1 INFO-VAX	Mon, 22 Nov 2004	Volume 2004 : Issue 649       Contents:  Re: 90TL Terminal Server Problem! carly(tm) bets on sunset business  DECnet positively in the news  Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw !P Re: interesting take on Olsen's "no reason for any individual to have a  compute+ Re: monitor (over TCPIP) hangs---any ideas?  NFS Problem with AIX, Re: Online forums for former digits/deccies? Re: OT: Joke of the week Re: OT: Joke of the week Re: OT: Joke of the week Re: OT: Joke of the week* Re: Programatically accessing HELP/MESSAGE* Re: Programatically accessing HELP/MESSAGE5 Re-post on TechWorld of OpenVMS: Survives and Thrives 1 Re: reporter inquiry: Is HP selling AlphaServers? 1 Re: reporter inquiry: Is HP selling AlphaServers? 1 Re: reporter inquiry: Is HP selling AlphaServers? 1 Re: reporter inquiry: Is HP selling AlphaServers? 1 Re: reporter inquiry: Is HP selling AlphaServers? 1 Re: reporter inquiry: Is HP selling AlphaServers?  Re: Strange VMS related spam Re: Strange VMS related spam Re: Strange VMS related spam Re: Strange VMS related spam  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 09:56:00 -0800& From: jordan@ccs4vms.com (Rich Jordan)) Subject: Re: 90TL Terminal Server Problem = Message-ID: <cc5619f2.0411220956.2f51e6c1@posting.google.com>   o peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) wrote in message news:<newscache$38vg7i$a1i1$1@news.sil.at>... d > In article <_NqdnTtKANqMAQPcRVn-oA@comcast.com>, David Reed <junkman24@nospam.comcast.net> writes: > >David Reed wrote:N > >> I have about 10 90tl terminal servers that I've upgraded to 4 meg of ram H > >> and currently use with TCP-IP to connect to various serial devices  > >> (printers etc..). > I > Which S/W ? (I use now DNAS V2.4 BL50 - btw. Anybody a newer version ?)  > J > >> They have static IP addresses and work really well. However every 60 L > >> days exactly they quit responding. I go power them off and they reboot - > >> and work fine again for another 60 days.  > ) > IP only, or LAT and local access, too ?  > D > >> I am puzzled! There are no lease timers on static IP addresses.E > >> The lights on the front look "normal" The ones with active port  P > >> connections still have the port led's lit but can't ping them or anything.." > >> What am I overlooking here ?? > >>  % > >Nobody have any ideas about this ?  > Q > Sorry, no. My DS90s (ok, it used to be ~28 DS90TL/DS90M in my previous company, G > but now it is only one DS90M left) have/had years uptime w/o hickups.   F I didn't think DNAS of any version would run on a 90TL; I think you'reB stuck with the old DECserver software.  But it might be helpful to/ know the version you are running on your 90TLs.   F Also, why did you upgrade the memory?  I've not heard that it providesA any benefit on the older boxes running the old pre-DNAS software; F maybe that is causing problems.  I used to have a couple of 90TLs thatB would run solid between power failures (uptimes exceeding 9 monthsA were common); we ran the latest software that had come on the old  CONDIST CDs.   Rich CCS    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 08:38:37 -0500 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> * Subject: carly(tm) bets on sunset business, Message-ID: <j6qdnRRrKJhDdjzcRVn-pA@igs.net>  L http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1211&e=10&u=/nm/20041121/tc' _nm/tech_digitalcameras_dc&sid=95573372   ) Profits Fading in Digital Camera Industry    Sun Nov 21, 8:08 AM ET By Nathan Layne   J TOKYO (Reuters) - Bloated with inventory and mired in the red, the digitalL camera business of Japan's Olympus Corp. underscores how making money in the% cut-throat market is getting tougher.   J Sony Corp (NYSE:SNE - news) (news - web sites). and Canon Inc. are seen asI the strongest players in the $17 billion market, profiting even as prices L fall and growth slows. But most other makers will struggle and some might be" better off exiting, analysts said.  I "They seem to think it's a big game of chicken and if the other guy backs J down they will be able to make lots of money," said KBC Securities analystJ James Moon. "Someone has got to realize that you can't make money on these things anymore."  K The average price of a compact digital camera will decline by 15 percent in F 2004 and another 15 percent next year, according to UBS analyst Ryohei
