanium 2-based servers bysH   increasing the performance of many 32-bit software applications. IA-32H   EL is a software package integrated with the operating system. ItaniumG   processors have always provided support for 32-bit applications using0<   on-die hardware; however, with IA-32 EL, support for IA-32F   applications will be carried out in software. At run time, the IA-32E   Execution Layer software translates the IA-32 application code intoCG   native Itanium architecture code and allows it to run as native code.   @   HP Integrity system customers are taking full advantage of theH   performance and scalability offered by Itanium 2 based systems runningE   Windows Server 2003 with fully functional 64-bit database, decision H   support, and line-of-business application environments. Now, customersH   can take advantage of IA-32 EL software to run their 32-bit supportingG   software on the Itanium 2-based server. This new approach facilitates F   customer migration to Integrity servers and provides the flexibilityH   needed for future performance and scalability enhancements, as well asE   giving customers the ability to seamlessly deploy Integrity serversuG   throughout their data centers. The full line of HP Integrity servers,uA   from the 2-way Integrity rx2600 to the 64-way capable Integrity0D   Superdome running Windows Server 2003, supports IA-32 EL software.G   IA-32 EL is supported today in Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition B   for 64-Bit Itanium-based systems, Windows Server 2003 DatacenterA   Edition for 64-Bit Itanium-based Systems, and Windows XP 64-BitP
   Edition.  0   IA-32 EL software is available for download atG   http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/64bit/ipf/ia32el.mspx. The2B   software will be included with the Service Pack 1 release of all>   editions of Windows Server 2003 for Itanium 2 based systems.     ---.(   Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.<   Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).B   Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 10:42:51 -08001 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris)EV Subject: Intel and Microsoft provide higher 32-bit applications performance on Itanium= Message-ID: <cf15391e.0401301042.2fbad66c@posting.google.com>   C Intel and Microsoft release new technology for HP Integrity servers  by Jeff Kyle  D Intel and Microsoft have released the IA-32 Execution Layer (EL) 4.3F software driver for systems powered by the Intel Itanium 2 processor@ running Microsoft Windows Server 2003. The IA-32 EL technologyD provides greater flexibility for customers migrating applications toA the 64-bit Windows operating system on Itanium 2-based servers bygF increasing the performance of many 32-bit software applications. IA-32F EL is a software package integrated with the operating system. ItaniumE processors have always provided support for 32-bit applications using : on-die hardware; however, with IA-32 EL, support for IA-32D applications will be carried out in software. At run time, the IA-32C Execution Layer software translates the IA-32 application code into-E native Itanium architecture code and allows it to run as native code.S  > HP Integrity system customers are taking full advantage of theF performance and scalability offered by Itanium 2 based systems runningC Windows Server 2003 with fully functional 64-bit database, decisionhF support, and line-of-business application environments. Now, customersF can take advantage of IA-32 EL software to run their 32-bit supportingE software on the Itanium 2-based server. This new approach facilitates D customer migration to Integrity servers and provides the flexibilityF needed for future performance and scalability enhancements, as well asC giving customers the ability to seamlessly deploy Integrity serversCE throughout their data centers. The full line of HP Integrity servers,s? from the 2-way Integrity rx2600 to the 64-way capable Integrity0B Superdome running Windows Server 2003, supports IA-32 EL software.E IA-32 EL is supported today in Windows Server 2003 Enterprise EditionS@ for 64-Bit Itanium-based systems, Windows Server 2003 Datacenter? Edition for 64-Bit Itanium-based Systems, and Windows XP 64-Bit  Edition.  . IA-32 EL software is available for download atE http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/64bit/ipf/ia32el.mspx. Then@ software will be included with the Service Pack 1 release of all< editions of Windows Server 2003 for Itanium 2 based systems.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:25:36 +0000nO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>SC Subject: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!I0 Message-ID: <bvdbf1$isi$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   David Svensson wrote:) > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew No.Harrison No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvbhkj$scp$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...n >  >>Dirk Munk wrote: >>J >>>What many of us have been predicting for the last couple of years now i >> >> s w >>J >>>going to be a reality. Intel will have 64bit x86 cpu's. Please read the >> >>   >>2 >>>following article from the news agency Reuters: >>>  >>>( tH >>>http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=technologyNews&storyID= >> >> 4233918 Y >> >>>) >>>  >>@ >>If true then the last person working for HP Enterprise Systems6 >>Business should turn the lights off when they leave. >>	 >>regards0 >>Andrew Harrison  >  > ( > The usual childish behaviour from you. >    How do you work that out ?  8 HP's Enterprise Systems Division is totally committed to< Itanium from OS's to compilers systems, supporting chipsets, Interconnects etc.  8 The introduction of an x86-64 based processor from Intel5 will seriosly damage Itanium's chances of succeeding.   < If Itanium fails then HP's investment is basically worthless: and for example the 8.x OpenVMS port to Itanium would have to start again for x86-64.  8 In relatively small number of ISV's that HP have managed5 to attract so far to Itanium will be left with a zeroO: value investment. What do you rate HP's chances of getting< them to do another port to HP-UX/x86-64 and OpenVMS/x86-64 ?    ; If you honestly think that HP's Enterprise Systems business 8 could survive that and emerge unscathed you are deluding	 yourself.Z  3 Anyone who thinks otherwise is behaving childishly.e  : http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-5150336.html?tag=nefd_lede  ' Note the Microprocessor Report Comment.-  F > This has been known for years, and is not a new thing for most of usF > (and inside Intel) that Intel will make a x86-64 chip in the future.  = It has been rumoured for years and Intel up to now has deniedn
 every rumour.8  @ It has been suggested that Intel wanted to give Itanium a chance< to deliver with Yamhill as their back-stop if it didn't. The: announcment that they will demonstrate 64 bit support this9 year suggests that Intel are now getting to a point wherei, cutting their losses may be the best option.  @ The much faster takeoff of Opteron and AMD's improved financials- and market share will not have helped either.d  9 Take IBM, they are a key design win that Intel needed forI7 large Itanium based systems. Do you honestly think thatn= IBM will revisit their decision to use IA-32 based processors:= for their next generation large Intel based SMP box in favoureB of Itanium now that they know that the same IA-32 design will also get them 64bit support.U   You have got to be joking.  < It also puts enormous pressure on HP to get Itanium sales up> I would say that HP have 6 months to demonstrate to Intel that9 they can make a sucess of Itanium to do this they need toa; do a ~10x increase in Itanium systems. Unfortunately as the < Microprocessor Report Editor pointed out the fact that Intel: has announced that they will demo 64bit support means that HP will be further hampered.       Regards. Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:25:04 +0000 (UTC)  From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.ukC Subject: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !! ) Message-ID: <bvdif0$gaq$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>u  g In article <734da31c.0401291935.7ccfa072@posting.google.com>, icerq4a@spray.se (David Svensson) writes:  >Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew No.Harrison No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvbhkj$scp$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>... >> Dirk Munk wrote:eL >> > What many of us have been predicting for the last couple of years now i >>  s L >> > going to be a reality. Intel will have 64bit x86 cpu's. Please read the >>   54 >> > following article from the news agency Reuters: >> > 3 >> > ( 3J >> > http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=technologyNews&storyID= >>  4233918  >> > ) >> >   >>  A >> If true then the last person working for HP Enterprise Systemsn7 >> Business should turn the lights off when they leave.  >> D
 >> regards >> Andrew Harrison > ' >The usual childish behaviour from you.  >iE >This has been known for years, and is not a new thing for most of usiE >(and inside Intel) that Intel will make a x86-64 chip in the future.C  I Pretty much everyone believed that Intel was working on an x86-64 chip to3I counter AMD. However Intel have up until now always strongly denied these2K "Yamhill" rumours since to admit them would obviously have implications for0 Itanium.    
