1 INFO-VAX	Thu, 22 Jul 2004	Volume 2004 : Issue 402       Contents:1 Re: Attaching tk50 to simh emulator running on pc 1 Re: Attaching tk50 to simh emulator running on pc 1 Re: Attaching tk50 to simh emulator running on pc  Re: decamds  Re: decamds  Re: decamds  Re: decamds  downloading a VMS distribution" Re: downloading a VMS distribution1 Re: HSx ECB (cache battery) troubleshooting/specs 7 Re: Is it possible to route or tunnel the SCS protocol? 7 Re: Is it possible to route or tunnel the SCS protocol? 7 Re: Is it possible to route or tunnel the SCS protocol? 7 Re: Is it possible to route or tunnel the SCS protocol? - Re: Itanium Licensing and Hobbyist on Itanium - Re: Itanium Licensing and Hobbyist on Itanium $ Re: Just curious about MAXPROCESSCNT Re: Looking for a Video Card Re: OpenVMS security?  Re: OpenVMS security?  Re: OpenVMS security?  Re: OpenVMS security?  Re: OpenVMS security?  OT: Pretty good Linux ad6 Re: Sending page messages from VMS using a Unix server6 Re: Sending page messages from VMS using a Unix server6 Re: Sending page messages from VMS using a Unix server6 Re: Sending page messages from VMS using a Unix server Re: Solaris to Itanium... 1 Re: Turn-key OpenVMS E-mail, web server solution? 1 Re: Turn-key OpenVMS E-mail, web server solution? 1 Re: Turn-key OpenVMS E-mail, web server solution? 1 Re: Turn-key OpenVMS E-mail, web server solution? 1 Re: Turn-key OpenVMS E-mail, web server solution?   Video card compatiblity question$ Re: Video card compatiblity question$ Re: Video card compatiblity question" Re: [OT] Haggis in comp.os.vms :-)" Re: [OT] Haggis in comp.os.vms :-)  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 13:37:10 -0500 / From: Chris Scheers <chris@applied-synergy.com> : Subject: Re: Attaching tk50 to simh emulator running on pc3 Message-ID: <40FEB7D6.A9B6643E@applied-synergy.com>    Roy C Wood wrote:  > D > I know the tk50 is scsi device and in theory can be hung off a pc.J >  If I install the hardware, can a pc running vax-vms under simh actuallyP >  read tapes? If it can, how do I set it up. I already have vax-vms 7.3 running >  on my pc.   The TK50 is not a SCSI device.  = The TK50Z-GA is a SCSI device.  (The TK50Z-FA is sorta SCSI.)    The TZ30 is also a SCSI device.   E Also, certain TZ87s might be an option.  Some TZ87s can read (but not E write) TK50s and TK70s.  (I think a TZ87 will read TK50s, but a TZ87N ( will not, but I may have that reversed.)  1 I don't know if any of these will work with SIMH.   
 Good luck!  G ----------------------------------------------------------------------- $ Chris Scheers, Applied Synergy, Inc.  C Voice: 817-237-3360            Internet: chris@applied-synergy.com     Fax: 817-237-3074    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:08:52 +0100 5 From: "Robert A.M. van Lopik" <lopik@mail.telepac.pt> : Subject: Re: Attaching tk50 to simh emulator running on pc* Message-ID: <2m80voFikpecU1@uni-berlin.de>  4 "Roy C Wood" <rcwood0000@yahoo.com> wrote in message6 news:22e43e71.0407210557.d9c0623@posting.google.com...D > I know the tk50 is scsi device and in theory can be hung off a pc.J >  If I install the hardware, can a pc running vax-vms under simh actuallyH >  read tapes? If it can, how do I set it up. I already have vax-vms 7.3 running  >  on my pc. > 
 >  RC Wood >  former DECCIE....  H AFAIK simh doesn't allow to attach ANY REAL devices. All controllers areJ simulated and the attached media are simply disk files. The only exceptionC being the ethernet interface and, to some extent, the DZ11 terminal 8 interface which is emulated through a TELNET connection.  
 rob van lopik    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 16:50:37 -0400 2 From: "Stanley F. Quayle" <squayle@insight.rr.com>: Subject: Re: Attaching tk50 to simh emulator running on pc. Message-ID: <40FE9EDD.30583.DFCFC18@localhost>  F > > I know the tk50 is scsi device and in theory can be hung off a pc.C > >  If I install the hardware, can a pc running vax-vms under simh G > >  actually read tapes? If it can, how do I set it up. I already have " > >  vax-vms 7.3 running on my pc. > F > AFAIK simh doesn't allow to attach ANY REAL devices. All controllersF > are simulated and the attached media are simply disk files. The onlyF > exception being the ethernet interface and, to some extent, the DZ11C > terminal interface which is emulated through a TELNET connection.   F If you're doing something commercial, might I suggest CHARON-VAX?  It % supports real SCSI devices just fine.   = [Yep, another Shameless Plug (tm) from your local CHARON-VAX  
 reseller.]  
 --Stan Quayle  Quayle Consulting Inc.  
 ----------- Stanley F. Quayle, P.E. N8SQ  +1 614-868-1363 3 8572 North Spring Ct., Pickerington, OH  43147  USA 0 stan-at-stanq-dot-com       http://www.stanq.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 15:02:25 -0400 & From: Jilly <jilly@clarityconnect.com> Subject: Re: decamds9 Message-ID: <B4zLc.69445$5Y.50499@cyclops.nntpserver.com>    John N. wrote:  J > In a pure VMS environment, can we continue to run DECAMDS, or do we need  > to go to Availability Manager? > K > I have had AMDS running on our VMS 7.3-1 cluster nodes for some time.  We J > just added another cluster node at VMS 7.3-2.  I cannot get this node toE > display on our VMS 7.3-1 system where the AMDS analyzer is running.  > H > Is this because it the analyzer is older than the collector?  Based onL > this assumption, and the fact that the newer collector and analyzer should > beI > "better" I want to upgrade all my nodes to the latest version of AMDS.   > But 6 > I cannot find the AMDS installation kit.  Any ideas?   John, G         The DECAMDS V7.3-2 kit is on the V7.3-2 LP CD which is labeled  A ALP0732LP and in the directory [DECAMDS_0732].  DECAMDS V7.3-2 is E compatabile with OpenVMS V7.3-1 so I would update all systems to that  version.   --  C Jilly - Working from Home in the Chemung River Valley - Waverly, NY H       - jilly@clarityconnect.com                      - Brett Bodine fanH       - Mark.Jilson@hp.com                            - since 1975 or soH       - http://www.jilly.baka.com           - http://www.brettbodine.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 15:02:25 -0400 & From: Jilly <jilly@clarityconnect.com> Subject: Re: decamds9 Message-ID: <_5zLc.69449$5Y.19717@cyclops.nntpserver.com>    John N. wrote:  J > In a pure VMS environment, can we continue to run DECAMDS, or do we need  > to go to Availability Manager? > K > I have had AMDS running on our VMS 7.3-1 cluster nodes for some time.  We J > just added another cluster node at VMS 7.3-2.  I cannot get this node toE > display on our VMS 7.3-1 system where the AMDS analyzer is running.  > H > Is this because it the analyzer is older than the collector?  Based onL > this assumption, and the fact that the newer collector and analyzer should > beI > "better" I want to upgrade all my nodes to the latest version of AMDS.   > But 6 > I cannot find the AMDS installation kit.  Any ideas?   John, G         The DECAMDS V7.3-2 kit is on the V7.3-2 LP CD which is labeled  A ALP0732LP and in the directory [DECAMDS_0732].  DECAMDS V7.3-2 is E compatabile with OpenVMS V7.3-1 so I would update all systems to that  version.   --  C Jilly - Working from Home in the Chemung River Valley - Waverly, NY H       - jilly@clarityconnect.com                      - Brett Bodine fanH       - Mark.Jilson@hp.com                            - since 1975 or soH       - http://www.jilly.baka.com           - http://www.brettbodine.com   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:40:01 +0000 (UTC) 6 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) Subject: Re: decamds0 Message-ID: <newscache$2g181i$9tr$1@news.sil.at>  c In article <45vLc.36609$KP6.2194716@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, "John N." <JNixon@cfl.rr.com> writes: L >In a pure VMS environment, can we continue to run DECAMDS, or do we need to >go to Availability Manager?  L As the device driver part (RMDRIVER) is included in VMS (but a newer versionG of it can be installed with a newer version of AMDS and/or AVAIL_MAN on F slightly older versions of VMS) you may do what you want. Install AMDSH or AVAIL_MAN on VMS or don't install anything (besides on the one system where your AMDS$COMM will run).   H AVAIL_MAN is the JAVA based console while AMDS is the X11 based console.L So, on a WINTEL Crap, there is only AVAIL_MAN, but on OpenVMS Alpha there is- both (and on OpenVMS VAX there is only AMDS).   H Previously, AMDS had more features than AVAIL_MAN. Currently they are onM parity. It is said, that later versions will show more features in AVAIL_MAN.   J >I have had AMDS running on our VMS 7.3-1 cluster nodes for some time.  WeI >just added another cluster node at VMS 7.3-2.  I cannot get this node to D >display on our VMS 7.3-1 system where the AMDS analyzer is running.  N You need a VMS 7.3-2 Console (and a V7.3-2 driver - which is already in 7.3-2)K to display V7.3-2 systems. You should be able to display V7.3-1 nodes (with I a V7.3-1 driver) with a V7.3-2 console. And you should be able to install J a newer RMdriver on OpenVMS V7.3-1 without problems (but this requires theN installation of a newer AMDS or AVAIL_MAN - option 'driver only' if you like).  = >Is this because it the analyzer is older than the collector?    Yes.  1 btw: Have you also tried the opposite direction ? B Do you have the console available (means the product installed) on# every system[disk] in the cluster ?   L >                                                              Based on thisI >assumption, and the fact that the newer collector and analyzer should be L >"better" I want to upgrade all my nodes to the latest version of AMDS.  But5 >I cannot find the AMDS installation kit.  Any ideas?   