 Takahashi.  J He sees slowing growth ahead, forecasting the global market to climb aboutI 40 percent in 2004 to 68.5 million units and a further 22 percent to 84.1 > million next year before leveling out at 84.7 million in 2006.  K The spread of cellphones equipped with powerful cameras is also a worry, as E some consumers feel they don't need to buy a separate digital camera.   J Many digital camera firms have cut their annual shipment targets in recentK weeks, but Olympus, the world's third-largest after Sony and Canon, as well G as Pentax Corp. and Konica Minolta Holdings stood out with their camera  divisions in the red.      PRICES TO FALLG Even makers with hit products have fallen on hard times. Nikon Corp. is F making money on a new digital SLR launched in March, but still expectsI profits in its camera division to fall as prices of compact models slide.   J "We expect prices to keep falling. But we are shifting our product line-upD toward the high end," said Nikon Chief Financial Officer Kenji Enya.  L The problem with that strategy is that every digital camera company is doingK the same thing: avoid the low-end of the market where price competition has  made margins razor-thin.  K Camera makers will also find it increasingly difficult to attract customers G by improving quality. There is a growing consensus among consumers that J three or four megapixels, the measure of how many million picture elementsH are captured in a digital snapshot, are enough to produce a high-quality shot.   L Last month Samsung Electronics launched the world's first 5-megapixel phone.  E "You used to be able to boost average selling prices by raising pixel J counts, but that doesn't really work anymore," UBS's Takahashi said. "ManyD people are coming to the realisation that five megapixels isn't even necessary."   K With the pie not likely to get much bigger, makers can either try and carve F out a profitable niche like Casio Computer Co. has done by focusing onL card-sized cameras, or flood the market with products in an effort to grab a higher market share.     KODAK A NEW THREATH With more than 30 players, the market is far more competitive than a fewH years ago. Eastman Kodak has emerged as a formidable rival in the UnitedJ States, while Matsushita Electric Industrial is gaining traction in Japan.  J Kodak's share of the U.S. market rose to 18.2 percent in the first half ofJ calendar 2004 from 15.1 percent in the same period last year, according toL research firm IDC. Olympus, Nikon, Hewlett-Packard, Pentax and Sony all lost share.  H "Kodak's advantage is that they are offering cameras at lower prices andL focusing on creating better products. They are putting pressure on everybody$ else," said IDC analyst Chris Chute.  F Success depends not only on developing attractive products but also on getting them to market quickly.   G Fuji Photo Film slashed its annual digital camera shipment target by 18 C percent to 7 million units last month, partly because a shortage of J components kept it from launching a key model in time for the summer bonus season in Japan.  L Olympus expects its camera division to lose 18 billion yen ($173 million) inL the year to March as it disposes inventory that swelled to 2.6 months at theJ end of September, up 53 percent year-on-year. Still, the company is aimingE for 20 percent of the global market in three years, up from around 10  percent now.  L "Some time ago our share used to be about 20 to 23 percent," Olympus Imaging President Hiroshi Komiya said.  K Olympus can nurse its camera operations back to profit in the next business I year by clearing out inventory and starting from scratch with new models, " according to KBC Securities' Moon.  < But steady profits over the long-term are unlikely, he said.  C Olympus has a relatively weak brand and was late to address two key H segments -- the thin, card-sized model and the reasonably priced digitalD single lens reflex (SLR) camera, a high-margin, fast-growing segment dominated by Canon and Nikon.   L "Our problems stem from mistakes made in product development and our failureJ to correctly read market trends," Olympus President Tsuyoshi Kikukawa saidH last week. ($1=104.22 Yen) (Additional reporting by Franklin Paul in New York)    -----   L Guess she's counting on the 'synergy between the digital camera business andK convenience printing. Most of the people I know who use digital cameras now K cull the images they want printed and either burn a CD and take it to their H local photo lab or e-mail the images to the lab from optical printing onH real photo paper, bypassing the print-it-at-home route because it is farL less expensive to get Costco or Walmart or the myriad of other photo labs to do it.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 08:22:34 -0500 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> & Subject: DECnet positively in the news, Message-ID: <GKqdnSUlMKmGdTzcRVn-vg@igs.net>   Originally posted here http://www.informationweek.com/   < but also picked up and posted in Yahoo (more widely visible)  L http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=74&ncid=1212&e=10&u=/cmp/200 41120/tc_cmp/53701030     ? Attacks That Blend Threats Against People, IT Systems Predicted   J William Hancock, chief security officer at Savvis Communications, says theC migration of power-grid systems to the Internet has increased their  vulnerability.    # By Thomas Claburn,  InformationWeek 