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:11:06 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>hC Subject: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!oH Message-ID: <euuSb.70077$fgk.40709@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  ( Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote: > > > If Itanium fails then HP's investment is basically worthless< > and for example the 8.x OpenVMS port to Itanium would have > to start again for x86-64. >o  G HP's investment in Itanium would probably be close to worthless in thatSB event, but they do have a viable and relatively inexpensive in theL whole-scheme-of-things fall-back position - releasing a real EV79 (somethingK that could probably be done in 6 months time) and moving forward on EV8. HP L still owns the intellectual property rights to that - they only licenced useL to Intel.  HP needs only the political will to execute it. Of course certainG parties at the executive level will have to fall on their swords in thee process.  H Of course, the whole HP-UX thing would also then also take a turn in theH direction it should have followed in the first place - renaming Tru64 toJ HP-UX v15 and donating the insiginifcant worthwhile bits from HP-UX 11/12./ And the NSK efforts would revert back to Alpha.S  G Not possibly speaking for VMS Engineering, but it's my opinion that theeK porting effort to IA64, while regrettably delaying the introduction of manydJ desireable features in VMS, has only served to help clean-up a lot of lessJ efficient baggage that has accumulated over the years.  I think that would' only help if run on a real EV79 or EV8.    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 08:07:00 -0800' From: icerq4a@spray.se (David Svensson) C Subject: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!v= Message-ID: <734da31c.0401300807.5ca3871b@posting.google.com>e   Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvdbf1$isi$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...p > David Svensson wrote:a > > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew No.Harrison No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvbhkj$scp$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...d > >  > >>Dirk Munk wrote: > >>L > >>>What many of us have been predicting for the last couple of years now i > >> > >> s - > >>L > >>>going to be a reality. Intel will have 64bit x86 cpu's. Please read the > >> > >>   > >>4 > >>>following article from the news agency Reuters: > >>>- > >>>( -J > >>>http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=technologyNews&storyID= > >>
 > >> 4233918 : > >> > >>>) > >>>  > >>B > >>If true then the last person working for HP Enterprise Systems8 > >>Business should turn the lights off when they leave. > >> > >>regardsI > >>Andrew Harrisony > >  > > * > > The usual childish behaviour from you. > >  >  > How do you work that out ?  7 I don't think you would understand, even if I tell you.r   > H > > This has been known for years, and is not a new thing for most of usH > > (and inside Intel) that Intel will make a x86-64 chip in the future. > ? > It has been rumoured for years and Intel up to now has deniedy > every rumour.a > B > It has been suggested that Intel wanted to give Itanium a chance> > to deliver with Yamhill as their back-stop if it didn't. The< > announcment that they will demonstrate 64 bit support this; > year suggests that Intel are now getting to a point where . > cutting their losses may be the best option.  E I have since 2000 thought that Intel will some day will make a x86-64 B CPU. This must also have been in the heads of at least part of the people in Intel and HP.-  F Intel had desktop/mainstream plans for IA64 in the beginning, but that changed in 1999-2001.9   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:52:07 +0000 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>0C Subject: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!:0 Message-ID: <bve23o$r90$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   David Svensson wrote:a > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvdbf1$isi$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...i >  >>David Svensson wrote:'B >>>>If true then the last person working for HP Enterprise Systems8 >>>>Business should turn the lights off when they leave. >>>> >>>>regards> >>>>Andrew Harrison  >>>  >>>h) >>>The usual childish behaviour from you.z >>>s >> >>How do you work that out ? >  > 9 > I don't think you would understand, even if I tell you.  >   8 Well what do you think would happen to the HP Enterprise# Systems business if Itanium folds ?e  6 There was nothing childish about my comment, it neatly sums up the situation.  5 The fact that you may not like it is to be honest notH my problem.A > G >>>This has been known for years, and is not a new thing for most of usmG >>>(and inside Intel) that Intel will make a x86-64 chip in the future.r >>? >>It has been rumoured for years and Intel up to now has denied  >>every rumour.  >>B >>It has been suggested that Intel wanted to give Itanium a chance> >>to deliver with Yamhill as their back-stop if it didn't. The< >>announcment that they will demonstrate 64 bit support this; >>year suggests that Intel are now getting to a point where . >>cutting their losses may be the best option. >  > G > I have since 2000 thought that Intel will some day will make a x86-64 D > CPU. This must also have been in the heads of at least part of the > people in Intel and HP.h > H > Intel had desktop/mainstream plans for IA64 in the beginning, but that > changed in 1999-2001.n  C Well of course. Doing x86-64 would be relatively easy for Intel and > as a backup strategy to guard against Itanium failure it makes sense.  B But you would always deny that the strategy was in place and being@ excuted until it became obvious that your chosen route (Itanium) had failed.e  9 So you work out what Intel announcing x86-64 really meanst   Regardse Andrew HarrisonC   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 17:36:26 +0000SO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>uC Subject: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!00 Message-ID: <bve4mr$skj$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   John Smith wrote:t* > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote: > > >>If Itanium fails then HP's investment is basically worthless< >>and for example the 8.x OpenVMS port to Itanium would have >>to start again for x86-64. >> >  > I > HP's investment in Itanium would probably be close to worthless in thateD > event, but they do have a viable and relatively inexpensive in theN > whole-scheme-of-things fall-back position - releasing a real EV79 (somethingM > that could probably be done in 6 months time) and moving forward on EV8. HPuN > still owns the intellectual property rights to that - they only licenced useN > to Intel.  HP needs only the political will to execute it. Of course certainI > parties at the executive level will have to fall on their swords in thea
 > process. >   ; The problem would be what to do after EV79, the Alpha teamse; have gone to Intel AMD and Sun. HP no longer have any Alphay< Engineers and it seems unlikely that they could reconstitute; the development teams etc even if Intel was willing to helpe. HP produce what would then be a competing CPU.   regards- Andrew Harrison-J > Of course, the whole HP-UX thing would also then also take a turn in theJ > direction it should have followed in the first place - renaming Tru64 toL > HP-UX v15 and donating the insiginifcant worthwhile bits from HP-UX 11/12.1 > And the NSK efforts would revert back to Alpha.t > I > Not possibly speaking for VMS Engineering, but it's my opinion that the M > porting effort to IA64, while regrettably delaying the introduction of manyrL > desireable features in VMS, has only served to help clean-up a lot of lessL > efficient baggage that has accumulated over the years.  I think that would) > only help if run on a real EV79 or EV8.2 >  >    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 06:46:04 -0800% From: tadamsmar@yahoo.com (Tom Adams)r Subject: License questions?A= Message-ID: <ea44f5a1.0401300646.3b6503bb@posting.google.com>o  A I am about to buy a replacement for an dead Alphastation 400/233.   1 We are considering buying a refurbished DS10/600.e  0 I want double check the info I have on licenses.   It is my understanding that:  ? 1.  I need to buy the Enterprise Integration Package.  I cannot( transfer these licenses.W  < 2.  I will be able to transfer my 1050 unit VOLSHAD license.  D 3.  I will be able to transfer my 800 unit OPENVMS-ALPHA-ADL license to allow concurrent users.j  ) Does this ring true with your experience?e  E The unit counts are the same as on our current DS10/466, but are theyf sufficient for a DS10/600?  * Can I just load the PAKs it will all work?  E I think I need to do some paperwork and pay a fee to make the license  transfer  all kosher.  Correct?m   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 06:46:03 -0800l# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>a Subject: RE: License questions? 9 Message-ID: <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIGENLCLAA.tom@kednos.com>o   Look at the charts  0 http://licensing.hp.com/swl/view.slm?page=refmat     -----Original Message-----.   From: Tom Adams [mailto:tadamsmar@yahoo.com](   Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 6:46 AM   To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Coml   Subject: License questions?w      C   I am about to buy a replacement for an dead Alphastation 400/233.y   3   We are considering buying a refurbished DS10/600.m   2   I want double check the info I have on licenses.      It is my understanding that:   A   1.  I need to buy the Enterprise Integration Package.  I cannoth
   transfer   these licenses.    >   2.  I will be able to transfer my 1050 unit VOLSHAD license.   F   3.  I will be able to transfer my 800 unit OPENVMS-ALPHA-ADL license
   to allow   concurrent users.    +   Does this ring true with your experience?    G   The unit counts are the same as on our current DS10/466, but are theyd   sufficient for a DS10/600?   ,   Can I just load the PAKs it will all work?   G   I think I need to do some paperwork and pay a fee to make the licensel!   transfer  all kosher.  Correct?i      ---o(   Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.<   Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).B   Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004    ---A& Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 08:34:43 -0700"B From: "Tillman, Brian (AGRE)" <Brian.Tillman@smiths-aerospace.com> Subject: RE: License questions?fO Message-ID: <11721EF39C7D7F47A55447158274CAF7900265@cossmgmbx01.email.corp.tld>T   Tom Adams wrote:  > > 2.  I will be able to transfer my 1050 unit VOLSHAD license. >=0D> > 3.  I will be able to transfer my 800 unit OPENVMS-ALPHA-ADL$ > license to allow concurrent users.	 ..snip... ? > I think I need to do some paperwork and pay a fee to make theo) > license transfer  all kosher.  Correct?M  D Moving licenses internally, within the same legal entity requires no! paperwork nor notification of HP.r --=0Da Brian Tillman        =0D Smiths Aerospace 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS 1B3 Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991"> Brian.Tillman is the name, smiths-aerospace.com is the domain.	       =0D : I don't speak for Smiths, and Smiths doesn't speak for me.      * ******************************************G The information contained in, or attached to, this e-mail, may contain=tD  confidential information and is intended solely for the use of the=G  individual or entity to whom they are addressed and may be subject to=TH  legal privilege.  If you have received this e-mail in error you should=H  notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail, delete the message from=L  your system and notify your system manager.  Please do not copy it for any=F  purpose, or disclose its contents to any other person.  The views or=I  opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do=pG  not necessarily represent those of the company.  The recipient should=oI  check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses.  The= A  company accepts no liability for any damage caused, directly or= 4  indirectly, by any virus transmitted in this email.* ******************************************   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 06:30:56 -0700sB From: "Tillman, Brian (AGRE)" <Brian.Tillman@smiths-aerospace.com> Subject: RE: New VirusO Message-ID: <11721EF39C7D7F47A55447158274CAF7900207@cossmgmbx01.email.corp.tld>v   JF Mezei wrote:r   > Tom Linden wrote:yG >>   of MX are very worth-while additions.  Scanning the body, however,4E >>   is more complex.  It requires a full-fledged HTML interpreter spc >> that,=0Di  A Where did you get that quote?  It certainly wasn't written by Tom.H Linden.  I wrote those words on the MX-Support mailing list.  How did it get on comp.os.vms?q --=0D  Brian Tillman        =0D Smiths Aerospace 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS 1B3 Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991e> Brian.Tillman is the name, smiths-aerospace.com is the domain.	       =0Dt: I don't speak for Smiths, and Smiths doesn't speak for me.   </table> </Pre>V <HTML> <br> <br>4 ************************************************<br>G The information contained in, or attached to, this e-mail, may contain=-D  confidential information and is intended solely for the use of the=G  individual or entity to whom they are addressed and may be subject to=tH  legal privilege.  If you have received this e-mail in error you should=H  notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail, delete the message from=L  your system and notify your system manager.  Please do not copy it for any=F  purpose, or disclose its contents to any other person.  The views or=I  opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do=eG  not necessarily represent those of the company.  The recipient should=sI  check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses.  The=cA  company accepts no liability for any damage caused, directly or= 8  indirectly, by any virus transmitted in this email.<br>4 ************************************************<br> </HTML>    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 05:34:28 -0800i# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>  Subject: RE: New Virus9 Message-ID: <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIGENJCLAA.tom@kednos.com>f  L I had cross-posted asking id anyone was aware of a port of spambayes to VMS,5 and apparentaly JF didn't look carefully at the text.w     -----Original Message-----I   From: Tillman, Brian (AGRE) [mailto:Brian.Tillman@smiths-aerospace.com] (   Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 5:31 AM   To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com    Subject: RE: New Virus            JF Mezei wrote:3      > Tom Linden wrote:1I   >>   of MX are very worth-while additions.  Scanning the body, however, G   >>   is more complex.  It requires a full-fledged HTML interpreter sp<   >> that, -C   Where did you get that quote?  It certainly wasn't written by TomeJ   Linden.  I wrote those words on the MX-Support mailing list.  How did it   get on comp.os.vms?n+   -- Brian Tillman         Smiths Aerospaceo    3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS 1B3   Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991 @   Brian.Tillman is the name, smiths-aerospace.com is the domain.C          I don't speak for Smiths, and Smiths doesn't speak for me.       </table> </Pre>r   <HTML>   <br>   <br>6   ************************************************<br>A   The information contained in, or attached to, this e-mail, may SB   contain confidential information and is intended solely for the A   use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed and s@   may be subject to legal privilege.  If you have received this D   e-mail in error you should notify the sender immediately by reply >   e-mail, delete the message from your system and notify your =   system manager.  Please do not copy it for any purpose, or aD   disclose its contents to any other person.  The views or opinions    presentede<    in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not D   necessarily represent those of the company.  The recipient should <   check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of D   viruses.  The company accepts no liability for any damage caused, E   directly or indirectly, by any virus transmitted in this email.<br> 6   ************************************************<br>	   </HTML>8      ---.(   Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.<   Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).B   Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004    ---i& Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 07:24:25 -0800& From: twnews@kittles.com (Thomas Wirt) Subject: Re: PATHWORKS question = Message-ID: <b3531425.0401300724.69a96079@posting.google.com>m  q Dieter Montanez <dieter@plantcomputers.com> wrote in message news:<KYMRb.8225$nI4.6588@bignews2.bellsouth.net>...   	 >> Hello,o >> j? >> I need to connect a PC Running Windows XP to a VAX  4000/300h@ >> running VMS 5.xx. There is no PATHWORKS installed on the VAX.@ >> I would likte the PC to be able to run the DECNET protocol toB >> connect to the VAX and be able to start a DOS based application/ >> on the PC that will comunicate with the VAX.k >> R; >> I've seen "client only" versions of PATHWORKS 32 7.x for 6 >>  $ 200.00. Will those version help me doing that ? >> i
 >> regards >>  	 >> Dieterf Andy Bustamante wrote:  N > In addition to the client (Thomas Wirt) you'll need the host software. For aL > 5.5xxx system I believe you'll need a Pathworks 5.0F2 (5.0F1) distributionM > on the host.  The current Advanced server version 6.0 plus requires VMS 7.2RN > or better if I recall correctly.  On the client side, for Windows XP, you'llE > need Pathworks 32 v7.3.  A client license should also be installed.. > F For this particular problem there should not be a need for a PW serverD to be installed.  Dieter is only trying to get DECNET working on his> PC according to his original posting.  If he wishes to use theA wonderful file sharing features of PW he will need to install theeF server on VMS, but once DECNET is installed on the PC he can do DECNETC file operations like copy without any further installation.  Yes herF needs a license for the PW 32, but IIRC this is an unenforced license, so no license server is needed.8   -- b Thomas Wirtg Systems ManagerP Kittle's Home Furnishingsm Indianapolis, IN   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 09:08:24 -0500-* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>! Subject: Renaissance of VAX-VMS ?M) Message-ID: <401A6542.291639D0@istop.com>R  I With the popularity of the VAX emulators on 8086s, would this create somecI impetus for the VMS engineers to begin work on VAX-VMS again ? (giving us L ODS5, CDE and PPP support for TCPIP and all the other goodies that have been omitted from VAX-VMS ?)    ? ?m  M Once IA64 is declared mature and HP decides to move its enterprise systems toiK the 8086 architecture, customers could immediatly buy some 64 bit 8086s and,N initially run the VAX-VMS version with the emulator and once the VMS engineersI have finished the port to the 8086, customers could then move to a natives VMS-8086 on the same hardware.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 07:38:26 -0700/B From: "Tillman, Brian (AGRE)" <Brian.Tillman@smiths-aerospace.com>% Subject: RE: Renaissance of VAX-VMS ?-O Message-ID: <11721EF39C7D7F47A55447158274CAF7900238@cossmgmbx01.email.corp.tld>e   JF Mezei wrote:.  ? > With the popularity of the VAX emulators on 8086s, would thisD< > create some impetus for the VMS engineers to begin work on: > VAX-VMS again ? (giving us ODS5, CDE and PPP support forH > TCPIP and all the other goodies that have been omitted from VAX-VMS ?)  G It'll never happen.  VAXes (and emulated VAXes) no longer exist, as far3 as HP is concerned.p --=0Ds Brian Tillman        =0D Smiths Aerospace 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS 1B3 Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991>> Brian.Tillman is the name, smiths-aerospace.com is the domain.	       =0D : I don't speak for Smiths, and Smiths doesn't speak for me.      * ******************************************G The information contained in, or attached to, this e-mail, may contain=iD  confidential information and is intended solely for the use of the=G  individual or entity to whom they are addressed and may be subject to=tH  legal privilege.  If you have received this e-mail in error you should=H  notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail, delete the message from=L  your system and notify your system manager.  Please do not copy it for any=F  purpose, or disclose its contents to any other person.  The views or=I  opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do=VG  not necessarily represent those of the company.  The recipient should=uI  check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses.  The=mA  company accepts no liability for any damage caused, directly or=S4  indirectly, by any virus transmitted in this email.* ******************************************   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 18:52:44 +0100n2 From: "Robert Boers" <robert.boers@softresint.com>% Subject: Re: Renaissance of VAX-VMS ?h5 Message-ID: <401a99f1$0$734$5402220f@news.sunrise.ch>'  K No, HP has the emulated VAXes not forgotten. They even support VMS on them:n> http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/sri-charon-vax-emulator.html   Robert Boers    E "Tillman, Brian (AGRE)" <Brian.Tillman@smiths-aerospace.com> wrote inM messagepI news:11721EF39C7D7F47A55447158274CAF7900238@cossmgmbx01.email.corp.tld...L   JF Mezei wrote:C  ? > With the popularity of the VAX emulators on 8086s, would thise< > create some impetus for the VMS engineers to begin work on: > VAX-VMS again ? (giving us ODS5, CDE and PPP support forH > TCPIP and all the other goodies that have been omitted from VAX-VMS ?)  G It'll never happen.  VAXes (and emulated VAXes) no longer exist, as farj as HP is concerned.o --
 Brian Tillman2 Smiths Aerospace 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS 1B3 Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991 > Brian.Tillman is the name, smiths-aerospace.com is the domain.  : I don't speak for Smiths, and Smiths doesn't speak for me.      * ******************************************F The information contained in, or attached to, this e-mail, may containB confidential information and is intended solely for the use of theK individual or entity to whom they are addressed and may be subject to legalmK privilege.  If you have received this e-mail in error you should notify thepK sender immediately by reply e-mail, delete the message from your system andsF notify your system manager.  Please do not copy it for any purpose, orK disclose its contents to any other person.  The views or opinions presented D in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarilyK represent those of the company.  The recipient should check this e-mail andaD any attachments for the presence of viruses.  The company accepts noE liability for any damage caused, directly or indirectly, by any viruse transmitted in this email.* ******************************************   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 09:52:34 -0800p# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> % Subject: RE: Renaissance of VAX-VMS ?e9 Message-ID: <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIIEOBCLAA.tom@kednos.com>i     -----Original Message-----9   From: Robert Boers [mailto:robert.boers@softresint.com]g(   Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 9:53 AM   To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comf'   Subject: Re: Renaissance of VAX-VMS ?m    I guess that was translated? :-)   /   No, HP has the emulated VAXes not forgotten.  0 Nein, HP hat die emulierte VAXen nicht vergessen   They even support    VMS on them:@   http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/sri-charon-vax-emulator.html      Robert Boers      G   "Tillman, Brian (AGRE)" <Brian.Tillman@smiths-aerospace.com> wrote inr	   messagetK   news:11721EF39C7D7F47A55447158274CAF7900238@cossmgmbx01.email.corp.tld...a      JF Mezei wrote:4   A   > With the popularity of the VAX emulators on 8086s, would this3>   > create some impetus for the VMS engineers to begin work on<   > VAX-VMS again ? (giving us ODS5, CDE and PPP support forJ   > TCPIP and all the other goodies that have been omitted from VAX-VMS ?)   I   It'll never happen.  VAXes (and emulated VAXes) no longer exist, as farr   as HP is concerned.h   --   Brian Tillman    Smiths Aerospace    3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS 1B3   Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991D@   Brian.Tillman is the name, smiths-aerospace.com is the domain.   <   I don't speak for Smiths, and Smiths doesn't speak for me.         ,   ******************************************H   The information contained in, or attached to, this e-mail, may containD   confidential information and is intended solely for the use of the=   individual or entity to whom they are addressed and may be m   subject to legalC   privilege.  If you have received this e-mail in error you should e   notify theC   sender immediately by reply e-mail, delete the message from your     system andH   notify your system manager.  Please do not copy it for any purpose, orD   disclose its contents to any other person.  The views or opinions    presented2F   in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarilyC   represent those of the company.  The recipient should check this s   e-mail andF   any attachments for the presence of viruses.  The company accepts noG   liability for any damage caused, directly or indirectly, by any virusc   transmitted in this email.,   ******************************************         ---r(   Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.