H That's not that complicated. It a few clicks away from the VMS home page (thanks, Warren)  : 	http://www.openvms.digital.com/openvms/products/availman/   HIH    --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 00:46:50 GMT / From: "Richard L. Dyson" <rick-dyson@uiowa.edu>  Subject: Re: decamds( Message-ID: <40FF0E87.6050303@uiowa.edu>   John N. wrote:  M > In a pure VMS environment, can we continue to run DECAMDS, or do we need to  > go to Availability Manager?  > K > I have had AMDS running on our VMS 7.3-1 cluster nodes for some time.  We J > just added another cluster node at VMS 7.3-2.  I cannot get this node toE > display on our VMS 7.3-1 system where the AMDS analyzer is running.  > M > Is this because it the analyzer is older than the collector?  Based on this J > assumption, and the fact that the newer collector and analyzer should beM > "better" I want to upgrade all my nodes to the latest version of AMDS.  But 6 > I cannot find the AMDS installation kit.  Any ideas?  H I believe AMDS is always on the binary install CD set.  Maybe on disc 2.J I was always told by an AMDS developer that you should use the most recentG version and install it on all the VMS nodes.  That meant installing the H kit for OpenVMS v7.3 on my Alpha V6.2 boxes too.  Then all the bits know about each other. :)  H I have not looked at a v7.3-2 kit or CD, but I would assume it is in one! of the kit directories somewhere.    Rick   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 23:51:48 GMT ) From: Andrew Walters <awxrt001@yahoo.com> ' Subject: downloading a VMS distribution 9 Message-ID: <okDLc.114$AY5.45@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>    Hi,   = I recently had my encompass membership confirmed and within a + few days will apply for a hobbyist licence.   ? However I'm too skint to buy a distribution CD. Yes I know it's ) only thirty bucks but ... skint is skint.   : Is there anywhere I can go to plug in a member-id, licence; number and whatever else (except credit-card #) to download  (gasp) a VMS distrib that way?   tia.   --  relax and enjoy your shoes    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:44:26 -0500 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>+ Subject: Re: downloading a VMS distribution + Message-ID: <40FF1BFA.BCC02A69@comcast.net>    Andrew Walters wrote:  >  > Hi,  > ? > I recently had my encompass membership confirmed and within a - > few days will apply for a hobbyist licence.  > A > However I'm too skint to buy a distribution CD. Yes I know it's + > only thirty bucks but ... skint is skint.  > < > Is there anywhere I can go to plug in a member-id, licence= > number and whatever else (except credit-card #) to download   > (gasp) a VMS distrib that way?  H Something that has never quite been managed. hp seems loath to allow it,( for reasons that are not entirely clear.  = ...and I don't have the server space, even if it was allowed!    D.J.D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 19:44:55 -0700 / From: Duncan Brown <brown_du@encompasserve.org> : Subject: Re: HSx ECB (cache battery) troubleshooting/specs2 Message-ID: <m5udnWYrftV5kGLdRVn-gg@speakeasy.net>  A I got my cells in, and rebuilt the battery pack and it works.  I  E documented it all in case anyone else wants to go down the same path:   , http://www.backglass.org/duncan/hsx_battery/  I I'm embarassed about the electrical tape, but I figure it will work fine  C and it's buried in a unit where nobody will ever see it (except of  I course for the fact that I took a picture of it and put it on that page!)    Duncan   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Jul 2004 12:57:09 -0500 From: briggs@encompasserve.org@ Subject: Re: Is it possible to route or tunnel the SCS protocol?3 Message-ID: <EzPWcSr257al@eisner.encompasserve.org>   P In article <cdm58m$37e$1@lore.csc.com>, Nic Clews <spamthis@[127.0.0.1]> writes: > David J Dachtera wrote:  >  >> Bob Koehler wrote:  >>  _ >>>In article <40F7F77D.5B8FD079@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:  >>> K >>>>If an all mighty Microvax II is capable of participating in an ethernet K >>>>cluster, wouldn't modern routers be able to get SCS packets to a remote E >>>>destination faster than it takes the MVII to process the packet ?  >>> D >>>   It's not the hardware, it's the protocol.  You asking IP to do8 >>>   something reliably that it was not designed to do. >>   >>  0 >> TCP is (supposed to be) more reliable, but... > 
 > Yes and no.  > I > TCP/IP is supposed to find another way to get there, if it's "primary"  J > route is disturbed, remember this protocol was designed to be literally J > bombproof, if some event took out a routing station, the network packet D > was supposed to figure out how to get to its ultimate destination.  D If a routing node goes down, your IP datagram [fragment] is supposed to be discarded.    D IP provides unreliable, unsequenced, datagram delivery services from1 any network station to any other network station.   # You don't get a delivery guarantee. ) You don't get a delivery order guarantee.   A TCP provides reliable, sequenced, error free byte stream delivery D services from any network station to any other network station.  ButG in order to guarantee reliable delivery, TCP has to trade away latency. C TCP will keep trying to retransmit a failed segment for minutes and > will not transmit any further data until that segment has been successfully delivered.   G Note well -- there's nothing special about TCP in this regard.  Timeout H and retransmit is about as good as it gets for mainstream WAN protocols.  ? If you want good latency, you go with a datagram based service. ' And you learn to live with packet loss.   @ If you want good reliability, you go with a reliable data stream6 service.  And you learn to live with variable latency.  A If you want both, you need to impose restrictions on the hardware + and/or configurations that you can support.   E If it were me, I'd be tempted to layer my SCS datagram service on top E of UDP.  Tack on some support for sequence numbers, acknowledgements, B negative acknowledgements and retransmissions and impose a horizonA of 2 seconds (if it takes longer than 2 seconds, give up) and you $ have something that fits quite well.  G > is nothing in the IP rules that states it has to go via the shortest  / > route. Hence the timing issues (and latency).   A There's nothing in the Ethernet rules (spanning tree) that states A that it has to go via the shortest route.  There's nothing in the A DECnet rules (circuit cost) that states that it has to go via the @ shortest route.  There's nothing in the IPX rules (RIP/SAP) that0 states that it has to go via the shortest route.  > If you're talking about forwarding IP datagrams over a network@ that you do not control...  Well, don't blame TCP or IP for what% your Internet performance looks like.   . Latency tends to come from four major sources.  - 	1.  Packet loss, timeout and retransmission. @ 	2.  Congestion delays (interface queueing and link arbitration)4 	3.  Bandwidth (packet length divided by link speed, 	    summed over every hop)  	4.  Speed of light   C There's only so much that a reliable delivery protocol can do about B number 1.  The other three are below the level at which TCP and IP operate.   	John Briggs   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Jul 2004 19:48:18 GMT1 From: JONESD@er6.eng.ohio-state.edu (David Jones) @ Subject: Re: Is it possible to route or tunnel the SCS protocol?: Message-ID: <cdmha2$4ck$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>  3 In message <EzPWcSr257al@eisner.encompasserve.org>, "   briggs@encompasserve.org writes:F >If it were me, I'd be tempted to layer my SCS datagram service on topF >of UDP.  Tack on some support for sequence numbers, acknowledgements,C >negative acknowledgements and retransmissions and impose a horizon B >of 2 seconds (if it takes longer than 2 seconds, give up) and you% >have something that fits quite well.   K That's essentially what the PE (port emulator) driver does in LAVC to carry M traffic via unreliable ethernet packets.  Some of the crappier early ethernet O interfaces would sometimes deliver packets out of order, so the virtual circuit ) algorithms had to deal with that as well.       < David L. Jones               |      Phone:    (614) 292-6929- Ohio State University        |      Internet: L 140 W. 19th St. Rm. 231a     |               jonesd@er6s1.eng.ohio-state.edu: Columbus, OH 43210           |               vman+@osu.edu  1 Disclaimer: I'm looking for marbles all day long.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:25:04 -0500 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>@ Subject: Re: Is it possible to route or tunnel the SCS protocol?+ Message-ID: <40FF176F.271334C2@comcast.net>    Nic Clews wrote: >  > David J Dachtera wrote:  >  > > Nic Clews wrote: > >  > >>David J Dachtera wrote:  > >> > >> > >>>JF Mezei wrote: > >>>  > >>>  > 
 > >>>My take:  > >>> : > >>>Early 1990's processor speeds <100MHz, Ethernet = 3Mb > >>> 2 > >>>2004 processor speeds >500MHz, Ethernet = 1Gb > >>> ? > >>>Yes, I'd expect to see significant differences in latency.  > >>I > >>First supported interconnects were CI, remember that these have LOCAL L > >>(i.e. non CPU dependent) processing capability, so comparing chip speeds > >>is pointless.  > >  > > A > > Huh? "Star couplers" are passive devices - totally unpowered.  > I > The CI adapters in VAXen have on-board processing. I'm not sure if this J > is true of the Alpha PCI variety (CIPCA's). [I wasn't talking about starH > couplers, I know they are passive devices with "pulse" transformers in > them].  E So, just to keep it apples-to-apples, the protocol router must appear / equally passive. Hence, the latency discussion.   