 Nov. 19, 2004  URL:I http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=53701030       J In San Francisco on Thursday, William Hancock, VP of security practice andA strategy and chief security officer of IT service provider Savvis K Communications, told a group of IT professionals and reporters that the sky  was falling.  F Hancock said he expects the emergence of "blended-threat" attacks thatL combine war on critical infrastructure occurring simultaneously with attacksI designed for large-scale fatalities such as biological terrorism. Hancock K went as far as to predict that such attacks would exceed those on the World & Trade Center in magnitude of disaster.  G The cyberwarfare aspect of such an attack could happen in any number of I ways. He described the migration of the power grid from protocols such as K DECnet and OSI to TCP/IP as one area of increasing vulnerability. With more K of these power-grid systems connecting directly to the Internet, he warned, E they become susceptible to denial-of-service attacks that could cause # blackouts across the United States.   J As a more mundane example, a new PC connected to the Internet could becomeK infected with a worm within 25 minutes--before it has completed downloading E the patches necessary to protect it against the most current threats, 
 Hancock said.   L Layered defenses are necessary, he argued. "There's not a firewall made that you can't get through."   J Hancock, chairman of the National Reliability and Interoperability CouncilC Focus Group 2B, Cybersecurity, a council of advisers to the Federal L Communications Commission, said that while he didn't want to be an alarmist,+ the state of Internet security is alarming.   L Testifying before Congress in September on identity theft--currently favoredD by worm writers and phishers--Hancock focused on what could be done,/ principally in the area of identity management.   K "Identity management of the future cannot be simplistic password methods of J the past," he said. "It will need to incorporate advanced concepts such asJ biometrics and cryptographically sound methods to ensure the identity of aJ device, application, or individual is permitted to access data elements in. databases and other information repositories."  K That's essentially what Microsoft chairman Bill Gates said at the Microsoft J IT Forum in Copenhagen earlier this week, where he addressed the "weakness of the password."   F In his keynote address, Gates said that we cannot rely on passwords toJ protect health data, financial data, or records access. "Therefore, movingL to biometric identification, and particularly in moving to smart cards, is aJ way that is coming," he predicted. "This is something that has been talkedJ about for several years, but now we finally see the leading-edge customers taking that step."     ====  L Do you think that HP might take out even one ad that tells users that TCP/IPL is ok but if you want better security DECnet is the way to go...available on all major platforms......nah.    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:45:11 GMT 3 From: hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com (Charlie Hammond) % Subject: Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! 2 Message-ID: <H3mod.3307$pe1.2416@news.cpqcorp.net>  \ In article <419D2A92.B73F10A2@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:" >VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:L >> 'Tis my understanding that Mr. Einstein's theories state that any assump-L >> tion that time is consistent for all observers it not true.  I do not be-< >> lieve that his theories show that time varies negatively. > > >It does every year in most parts of the world, by one hour... >   $ O.K., kids.  Let's get serious here.  < Standard <-> Daylight "time changes" do not chagne the time.@ They change only the reference for the name we give a particualrD point in time.  This is nor relative to relativity.  (Pun intendec!)  D But, yes, changes Standard <-> Daylight can cause unexpected resultsB for time related events on OpenVMS.  e.g time-stamped logs may notE order correctly.  Please see my prior "short answer". (Live with it.)    --  J       Charlie Hammond -- Hewlett-Packard Company -- Ft Lauderdale  FL  USAF           (hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com -- remove "@not" when replying)J       All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:47:25 GMT 3 From: hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com (Charlie Hammond) % Subject: Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! 2 Message-ID: <N5mod.3308$pe1.2559@news.cpqcorp.net>  > In article <e2ac4c66.0411181740.43f9fc7b@posting.google.com>, / elementyl@hotmail.com (James Wilkinson) writes:    ..E >No, I looked at this recently and this is not a problem with the way F >that $SETIMR itself is called.  This causes a big problem with one ofD >our X apps on DST fallback.  I have checked the timer queue and theG >timer is properly a delta timer rather than an absolute timer, however B >when it expires it then creates another delta timer that seems to  >compensate for the time change. ..  9 Please report this problem via formal support mechanisms.      --  J       Charlie Hammond -- Hewlett-Packard Company -- Ft Lauderdale  FL  USAF           (hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com -- remove "@not" when replying)J       All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 08:28:58 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) % Subject: Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! 3 Message-ID: <G9SAiekL7LQL@eisner.encompasserve.org>   \ In article <41A13C61.F75D52B1@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:P > Considering recent discussion, I must therefore make a request for imporvement  > to DECW$CLOCK, not just a fix. > P > DECW$CLOCK must absolutely be able to handle cases where the CPU is travellingP > and thus, DECW$CLOCK must be able to get input for current speed of travel andL > adjust current time according to Einstein's theories to display "accurate"O > time. In fact, it should be able to display 2 relative times, the one for the J > environment that is traveling, and one for the enviropnment which is not' > travelling (all relative, of course).   G    It is not possible to define "accurate" time as you have discussed.  G    It is possible to define am arbitrary time standard which would have     those properties.  F    Personnaly, I prefer to have DECW$CLOCK measure the local time.  InE    keeping with VMS' upward compatability history, the default action F    must be to disable your new feature.  I suggest /earth_bound as the.    qaulifier which invokes your new behaviour.   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 08:18:14 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) % Subject: Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! 3 Message-ID: <kGg+6VDReaWU@eisner.encompasserve.org>   I In article <cnlg82$eh$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>, david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes: s > In article <kS9YCwnic6AY@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: L >>In article <cnksrl$njp$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>, david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes: >>C >>> Kurt Godel found a solution for Einstein's equations of General R >>> Relativity in 1949 that allowed "closed timelike curves" ie allows travel back >>> in time. >>H >>   There are equations in Physics 101 that have solutions that predictC >>   things fall up.  Just because Godel did the math doesn't prove & >>   the solution is physically valid. >> > M > I didn't claim that the solution was a valid physical representation of our D > Universe only that it is a valid solution of Einstein's Equations.  G    The thread seemed to follow on whether time can travel backward, not G    on whether the math could be done.  My post went beyond the specific !    claim to the general question.    ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 08:19:43 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) % Subject: Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! 3 Message-ID: <uwaGhgM1ykZi@eisner.encompasserve.org>   n In article <b096a4ee.0411191836.4aaec51a@posting.google.com>, spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman) writes:  E > But you are right that I spoke only of Special Relativity. But when H > General Rel. is applied to known situations, there is no backward timeH > travel. Black holes you say, but they are not known well enough to sayF > anthing about what happens should you enter one and somehow actually
