1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 01 May 2004	Volume 2004 : Issue 241       Contents:# Re: 11:05 PM Encompass Wake Up Call # Re: 11:05 PM Encompass Wake Up Call # Re: 11:05 PM Encompass Wake Up Call 5 Re: Determining who in a cluster has the lock manager ( Re: Disk De-Frag utilities, suggestions?> Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ...> Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ...> Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ...> Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ...> Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ... Re: Marillion Comeback) Re: Normal operating temerpature for ES40 ! Re: Oracle statement of direction ) Preserving case in PATH_INFO in CSWS_PHP? + Re: System organization preference question + RE: System organization preference question < Re: TCPIP: which VMSmail messages does the POP server take ?  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 04:26:15 GMT 6 From: "Kenneth Farmer" <KFarmer@NOSPAM.SpyderByte.com>, Subject: Re: 11:05 PM Encompass Wake Up Call= Message-ID: <HFFkc.74333$yv.2604171@twister.southeast.rr.com>   7 "tutor" <tutor_removespam_@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message 2 news:4ut590dr2qckon2pa5b76cptof4h99pvph@4ax.com... > Ok, > >    Did anyone else receive a call last night from ENCOMPASS? > ; > I received a 11:05 pm recorded message from Encompass....  > D > Not sure how they got my number. I've never paid for membership...
 > Oh wait.- > Maybe that's why they call AFTER 11 pm !!!!  > ? > If you have paid membership, they call during NORMAL BUSINESS  > hours????   * I'm a member.  That didn't seem to matter.  L I got the call at around 11:00 PM EST.  Everyone was asleep.  I must admit IG was a little pissed about that.  I was in such a daze I forgot about it  until I saw your message.     11:00 PM, who thunk that one up!   Ken    -- Kenneth Farmer  <><  OpenVMS.org  |  dcl.OpenVMS.org    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 13:01:30 GMT 5 From: rdeininger@mindspringdot.com (Robert Deininger) , Subject: Re: 11:05 PM Encompass Wake Up CallL Message-ID: <rdeininger-0105040904280001@user-105n89t.dialup.mindspring.com>  > In article <4ut590dr2qckon2pa5b76cptof4h99pvph@4ax.com>, tutor% <tutor_removespam_@cfl.rr.com> wrote:    >Ok,= >   Did anyone else receive a call last night from ENCOMPASS?  > : >I received a 11:05 pm recorded message from Encompass....  @ I got the call at 11 PM also.  Asking me to take a survey, IIRC.   GRRRR.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 10:27:42 -04008 From: "Tom Simpson" <thomas.simpson1@nospam.comcast.net>, Subject: Re: 11:05 PM Encompass Wake Up Call0 Message-ID: <BcGdnfjHZ_lyLg7dRVn-ig@comcast.com>  J Yes.  I got the Encompass call at 11:20 pm Thursday night.  I was not real thrilled, as I am $ an early-riser and was sound asleep.   Regards, Tom   7 "tutor" <tutor_removespam_@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message 2 news:4ut590dr2qckon2pa5b76cptof4h99pvph@4ax.com... > Ok, > >    Did anyone else receive a call last night from ENCOMPASS? > ; > I received a 11:05 pm recorded message from Encompass....  > D > Not sure how they got my number. I've never paid for membership...