 > >>[snip]< > >>Verel Boaen is the main man for this sort of discussion. > >  > >  > > How does one reach him/her?  > H > I'll drop you a note with his email... Just say the DSSI advocate from > England sent you ;-)   Thanx!   D.J.D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 00:45:17 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> @ Subject: Re: Is it possible to route or tunnel the SCS protocol?, Message-ID: <40FF464F.7EEDF09A@teksavvy.com>   David J Dachtera wrote: / > TCP is (supposed to be) more reliable, but...   > Ok, there have been many mentions of TCPIP not being reliable.  L OUt of curiosity, is it the protocol itself which is not considered reliable& enough, or just the internet network ?  I If one has his own network with dedicated links that do not depend on the 7 "internet", does TCPIP then become much more reliable ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:30:20 -0500 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>6 Subject: Re: Itanium Licensing and Hobbyist on Itanium+ Message-ID: <40FF18AC.57EB81CD@comcast.net>    Guy Peleg wrote: > A > "David J Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> wrote in message ' > news:40FAAE1D.ED128966@comcast.net...  > > Alex Daniels wrote:  > > > M > > > With some of the talk about what will (and will not) be included in the L > > > different licensing options with Itanium and the comments about it not > being L > > > definitively decided yet, I had a look around on an pre 8.2 base level > > > machine. > > > L > > > The products in the different categories were no shock and as previousM > > > stated by hp, but looks like hobbyists won't have to load quite so many N > > > licences any more, and more importantly shows that they are committed to< > > > catering for hobbyist's from the start. Well done hp.. > > >  > > > From the early 8.2 box...  > > >  > > >    FOE     Foundation 7 > > >    OPENVMS-I64,OPENVMS-USER,DVNETEND,DW-MOTIF,UCX @ > > >    TDC,DCOM-MIDL,X500-ADMIN-FACILITY,X500-DIRECTORY-SERVER > > >  > > >    EOE     Enterprise % > > >    DECRAM,RMSJNL,VOLSHAD,SYSMGT  > > > ! > > >    MCOE    Mission Critical - > > >    RTR-SVR,VMSCLUSTER,VMSCLUSTER-CLIENT  > > >  > > >    HOE     Hobbyist  > > >    OPENVMS-HOE > > > G > > > It has been documented prior that each category will also include  > everything$ > > > from the preceding categories. > > K > > It is interesting to note that the most common place for VMS to live is L > > in the back-end server tier, which of course requires the MCOE licensingL > > tier. That is, once again: minimal acceptable OpenVMS licensing bundle =G > > prohibitive cost-to-acquire, while affordable (read: competitive) =  > > virtually useless. > > L > > These supposed business school graduates just don't get it, and probably > > never will.  > > 
 > > D.J.D. > N > It is possible to purchase the FOE pak and then purchase separately specificD > products from other bundle. So you can have an rx2600 with FOE andE > VMSCLUSTER license. Without going into too much details (as I'm not G > a sale person) the price of the VMSCLUSTER license for rx2600 will be  > different ! > than the price for a Superdome.   2 We can only hope that this will get fixed someday.  > Mission-critical != bottomless pockets, private goldmine, etc.   D.J.D.   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Jul 2004 21:17:36 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 6 Subject: Re: Itanium Licensing and Hobbyist on Itanium3 Message-ID: <SOvUIcxfsT1L@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ` In article <40FF18AC.57EB81CD@comcast.net>, David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> writes: > Guy Peleg wrote:  O >> It is possible to purchase the FOE pak and then purchase separately specific E >> products from other bundle. So you can have an rx2600 with FOE and F >> VMSCLUSTER license. Without going into too much details (as I'm notH >> a sale person) the price of the VMSCLUSTER license for rx2600 will be >> different" >> than the price for a Superdome. > 4 > We can only hope that this will get fixed someday. > @ > Mission-critical != bottomless pockets, private goldmine, etc.  E Hmmm.  I took that remark to indicate that the VMSCLUSTER license for 7 the rx2600 would be _less_than_ that for the Superdome.   H I think the bottomless pockets folks are the ones who buy the Superdome.   Why do you thing differently.    ------------------------------    Date: 21 Jul 2004 11:25:19 -0700. From: spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman)- Subject: Re: Just curious about MAXPROCESSCNT = Message-ID: <b096a4ee.0407211025.13552f74@posting.google.com>   _ "Jim" <jim.nospam.gould@charter.net> wrote in message news:<cdjfl9$h1l$1@news.doit.wisc.edu>... K > I have noticed that no matter what I set MAXPROCESSCNT to, AUTOGEN always M > sets BALSETCNT to exactly 2 less.  This is on three different clusters, one N > running 7.3-2, the other two running 7.3-1, and one lone server running 6.2.K > Is the calculation of BALSETCNT based on other parameters or is it always  > just 2 less. >  > No big deal, just curious.  < On my VMS v6.1 and v6.2 VAX systems I always get BALSETCNT =< 0.9*MAXPROCESSCNT. The only statement I typically have in my4 MODPARAMS.DAT for these two params is the following:   MIN_MAXPROCESSCNT=100   D Does anyone know why the OP and I are getting different results? OP:E Is there some statement regarding these params in your MODPARAMS.DAT?    Thanks.    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:09:33 GMT  From: dittman@dittman.net % Subject: Re: Looking for a Video Card 8 Message-ID: <hYALc.38841$lz2.30667@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>  . David B Sneddon <dbsneddon@bigpond.com> wrote:' > Fred Kleinsorge was overheard to say: L >> If you want to buy it on the secondary market, the 3DLabs Oxygen VX1 cardO >> fits your bill.  It is great at 2D.  My DS20 is running it at 1920x1200 with 	 >> 16bpp.  >>  K >> If you want it directly from HP, then the Radeon 7500 is the one to get. M >> This card can also do 3D.  But you will need to get up to V7.3-1 or better  >> (V7.3-2) for this card. >>  % >> Both should work well on the DS20.  > D > Will the Radeon 7500 work on a Digital Personal Workstation 600au?- > The Oxygen cards required an EV6 or better.   * The Radeon 7500 requires an EV6 or better. --   Eric Dittman dittman@dittman.net    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:47:37 +0200 0 From: Keith Cayemberg <keith.cayemberg@arcor.de> Subject: Re: OpenVMS security?B Message-ID: <40fec85a$0$19744$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>   Undisclosed wrote:  J >>> couple of questions from a OpenVMS newbie with a little (real little)  >>> security knowledge.  >>> J >>> 3. OpenVMS's native access control would be considered discressionary B >>> (sp..) like Unix's is, correct? Except that it has much finer ) >>> granularity (more priviledge levels).  >>       > ' > This is tangential to my questions...  > J > but how can the VMS team have the use of 3 or more rings patented, when M > the ring concept originated with Multics, which had 6 hardware-based rings?     H Yes, I am fully aware of potentially applicable "prior art", especially H in reference to Multics. This should also be obvious from my posting in  January here...   U http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3a65a5c8.0401091542.1df169b%40posting.google.com   C inwhich I mentioned "Multics already had early forms many of them".   E Incidentally, Multics supported either 8 (hardware) or 64 (software)  G protection rings depending (in part) on the hardware it was running on. 