 > survive.  E    Current black hole theory and observation make it quite clear that 3    you don't survive, Walt Disney not withstanding.    ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 08:22:37 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) % Subject: Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! 3 Message-ID: <jpehMKtpLQna@eisner.encompasserve.org>   o In article <5d708ac7.0411192002.41ab8920@posting.google.com>, johnhreinhardt@yahoo.com (John Reinhardt) writes:  > E >   Don't tell Geordi LaForge and Data that tachyons shouldn't exist! F > They've used tachyon fields, pulses and beams to fix everything from? > the Captain's commode to rips in the time-space continuium...   F    Only because they didn't have the superior skills of a truely great6    starship engineer around for more than one episode.   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 08:25:43 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) % Subject: Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! 3 Message-ID: <VZIPICzzTZFB@eisner.encompasserve.org>   J In article <cnq9mf$ih8$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>, david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes:  L > The theories we currently have cannot be the final real description of theG > Universe since GR and quantum theory cannot be successfully combined. N > However at the moment both General and Special relativity would preclude anyQ > physical object actually reaching the speed of light "where time would actually  > stop".  G    In my universe photons are physical objects and they routinely reach     the speed of light.  G    It's only non-zero rest mass objects which are constrained to travel 
    slower.   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 08:30:37 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) % Subject: Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! 3 Message-ID: <YoykacNBpCMv@eisner.encompasserve.org>   m In article <b096a4ee.0411211618.9fa39ec@posting.google.com>, spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman) writes:  > D > Uh, I don't see that. GR was a "generalization" of special rel. to > acceleration and gravity.   F    Nope.  "General Relativity" and "Special Relativity" are misnomers.  >    "Special Relativity" is actually as general as it gets when    discussing relativity.   <    "General Relativity" is actually a theory of gravitation.   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 15:25:06 +0000 (UTC)  From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk% Subject: Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! ) Message-ID: <cnt0ci$fvs$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>   q In article <kGg+6VDReaWU@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: J >In article <cnlg82$eh$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>, david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes:t >> In article <kS9YCwnic6AY@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:M >>>In article <cnksrl$njp$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>, david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes:  >>> D >>>> Kurt Godel found a solution for Einstein's equations of GeneralS >>>> Relativity in 1949 that allowed "closed timelike curves" ie allows travel back 
 >>>> in time.  >>> I >>>   There are equations in Physics 101 that have solutions that predict D >>>   things fall up.  Just because Godel did the math doesn't prove' >>>   the solution is physically valid.  >>>  >>  N >> I didn't claim that the solution was a valid physical representation of ourE >> Universe only that it is a valid solution of Einstein's Equations.  > H >   The thread seemed to follow on whether time can travel backward, notH >   on whether the math could be done.  My post went beyond the specific" >   claim to the general question. > O The thread was in response to a statement that Einstein's theories didn't allow  time travel into the past. Note the word theories.   F The general question can only be answered by travelling into the past.  M Since a theory is just a theory the only way to establish whether time travel N into the past is really possible in our Universe is to carry out an experiment" which allows travel into the past.  O We are not currently (and maybe never will be ) in a position to carry out such M experiments with GR. However since the theory does have solutions which allow M time travel we can at least consider the idea of setting up such experiments.     G Note. If the theory says you can travel into the past and you set up an K experiment which the theory says will take you into the past and it doesn't I work then all you have done is invalidate your theory. You haven't proved 9 anything about whether time travel is or is not possible.     K Theories and experiment are the only things we have and theories are always + provisional. That is the nature of Science.     