 > Oh wait.- > Maybe that's why they call AFTER 11 pm !!!!  > ? > If you have paid membership, they call during NORMAL BUSINESS  > hours????  >  > 	 > Jerrold    ------------------------------  * Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 12:45:13 +0000 (UTC)7 From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) > Subject: Re: Determining who in a cluster has the lock manager( Message-ID: <c7064p$i8f$1@pcls4.std.com>  1 rcyoung@aliconsultants.com (Robert Young) writes:   D >I am wondering  how to tell which node is the "current home" of theD >cluster lock manager so that if performance problems arise, one canF >readily "eliminate" the lock manager migration issue from the list of! >possible sources of the problem.   H There is no single node that runs "the lock manager" in a cluster.  VMS A Engineering named it DLM (Distributed Lock Manager) for a reason.   F For any given lock tree (a lock and its sublocks) there will be a nodeI that manages it, so you'll want to find the node(s) managing the lock(s)  G of interest to you.  I suspect the $GETLKI system service can tell you  5 which node is currently managing any particular lock.    --   -Mike    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 13:58:28 GMT . From: Beach Runner <BeachRunner@cfl.rr.nospam>1 Subject: Re: Disk De-Frag utilities, suggestions? > Message-ID: <82Okc.507352$B81.9054384@twister.tampabay.rr.com>  F If you go to 7.3-1 and use XFC (requires patches) or 7.3-2 disk cache  programs become & obsolete, and it's free and supported.   Just set vcc_flags =2          John Brandon wrote:   N >I am about to endeaver back into the world of disk de-fragmenation utilities. > M >Anyone have any suggestions or recommendations for products or who to avoid?  >  >TIA!  >  >  >J*o*h*n B*r*a*n*d*o*n >VMS Systems Administrator+ >firstname.lastname.spam.me.not@dalsemi.com  >    >    ------------------------------   Date: 01 May 2004 14:38:35 GMT. From: jealousxmp@aol.commonplace (jealous xmp)G Subject: Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ... : Message-ID: <20040501103835.17707.00000722@mb-m04.aol.com>  = >wrong ... VMS has all the services that everything else has, = >telnet, ethernet, SSH, webservers, FTP ... a buffer overflow = >is a buffer overflow, only on VMS these exploits are twarted 9 >with that nasty "ACCESS VIOLATION" error time after time   J There are things like W^X, PAX, gr-security, SE linux, stack guard, formatM guard, and more that are helping linux and bsd.  With unix, there are trusted L systems like Trusted HP-UX and Trusted Solaris.  Unix can also use chrootingM which helps a bit.  And trusted variants mean the local root exploits are not 
 as useful.  N As I understand it, the usual stack overflows won't work on VMS because of theO non-executable stack.  Not sure about heap overflows or format bugs.  I've seen 3 a DCL script exploited on a web site before though.   N There is/was a hardened (trusted even?) form of VMS.  I don't know the detailsA and how this compares to some of the trusted and hardened unices.    Michael    ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 16:45:40 +0200* From: "Karsten Nyblad" <nospam@nospam.com>G Subject: Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ... , Message-ID: <c70d6q$4vp$1@news.cybercity.dk>  + <david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk> wrote in message # news:c6r9k8$gmb$1@news.mdx.ac.uk... H > Independently of their defintions the virus companies tend to call any > malware a virus.  I True, however, I think the viruses at large were code attaching itself to = DOS programs.  Macro viruses in, e.g., Word files came later.   E > However your definition of a virus (by example of getting a user to  install G > and run a DCL command procedure which appends code to any DCL command G > procedure the user has write access to and then requiring the user to  lower K > permissions and tell his friends to run it - in order for it to spread to 2 > other accounts) is a totally useless definition.L > Such a "virus" could be written for any computer system which had either aK > scripting language or compiler and which allowed the user to grant others  > access to his files. > G I get the impression that you think that the victims know that they run L viral code.  Of course they don't.  The first victim on the system will copyJ a command procedure from, e.g., the Internet, because it seems like it canF do something that the victim wants done.  He does not realise that theL command procedure is infected with a virus.  He tries it and all his commandH procedures become infected, including those used by friends, colleagues,I etc.   All this has happened without the victim realising that he has let K malicious code at large on the system.  The friends and colleagues continue G to use the now infected command procedures of the first victim.  If the H friends and colleagues make command procedures available to others, then$ those others may become victims too.  D Such a virus can infect quite a number of user accounts in the rightJ environment of users with some but limited computer knowledge.  I rememberL reading abort two professors discussing whether og not one of the professorsL could attack the other professors Unix account.  The first professor place aJ virus infected copy of ls in a directory, that was on the other professorsG path.  The other professor noticed that ls was a little bit slower than L usual and realised what had happened.  The virus had already made a to digit2 number of copies and was spreading to other users.   