 Please see... ' http://www.multicians.org/mgr.html#ring I As demonstrated by Multics, an effective ring protection architecture is  , not necessary dependent on hardware support.  I > that certainly sounds like a challengable patent considering Multics's  & > prior art based on your description.  I All patents are in principal challengeable. In fact, my understanding is  C that they are only binding in as far as the owner of the patent is  H willing to defend them. The government doesn't make it it's business to I actively control whether someone is making use of a patent. The owner of  G the patent must monitor the markets and bring a transgression to court.   E It remains that a patent was indeed awarded to the Digital Equipment  I Corporation (Maynard, MA) with the inventors Cutler; David N. (Bellevue,  E WA); Orbits; David A. (Redmond, WA); Bhandarkar; Dileep (Shrewsbury,  G MA); Cardoza; Wayne (Merrimack, NH); Witek; Richard T. (Littleton, MA)  7 on June 8th, 1993, inwhich the 1st Claim refers to a...   I "processing means for performing processing operations in at least three  I privilege modes, including a user mode, a kernel mode, and a third mode;"   ; This is naturally (as with all patents) within a specified  6 enhancement(s) context or solution/problem(s) context.G For most purposes, I think one can agree that the context "using three  I or more privilege modes to enhance Operating System Security" is not too  F broad not to be the context of an admissable charge in court, even if I there was prior art. In fact, you need only read a few patents to notice  ? that they are generally formulated as broad as possible by the  B applicants to cover as many potential implementations as possible F without endangering that the patent is awarded. There is consequently A appears to be quite a lot of overlap between patents despite any  I vigilence by the patent administration to have them clearly defined.  In  F the case of defending the patent, the court would have to look at the C specifics of the patent compared with implementation(s) and make a  H decision based on the details. Considering that the patent was awarded, F there "should" be specifics within the patent that make it defendable F within it's context. These patent specifics probably added such value F that the IP was considered worthy of a patent despite the known prior I art in Multics. Regardless of what you or I say or believe, the decision  G rests ultimately with the justice system. And obviously the government  H considers the patent defendable, otherwise they should not have awarded F the patent after nearly 3 years of review time. In spite of all this, G please don't get the idea that I'm a fan of software patents. I'm also  C not a lawyer, and can only provide my limited understanding of the  B patent process and my common sense. I'm quite willing to learn if % someone else here is better informed.   E > also, VMS was created in 1978, and patents last for 20 years IIRC?  - > Wouldn't it be null and void at this point?  >   E To my knowledge, patents (at least on software) were shortened to 17  G years, with the possibility to apply for an extension to the patent if  C the owner could provide a reasonable argument for the extension. I  I believe that would make the patent we are discussing valid at least till  E June 7th, 2010, assuming the clock starts ticking when the patent is  I awarded. If the application date is to be used as the stating date, then  1 till June 7th, 2007, assuming it's not prolonged.    The Patent is...   United States Patent: 5,218,712 B DEC - EPICODE Mode -  Providing a data processor with a user-mode I accessible mode of operations in which the processor performs processing   operations without interruption    Please see Claim 1...   
 <start quote>  What is claimed is:   H 1. A data processor for processing programs and for servicing interrupt = requests that are applied to said data processor, comprising:   H processing means for performing processing operations in at least three H privilege modes, including a user mode, a kernel mode, and a third mode;  H control means for controlling said processing means in relation to said F privilege modes, said control means enabling said processing means to @ temporarily suspend said processing operations and service said G interrupt requests when said processing means is processing operations  @ in either the user mode or the kernel mode, and inhibiting said @ processing means from suspending said processing operations and @ servicing said interrupt requests when said processing means is , processing operations in the third mode; and  H said control means including means responsive to a selected instruction A processed by said processing means when said processing means is  D processing operations in said user mode for causing said processing F means to switch from said user mode to said third mode and atomically I execute a sequence of instructions in said third mode that is associated   with said selected instruction.  <end quote>   9 You will find the United States Patent 5,218,712  here...X http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/search-bool.html&r=18&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=ptxt&s1=5,218,712&OS=5,218,712&RS=5,218,712    G For your reading pleasure, I have collected a list of references which e? contain many if not most of sources I would need to defend the n- assertions I made in my posting in January...b  3 Buffer Overflow (near) Immunity in OpenVMS - GoogleoN http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3C23EA72.48874137%40gce.com&oe=ISO-8859-1  A What you should know about HP OpenVMS and Malicious Code - Google I   http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3f43d8fe%241%40usenet01.boi.hp.coms  . OpenVMS among most-secure of operating systems<    http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=04/01/09/3843093  5 Hackers attempting BO in Installed Priv. SW - failed! <    ftp://dahmer.vistech.net/upper-deck/octogens-bo-notes.txt  $ Maximum Security -- Ch 19 -- VAX/VMSF    http://www.ods.com.ua/win/eng/security/Max_Security/ch19/ch19.phtml  B OpenVMS HACK FAQ - html -- at a well-known OpenVMS Hacker Hangout.+    http://vmsbox.cjb.net/VMS/vmsHackFAQ.txt   ) Hackin' it old school with VMS - Tutoriali2    http://neworder.box.sk/newsread.php?newsid=5424  : Gordon Bell's CyberMuseum for Digital Equipment Corp (DEC)=    http://research.microsoft.com/~gbell/Digital/DECMuseum.htmr  ( PDP11 Architectural Enhancement StrategyO http://research.microsoft.com/~gbell/Digital/PDP11_Arch_Enhance_Strategy_75.pdf   / VAX Strategy c1979.pdf (application/pdf Object)lI   http://research.microsoft.com/~gbell/Digital/VAX%20Strategy%20c1979.pdf.  H 20th anniversary of OpenVMS - OpenVMS at 20 Nothing Stops it (pdf 2.5MB)5    http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/20th/vmsbook.pdfe   25th anniversary of OpenVMS 4    http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/25th/index.html    ! Here are a few security classics:r  F Multics Security Evaluation - Vulnerability Analysis - June 1974 - PDF7    http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/history/karg74.pdfd   The Multicians!u)    http://www.multicians.org/multics.html    Multics Security*    http://www.multicians.org/security.html  @ Thirty Years Later: Lessons from the Multics Security Evaluation7    http://www.acsac.org/2002/papers/classic-multics.pdfA  * ACM Classic: Reflections on Trusting Trust%    http://www.acm.org/classics/sep95/   = The Security of Applications: Not All Are Created Equal - PDF(I   http://www.atstake.com/research/reports/acrobat/atstake_app_unequal.pdfZ  % Smashing The Stack For Fun And Profits3    http://www.vistech.net/users/beave/overflow.htmlI  H NSA: The Inevitability of Failure: The Flawed Assumption of Security in # Modern Computing Environments - PDFp6    http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/papers/inevitability.pdf    H Here are a few more articles with statements concerning the security of % Operating Systems other than OpenVMS.2  ) Lead Windows developer bugged by security 0 http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2002/0905valen.html  9 Linux is favourite hacker target: Study - GlobetechnologyU\ http://www.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030911.gtlinuxsep11/BNStory/Technology/  3 Microsoft cerebrates fifteen years of poor securitys) http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11108a  D Microsoft software 'riddled with vulnerabilities', trade body claims) http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11249I  + MS: Secure computing is still a decade away 6 http://reviews-zdnet.com.com/4520-7297_16-4207833.html  5 Next-Generation Win32 exploits: fundamental API flawsc) http://security.tombom.co.uk/shatter.htmlm  3 Nimda Worm Shows You Can't Always Patch Fast Enoughh4 http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=101034  1 Reliance On Microsoft Danger To National Securityc2 http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20030924S0008  4 Software vulnerabilities still dog operating systems) http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13420.  + Would the real insecure OS please stand up?t3 http://arstechnica.com/news/posts/20021127-882.html@  E The discourse above "Next-Generation Win32 exploits: fundamental API gG flaws" (also known as The Shatter Exploit Paper) is especially damning rH of Windows. Essentially, it states that the Win32 API has an inherently @ flawed design with regard to security, and this design can't be G corrected without making all Win32 API based applications incompatible  