 David Webb Security team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 15:32:34 +0000 (UTC)  From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk% Subject: Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! ) Message-ID: <cnt0qi$fvs$2@news.mdx.ac.uk>   q In article <VZIPICzzTZFB@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: K >In article <cnq9mf$ih8$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>, david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes:  > M >> The theories we currently have cannot be the final real description of the H >> Universe since GR and quantum theory cannot be successfully combined.O >> However at the moment both General and Special relativity would preclude any R >> physical object actually reaching the speed of light "where time would actually	 >> stop".  > H >   In my universe photons are physical objects and they routinely reach >   the speed of light.  > H >   It's only non-zero rest mass objects which are constrained to travel >   slower.  >   L Yes sorry for that. In mitigation I was responding to the rather weird idea K of something which could travel at the speed of light and in it's own time  G frame then decide to slow down and stop having as the poster said then   travelled an infinite distance.   O But you are correct I should have referred to non-zero rest mass objects rather  than physical objects.    
 David Webb Security team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 15:51:40 +0000 (UTC)  From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk% Subject: Re: DECW$CLOCK design flaw ! ) Message-ID: <cnt1uc$gbv$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>   q In article <YoykacNBpCMv@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: n >In article <b096a4ee.0411211618.9fa39ec@posting.google.com>, spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman) writes: >>  E >> Uh, I don't see that. GR was a "generalization" of special rel. to  >> acceleration and gravity.   > G >   Nope.  "General Relativity" and "Special Relativity" are misnomers.  > ? >   "Special Relativity" is actually as general as it gets when  >   discussing relativity. > = >   "General Relativity" is actually a theory of gravitation.  >   F No Alan is correct. Special relativity doesn't deal with acceleration.D General Relativity reduces to the special case of Special RelativityJ when you are not dealing with accelerations (or equivalently gravitational fields).  
 David Webb Security team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 23:03:07 +0800  From: prep@prep.synonet.com Y Subject: Re: interesting take on Olsen's "no reason for any individual to have a  compute - Message-ID: <87acta3p04.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   / JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:   A > If IBM understood the potential of personal computers. how come  > Digital didn't ?  C IBMs `understanding' PCs was to cripple them to be a funky terminal D with a few cute trickes. But it escaped and ran away with 20 zillionD industry standard pundits who could supply almost anything you couldD imagine for them. This was not in the great scheme of things hanging@ in Entry Systems Division, you where meant to come begging for a system 3 or 36! (gag...)  D But yes, DECs persistant braindeath in the face of all facts is mind numbing!   --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076* comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 07:44:09 -0600 ( From: brandon@dalsemi.com (John Brandon)4 Subject: Re: monitor (over TCPIP) hangs---any ideas?1 Message-ID: <04112207440939@dscis6-0.dalsemi.com>   & helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de wrote:G > ... at 7.3 and the ALPHA at 7.3-1 and I'm not missing any patches ... I > The problem is that MONITOR works on the local node, but can't connect  I > to remote nodes, e.g. /NODE doesn't work, nor does MONITOR CLUSTER.  I  ' > have the same behaviour on all nodes.  > + > I did STOP/ID on the above processes then  > , >    SYSMAN> do @SYS$STARTUP:VPM$STARTUP.COM  J I have V7.2 and experience the same problem.  I suspect there is a networkJ related component at play - since this only affects my NI network cluster.     John "REBOOT" Brandon  VMS Systems Administrator * firstname.lastname.spam.me.not@dalsemi.com   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 07:14:40 -0800" From: udo.kaul@merck.de (Udo Kaul) Subject: NFS Problem with AIX = Message-ID: <302d60f2.0411220714.32b8bcbf@posting.google.com>    Hi,   < we mount a NFS- Device from OpenVMS 7.3-2(TCPIP 5.4 ECO2) on AIX RS6000 V51 .