<   Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).B   Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004    ---e& Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:09:11 -0700oB From: "Tillman, Brian (AGRE)" <Brian.Tillman@smiths-aerospace.com>% Subject: RE: Renaissance of VAX-VMS ? O Message-ID: <11721EF39C7D7F47A55447158274CAF79002D4@cossmgmbx01.email.corp.tld>h   Robert Boers wrote:r  8 > No, HP has the emulated VAXes not forgotten. They even > support VMS on them:@ > http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/sri-charon-vax-emulator.html  A My point is that I believe HP has no intention of adding anythingd& substantial whatsoever to OpenVMS VAX. --=0D  Brian Tillman        =0D Smiths Aerospace 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS 1B3 Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991n> Brian.Tillman is the name, smiths-aerospace.com is the domain.	       =0D.: I don't speak for Smiths, and Smiths doesn't speak for me.      * ******************************************G The information contained in, or attached to, this e-mail, may contain=nD  confidential information and is intended solely for the use of the=G  individual or entity to whom they are addressed and may be subject to=sH  legal privilege.  If you have received this e-mail in error you should=H  notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail, delete the message from=L  your system and notify your system manager.  Please do not copy it for any=F  purpose, or disclose its contents to any other person.  The views or=I  opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do=-G  not necessarily represent those of the company.  The recipient should=rI  check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses.  The= A  company accepts no liability for any damage caused, directly or=k4  indirectly, by any virus transmitted in this email.* ******************************************   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:37:07 +0000sO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> " Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars0 Message-ID: <bvdc4k$j42$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Sue Skonetski wrote:H > This is a great example of why folks stop posting all together in thisH > newgroup.  Andrew do you have a list of approved people you would likeE > to hear from or is anyone that happens to think highly of VMS or HP  > open to your wrath?h > H > At least in the United States Consultants get paid as do the workers. D > I am not sure the process used in the UK or by SUN but I am fairlyE > sure they also pay for consultants and employees that does not maker8 > the consultants or the employees people of ill repute. > F > There is obviously some other motive in this message, maybe Terry is? > not your favorite person, which is a shame since he has never B > mentioned you to me in our conversations.  Or maybe the truth is/ > hitting a little hard, but what is your goal?a >    Truth ohhh come on Sue.e  D There is no truth to the suggestion that Opteron isn't 64bit (it is)C There is no truth to the suggestion that SPARC will stop after USIVsD There is no truth to the suggestion that Opteron ISV's need to port. etc.  C The problem is that the article is based on a series of assumptionsn that are demonstrably untrue..  G Could it be that the truth about the "truth" is hitting a bit to hard ?s  C You asked me what my goal was. I have corrected Terry's article andsD dawn a different conclusion at the end based on the corrections that( seems to be a perfectly acceptable goal.  3 Do you want to base OpenVMS marketing on untruths ?    You should thank mev   Regards  Andrew Harrisonr > Suea >  >  > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew No.Harrison No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvb1b6$mnq$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...  >  >>Ken Farmer wrote:h >> >>>SKHPC: Rumours of (CPU) Wars  >>>uJ >>>Two days ago, CNET.COM published an article citing unnamed sources who  >> >> are >>J >>>alleging that HP plans to come out with servers that contain AMD's Opte >> >> ron >>J >>>processor. While SKHPC is not in a position to confirm or deny the vera >> >> cityb >>G >>>of this story, we do have some Opteron and Itanium data that's worthu >>>considering.w >>> D >>>http://www.shannonknowshpc.com/stories.php?story=04/01/28/7503155 >>>  >>>a >>; >>The article contained a number of major innacuracies thate! >>tend to reduce its credibility.t >>E >>"It is arguable that the alleged adoption of Opteron technology in tH >>select ProLiant systems will represent a setback for Intel and HP. In D >>fact, certain posters in HP-related Usenet newsgroups are already G >>claiming that such an alleged adoption is a  deja vu all over again  P >>H >>reprise of the decline and fall of the Alpha architecture. Apparently I >>the newsgroup denizens believe that HP will ultimately scuttle Itanium iH >>in favor of Opteron, and that Intel will drop Itanium in favor of the C >>so-called  Yamhill  processor. Like the AMD Opteron CPU, Intel s tD >>so-called  Yamhill  processor would purportedly be based on IA-32 G >>technology with 64-bit extensions. Neither Opteron nor the so-called NG >> Yamhill  processor represent full 64-bit architectures, hence both Ce >>PUs I >>lack the full range of capabilities offered by Intel s Itanium processo  >>rs." >>= >>Sadly this is Tosh. x86-64 is a full 64bit architecture, ite: >>currently has a physical address space of 40 bits enough< >>to address 1 TB or RAM. Itanium has a 50 bit address space< >>which if you are using the "only" 40 bits argument against9 >>Opteron as a way of claiming that it isn't a 64 bit CPU 8 >>also means that Itanium isn't either. And what Yamhill' >>is or isn't is currently speculation.f >>E >>"Future Itanium implementations will incorporate Alpha technology, iI >>multithreading, and multiple-core processors. Intel s acquisition of a a >>I >>significant portion of Compaq s Alpha development team and the erstwhilh >>e E >>firm s world-class compiler development group bode well for future  E >>Itanium products. All of the above support the long-term future of  G >>Itanium, which SKHPC believes will be one of the two high-end 64-bit uF >>processors to survive the phaseout of Alpha, MIPs, and PA-RISC CPUs I >>early in the second half of the decade. (Assuming that Sun s 15-year-ole >>d A >>UltraSparc architecture is phased out after the release of the uI >>UltraSparc IV process shrink, IBM s POWER architecture is likely to be - >>B >>the primary competitor for Itanium. IBM has an Itanium fallback B >>strategy, and while POWER is an impressive and very competitive F >>architecture, IBM Microelectronics may at some point emulate HP and I >>standardize on Itanium to save billions of dollars in R&D expenses and mJ >>new fabrication facilities, which today cost well upwards of $5B USD to  >>construct.)" >>H >>Total tosh, UltraSPARC isn't 15 years old and SPARC isn't being phasedE >>out after USIV why would the producer of the most sucessfull 64 bitm5 >>RISC processor in the market suddenly phase it out.t >>C >>Nor does IBM seem very interested in Itanium as a back-stop theirlB >>recent announcments that they will be using IA-32 for their nextH >>generation large Intel based SMP server puts paid to that supposition. >>E >>If they wanted a backstop they would be continuing with Power whilet; >>doing a Itanium based SMP system for their xSeries range.a >> >>G >>"Since it is based on x86 technology with 64-bit extensions, Opteron fK >>represents an easier port for IA-32 ISVs than does Itanium, which relies s >>G >>on Explicitly Parallel Instruction Computing (EPIC) technology. EPIC oI >>relies on extremely sophisticated compiler technology (a la the second eE >> RISC  acronym-- Relegate InStructions to the Compiler), and with Hi >>P s J >>assistance, Intel has made great strides in boosting the performance of J >>Itanium, and we believe that even greater performance increases are yet B >>to come. As for Opteron s ability to run native 32-bit software H >>efficiently, Intel s new IA-32 Execution Layer for Itanium processors I >>should mitigate AMD s advantage in this regard. Additionally, Intel hasU >> oJ >>stated that it will slash the cost of Itanium processors to enable them K >>to compete more effectively with Opteron offerings while delivering full r >>@ >>native 64-bit computing capabilities at reduced price points." >> >>More Tosh.= >>The whole point about Opteron is that existing x86 ISV's dot= >>not need to port unless their application will benefit fromt; >>having 64bit support. For example Oracle will do a 64 bite: >>DBMS port but there is no need for an Oracle forms port. >>D >>In addition Intels IA-32 execution layer has been delayed and even> >>the most optimistic estimates from Intel put its performance: >>for IA-32 apps at 50% of the native performance on a x86= >>processor. This means that if AMD were selling Itanium intof@ >>the x86 space with the emulator, using their clock equivalence5 >>scheme Itanium at best would be marketed as a 1600.o >>< >>And even when they do release it they need to get ISV's to= >>support it otherwise it will fail as FX!32 failed on Alpha.e >>= >>In addition Intels attempts to drive cost out of Itanium tor@ >>make it competitive with x86 and AMD64 from a price standpoint> >>are at the expense of performance. Deerfield is at least 40%> >>slower than the fastest Itanium which in turn is slower than9 >>the fastest IA-32 and AMD64 CPU's. Saddle it with a 50%g; >>performance hit on top of that for IA32 execution and you-: >>have something with the performance characteristics of a >>slug.i >>	 >>Finally  >>I >>"HP s unique ability to offer a full family of one-way to 64-way Itaniuo >>m F >>Integrity servers should significantly boost Itanium shipments this H >>year. In fact, senior HP executives and strategists believe that 2004 J >>will be the year that Itanium begins to make significant inroads in the  >>IT marketplace." >>? >>Wonderfull lets try to make a virtue out of what in fact is a-: >>major problem. If Itanium is to take off in the way that9 >>Terry predicts then HP has to become one of a number ofs8 >>vendors that do end to end Itanium systems rather than8 >>only vendor. Hoping that IBM will do big Itanium based6 >>systems as Terry does earlier in the article because9 >>that will help Itanium considerably is at odds with then6 >>apparent advantage that HP has of being the only end >>to end Itanium OEM.i >> >>= >>marks out of 10  ..... 2 (spelling and grammar not content)e >>worth publishing noi! >>waste of bandwidth and bits yesn >>9 >>All in all the best description of the article would be> >>poorly researched codswallop.u >>	 >>Regards> >>Andrew Harrisonu   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:48:16 +0000eO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> " Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars0 Message-ID: <bvdcph$jbg$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   David Svensson wrote:  > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew No.Harrison No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvb1b6$mnq$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...s > H >>Total tosh, UltraSPARC isn't 15 years old and SPARC isn't being phasedE >>out after USIV why would the producer of the most sucessfull 64 bite5 >>RISC processor in the market suddenly phase it out.I >  > G > Sun may not have end the development of SPARC, but the general beliefpD > of many people is that SPARC will gradually be phased out. The AMDA > announcment and the slow performance of recent SPARC CPU's alsoh > accellerate this belief. >   = Does the fact that IBM use x86 CPU's mean that they will stopt: doing Power, does the fact that HP use x86 CPU's mean that9 they will stop using Itanium ? Actually the last point in 2 light of Intels recent annoucement may be suspect.  8 The answer at least in the case of IBM is of course not.  7 Sun has had a long standing relationship with AMD, doese2 Sun signing for Opteron mean that SPARC is dead of course not.   A Sun also continues to invest in SPARC, why do you think we boughtg Afara.  ? And all the BS about Sun dropping SPARC ignores one major pointr< which is that SPARC easily leads the 64bit processor market.   > C >>Nor does IBM seem very interested in Itanium as a back-stop their-B >>recent announcments that they will be using IA-32 for their nextH >>generation large Intel based SMP server puts paid to that supposition. >>E >>If they wanted a backstop they would be continuing with Power whileg; >>doing a Itanium based SMP system for their xSeries range.e >  > 1 > Does not make sense, Itanium is not an x86 CPU.a( > Xeon has been very successfull at IBM.7 > IBM has no big reason to make a large Itanium server.t  ; You really need to read the press a bit more carefully. IBMP8 currently produce Itanium based Servers in their xSeriesA unit. The xSeries unit considered Itanium for the next generationx; high end xSeries SMP box and rejected it in favour of Xeon.   = The xSeries unit is the unit of IBM that would be most likelyn< to competing with large Itanium based HP boxes running Linux or Windows 2003.  @ Would they have done that if they had thought that Itanium would> be price competitive and performance competitive running IA-32 apps ?  < Of course not but they didn't and have chosen IA-32 instead.   Regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:45:13 +0000dO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>l" Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars0 Message-ID: <bvdjkq$loe$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Rob Young wrote:h > In article <734da31c.0401291257.358d2c3@posting.google.com>, icerq4a@spray.se (David Svensson) writes: >  > 1 >>Does not make sense, Itanium is not an x86 CPU.t( >>Xeon has been very successfull at IBM.7 >>IBM has no big reason to make a large Itanium server.  >  >  > > > 	Cheaper and you can cobble together Itaniums to make thingsA > 	faster.  See tpc.org for examples.  Cheaper and faster usually A > 	changes things.  That said, AIX doesn't run on Itanium so theytF > 	go with Power.  But Fister tells us Itanium systems will be gettingE > 	cheaper - down to the Xeon level.  We suppose they will be gettingeB > 	quite a bit faster (elsewhere we read Tikwula is 7 times faster> > 	than Madison).  Danger here is much cheaper and faster puts? > 	tremendous pressure on the Power architecture as a preferredLD > 	solution (why?  In love with AIX?  ok, but that love is in danger= > 	of waning with a siren song of cheaper/faster in the ear).h >   9 You seem to be dismissing IBM's intelligence out of hand.0  : The fact is that they will know how much Itaniums cost and: how much it costs to cobble Itaniums together (nice choice: of phrase BTW with respect to Itanium). They have probably5 been on the end of a deluge of material from Intel onS the subject.  6 They will also know the same for Xeon but despite that: IBM have chosen to do Xeon for large SMP systems delivered+ in 2005 and one reason they cited was cost.t  9 I say despite that because you seem to think that it willf# be cheaper to do this with Itanium.l   So have IBM got it wrong ? Do you know more than IBM ?    Regardsn Andrew Harrisonk   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 07:37:27 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)0" Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars3 Message-ID: <B8xh60$moKR8@eisner.encompasserve.org>-  _ In article <ecSdnaWH0b_tboTd4p2dnA@metrocast.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:/ > : > "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message  A >> How soon before IBM follows this trend and drives Power system % >> costs down to Xeon/Itanium levels?o > N > They're already there, Rob:  it's only the extremely high-end configurations > that command the big bucks.  >   , 	Have you priced out a 4-way Power4+ lately?  2 	But you are touching on the crux of the matter.    C 	"How long before Intel drives Itanium 8, 16, 32, 64 way costs downn< 	to the per-CPU costs of the most expensive Xeon out there?"  A 	Won't happen?  Actually, surely will.  All that engineering will C 	be moved to the CPU with switches for memory and network.  The OEMPA 	(Dell) will literally just have to combble them together.  Inteli@ 	isn't doing/going to do that?  Why not?  Makes all the sense inD 	the world.  How else to get Itanium moving in the marketplace OTHER2 	than cheaper costs up and down all product lines?   				Robh   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 14:06:29 +0000fO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> " Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars0 Message-ID: <bvdod6$nm6$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Rob Young wrote:a > In article <ecSdnaWH0b_tboTd4p2dnA@metrocast.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:  > : >>"Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message >  > A >>>How soon before IBM follows this trend and drives Power systeme% >>>costs down to Xeon/Itanium levels?m >>N >>They're already there, Rob:  it's only the extremely high-end configurations >>that command the big bucks.1 >> >  > . > 	Have you priced out a 4-way Power4+ lately? > 4 > 	But you are touching on the crux of the matter.   > E > 	"How long before Intel drives Itanium 8, 16, 32, 64 way costs down0> > 	to the per-CPU costs of the most expensive Xeon out there?" >   
 Some time.  A Dearfield is the only low cost Itanium on the radar at the moment @ and it acheives its cost cutting by shedding performance so that= it isn't competitive with the Xeons that are out there now ini terms of performance.a  C > 	Won't happen?  Actually, surely will.  All that engineering will E > 	be moved to the CPU with switches for memory and network.  The OEMcC > 	(Dell) will literally just have to combble them together.  IntelsB > 	isn't doing/going to do that?  Why not?  Makes all the sense inF > 	the world.  How else to get Itanium moving in the marketplace OTHER4 > 	than cheaper costs up and down all product lines? >   " You seem to have missed the point.  > Itanium will get cheaper in theory because moving to a smaller< process will result in lower cost CPU's because you get more CPU's per wafer.  < This is a nice theory but it ignores that fact that each new< Itanium CPU isn't just a die shrink its also a new CPU which; uses more transistors, these have a tendancy to increase ins8 number to match the available space. Because of this the% CPU's don't in fact get much cheaper.n  B And at the same time that process improvements deliver theoretical3 cost savings for Itanium they do the same for Xeon.e  > Of course again this is notional as well because each new Xeon> uses more transistors than the preceading Xeon and on it goes.  > The cheapest CPU will be the one that uses least die space and3 the one that gets into the newest proceses earlier.0  9 In a Xeon vs Itanium discussion Xeon it in pole position.s  9 Of course Intel could take a decision to drop the Itanium79 prices to below cost to make it competitive with Xeon butt: why would they want to do this. All they would be doing is5 substituting margin positive Xeon revenues for marginw negative Itanium revenues.  9 As always your arguments lack the financial and technical0 background to make them fly.   Regardse Andrew Harrisoni  	 > 				Rob  >    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 09:28:41 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) " Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars3 Message-ID: <aVowOPkHLqnU@eisner.encompasserve.org>    In article <bvdod6$nm6$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: > Rob Young wrote:  D >> 	Won't happen?  Actually, surely will.  All that engineering willF >> 	be moved to the CPU with switches for memory and network.  The OEMD >> 	(Dell) will literally just have to combble them together.  IntelC >> 	isn't doing/going to do that?  Why not?  Makes all the sense injG >> 	the world.  How else to get Itanium moving in the marketplace OTHERu5 >> 	than cheaper costs up and down all product lines?l >> e > $ > You seem to have missed the point. >   > 	Actually, no.  If Fister is to be believed, he talks in terms9 	of breadth - i.e. moving in several directions.  He also  	talks in terms of systems.-  @ > Itanium will get cheaper in theory because moving to a smaller> > process will result in lower cost CPU's because you get more > CPU's per wafer. > > > This is a nice theory but it ignores that fact that each new> > Itanium CPU isn't just a die shrink its also a new CPU which= > uses more transistors, these have a tendancy to increase in*: > number to match the available space. Because of this the' > CPU's don't in fact get much cheaper.4 >   5 	[snip for brevity - nice discussion about CPU costs]:     > ; > Of course Intel could take a decision to drop the Itaniumf; > prices to below cost to make it competitive with Xeon butf< > why would they want to do this. All they would be doing is7 > substituting margin positive Xeon revenues for marginl > negative Itanium revenues. > ; > As always your arguments lack the financial and technical4 > background to make them fly. >   ; 	That is why it is important to focus on system costs.  The ? 	tired old days of SPEC/MHz battles in comp.arch are behind us.i@ 	What matters is how much money you have to spend and the amount? 	of system you can get with that money.  Cheaper/Faster systems B 	will mean the difference.  That is why the battles out at tpc.orgE 	are won at the high-end by HP.  Sure, IBM is more powerful (and Sun  F 	*mostly* absent) but you actually get higher performance and cheaper C 	systems with HP Itanium versus Power at the high-end.  So all the .F 	tongue wagging about TPC/CPU is a nice marketing angle but at end of E 	day - with money to spend on high-end system - one makes more sense <> 	than the other (unless of course you are chained to IBM/Sun).  F 	Intel intends to accelerate that (again, if Fister is to be believed)< 	all the nice fat margins to disappear from 64-bit high-end < 	CPUs.  Not today, not tomorrow - but in a few years.  Think@ 	IBM micro is losing money now?  They haven't even BEGUN to lose
 	money ;-)   				Robd   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 07:59:06 -0800' From: icerq4a@spray.se (David Svensson) " Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars= Message-ID: <734da31c.0401300759.54a896ee@posting.google.com>c   Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvdcph$jbg$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...  > David Svensson wrote:h > > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew No.Harrison No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvb1b6$mnq$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...l > ? > Does the fact that IBM use x86 CPU's mean that they will stopr< > doing Power, does the fact that HP use x86 CPU's mean that; > they will stop using Itanium ? Actually the last point ini4 > light of Intels recent annoucement may be suspect. > : > The answer at least in the case of IBM is of course not.  @ I agree, but I still hear people think Sparc will be phased out.@ I don't know if/when it will happen, but I hear it all the time.   > A > And all the BS about Sun dropping SPARC ignores one major pointt> > which is that SPARC easily leads the 64bit processor market.   You often use the BS word.= There is no secret the Sparc market gets smaller and smaller.    > = > You really need to read the press a bit more carefully. IBMt: > currently produce Itanium based Servers in their xSeriesC > unit. The xSeries unit considered Itanium for the next generationj= > high end xSeries SMP box and rejected it in favour of Xeon.0  C I still don't think it make much sense for IBM to make many Itanium>C boxes. Itanium is not compatible with IBM's successfull Xeon boxes,nD and I believe IBM currently want to push Power instead of Itanium asB much as possible. Besides, they might make a larger Itanium serverD anyway after all, I haven't seen that they have rejected anything, I2 have seen that they will make a large Xeon server.   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 08:19:09 -08001 From: susan_skonetski@hotmail.com (Sue Skonetski)." Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars= Message-ID: <857e9e41.0401300819.50938cf9@posting.google.com>n  F I think that if we talk about truth we should look at history.  If youE look at consultant companies that 15 years ago said that VMS would bewD dead within a year was that truth a lie or an opinion?  Obviously itD was not truth, but companies still pay them hundreds of thousands ofA dollars for their opinions.  They are not penalized or have theirCE character defamed because their opinions did not turn out to be fact.   E Terry as well as other consultants have their opinions, usually basedbB on individual briefings given by companies and/or by research theyC have done. If there are inaccuracies, either the information is note@ communicated clearly in the briefings or on available documents.  F The VMS group does not base our marketing on consultants opinions (notA that I am in the Marketing) we usually try to ask the customers. -1 Actually I would just like to see more marketing.m  D You seem to have a lot of passion in this area and I am sure that ifD you were to collaborate with Terry the SUN information would be more= correct since you have much more direct knowledge.  As far as F OpenVMS.Org goes, Ken is always looking for meaningful articles aroundB VMS and while I can not speak for him, I am sure he would value an article from you.V  E And yes I do thank you, thank you for your interest in VMS, thank you C for your caring about truth particularly where VMS is concerned andm thank you for your passion.    Regards, Sueu     Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvdc4k$j42$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...s > Sue Skonetski wrote:J > > This is a great example of why folks stop posting all together in thisJ > > newgroup.  Andrew do you have a list of approved people you would likeG > > to hear from or is anyone that happens to think highly of VMS or HP5 > > open to your wrath?g > > J > > At least in the United States Consultants get paid as do the workers. F > > I am not sure the process used in the UK or by SUN but I am fairlyG > > sure they also pay for consultants and employees that does not maket: > > the consultants or the employees people of ill repute. > > H > > There is obviously some other motive in this message, maybe Terry isA > > not your favorite person, which is a shame since he has never=D > > mentioned you to me in our conversations.  