 and obsolete.d    @ Here are a few more interesting OpenVMS-specific Security Links:  / OpenVMS Programming FAQ - What is a descriptor?tE http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/VMS_Programming_FAQ.html#1.8.n   OpenVMS Security Homepage 6    http://www.openvms.compaq.com/openvms/security.html   OpenVMS Calling Standard:    http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/73final/5973/5973PRO.HTML  # OpenVMS Programming Concepts Manualn;    http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/731FINAL/5841/5841PRO.HTML6  # HP OpenVMS Guide to System Security,F    http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/732FINAL/aa-q2hlg-te/aa-q2hlg-te.HTMl  D HP Open Source Security for OpenVMS, Volume 1: Common Data Security  ArchitectureC http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/732FINAL/aa-rscub-te/aa-rscub-te.HTMl4  A HP Open Source Security for OpenVMS, Volume 2: HP SSL for OpenVMS C http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/732FINAL/aa-rscvb-te/aa-rscvb-te.HTMlg  7 HP Open Source Security for OpenVMS, Volume 3: KerberosnC http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/732FINAL/aa-rueba-te/aa-rueba-te.HTMlr  8 A Primer on OpenVMS (VMS) Security - PDF - SANS Intitute1    http://www.sans.org/rr/papers/index.php?id=604e  6 OpenVMS 7.2 Security Essentials - SANS Institute - PDF*    http://www.sans.org/rr/papers/8/854.pdf  6 Practical Exercise in Securing an OpenVMS System - NSI-    http://nsi.org/Library/Compsec/openvms.txta  6 Security for OpenVMS Applications - by John WisniewskiH http://www.mindiq.com/resources/webcasts/JohnwEncompasswebcast031804.ppt     A couple more notes:  I I have noticed in many postings that discuss security a preponderance on 7F which compiler is being used (in the application and the OS, and what I programming checks and methods are implemented in the compiler or by the eI programmer. I do not wish to detract from the importance of these issues  H for an application, but within the context of having a secure operating I system, I believe these aspects to be largely meaningless. Because there  E is no way to guarantee what compiler or programming methods a hacker aG used. And there it is not reasonable to expect that every user able to oF introduce software into his enironment is going to know what compiler I the programmer used or their methods. What matters is what the operating nG system does to *enforce* secure methods of allocation of resources and  I services. With respect to OS Security there is no fundamental difference  H between and unintentional programming error and an intentional trick by E a hacker to exploit a security hole. Indeed, sometimes unintentional  > errors can be much more clever. An OS needs and uses the same 8 architectural designs and methods to guard against both.  B My posting in January focused on Operating System "Architecture & E Design" and not so much on the implementation. I am fully aware that  F OpenVMS was in many ways also an evolutionary design, especially with I regard to it's file system being largely carried over from RSX-11m. Also rD of note, is that the software and hardware architecture were highly : integrated and intertwined in the original VAX design and E implementation. These points should be remembered when analyzing the  . applicability of many of the above references.  I I also fully recognize that the *implementation* details and methods are  F equally important links in the "Security Chain". Maybe someday I will = feel that I have enough original thoughts to write something aF specifically about these aspects. However, with OpenVMS being over 25 A years old, and the many documented cases inwhich OpenVMS was the cI specific target of professional hackers and spies, I think the empirical eC evidence says a lot more about the success of the OpenVMS Security e  implementation as I can provide.  > My point is that the OS Architecture (as a fully independent, B determinant link in the chain of security) is already an absolute @ limiting factor in the true security level attainable by an OS. E Attainable security can only potentially be improved by replacing or aH improving that link. Considering this OS security architecture includes F (by definition) the way services and resources are accessed and used, H the entire "tree" of application and services security on top of the OS J Architecture "trunk" are also fundamentally affected and determined by it.  C Based on this principle, I leave it to the reader to decide whetheraC Unix (and Windows) can even be regarded to be in the same class as r: OpenVMS with regard to security. I have formed my opinion.    H I will make one last assertion which is just a little bit more strongly F based on my opinion as the previous assertions in this posting and in J the posting of January. But which I also consider completely defendable...  A "In this day and age of continuous security problems, a computer dF security professional who has not studied and understood the security ? principles implemented in OpenVMS is *incompetent* in his job."t   Cheers!    Keith Cayemberg ) IBM Business Services - Hannover, Germanye   Semi-Nonstandard Disclaimer:3 Any non-official claims concerning my semi-officiali* opinions are hereby officially disclaimed.  i.e. I said it, not my employer.0 (and no I didn't steal this one from Yogi Berra)  > I welcome rebuttal, however a lack of response on my part only= indicates a lack discretionary time to indulge in discussions ' peripheral to my employment activities.    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 22:11:59 GMTd) From: Antonio Carlini <arcarlini@iee.org>p Subject: Re: OpenVMS security?& Message-ID: <40FEDC1C.2070700@iee.org>   John E. Malmberg wrote:A  @ > VAX had the four rings implemented in hardware, so does Alpha.  ) VAX certainly had four rings in hardware.:  7 AFAICR Alpha does all of that kind of stuff in PALcode.    Antonioe   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:26:21 -0500e2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> Subject: Re: OpenVMS security?+ Message-ID: <40FF17BD.E4C2FB74@comcast.net>a   Bob Ceculski wrote:: > [snip] > care to chime in Andrew? :)k  	 MUST you?e   D.J.D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:27:53 -0500:2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> Subject: Re: OpenVMS security?+ Message-ID: <40FF1818.FDD2FE4D@comcast.net>h   jlsue wrote: > 6 > On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 21:35:00 -0500, David J Dachtera$ > <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> wrote: >  > >o8 > >The root vulnerabitity doe snot exist in VMS, TTBOMK. > ! > Making it very slippery indeed.  >  > ;-)a  * That's what comes from being lysdexic. :-)   D.J.D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 23:10:04 -0400s3 From: Undisclosed <nomail@dontbeaweaselspammer.com>o Subject: Re: OpenVMS security?0 Message-ID: <D8KdnbfLkZGLrWLdRVn-hg@comcast.com>   Keith Cayemberg wrote: > Bob Koehler wrote: > @ >> In article <Y4ednf5iy_AwTGDdRVn-hg@comcast.com>, Undisclosed , >> <nomail@dontbeaweaselspammer.com> writes: >>A >>> does the descriptor calling standard guarantee integer-based  A >>> overflows (really, integer wraparounds) cannot occur somehow?  >> >> >>D >>    Integer overflows can be detected by the CPU and dealt with inH >>    an exception-handling manner.  All languages supported by VMS haveE >>    access to exception-handling capabilities.  That eliminates any J >>    need to write special algorithms or use up CPU looking for potential >>    problems.o >>J >>    Where and how much of this is made use of in VMS is not clear to me.H >>    Since I don't know how the integer overflow exploit works, its not" >>    clear whether its a problem. >> > ? > An Integer overflow as a class of OS-level security risks or nK > vulnerabilities would be new to me. And, I believe it would be a new one uJ > to most security professionals.   Math operations taking place on known B > types are well understood and thoroughly controlled operations. I > Mathematical operations leading to a mathematical overflow are handled aB > by some form of exception often already recognized in hardware. K > Certainly, mathematical errors can result in application errors. Whether WB > that error is to be regarded as a security risk in a particular I > application or by an organisation, I regard to be outside of the scope  G > of my Operating System security architecture essay from last January.  > J > Maybe one could regard Integer Overflow as a class of OS-level security I > risks or vulnerabilities if there were OS-level structures inwhich the aC > use of an address, privilege or a resource were dependent on the tH > integer's value which is determined or changeable from user-mode with E > math operations. Such a dependency is not known to me in any OS. I nH > suppose it's not impossible, but would require also having additional E > unusual privileges (to break inherent OS structural integrity) and sJ > atypical operations (on privileged OS stuctures) in the scenarios I can  > imagine at this time.R     uh...e  , http://www.phrack.org/phrack/60/p60-0x0a.txt   ---p  4 Basic Integer Overflows  by blexim <blexim@hush.com>   1: Introductiono      1.1 What is an integer?%      1.2 What is an integer overflow? #      1.3 Why can they be dangerous?a   2: Integer overflows      2.1 Widthness overflows          2.1.1 Exploiting       2.2 Arithmetic overflowse          2.2.1 Exploiting    3: Signedness bugs       3.1 What do they look like?          3.1.1 Exploiting-4      3.2 Signedness bugs caused by integer overflows   4: Real world examples      4.1 Integer overflows      4.2 Signedness bugs   [ 1.0 Introduction  I In this paper I'm going to describe two classes of programming bugs whichiG can sometimes allow a malicious user to modify the execution path of an>I affected process.  Both of these classes of bug work by causing variables I to contain unexpected values, and so are not as "direct" as classes whichyC overwrite memory, e.g. buffer overflows or format strings.  All the,F examples given in the paper are in C, so a basic familiarity with C isJ assumed.  A knowledge of how integers are stored in memory is also useful, but not essential.   ---'  , http://www.phrack.org/phrack/60/p60-0x06.txt   ---e  G This paper should not be viewed as an exploit construction tutorial, mybI goal is, rather, to explore and demonstrate generic ways to exploit stacki@ overflows and *signed/unsigned vulnerabilities* in kernel space.  G Case studies will be used to demonstrate these techniques, and reusable E *BSD "kernel level shellcodes" -- with many cool features! -- will bes