Karsten Nyblad ibpit1202 at sneakemail dot com    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 11:47:11 -0400 ' From: Glenn Everhart <Everhart@gce.com> G Subject: Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ... 3 Message-ID: <4093c6ee$0$3070$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>   D I suspect many of our younger colleagues in IT shops have no concept@ what running on a secure platform is like, and that they must beB taught lessons from the ground up. Notice the occasional trolls by? folks who know Windows or some unixoid flavors, but are used to ? being surrounded by systems where most every process is running  in highly privileged states.  C If HP were to want to attract some interest in a way more useful to D the industry than just admitting "VMS is good" in public, they couldC profitably have series of articles on how to design a secure system @ and what it's like. At the end of each would be mention that the8 aforementioned describes VMS, which incidentally runs onA reasonably fast platforms X. (Alpha was a great story there; IA64 F seems less so to me, but its performance is respectable. What is toughD for some is changing over their iron, which is typically still beingE depreciated. That's an advantage Linux has, with NSA or other addins, E since it can be run on existing boxes. But the point needs to be made J that a move to VMS does not require a move to the platforms of the 1980s.)  C The reason for hardcopy security logging was of course to make them F tamper proof. The technique works very well, as long as the logs don't7 flood the terminal (cause it to run out of paper etc.).   C Those who recall V4.0 will recall the numerous brand new holes that A got poked in it at once, which led to more rewriting/redesign and ? impressive security strength. VMS got strong that way by having A been to the wars. Look hard and some of the old bullet wounds are 
 visible...   Glenn Everhart   Paul Sture wrote:    > Karsten Nyblad wrote:  > I >> "Andrew Harrison" <andrew_._remove_harrison@su_n.com> wrote in message - >> news:c6ntl3$nvf$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com...  >>? >>> So far in this thread we have had Bob K making claims about < >>> UNIX authentication which are incorrect and Bob C making? >>> claims about the relatie Security of OpenVMS vs UNIX namely = >>> that OpenVMS cannot be infected with virii which are also  >>> incorrect. >> >> >>L >> And Bob K claimed in <KsPWa8jYe286@eisner.encompasserve.org> that VMS hasK >> had security logs since 1984.  However, when I pointed out the error, he J >> claimed in <3nFczU07Ju10@eisner.encompasserve.org> that he was writing  >> that K >> VMS has had cluster since 1984.  Clusters are not mentioned in the first ; >> article.  Here are references to the articles on Google:  >> http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_umsgid=%3CKsPWa8jYe286@eisner.encompasserve.org%3E&lr=&hl=en   >> >> http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_umsgid=%3C3nFczU07Ju10@eisner.encompasserve.org%3E&lr=&hl=en   >> >> > K > Oh, but as I remember it, VMS did have security logs with V4.0. Not disk  J > logs as they later became, because the concept then was to log messages  > to a hardcopy terminal.  >    ------------------------------   Date: 1 May 2004 06:31:28 -0700 ( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)G Subject: Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ... = Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0405010531.712c93e4@posting.google.com>   p jealousxmp@aol.commonplace (jealous xmp) wrote in message news:<20040430115441.21491.00000652@mb-m10.aol.com>...F > >> that is because it can't be exploited because it has security ... > > 1 > >Nope sorry Bob but thats the wrong conclusion.  > > 7 > >To even start exploiting a system requires knowledge 5 > >of a system, without that the hackers stand little 
 > >chance. > >  > Q > Bob has a tendency to go overboard.  I'm certain there are zero day exploits in Q > VMS like elsewhere.  Admittedly certain forms of overflow are very difficult on  > VMS. > 	 > Michael   > Bob is not going overboard ... and in VMS, every day is a zero< exploit day, unlike other os's ... and all forms of overflow are difficult on VMS ...  , http://www.process.com/techsupport/cert.html   ------------------------------   Date: 1 May 2004 06:37:25 -0700 ( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)G Subject: Re: How to turn linux into VMS - memory refresher for Dave ... = Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0405010537.69a21a7a@posting.google.com>    Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<c6tkmv$pku$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...  > > E > > that is because it can't be exploited because it has security ...  > 0 > Nope sorry Bob but thats the wrong conclusion. > 6 > To even start exploiting a system requires knowledge4 > of a system, without that the hackers stand little	 > chance.  > 9 > The Defcon 9 hackers knew nothing about OpenVMS, so for 9 > the purposes of that test it was virtually invunerable, : > not by design but instead by lack of knowledge and thats8 > not a feature of OpenVMS its a feature of the hackers. > 	 > Regards  > Andrew Harrison   < wrong ... VMS has all the services that everything else has,< telnet, ethernet, SSH, webservers, FTP ... a buffer overflow< is a buffer overflow, only on VMS these exploits are twarted< with that nasty "ACCESS VIOLATION" error time after time ...  , http://www.process.com/techsupport/cert.html   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 10:48:38 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: Marillion Comeback 0 Message-ID: <00A312D0.D24157D5@SendSpamHere.ORG>  f In article <c6uvoi$evpa2$1@ID-132135.news.uni-berlin.de>, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net> writes: >VAXman- wrote:  >>  J >> If you like Marillion and other progressive rock, try out Auralmoon.comK >> internet radio.  You might even hear my DECtalk speak if you listen long 