Or maybe the truth is1 > > hitting a little hard, but what is your goal?o > >  >  > Truth ohhh come on Sue.  > F > There is no truth to the suggestion that Opteron isn't 64bit (it is)E > There is no truth to the suggestion that SPARC will stop after USIVcF > There is no truth to the suggestion that Opteron ISV's need to port. > etc. > E > The problem is that the article is based on a series of assumptionsa > that are demonstrably untrue.i > I > Could it be that the truth about the "truth" is hitting a bit to hard ?d > E > You asked me what my goal was. I have corrected Terry's article andnF > dawn a different conclusion at the end based on the corrections that* > seems to be a perfectly acceptable goal. > 5 > Do you want to base OpenVMS marketing on untruths ?l >  > You should thank meo > 	 > Regardsa > Andrew Harrisone > > Sueo > >  > >  > > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew No.Harrison No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvb1b6$mnq$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...c > >  > >>Ken Farmer wrote:c > >>! > >>>SKHPC: Rumours of (CPU) Warsi > >>>*L > >>>Two days ago, CNET.COM published an article citing unnamed sources who  > >> > >> are > >>L > >>>alleging that HP plans to come out with servers that contain AMD's Opte > >> > >> ron > >>L > >>>processor. While SKHPC is not in a position to confirm or deny the vera > >>	 > >> city  > >>I > >>>of this story, we do have some Opteron and Itanium data that's worth/ > >>>considering.a > >>>lF > >>>http://www.shannonknowshpc.com/stories.php?story=04/01/28/7503155 > >>>o > >>>e > >>= > >>The article contained a number of major innacuracies that0# > >>tend to reduce its credibility.e > >>G > >>"It is arguable that the alleged adoption of Opteron technology in eJ > >>select ProLiant systems will represent a setback for Intel and HP. In F > >>fact, certain posters in HP-related Usenet newsgroups are already I > >>claiming that such an alleged adoption is a  deja vu all over again  m > >>J > >>reprise of the decline and fall of the Alpha architecture. Apparently K > >>the newsgroup denizens believe that HP will ultimately scuttle Itanium  J > >>in favor of Opteron, and that Intel will drop Itanium in favor of the E > >>so-called  Yamhill  processor. Like the AMD Opteron CPU, Intel s *F > >>so-called  Yamhill  processor would purportedly be based on IA-32 I > >>technology with 64-bit extensions. Neither Opteron nor the so-called lI > >> Yamhill  processor represent full 64-bit architectures, hence both Ca > >>PUs K > >>lack the full range of capabilities offered by Intel s Itanium processod > >>rs." > >>? > >>Sadly this is Tosh. x86-64 is a full 64bit architecture, its< > >>currently has a physical address space of 40 bits enough> > >>to address 1 TB or RAM. Itanium has a 50 bit address space> > >>which if you are using the "only" 40 bits argument against; > >>Opteron as a way of claiming that it isn't a 64 bit CPUe: > >>also means that Itanium isn't either. And what Yamhill) > >>is or isn't is currently speculation.h > >>G > >>"Future Itanium implementations will incorporate Alpha technology, bK > >>multithreading, and multiple-core processors. Intel s acquisition of a * > >>K > >>significant portion of Compaq s Alpha development team and the erstwhil  > >>e G > >>firm s world-class compiler development group bode well for future sG > >>Itanium products. All of the above support the long-term future of  I > >>Itanium, which SKHPC believes will be one of the two high-end 64-bit  H > >>processors to survive the phaseout of Alpha, MIPs, and PA-RISC CPUs K > >>early in the second half of the decade. (Assuming that Sun s 15-year-ol  > >>d C > >>UltraSparc architecture is phased out after the release of the VK > >>UltraSparc IV process shrink, IBM s POWER architecture is likely to be w > >>D > >>the primary competitor for Itanium. IBM has an Itanium fallback D > >>strategy, and while POWER is an impressive and very competitive H > >>architecture, IBM Microelectronics may at some point emulate HP and K > >>standardize on Itanium to save billions of dollars in R&D expenses and eL > >>new fabrication facilities, which today cost well upwards of $5B USD to  > >>construct.)" > >>J > >>Total tosh, UltraSPARC isn't 15 years old and SPARC isn't being phasedG > >>out after USIV why would the producer of the most sucessfull 64 bit 7 > >>RISC processor in the market suddenly phase it out., > >>E > >>Nor does IBM seem very interested in Itanium as a back-stop their D > >>recent announcments that they will be using IA-32 for their nextJ > >>generation large Intel based SMP server puts paid to that supposition. > >>G > >>If they wanted a backstop they would be continuing with Power while*= > >>doing a Itanium based SMP system for their xSeries range.r > >> > >>I > >>"Since it is based on x86 technology with 64-bit extensions, Opteron lM > >>represents an easier port for IA-32 ISVs than does Itanium, which relies   > >>I > >>on Explicitly Parallel Instruction Computing (EPIC) technology. EPIC  K > >>relies on extremely sophisticated compiler technology (a la the second mG > >> RISC  acronym-- Relegate InStructions to the Compiler), and with Ho > >>P s L > >>assistance, Intel has made great strides in boosting the performance of L > >>Itanium, and we believe that even greater performance increases are yet D > >>to come. As for Opteron s ability to run native 32-bit software J > >>efficiently, Intel s new IA-32 Execution Layer for Itanium processors K > >>should mitigate AMD s advantage in this regard. Additionally, Intel has  > >> rL > >>stated that it will slash the cost of Itanium processors to enable them M > >>to compete more effectively with Opteron offerings while delivering full   > >>B > >>native 64-bit computing capabilities at reduced price points." > >> > >>More Tosh.? > >>The whole point about Opteron is that existing x86 ISV's doi? > >>not need to port unless their application will benefit fromo= > >>having 64bit support. For example Oracle will do a 64 bit:< > >>DBMS port but there is no need for an Oracle forms port. > >>F > >>In addition Intels IA-32 execution layer has been delayed and even@ > >>the most optimistic estimates from Intel put its performance< > >>for IA-32 apps at 50% of the native performance on a x86? > >>processor. This means that if AMD were selling Itanium intoeB > >>the x86 space with the emulator, using their clock equivalence7 > >>scheme Itanium at best would be marketed as a 1600.i > >>> > >>And even when they do release it they need to get ISV's to? > >>support it otherwise it will fail as FX!32 failed on Alpha.  > >>? > >>In addition Intels attempts to drive cost out of Itanium to2B > >>make it competitive with x86 and AMD64 from a price standpoint@ > >>are at the expense of performance. Deerfield is at least 40%@ > >>slower than the fastest Itanium which in turn is slower than; > >>the fastest IA-32 and AMD64 CPU's. Saddle it with a 50%a= > >>performance hit on top of that for IA32 execution and youu< > >>have something with the performance characteristics of a	 > >>slug.u > >> > >>Finallyp > >>K > >>"HP s unique ability to offer a full family of one-way to 64-way Itaniur > >>m H > >>Integrity servers should significantly boost Itanium shipments this J > >>year. In fact, senior HP executives and strategists believe that 2004 L > >>will be the year that Itanium begins to make significant inroads in the  > >>IT marketplace." > >>A > >>Wonderfull lets try to make a virtue out of what in fact is a < > >>major problem. If Itanium is to take off in the way that; > >>Terry predicts then HP has to become one of a number ofb: > >>vendors that do end to end Itanium systems rather than: > >>only vendor. Hoping that IBM will do big Itanium based8 > >>systems as Terry does earlier in the article because; > >>that will help Itanium considerably is at odds with the 8 > >>apparent advantage that HP has of being the only end > >>to end Itanium OEM.  > >> > >>? > >>marks out of 10  ..... 2 (spelling and grammar not content)  > >>worth publishing no # > >>waste of bandwidth and bits yes  > >>; > >>All in all the best description of the article would bed! > >>poorly researched codswallop.r > >> > >>Regardst > >>Andrew Harrisonh   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:44:15 +0000eO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>h" Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars0 Message-ID: <bve1l0$r29$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   David Svensson wrote:o > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvdcph$jbg$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...v >  >>David Svensson wrote:e >> >>>Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew No.Harrison No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvb1b6$mnq$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>... >>? >>Does the fact that IBM use x86 CPU's mean that they will stopt< >>doing Power, does the fact that HP use x86 CPU's mean that; >>they will stop using Itanium ? Actually the last point ine4 >>light of Intels recent annoucement may be suspect. >>: >>The answer at least in the case of IBM is of course not. >  > B > I agree, but I still hear people think Sparc will be phased out.B > I don't know if/when it will happen, but I hear it all the time. >  > A >>And all the BS about Sun dropping SPARC ignores one major pointe> >>which is that SPARC easily leads the 64bit processor market. >  >  > You often use the BS word.? > There is no secret the Sparc market gets smaller and smaller.   5 So the fact that unit volumes are at an all time highU+ has no bearing on the its no secret claim ?s  : As I said earlier there is huge amount of BS about SPARC's8 demise spread liberally by competitors. If any of it was) true then SPARC would have died long ago..  < Despite the FUD it is still the market leader and even IDC's7 best estimate for Itanium server revenues of ~8 billiont+ per year by 2007 would put it behind SPARC.o     >  > = >>You really need to read the press a bit more carefully. IBM>: >>currently produce Itanium based Servers in their xSeriesC >>unit. The xSeries unit considered Itanium for the next generationo= >>high end xSeries SMP box and rejected it in favour of Xeon.> >  > E > I still don't think it make much sense for IBM to make many ItaniumeE > boxes. Itanium is not compatible with IBM's successfull Xeon boxes,OF > and I believe IBM currently want to push Power instead of Itanium asD > much as possible. Besides, they might make a larger Itanium serverF > anyway after all, I haven't seen that they have rejected anything, I4 > have seen that they will make a large Xeon server.    ? The xSeries division is a separate BU to the zSeries or pSeriese= IBM tend to give their BU's plenty of leway in terms of salesf< technology etc as anyone who has dealt with IBM software for example will confirm.i  : If the xSeries BU had thought that the only way they could: be competitive in the 2005+ timeframe would be through the8 adoption of Itanium then I have no doubt that they would have gone ahead and adopted it.s  < The fact that they didn't speaks volumes for how competitive Itanium systems will be.  : The fact that the xSeries BU will probably now get a 64bit9 x86 CPU and not need to worry about lack of 64bit supporti, only strengthens the case to stay with Xeon.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 17:03:27 +0000aO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>w" Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars0 Message-ID: <bve2p0$rgu$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Sue Skonetski wrote:  G > Terry as well as other consultants have their opinions, usually basedlD > on individual briefings given by companies and/or by research theyE > have done. If there are inaccuracies, either the information is notmB > communicated clearly in the briefings or on available documents. >   = You seem to have missed the point. The statement that Opteronr@ isn't a 64bit processor make in the article is untrue. Inference< that this will hamper 64bit apps on Opteron is untrue (it is 64bit).r  ? The inference the Opteron requires porting to is not true there 9 is no barrier to an Intel ISV using Opteron it just runs.n  ? The allegation that SPARC will cease after USIV is not true and ; the convenient demise (due to this assumption) of the 64bitO* market leader is also not going to happen.  = The problem appears to be that Terry has based his article on>? briefings that seem to have come from one side of the argument. < Any journalist will tell you that the quality of your source: of information is key to the quality of your story and its( ability to withstand editorial scrutiny.  ; He certainly hasn't had briefings from Sun, nor I very mucho6 doubt has he had the same from AMD, IBM etc instead he8 appears to have repeated lines given to him by HP/Intel.  ; Just to illustrate this, Keith one of your marketing peopler8 posted an article claiming that Opteron isn't 64bit. Its5 interesting that exactly the same claim (which is BS)  appears in Terrys article.   Regards  Andrew Harrisonh   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 18:13:24 +0000 (UTC).