 presented.  A There has been related work done by [ESA] and [LSD-PL], which mays complement this article.   ---]  I by "integer overflows", I also included *signed/unsigned vulnerabilities*g   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:29:56 -0700n+ From: "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@MMaz.com>o! Subject: OT: Pretty good Linux adt' Message-ID: <40FF42C4.3090501@MMaz.com>   @ You'll need Shockwave or Flash players to see this, but it is a F hilarious Linux ad, put to the music of 'The Doors,' and does a smart 7 job of bashing MS at the same time...  Very creative...g  : http://images.linspire.com/RunLinspireSong/RunLinspire.swf   Barry    --    > Barry Treahy, Jr                       E-mail: Treahy@MMaz.com> Midwest Microwave                          Phone: 480/314-1320> Vice President & CIO                         FAX: 480/661-7028                        w   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 12:18:49 -0600l0 From: Mark Berryman <mark.berryman@mvb.saic.com>? Subject: Re: Sending page messages from VMS using a Unix server % Message-ID: <40fe511a@cpns1.saic.com>u   Lee Mah wrote:  E > Currently, I'm paging text messages from VMS by running ftp to sendu; > the appropriate file to an NT machine which runs winbeep.CB > However, the NT box has no failover or redundancy.  It failed to@ > respond shortly after midnight and the situation has been likeI > that for several hours.  This is not the first time that the NT machineeF > has failed.  Unfortunately, an application running on the VMSclusterA > is relying on the NT box for passing on semi-critical messages. = > I'm considering requesting that the NT machine be made moreh3 > reliable but I would prefer a different solution. @ > I've found out we have a Unix machine which has Remedy running? > on it which sends out pages by using Telalert commands in the  > following format: 6 >  /etc/telalert/bin/telalertc -c $MAIN_PAGER_SERVICE$3 >    -pin $MAIN_PAGER_NR$  -m "$PAGER_TEXT_MESSAGE$r  > I know very little about Unix.> > Is there a way to send a command with parameters from VMS to > the Unix machine to page?I  F The TelAlert client is available for VMS so you could run it yourself C rather than asking the Unix box to do so.  The group that owns the eC TelAlert server should be able to get you a copy of the VMS client.h  
 Mark Berrymani   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:40:26 -0500 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>? Subject: Re: Sending page messages from VMS using a Unix servera+ Message-ID: <40FF1B0A.AACBD1B3@comcast.net>    Mark Berryman wrote: > G > The TelAlert client is available for VMS so you could run it yourselfdD > rather than asking the Unix box to do so.  The group that owns theE > TelAlert server should be able to get you a copy of the VMS client.>  $ Who is "TelAlert"?  Do you have URL?   D.J.D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:37:25 -0500t2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>? Subject: Re: Sending page messages from VMS using a Unix servert+ Message-ID: <40FF1A54.87D0FD35@comcast.net>i  * Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote: > W > In article <fxrLc.53099$iw3.22955@clgrps13>, Lee Mah <lytmah@telusplanet.net> writes:n
 > > [snip]? > >Is there a way to send a command with parameters from VMS to  > >the Unix machine to page? >  > [snip] > Q > If you have an alphanumeric page that works by email (which is what we've got), O > you can send to pagernumber@airtouch.net (or whatever); of course you're thens. > stuck with email latency, which can be high.  E Be advised that this is also subject to spam attacks, as we found out G recently during a critical systems outage (unable to send notifications A to pagers via e-mail due to a spam attack in progress against our  service provider).   Other approaches include:-  E For Cingular Wireless, WGET can be used to transmit all the necessary< data in a URL via HTTP.>  G For Arch Wireless, KERMIT can be used to emulate an HTTP POST operation-( (as would normally be done from a form).  E These are the only two I currently know of. I am researching this for G the company to find alternate notification methods as a backup to SMTP.>   D.J.D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:39:36 -0500t2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>? Subject: Re: Sending page messages from VMS using a Unix serverc+ Message-ID: <40FF1AD8.CA741AEA@comcast.net>    John Brandon wrote:  > G > > Currently, I'm paging text messages from VMS by running ftp to sends= > > the appropriate file to an NT machine which runs winbeep. D > > However, the NT box has no failover or redundancy.  It failed toB > > respond shortly after midnight and the situation has been likeK > > that for several hours.  This is not the first time that the NT machineaH > > has failed.  Unfortunately, an application running on the VMSclusterC > > is relying on the NT box for passing on semi-critical messages.h? > > I'm considering requesting that the NT machine be made morec5 > > reliable but I would prefer a different solution.iB > > I've found out we have a Unix machine which has Remedy runningA > > on it which sends out pages by using Telalert commands in the  > > following format: 9 > >   /etc/telalert/bin/telalertc -c $MAIN_PAGER_SERVICE$-6 > >     -pin $MAIN_PAGER_NR$  -m "$PAGER_TEXT_MESSAGE$" > > I know very little about Unix.@ > > Is there a way to send a command with parameters from VMS to > > the Unix machine to page?F > % > Why not use SMTP mail or SMTP_SFF ?h  F One item to watch out for is that SMTP messages must usually appear toD originate from a valid IP Address / FQDN combination. Otherwise, theD message may be rejected as either spam or a relay attempt (or both).   D.J.D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:38:12 -0400 * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>" Subject: Re: Solaris to Itanium...2 Message-ID: <84mdnSwVkOyukWLdRVn-vg@metrocast.net>  < "konabear" <konabearg-newsgroups@yahoo.com> wrote in message6 news:vPwLc.2435$eu6.1257@newssvr15.news.prodigy.com...J > Interesting Link.   Seems Sum thinks Itanium will be around for a while: >t= > http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39161196,00.htmi  K More accurately, they think it *may* be around for a while, and *if* it is, K given that they ported Solaris to it several years ago anyway they might asdD well make a buck out of it (should the Itanic market actually becomeE significant) while at the same time establishing a foot-hold with thek! customers who may wish to use it.   K Sun seems to be starting to emulate Lou Gerstner's highly successful "DogmaoC be damned - sell wherever the demand is" philosophy, and leveragingtI partnerships and external suppliers to do so on a far smaller budget than L IBM used.  Whether they'll be successful will take a while to determine, but! the potential is certainly there.m   - bill   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:16:37 +0000 (UTC)U From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk: Subject: Re: Turn-key OpenVMS E-mail, web server solution?) Message-ID: <cdmmfk$ebd$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>    In article <00A35260.A1649B80@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr") writes: K >In article <cdl4gu$rn3$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>, david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes:u >>In article <00A35210.02FC02AA@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr") writes:tU >>>In article <1dKdnUOgd8yQrGjd4p2dnA@igs.net>, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> writes:h >>>>David J Dachtera wrote:lL >>>>> Is anyone aware of a company prodiving a turn-key OpenVMS solution forF >>>>> e-mail, web services and/or both? I thought I followed a link onJ >>>>> Google Groups to one once, but I didn't print anything out from that) >>>>> site and don't a URL to go back to.  >>>>>eJ >>>>> The time for such seems to be ripening, and if Itanic can repair itsJ >>>>> hull, pump out and put itself to rights, OVMS-I64 may be a practicalK >>>>> alternative to the trendier UN*X options (which will, undoubtedly, becJ >>>>> available on the soon-to-be ubiquitous x86-64, unlike a certain o.s.. >>>>> we all know of - VMS snoozes, it loses). >>>>>r >>>>> D.J.D. >>>> >>>>L >>>>Time to DJD to pull together an open-source CD and a self-published book$ >>>>that contains all the foregoing. >>>> >>>>;-) (half kidding) >>>-K >>>It wouldn't be a bad idea, except that there isn't really an open sourceaN >>>mail product.  PMDF costs money.  (It's _worth_ money, but it costs money.) >>>s >>L >>Well MX used to be free. I believe the latest versions cost something like, >>$50. Again this is available from Process. > J >Is it?  Last I looked, it was $500, and it wasn't available from Process.J >(If it's $50 now, I'll buy it for my home VMS box; can't justify that for >$500.)w >   I Yes sorry looks like you are right. I've never used it and thought it wasn cheaper.M I may also have been confused as to who now sells it since Hunter Goatley nowt@ works for Process developing the Precisemail Anti-spam product. I However since a quick check on the Process site revealed nothing about MX K licenses I then checked http://www.madgoat.com/ which still seems to be theL place to go for licenses.6  