 >> enough. >>   > D >I honestly don't know whether I like Marillion or not, as I've not H >really heard them much, but I do like what I see and hear on Auralmoon  >so far.  I Great Paul.  Listen for the MC Hawk station promo.  That one is me and my  DECtalk.   --  B http://www.legacy-2000.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system securityC                             solutions that others only claim to be.  --  K VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM              5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"     ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 10:44:55 -04008 From: "Tom Simpson" <thomas.simpson1@nospam.comcast.net>2 Subject: Re: Normal operating temerpature for ES400 Message-ID: <BPSdnQun0cJrKg7dRVn-vA@comcast.com>  K Those temperatures look great.  I'm happy if I can keep my highest readings  under 90 degrees.    Regards, Tom   5 "John Brandon" <brandon@dalsemi.com> wrote in message + news:04043009103323@dscis6-0.dalsemi.com... L > I have an AlphaServer ES40 (4x667, 3-GB) and was wondering what the normal$ > internal operating temperature is. > J > I have been using the CPU_TEMPERATURE.COM posted in openvms.org and have beenC > seeing ranges between 71 and 84 (I modified the procedure a bit).  >  > SENSOR_0" = "82.40 > SENSOR_1" = "82.40 > SENSOR_2" = "84.20 > SENSOR_3" = "71.60 > SENSOR_4" = "78.80 > SENSOR_5" = "73.40 > SENSOR_6" = "73.40 >  > J > The other day these values were between 87 and 93.  That is when some of our F > other servers started to have heat stroke - our A/C unit went out... >  > K > Anyone else running this process that would care to share the temperature  range  > they normally experience?  >  > 0 > I find the above values too high for my taste. >  > TIA  >  >  >  >  > J*o*h*n B*r*a*n*d*o*n  > VMS Systems Administrator , > firstname.lastname.spam.me.not@dalsemi.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 22:54:40 -0400 ( From: "Wayne" <bruzeks@atcomcastdot.net>* Subject: Re: Oracle statement of direction0 Message-ID: <BvSdnYbgpMThjA7dRVn-jw@comcast.com>  . "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message& news:vYidnSKqrqIVug3dRVn-uQ@igs.net... > K http://forums1.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer.do?threadId=574901  > I > Posted by Sue. It's a Microsoft Word document. Old news to some, new to 	 > others.  >  > B The document is dated February 2004 and states that "OpenVMS 7.3-2- certification is targeted for December 2003"?    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 02:48:06 GMT L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")2 Subject: Preserving case in PATH_INFO in CSWS_PHP?6 Message-ID: <00A31274.851361B6@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  	 Vmsers --   	 We've got   
 VMS 7.3-2 G CSWS 1.3  (can't go up to 2.0 unless the STM_LF restriction is removed)  CSWS_PHP 1.2  L and we're trying to get PMWIKI.PHP running.  (Google if you need to look at H PMWIKI source code; it's a PHP program suite to run a Wiki (a set of webM pages which can be updated by various people using only a browser for tools). I This is intended to allow a bunch of different users of our facilities to I easily record any problems or suggestions they have in a way which can be M viewed by support people, comment on, tagged, and not forgotten.  If we can't L get it running on VMS they'll run it on a Unix box, but I'd sure rather not ' have to say "we can't get it running.")   L PMWIKI maintains a bunch of files in a flat directory structure, using upperN and lower case file names.  We're on an ODS-5 disk, so this shouldn't be a big? problem, but it seems to create pages it then can't find again.   N As far as we can tell - and I'm still just feeling my way around PHP, so couldM be off-base here - it appears that HTTP_SERVER_VARS['PATH_INFO'] gives us the M PATH_INFO - the arguments to the PHP program, pretty much - rendered entirely K as lowercase, even if what the browser sent was mixed case. I haven't tried O recently to make sure, but I'm pretty sure that in a plain CGI environment CSWS M doesn't downcase the PATH_INFO, so I think this is happening between CSWS and O PHP.  Is there some way to stop it happening which won't break something else?     (Hmm.  Further investigation.)  O The APACHE$WWW LOGIN.COM already defines these CRTL feature logicals.  Is there % something else that needs to be set?     $ ! % $ define decc$argv_parse_style enable & $ define decc$efs_case_preserve enable  $ define decc$efs_charset enable% $ define decc$efs_case_special enable ( $ define decc$enable_getenv_cache enable+ $ define decc$posix_seek_stream_file enable    The manual says:    : >With DECC$ARGV_PARSE_STYLE enabled, case is preserved in  >command-line arguments D >when the process has been set up for extended DCL parsing using SET >PROCESS/PARSE_STYLE=EXTENDED.  K If I add a $ SET PROCESS/PARSE_STYLE=EXTENDED to the APACHE$WWW login, that G will affect everything, not just my single PHP program, or even all PHP M programs.  I really don't want to just try it and see if anything falls over.   I Has anyone done this?  Has anyone else seen this problem?  