% From: bdc@world.std.com (Brian Chase)w" Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars( Message-ID: <bve6s4$9o3$1@pcls4.std.com>  3 In article <rU$J9su23GqI@eisner.encompasserve.org>,8, Rob Young <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote:R > In article <bvcfse$91i$1@pcls4.std.com>, bdc@world.std.com (Brian Chase) writes:7 > > In article <b8iK8cTzbQs5@eisner.encompasserve.org>,h0 > > Rob Young <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote:  L > > IBM already make fast and cheap Power processors.  Apple have been usingI > > them in their G5 systems for nearly half a year now.  From my vantagetH > > point, it looks like IBM have all their bases covered and then some. >  > 	Oh don't be silly.r >  > 	An 8-way MCM isn't a G5.  p  H Er, no it isn't but neither is the Xeon.  According to Intel it /may/ beI another three years before Itanium gets to that price point.  IBM, on thet; otherhand, already have a 64-bit Power offering at the XeontD price/performance level today, and it's selling very well in Apple's" high-end desktops and server line.  - >       Here's a thought exercise, that 8-wayeD > 	MCM - what do you suppose the cost of manufacturing is?  Further,E > 	what markup in the MCM percentage wise?  What incentive does Intel>F > 	have to drive Itanium system costs down to Xeon system cost levels?B > 	How soon before IBM follows this trend and drives Power system % > 	costs down to Xeon/Itanium levels?r  C Only when (or rather if) the market forces IBM's hand to drop those I prices.  It'd be very foolish of them to start cutting prices before they F needed to do so.  And in order to succeed, HP Itanium server offeringsJ will not only have to undercut IBM's pricing, but they'll have to undercutD them enough to make the costs of migrating to HP-UX appealing.  ThenH they'll also have to overcome the inertia of IBM customer brand loyalty,D /and/ the fact that IBM are perceived as a very stable and generally dependable company.t   -brian.a -- tF --- Brian Chase | bdc@world.std.com | http://world.std.com/~bdc/ -----+ Font-o-Meter!      Proportional  Monospacedp'                                       ^t   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 13:02:23 -0500 * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>" Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars2 Message-ID: <I4-dnSRIlZSHAYfdRVn_iw@metrocast.net>  > "Sue Skonetski" <susan_skonetski@hotmail.com> wrote in message7 news:857e9e41.0401300819.50938cf9@posting.google.com...oH > I think that if we talk about truth we should look at history.  If youG > look at consultant companies that 15 years ago said that VMS would betF > dead within a year was that truth a lie or an opinion?  Obviously itF > was not truth, but companies still pay them hundreds of thousands ofC > dollars for their opinions.  They are not penalized or have theirIG > character defamed because their opinions did not turn out to be fact.  >oG > Terry as well as other consultants have their opinions, usually basedeD > on individual briefings given by companies and/or by research theyE > have done. If there are inaccuracies, either the information is notaB > communicated clearly in the briefings or on available documents.  F Or, in the case of Terry, is pure spin and lies, Sue:  he's beyond anyJ shadow of a doubt *not* the kind of 'consultant' that you described above,K but an extension of HP PR that conveniently can't be linked back solidly toeJ them when he libels the competition.  To suggest that a very large portionB of Terry's statements over the past 2.5 years bear any resemblanceK whatsoever to objective truth (or even to objectivity with an admitted biasi in presentation) is ridiculous.:  K The problem is not with Terry' opinions, but with the material that he puts L forth as factual.  And in at least many cases he cannot even plead ignoranceJ of the truth:  he just finds it expedient to ignore and/or falsify it, and has no hesitation in doing so.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:51:13 -0800e, From: Ken Fairfield <My.Full.Name@intel.com>, Subject: Re: Searching for DECps information+ Message-ID: <bvd9ei$qd9$1@news01.intel.com>l   David J. Dachtera wrote: > Davies wrote:f > G >>I have looked through these groups looking for current information onnH >>DECps  and I have yet to find anything.  It was highly recommended toE >>us for performance management, we have two VMS systems, one runningl >>7.2-1 and the other 7.3-2. >>H >>So far, my searching has lead me to believe the DECps was purchased byF >>CA:  http://www3.ca.com/Solutions/Product.asp?ID=1174  but I haven't4 >>been able to get any more information beyond that. >  > E > Quite correct. The slimeball-bastard-money-grubbing (censored)s gotoI > their filthy paws on it and destroyed it, like they did countless other  > products.R  < I'm still not very fond of CA, but amazingly enough, they've) improved greatly in the last 2-3 years...   H >>Where can I get a copy of or information on DECps?  Is it (or anything >>similar) covered in our CSLG?a  < Since it's now owned by CA, no, it is not on CSLG.  It costsA money.  If you were running an old version of VMS, and could finds? a corresponding version of DECps as sold by DEC, you might alsos? find a license for it in CSLG...but you said V7.3-2 & V7.3-2...   C > Recent OpenVMS and ALpha architecture changes have rendered DECpssJ > inoperable on current versions. I think V7.x broke most of it, but don't > recall exactly.o  C Gosh, then what are we running on our ES40's (and other older Alpha  models) at V7.3-1???   	-Kenr --  6 I don't speak for Intel, Intel doesn't speak for me...  
 Ken Fairfieldn! D1C Automation VMS System Supportt" who:   kenneth dot h dot fairfield where: intel dot com   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 08:38:36 -0800. From: alexdaniels@themail.co.uk (Alex Daniels), Subject: Re: Searching for DECps information= Message-ID: <9f7f13a8.0401300838.75cc993c@posting.google.com>p   > E > DECps was bought by Computer Associates is now called AdviseIT. Thes@ > DECsheduler was also bought by CA is now called ScheduleIT (CA > Workload).   and :-  D PCM (also previously known as VCS) and System Watchdog. They are nowE called WatchIT and ManageIT, I think. You can buy all four from them,n- as a package part of the UNICentre TNG suite.s  F Again havnt been a big fan of CA in the past, but as someone else said! they seem to be a bit better now.o   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 08:13:07 -0500s* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com># Subject: Semi controlled FTP access ) Message-ID: <401A5853.EE08F257@istop.com>g  F Ok, lets say I volunteer to help a group of pastry chefs. I am given aM collection of CDs with a task of allowing any member of that user group to be N able to FTP a group of files from anyone of those CDs (we'll call such a group% of files a "kit" to simplify things).a  " Now, this is a volunteer service.   K I do not have enough CD drives to mount the whole collection, nor do I havefM access to the membership list of that pastry chef user group. So each requesteJ will involve some manual processing (at least mounting a CD and coying the "kit" to the right directory.l  M So, whenever a member of that user group would like a copy of a "kit", I will F need to coordinate with the person in charge of the membership list toK authenticate the user, and then I will need to mount the appropriate CD and ; somehow grant some FTP access to those files for that user.t  L I may decide to keep the more popular kits on-line to save myself some work.  G Also, I don't really want those users to be able to deposit files on myhM system. So I'd like the first directory displayed when they establish the FTPnI connection to be the directory containing the kits, but I don't want themtB writing to it. (am concerned about the TCPIP$FTP_SERVER.LOG files)   Any suggestion on this ?  G What are the various suggestions on how to manage usernames/passwords ?d  J I was thinking of a single username with a password that is changed once aM week. So whenever a request comes in, once I have mounted the kit, I send thesL user an email with instructions which include this week's password. The userN then has a few days on average to download the kit, and the following week, he# no longer has access to the system.r   Any comments on this ?  F I have no problems automating creation of a username for each request.L However, my problem is removing the username once it is no longer needed. ItQ is pretty hard to know when a user has succesfully downloaded the stuff he wants.   4 Are there other methods of distributing such media ?  E If I had a copy of the membership list, perhaps I might be able to don something better.8   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 09:21:48 +0000e0 From: Chris Sharman <chris.sharman@sorry.nospam>' Subject: Re: SMG$ examples in Pascal...o4 Message-ID: <bvd7nd$bdi$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk>   John Reagan wrote:   > Shiva MahaDeva wrote:b > I >> Where could I get SMG$ examples in Pascal ? Im trying make a program  J >> to use smg$create_subprocess and smg$execute_command without success...- >> Is there any book to learn SMG$ routines ?d >> Thanks in advance...  >  > G > Can you post what you have so far?  Perhaps we can spot your problem n! > without re-inventing the wheel.d > K > I thought I had a working SMG$ example lying around, but I don't seem to - > have one.m  = There's the Pascal directory in sys$examples, which contains dE smg_example.pas - might be worth a look, although it doesn't contain  A those routines. Pascal's good at descriptors, though, which is a sK definite asset with some of the SMG routines (create_menu springs to mind).e   Chriss   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 08:06:48 -08000 From: keith.cayemberg@conti.de (Keith Cayemberg)' Subject: Re: SMG$ examples in Pascal... < Message-ID: <3a65a5c8.0401300806.843255c@posting.google.com>   Here is an example...   + in "VMS software written by Arne Vajhj" at 0 http://www.vajhoej.dk/arne/vms/vms_sw_arne.htmlx6 you will find SMP Routines used in a Pascal program...6 http://external.vajhoej.dk/arne/vms/split/termset.html  5 There was also a discussion in COV a while back at...oV http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=948f0720.0212190204.3eb16812%40posting.google.com  , An example of how to use the SMG$CREATE_MENU2 http://wwwvms.mppmu.mpg.de/vmssig/src/c/SMG_MENU.C  @ Of course there is also an "OpenVMS RTL Screen Management (SMG$) Manual" 5 in the Web-Based OpenVMS Documentation  Library at... 7 http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/73final/5935/5935PRO.HTML D which has a section called "Using SMG$ Routines in Compaq Pascal" atE http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/73final/5935/5935pro_008.html#smgpascall   Cheers!i   Keith Cayembergm) IBM Business Services - Hannover, Germanyg    r contracer11@uol.com.br (Shiva MahaDeva) wrote in message news:<ddf392ea.0401291256.1f20379c@posting.google.com>...H > Where could I get SMG$ examples in Pascal ? Im trying make a program I > to use smg$create_subprocess and smg$execute_command without success...n, > Is there any book to learn SMG$ routines ? > Thanks in advance...   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:00:37 GMTn# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> H Subject: Re: Terry, when Palmers involved you seal the deal on the spot!H Message-ID: <pkuSb.69886$fgk.56739@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>   JF Mezei wrote:n > <snip>  1 >Did Palmer really see VMS as a liability insteadt > of an asset ? Cant > one really be so stupid ?   2 Shirley you don't need to ask those questions. ;-)   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:08:46 GMT 2 From: "Ken Farmer" <KFarmer@NOSPAM.SpyderByte.com>H Subject: Re: Terry, when Palmers involved you seal the deal on the spot!= Message-ID: <2suSb.27856$YG.1964237@twister.southeast.rr.com>   H It's humor.  Terry emailed me the picture and I told him he should writeJ something humorous about meeting in a far away place to discuss purchasing the VMS franchise.   Keni   -- Kenneth Farmer <>< OpenVMS.org-    7 "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in messageo# news:4019E76C.8F757947@istop.com...  > Bob Ceculski wrote: = > > http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=04/01/29/9152791  > K > I am not sure whether this story is just fantasy that should be publishedt onK > april 1, or whether it really happened the way Mr Shannon has written it.o > K > I find it hard to beleive that Palmer would have agreed to give VMS to MrhK > Shannon (unless Mr Shannon at that point represented some other corporatel entity.v >oK > If the story is actually true, then there would have to be far more to itM thanF > just what was said in that article. One would need to understand why PalmerH > was really wanting to give VMS away for $1. Was it to protect VMS fromK > Palmer's brownosing relationship with Gates ? or was it really to get ridt of > VMS ?, > J > Giving VMS to an individual instead of selling it to a corporation wouldL > either have some extreme stupidity in undervalueing VMS, or very strategicJ > thinking. Did Palmer really see VMS as a liability instead of an asset ? Cane > one really be so stupid ?h   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 12:39:10 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)mI Subject: Re: The Register: OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systemsh3 Message-ID: <OWCtYcjB2qNP@eisner.encompasserve.org>    In article <bvb6av$oet$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: >  > The same applies to EAL.  