 David Webb Security Team Leader CCSS Middlesex University     >-- Alan >-- P >===============================================================================1 > Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU2N > Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056N > Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025P >=============================================================================== >1   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 23:19:00 GMTRL From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr"): Subject: Re: Turn-key OpenVMS E-mail, web server solution?6 Message-ID: <00A352C6.E542AB8F@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  J In article <cdmmfk$ebd$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>, david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes: >In article <00A35260.A1649B80@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr") writes:L >>In article <cdl4gu$rn3$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>, david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes: >>>In article <00A35210.02FC02AA@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr") writes:V >>>>In article <1dKdnUOgd8yQrGjd4p2dnA@igs.net>, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> writes: >>>>>David J Dachtera wrote:M >>>>>> Is anyone aware of a company prodiving a turn-key OpenVMS solution for G >>>>>> e-mail, web services and/or both? I thought I followed a link onoK >>>>>> Google Groups to one once, but I didn't print anything out from that>* >>>>>> site and don't a URL to go back to. >>>>>>K >>>>>> The time for such seems to be ripening, and if Itanic can repair itsnK >>>>>> hull, pump out and put itself to rights, OVMS-I64 may be a practical L >>>>>> alternative to the trendier UN*X options (which will, undoubtedly, beK >>>>>> available on the soon-to-be ubiquitous x86-64, unlike a certain o.s.>/ >>>>>> we all know of - VMS snoozes, it loses).  >>>>>>
 >>>>>> D.J.D.r >>>>>D >>>>>PM >>>>>Time to DJD to pull together an open-source CD and a self-published bookh% >>>>>that contains all the foregoing.. >>>>>  >>>>>;-) (half kidding)t >>>>L >>>>It wouldn't be a bad idea, except that there isn't really an open sourceO >>>>mail product.  PMDF costs money.  (It's _worth_ money, but it costs money.)? >>>> >>>DM >>>Well MX used to be free. I believe the latest versions cost something like - >>>$50. Again this is available from Process.  >>K >>Is it?  Last I looked, it was $500, and it wasn't available from Process.tK >>(If it's $50 now, I'll buy it for my home VMS box; can't justify that fors >>$500.) >> >eJ >Yes sorry looks like you are right. I've never used it and thought it was	 >cheaper. N >I may also have been confused as to who now sells it since Hunter Goatley nowA >works for Process developing the Precisemail Anti-spam product. eJ >However since a quick check on the Process site revealed nothing about MXL >licenses I then checked http://www.madgoat.com/ which still seems to be the >place to go for licenses.   That was my understanding.  L Maybe somebody knows some answer to this dilemma (other than "pull out your 7 checkbook", which I generally have some trouble doing).y  N I have a VMS system at home.  (It's actually EDU licensed rather than HobbyistD licensed, but it amounts to the same thing.)  I would like to host a0 not-for-profit hobby-related mailing list on it.  N The system currently runs TCP/IP services.  Modern versions of TCP/IP servicesJ have pretty decent anti-relay / anti-SPAM-spreading stuff configurable in L the SMTP agent; this works fine for sending and receiving regular mail from ; the home box.  So I can do that without spending any money.n  . But when it comes to hosting mailing lists ...  H LISTSERV-LITE (free edition) requires that I install PMDF or MX to allowG appropriate channel processing; it won't talk to my vanilla SMTP agent.   3 PMDF - No hobbyist edition, costs noticeable money.a: MX - version 5.3 has good anti-spam stuff, but costs $500.N      version 4.2 - free, but no anti-spam/anti-relay stuff in the SMTP server,M      and you have to use the MX SMTP server and can't use the TCP/IP servicese      server.    K There's quite decent mailing list support in MX (although you have to write K your own site-specific code if you want to have moderated lists, and 4.2 atnN least chokes when people send the list robot HTML-formatted messages), but the same issues arise.  H It appears that the VMS port of majordomo is kind of flakey.  (And in myK experience as a list subscriber, majordomo on Unix is kind of flakey, but Ii  haven't administered it myself.)  O On Unix you've got majordomo, mailman (full-featured, good web interface, workstN reliably in my experience, good anti-spam/privacy measures), ezmlm - all free,K open-source, all with large user communities, as well as Listserv-Lite Freeg5 Edition, and probably other stuff I don't know about.   I On VMS, is there anything but Listserv-Lite Free Edition, MX 4.2, and theaK creaky majordomo port?  Is there anything with as much anti-relay/anti-spamaD stuff as current levels of TCP/IP services, so it's not a step back?  K Has anybody ported mailman?  (It's in Python, so it theoretically ought to iK be fairly portable, but I haven't looked at the code, and I don't have very.N much experience with Python or very much free time to get expert with it.  And@ I don't even know if mod_Python is available for Apache on VMS.)  O [In my particular case, I've considered a two-machine pseudo-firewall solution, N where one machine running TCP/IP Services SMTP is the MX address for the otherO box, which (a) refuses to connect to any box but the first one and (b) can thenrI run MX 4.2 and LISTSERV LITE with as much protection as the first box canoN offer, but it seems silly to be forced into running more hardware just to  getD around arbitrary software difficulties.  Also, the 2100 server I wasO considering as the list box turned out to add $50/month to my electric bill, sorN this would have been _more_ expensive over 1 year than paying the $500 for theN MX license.  I might still be willing to consider it if I got a box that was aK lot cheaper to run.  In the meantime, I'm forced to go with not-at-my-housel  solutions for my mailing lists.]   -- Aland --  O ===============================================================================t0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056hM  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025vO ===============================================================================e   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:16:04 -0500o2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>: Subject: Re: Turn-key OpenVMS E-mail, web server solution?+ Message-ID: <40FF1554.5006AFF0@comcast.net>o   John Smith wrote:t > . > "Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr" wrote:; > > In article <40FE0533.10007@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froblec! > > <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:h > >> David J Dachtera wrote: > >>0 > >>> Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote: > >>>.@ > >>>> In article <1dKdnUOgd8yQrGjd4p2dnA@igs.net>, "John Smith" > >>>> <a@nonymous.com> writes:e > >>>> > >>>>> David J Dachtera wrote:l > >>>>>iB > >>>>>> Is anyone aware of a company prodiving a turn-key OpenVMSC > >>>>>> solution for e-mail, web services and/or both? I thought IuI > >>>>>> followed a link on Google Groups to one once, but I didn't print C > >>>>>> anything out from that site and don't a URL to go back to.t > >>>>>>I > >>>>>> The time for such seems to be ripening, and if Itanic can repairrG > >>>>>> its hull, pump out and put itself to rights, OVMS-I64 may be asH > >>>>>> practical alternative to the trendier UN*X options (which will,G > >>>>>> undoubtedly, be available on the soon-to-be ubiquitous x86-64,iG > >>>>>> unlike a certain o.s. we all know of - VMS snoozes, it loses).  > >>>>>> > >>>>>> D.J.D.t > >>>>>> > >>>>> < > >>>>> Time to DJD to pull together an open-source CD and a< > >>>>> self-published book that contains all the foregoing. > >>>>>e > >>>>> ;-) (half kidding) > >>>>>iH > >>>> It wouldn't be a bad idea, except that there isn't really an open
 > >>>> sourcerD > >>>> mail product.  PMDF costs money.  (It's _worth_ money, but it > >>>> costs money.) > >>>>H > >>>> (I was arguing as soon as I first heard of allegedly-really-cheap > >>>> ItaniumE > >>>> servers for HP to sell prepackaged PathWorks server solutions,2F > >>>> prepackaged webserver solutions, prepackaged mailhub solutions; > >>>> haven't seen much signS > >>>> of it happening.) > >>>> > >>>,F > >>> Commercial products are not at all incongruous with the proposed > >>> business plan. > >>>e > >>> D.J.D. > >>>s > >>D > >> Why is it that many people in education environments place suchH > >> value on freeware, and want everything to be free,  ....  until you0 > >> want a copy of one of the books they write? > > G > > Gosh, I don't know. It might have to do with our neither having bige > > budgets4I > > at work with which to buy stuff (so we're interested in free software 	 > > so wewH > > can have software at all),  or ogetting paid big money, so potential
 > > incomeG > > from books is nice.  (In my particular case, I was obliged to buy an > > homeJ > > VMS box in order to write the Webserver book.  After I've made as muchD > > money on the book as it cost me - what with equipment purchases, > > vacationJ > > time, and a bit of unpaid leave - I might consider making it availableI > > free.  I do give away the runoff-to-HTML translator I adapted from DPp' > > Murphy's runoff-to-RTF translator.)  > >iG > > However, some people in education do put their books on the Web fora > > free0 > > download, like the economist David Friedman. > >pE > > In the meantime, it was John Smith - not in education as far as I.