Am I guessing  > wrong about how CSWS_PHP gets environment variables from CSWS?  ! Thanks in advance for any advice.   I (After this part is solved, I'll tackle the way the program uses sendmail , to make mail notifications of page changes.)   -- Alan    --  O =============================================================================== 0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056 M  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025 O ===============================================================================    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 04:00:05 +0200 * From: Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net>4 Subject: Re: System organization preference question9 Message-ID: <c6v0b9$gkhb3$1@ID-132135.news.uni-berlin.de>    Paul Repacholi wrote: - > Jack Fortune <jfortune@uoregon.edu> writes:  >  > D >>I'm trying to weigh the pro's & con's to determine if there is anyE >>great value in changing this practice, or simply leaving everything  >>in place.  >  > 1 > It is your camel, it's up to you how you do it.  > ? > But, some things are much more down than others. Using SYSTEM ? > is one of them. Gets you nothing over a suitable account, but 4 > makes it way harder to find out who did something. > < > Most of the rest have pros and cons, so take your picks... >   E My preference is to keep application stuff out of [SYSMGR], and I do  H that when starting out with a new system, but in your situation I would 4 be very wary of making changes in case I got bitten.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 09:03:08 -0400' From: "Main, Kerry" <kerry.main@hp.com> 4 Subject: RE: System organization preference questionR Message-ID: <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB313FEF@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----6 > From: Paul Sture [mailto:nospam@sture.homeip.net]=20 > Sent: April 30, 2004 10:17 PM  > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com 6 > Subject: Re: System organization preference question >=20 > David M Smith wrote:7 > > On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 13:21:44 -0700, Jack Fortune=20  > <jfortune@uoregon.edu> wrote:  > >=20 > >=20B > >>While I'm sure there is no _right_ or _wrong_ way to manage=20 > a cluster,6 > >>I'm curious as to what approach others have taken. > >>B > >>The main differences concern the use of the SYSTEM accound andG > >>SYS$MANAGER directory. At my former job, I hardly ever logged in as H > >>SYSTEM and never ran any batch jobs under the SYSTEM username. Also,A > >>we did not put any site-specific command procedures in any=20 
 > SYS$MANAGER F > >>directory (except for SYSTARTUP_VMS.COM, SYPAGSWPFILES.COM ,etc.). > >>B > >>Here, there are many batch jobs running under SYSTEM, and mostE > >>site-specific command files used to run the systems are typically  > >>located in SYS$MANAGER.=20 > >>- > >>How have others configured their cluster?  > >=20 > >=20  	 [snip ..]   = > On the subject of knowing what is "ours", I've worked at=20  > several places=20 H > where production stuff includes a short abbreviation of the company=20J > name, and I've found that very useful. For example, if the company is=20? > call AB Corp, I'd have logicals and associated directories=20  > called ABC_*.=20I > Good naming conventions for logicals, directories and procedures can=20 = > also save a lot of time when it comes to problem diagnosis.  >=20? > I also make sure that "key" startup stuff is on the system=20  > disk so that=20 B > I can get at it from a minimal (vs standalone, but standalone=20
 > as well)=20 A > boot. The definition of "key" here is obviously site dependant.  >=20     Paul,     Re: company names in logicals ..  D Fwiw, in this day of mergers, acquisitions and name changes, I wouldG likely stay away from company names in logicals and any types of things E like directories. I now have seen internal systems with DEC, Digital, = Compaq, CPQ, HP etc references and directories all over them.   F My preference these days is to keep everything as rock solid simple asD possible while at the same time allowing one to grow the std easily.F System names like SYS001, SYS002...SYSxxx etc, disk labels like APP001 e.g. disk$app001:[HR] etc.  G Its not as exotic as some naming stds, but imho, simplifying IT stds as G much as possible will have long term benefits. Server HW, company names A and OS versions can change, but the IT resource naming std should ) continue with as few changes as possible.   E Course, there is no better way to start a long discussion than to try 2 and resolve which is the best resource naming std.   :-)    Regards,  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax: 613-591-4477  Email: kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom . (remove the DOT's and AT for email address)=20   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 19:43:27 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> E Subject: Re: TCPIP: which VMSmail messages does the POP server take ? , Message-ID: <4092E49A.F1995FEE@teksavvy.com>   Michael Austin wrote: R > (I use Netscape 4.7 and 7.1 mail/newsreader)  This week I began playing with the1 > TCPIP5.3-2 IMAP server using the same readers.    N Unfortunatly, they broke the VAX IMAP server between 5.3 and 5.3-2, so I can'tL use it anymore (I guess I could just extract the relevant files from the 5.3( kit and overwrite the broken 5.3-2 ones.  6 But I found the IMAP server to be excruciatingly slow.   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2004.241 ************************