G    Nope.  I don't get my warm fuzzies by reading other people's supportnF    of my posts.  I get them by knowing what I'm doing.  EAL is a joke.(    Nothing you can say will change that.  #    A point you always seem to miss.g   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:58:50 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG8 Subject: Re: The VMS Path Not Taken: Now It Can be Told!0 Message-ID: <00A2CA8F.5E80B5CF@SendSpamHere.ORG>  y In article <4019C52C.1CAE3D3B@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> writes:l >Ken Farmer wrote: >> h. >> The VMS Path Not Taken: Now It Can be Told! >>  K >> It was back in 1994 that Terry Shannon approached DEC CEO Bob Palmer and M >> offered to purchase the VMS franchise in an effort to save the best serveruJ >> OS on the planet from the inevitable oblivion associated with the Risky >> Affinity Scheme...  >> d< >> http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=04/01/29/9152791 >o@ >Moral of the story: Get it in writing! ...and get it notarized!  @ ... but will that hold up in a court of law(lie)?  Probably not.   --B http://www.legacy-2000.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system securityC                             solutions that others only claim to be.M -- oK VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMd            -5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" 0   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 07:44:45 -0800/ From: kenneth.randell@verizon.net (Ken Randell)e8 Subject: Re: The VMS Path Not Taken: Now It Can be Told!= Message-ID: <79de9693.0401300744.2de8222d@posting.google.com>:  x "Ken Farmer" <KFarmer@NOSPAM.SpyderByte.com> wrote in message news:<o8cSb.21749$F86.1953280@twister.southeast.rr.com>...- > The VMS Path Not Taken: Now It Can be Told!b > J > It was back in 1994 that Terry Shannon approached DEC CEO Bob Palmer andL > offered to purchase the VMS franchise in an effort to save the best serverI > OS on the planet from the inevitable oblivion associated with the Risky  > Affinity Scheme... > ; > http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=04/01/29/9152791s  8 Why did it have to wait until 'now' for this to be told?  B Multiple times the idea of purchasing/saving/rescuing VMS has beenE floated on this newsgroup.  If there was really a serious effort herenE to purchase VMS, why not sound the alarm and get help from all of thee
 loyal troops.r  E Personally I'd like to see more details on all of this before passinge( judgement on the veracity of this story.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:34:34 GMTd0 From: "David Barnes" <david@nospam-bitsolve.com>8 Subject: Re: The VMS Path Not Taken: Now It Can be Told!= Message-ID: <uIvSb.1669$W37.16152730@news-text.cableinet.net>e  D > Multiple times the idea of purchasing/saving/rescuing VMS has beenG > floated on this newsgroup.  If there was really a serious effort herenG > to purchase VMS, why not sound the alarm and get help from all of theu > loyal troops.e  A I would contribute $100 to the cause.. VMS under a GNU licence...a. Er.. methinks Lin#* would be dead in a year...  ( So come on everyone!!! How about a poll?   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 13:46:17 -05000* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>8 Subject: Re: The VMS Path Not Taken: Now It Can be Told!2 Message-ID: <CsidnUzJwNj5O4fdRVn-vg@metrocast.net>  < "Ken Randell" <kenneth.randell@verizon.net> wrote in message7 news:79de9693.0401300744.2de8222d@posting.google.com...s? > "Ken Farmer" <KFarmer@NOSPAM.SpyderByte.com> wrote in messager: news:<o8cSb.21749$F86.1953280@twister.southeast.rr.com>.../ > > The VMS Path Not Taken: Now It Can be Told!  > > L > > It was back in 1994 that Terry Shannon approached DEC CEO Bob Palmer andG > > offered to purchase the VMS franchise in an effort to save the bestu serverK > > OS on the planet from the inevitable oblivion associated with the Riskys > > Affinity Scheme... > >e= > > http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=04/01/29/9152791e >o: > Why did it have to wait until 'now' for this to be told? > D > Multiple times the idea of purchasing/saving/rescuing VMS has beenG > floated on this newsgroup.  If there was really a serious effort herecG > to purchase VMS, why not sound the alarm and get help from all of thet > loyal troops.i >rG > Personally I'd like to see more details on all of this before passingr* > judgement on the veracity of this story.  * Er, I *think* that it's meant as satire...   - bill   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jan 2004 09:48:36 -0800% From: whohe@whoever.com (DL Phillips) M Subject: Re: Well Andrew, "3" count them "3" security patches for VMS in fiver= Message-ID: <af0dc2ea.0401300948.479c4559@posting.google.com>c  F I can only presume that the reason neither Mike R. nor Andrew HarrisonE has responded is that each is carefully crafting a reply that will ben! as thoughtful as Mr. Cayemburg's.w  > I hope they don't think we haven't noticed their non-response.      <top posted on purpose>   Keith Cayemberg wrote: > > Mike R wrote:s > > > Bob Ceculski wrote:y > > > > C > > > > listen Andrew, VMS security mup kits are rarely issued, and @ > > > > don't confuse ucx flaws with VMS os and kernel flaws ... > > > J > > > Aah, that old chestnut.  Whenever you discuss security with VMS guysI > > > they always trot it out.  Does that mean we can take your figure of G > > > 1000+ solaris holes and cross off anything not in the kernel ? :)  > >  > E > Yes, but first redesign and rewrite your unix to cleanly catagorizeoC > and separate Kernel Mode from Supervisor Mode and from User Mode.fE > Three modes are a minimum for a correct ring protection system. The G > use of three or more rings happens to be a fully patented methodologyhF > by OpenVMS Engineering. OpenVMS has four. OpenVMS also has 40 groupsD > of higher mode functionality classified as requiring special named
 > privileges.  >  > And, then... > 9 >  - allow access to higher mode services only through a e7 >    DESCRIPTOR-based calling standard which rules out  7 >    "by design" the primary cause of security holes -  8 >    buffer-overflows. The secure Calling Standard is a % >    central design theme in OpenVMS." > 6 >  - rewrite and install your TCP/IP stack so that it 4 >    doesn't live in or directly access kernel mode 6 >    services except through the calling standard. If 7 >    the previous condition was met, your tcp/ip stack  9 >    probably won't work in Supervisor mode or User Mode  8 >    without these changes. This is the reason why most ; >    security holes for which OpenVMS is affected does not A7 >    in fact lead to a security vulnerability. In this w7 >    sense I agree with Andrew. Security vulnerability  8 >    listings are innaccurate for OpenVMS. Because they = >    do not correctly differentiate whether only a user-mode  ; >    process can be affected or a higher mode, and whether t: >    a higher privilege can be attained. A correct listing= >    must rate the severity of the security hole. In OpenVMS o7 >    the severity is usually lower (or meaningless) in >+ >    comparison to other operating systems.  > < >  - design privilege assignments to be attached to a mode. ; >    If a program installed in a higher mode breaks out to 1< >    a user-mode prompt. All privileges assigned during the ; >    program run must be automatically lost. This prevents y< >    program privilege tailgating. OpenVMS Hackers (yes they< >    do exist, an admirably persistent if unsuccessful lot) = >    have recently discovered this functionality in OpenVMS, n9 >    inwhich they intentionally installed an application a8 >    with privileges and with a buffer overflow leading < >    to a DCL prompt. Their experiment failed. This OpenVMS 7 >    "knockdown" functionality can also be extended to t: >    disable the privilege of receiving a DCL Prompt when 9 >    breaking out of a program or DCL procedure, just by  ? >    assigning the CAPTIVE and RESTRICT flags to user accounts.s > 9 >  - design your Unix to provide only strictly separated d; >    (and from overflow controlled) user and system stacks t; >    to prevent stack crashing leading to access to higher u >    mode functions. > < >  - lets also not forget a redesign of the internal logon  > >    mechanism to be carried out by one program/process first = >    created at user request and has complete responsibility u# >    for the entire login sequence.o > B > By the way, that was not by any means a complete list of OpenVMS. > design advantages.  It was only a beginning. >bB > These are only a few of the unique, patented design decisions in? > OpenVMS resulting in a world-beating matrix of Functionality,tE > Reliability, Availability, Security, Stability, and Scalability(RT, C > APMP, SMP and Cluster). It's an OS that was "Designed" first by 4t@ > competing teams of experts, and then the best results of theseF > competing design teams merged into a final design team. They knew ofG > the older Unix, MVS and Multics designs, and naturally they innovated ; > and improved on them for the Enterprise OS problem space.e > H > When you are done making these elementary design changes to Unix (manyG > of which were intentionally excluded or ignored by the Unix designersoG > in 1969 - Multics already had early forms many of them) you will findaC > most of the commercial products on the Unix Market will no longertH > function correctly on your New-Unix, and will also require a redesign, > and then a rewrite.t > A > But at least you will finally have an OS and TCP/IP stack which B > "begins" to technically compare with OpenVMS within the frame ofE > security. And you'll have a product which pays royalties to OpenVMSm > Engineering. > H > Each OS has it's strengths and weaknesses in design and implementationG > which will have a different evaluation depending on the problem spacepA > it will be applied to, and depending on the design goals of theSC > designers. For the general Enterprise OS problem space, I believeSF > OpenVMS Engineering has most consistently made the best decisions inG > design and implemented them with an admirably consistent high qualitye > and methodology. > F > OpenVMS enthusiasts can righteously bemoan that the Computer ScienceC > Profession (Informatics) have failed to recognize and teach theirsD > students the sophisticated mechanisms and high principals found inF > OpenVMS, preferring instead to favoritize the minimalistic astheticsF > of Unix, or the marketing level sophistication in OS selection. ThisC > is a real loss for enterpise efficiency (money), mission-criticalr? > system stability (lives), and the computer science profession>E > (maturity as a science). A more balanced and impartial framework of H > scientific thought is needed. Computer Science needs some independenceG > from commercial and marketing interests to even discover the value of % > many existing designs, technologies F > and ideas. The last major papers over OS design were written over 101 > years ago, but their work is far from complete.  > B > Critics of OpenVMS should first study and compare it's internalsF > (Professional OS comparisons and choices should not be reduced to anB > application layer beauty contest) with an open mind concering OS@ > design paradigms, system operations principals and reliabilityE > methodologies. After recovering from the shock, they will likely noi > longer be as critical. > 	 > Cheers!l >  > Keith Cayemberg-+ > IBM Business Services - Hannover, Germanyo >  > Semi-Nonstandard Disclaimer:5 > Any non-official claims concerning my semi-officiald- > opinions are hereby officially disclaimed. o" > i.e. I said it, not my employer.2 > (and no I didn't steal this one from Yogi Berra) > A > I welcome rebuttal, however a lack of response on my part only n@ > indicates a lack discretionary time to indulge in discussions ) > peripheral to my employment activities.l   <and a followup correction>A  F >Excuse me one last time, I have checked my sources and find I need toE >change one sentence of my earlier Email. The sentence should read...e >a> >   It's an OS that was "Designed" by experts first producing ? >   four design iterations, and then the best results of these e@ >   designs were carried over into a  final design by "The Blue  >   Ribbon Committee". >p   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 14:25:50 +010027 From: Robert Trawinski <robert.trawinski@softax.com.pl> 1 Subject: What happend with vmspython.dyndns.org ?D/ Message-ID: <bvdm0u$332$1@bozon2.softax.com.pl>t  ( What happend with vmspython.dyndns.org ?   Robert   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2004.059 ************************