 > > know -F > > who introduced the idea of an open source book and disk, and all I > > saidC > > was that you'd need to spend money on the mail server software.  > > Nothing2I > > wrong with packaged solutions where you have to spend _some_ money onm > > the software.a > & > Correct - I'm not in the .edu space. > M > Assume for a moment that there is some economic justification for D.J.D. or K > somebody else in investing the time/effort/money in this sort of thing tocN > help HP sell more VMS systems (I leave it to the reader of this paragraph toN > draw their own conclusions as to just why a $60B corporation needs people toM > do things for them for free or nearly so when it comes to VMS), a different < > approach to the question is a freeware/trialware combo CD. > [snip]  < Interesting suggestion. I'll have to give that some thought.  B My first impulse was not positive, however. Although this has beenC successful in the past, I think the operative key-phrase is "in theqG past". The days of "shareware" have given way to "open source" in large.F measure. At least initially, I think it would be best not to be viewedB as a "throw-back" - shaking the "legacy" image will be challenging enough.h  G Possible marketing slant: "OpenVMS - A Legacy That's Truly a Treasure!" 1 ((C)2004, David J Dachtera - All rights Reserved)   A To answer the poster before Alan, however, speaking from personalgF experience the answer is that given the choice between advancing one'sH technological leanings or feeding one's family, what do you expect to be: the most common choice? ...even when the intent/pursuit is entrepreneurial?   D.J.D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:20:38 -0500r2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>: Subject: Re: Turn-key OpenVMS E-mail, web server solution?+ Message-ID: <40FF1665.CA7BC019@comcast.net>t  * Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote: > [snip]5 > PMDF - No hobbyist edition, costs noticeable money.u   Guys (and Gals),  1 Could we please be careful about our terminology?   H There is no "hobbyist edition" of OpenVMS, either - VMS is VMS is VMS...  5 The difference is in the licensing, not the software.T   D.J.D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:03:27 -0500v2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>: Subject: Re: Turn-key OpenVMS E-mail, web server solution?+ Message-ID: <40FF125F.1A8105F8@comcast.net>m  * Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote: > b > In article <40FDCC63.C362F721@comcast.net>, David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> writes:- > >Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote:t > >>W > >> In article <1dKdnUOgd8yQrGjd4p2dnA@igs.net>, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> writes:a > >> >David J Dachtera wrote:cN > >> >> Is anyone aware of a company prodiving a turn-key OpenVMS solution forH > >> >> e-mail, web services and/or both? I thought I followed a link onL > >> >> Google Groups to one once, but I didn't print anything out from that+ > >> >> site and don't a URL to go back to.  > >> >> L > >> >> The time for such seems to be ripening, and if Itanic can repair itsL > >> >> hull, pump out and put itself to rights, OVMS-I64 may be a practicalM > >> >> alternative to the trendier UN*X options (which will, undoubtedly, becL > >> >> available on the soon-to-be ubiquitous x86-64, unlike a certain o.s.0 > >> >> we all know of - VMS snoozes, it loses). > >> >>T > >> >> D.J.D. > >> > > >> >N > >> >Time to DJD to pull together an open-source CD and a self-published book& > >> >that contains all the foregoing. > >> > > >> >;-) (half kidding) > >>M > >> It wouldn't be a bad idea, except that there isn't really an open source-P > >> mail product.  PMDF costs money.  (It's _worth_ money, but it costs money.) > >>N > >> (I was arguing as soon as I first heard of allegedly-really-cheap ItaniumO > >> servers for HP to sell prepackaged PathWorks server solutions, prepackagedsO > >> webserver solutions, prepackaged mailhub solutions; haven't seen much signh > >> of it happening.) > >8C > >Commercial products are not at all incongruous with the proposed  > >business plan.r > I > I don't think it's a bad idea at all, especially if you can get ProcesssO > to cut you some kind of deal on license costs.  I was responding specifically O > to "John Smith's" remark about "open-source CD"; you're not going to get PMDFr > on one of those.  D Intuitive of you to say that. I do actually prefer Multinet. TCPwareH would be my #2 choice, but only because I'm more familiar with Multinet.  E I haven't yet reviewed the choices for an IMAP server and the rest. I G just think that this would be a good starting point for anyone choosing ; to build a stable of turn-key OpenVMS-based server systems.B   D.J.D.   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Jul 2004 10:52:09 -0700% From: tadamsmar@yahoo.com (Tom Adams)n) Subject: Video card compatiblity questionn= Message-ID: <ea44f5a1.0407210952.40ce179c@posting.google.com>i  . I just received a new DS 10/600 (DY-74BAA-FA).  ? I expected it to have a video card, but there is no video card.h  H Can I move the video card from an old Alpha Station 400 to the new DS 10 and have it work?n  O (I may not have to do this, depends on if HP takes responsibility for the erroriJ or if we have to take responsibility.  And, we may buy a new card anyway.)   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 12:24:41 -0600c From: Kevin Handy <kth@srv.net>d- Subject: Re: Video card compatiblity question 0 Message-ID: <qYadnXsATqIULGPdRVn-jA@onewest.net>   Tom Adams wrote:0 > I just received a new DS 10/600 (DY-74BAA-FA). > A > I expected it to have a video card, but there is no video card.  > J > Can I move the video card from an old Alpha Station 400 to the new DS 10 > and have it work?a > Q > (I may not have to do this, depends on if HP takes responsibility for the error L > or if we have to take responsibility.  And, we may buy a new card anyway.)  B I believe that there are only a couple of specific cards that willC work properly in it. If all you want it for is to boot the machine,tD and do not plan on using it for X, than generic VGA cards will work,D but if you need X to work, then you need one of the supported cards.   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:44:59 +0000 (UTC)u6 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)- Subject: Re: Video card compatiblity questione0 Message-ID: <newscache$co181i$ttr$1@news.sil.at>  R In article <qYadnXsATqIULGPdRVn-jA@onewest.net>, Kevin Handy <kth@srv.net> writes: >Tom Adams wrote:(1 >> I just received a new DS 10/600 (DY-74BAA-FA).h >> fB >> I expected it to have a video card, but there is no video card. >> lK >> Can I move the video card from an old Alpha Station 400 to the new DS 10v >> and have it work?   What card ?l  R >> (I may not have to do this, depends on if HP takes responsibility for the errorM >> or if we have to take responsibility.  And, we may buy a new card anyway.)d >rC >I believe that there are only a couple of specific cards that willmD >work properly in it. If all you want it for is to boot the machine,E >and do not plan on using it for X, than generic VGA cards will work,eE >but if you need X to work, then you need one of the supported cards..  E You don't need a graphic card to boot a DS10. A serial console is it.uH Iff one wants a graphic card for a DS10 then obviously for MOTIF/CDE ;-)   --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERo% Network and OpenVMS system specialisti E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 22:44:15 GMTnL From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")+ Subject: Re: [OT] Haggis in comp.os.vms :-)v6 Message-ID: <00A352C2.0A500CBA@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  S In article <00A3528B.E8395505@SendSpamHere.ORG>, VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: [ >In article <2m73loFjnlaoU1@uni-berlin.de>, Roy Omond <Roy.Omond@BlueBubble.UK.Com> writes:m >>VAXman- wrote:
 >{...snip...}pN >>> I prefer tuna in raw form such as sashimi, or extremely rare and seared asD >>> an ahi tuna steak.  If cooked beyond extremely rare, tuna sucks. >>> N >>> No.  But I did order up haggis for a meal one evening and I enjoyed it.  I+ >>> even ordered it again for another meal.s >>J >>Well, this must *surely* be the first mention of "haggis" in the history >>of com.os.vms !t >>D >>As Brian discovered, haggis is actually very nice, and pretty muchE >>formed the staple diet for us poor people growing up in Scotland iniD >>the 1950's and 1960's.  It was cheap (consisting basically of the  >>"leftover" parts of a sheep).< >sG >I think it is this knowledge that tends to turn most people off to its1G >consumption.  I'm very open minded when it comes to foods.  I will tryhG >most anything once.  If I don't like it, at least I have an "informed"- >opinion. ;) >2F >BTW, my haggis was served to me with drambuie, not a fine malt.  Mrs.G >VAXman will attest to my state of being for the rest of the pub crawlsmG >later that evening after consuming the drambuie.  I have no recollect-iD >tion of our returning to the guest house in Edinburgh that evening.  G A friend once described Drambuie to me as being to Scotch as Coke syrupp
 is to Coke.      -- Alan    -- wO =============================================================================== 0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056sM  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025oO ===============================================================================    ------------------------------    Date: 21 Jul 2004 21:15:28 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) + Subject: Re: [OT] Haggis in comp.os.vms :-) 3 Message-ID: <UagcPVTVCCIV@eisner.encompasserve.org>r   In article <00A352C2.0A500CBA@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr") writes:s  I > A friend once described Drambuie to me as being to Scotch as Coke syrupt > is to Coke.  h   No.s  ? Drambuie is a small port city features in the movie "Airplane".n  & By the way, beware of the Girl Scouts.   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2004.402 ************************