< If we do ls -l from the mountpoint on the AIX Server we saw  all the data we need. = If we do a find *.syn from the mountpoint on the AIX Server , ; we receive the following error in the operator.log ( VMS) :   8 %%%%%%%%%%%  OPCOM  22-NOV-2004 13:51:03.33  %%%%%%%%%%%% Message from user NFS Server on MIZAR $ svcktcp_reply: mbuf_send returned 328 %%%%%%%%%%%  OPCOM  22-NOV-2004 13:51:03.33  %%%%%%%%%%%% Message from user NFS Server on MIZAR : rfs_dispatch: sendreply failed IP address: 155.250.205.133  " After this the ls -l didn't work .   Does anybody has any idea ?    best regards Udo   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 08:37:35 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) 5 Subject: Re: Online forums for former digits/deccies? 3 Message-ID: <PAv+s7PJaQYk@eisner.encompasserve.org>   d In article <d0e744c9.0411191400.32d83f16@posting.google.com>, leeroth@my-deja.com (Lee Roth) writes:  Q > Wow, what a dilema: Having an ex-dec employee forum running on DECnotes or have M > it run on a 'modern' web-based forum system. Nostalgia favors the DECnotes, B > practicality (hyperlinks, pictures, attachments, etc.) favor the > web-based item.   6    I'll take DECnotes over a web based system any day.   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 08:41:19 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) ! Subject: Re: OT: Joke of the week 3 Message-ID: <v1IoXxC$YSP0@eisner.encompasserve.org>   K In article <419EA6F9.30503@prodigy.net>, CJT <abujlehc@prodigy.net> writes:  >>  O >> Seems they are paying big bucks to Microsoft to configure all their PCs. For P >> an organisation which for years was so paraniod that it insisted on degradingQ >> GPS signals for civilians, it is ironic that they would choose the one company O >> responsible for all those viri and trojan horses to assure security of their  >> computing infrastructure. > A > It would be comical except that it's such a gift to terrorists.  >   F    Actually Microsoft does know something about thier own failures, as    well as others.  D    Billy is the most spammed person on earth, getting hit about fourB    million times a day.  Very little gets through the spam filter.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:54:25 -0500 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> ! Subject: Re: OT: Joke of the week , Message-ID: <cZCdnWs4R5FPuj_cRVn-pw@igs.net>   Bob Koehler wrote:E > In article <419EA6F9.30503@prodigy.net>, CJT <abujlehc@prodigy.net> 	 > writes:  >>> G >>> Seems they are paying big bucks to Microsoft to configure all their D >>> PCs. For an organisation which for years was so paraniod that itF >>> insisted on degrading GPS signals for civilians, it is ironic thatD >>> they would choose the one company responsible for all those viri; >>> and trojan horses to assure security of their computing  >>> infrastructure.  >>B >> It would be comical except that it's such a gift to terrorists. >> > H >    Actually Microsoft does know something about thier own failures, as >    well as others. > F >    Billy is the most spammed person on earth, getting hit about fourD >    million times a day.  Very little gets through the spam filter.  E 1% failure rate in his spam filter = 40,000 spam per day in his inbox   < A Microsoft Outlook .pst file self-destructs at 4Gb in size.   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Nov 2004 17:59:55 GMT/ From: Thierry Dussuet <thierry@dussuet.lugs.ch> ! Subject: Re: OT: Joke of the week 0 Message-ID: <slrncq4a8s.11j.thierry@MARS.Family>  1 On 2004-11-22, John Smith <a@nonymous.com> wrote:  > Bob Koehler wrote:F >> In article <419EA6F9.30503@prodigy.net>, CJT <abujlehc@prodigy.net>
 >> writes: >>>>H >>>> Seems they are paying big bucks to Microsoft to configure all theirE >>>> PCs. For an organisation which for years was so paraniod that it G >>>> insisted on degrading GPS signals for civilians, it is ironic that E >>>> they would choose the one company responsible for all those viri < >>>> and trojan horses to assure security of their computing >>>> infrastructure. >>> C >>> It would be comical except that it's such a gift to terrorists.  >>>  >>I >>    Actually Microsoft does know something about thier own failures, as  >>    well as others.  >>G >>    Billy is the most spammed person on earth, getting hit about four E >>    million times a day.  Very little gets through the spam filter.  >CG > 1% failure rate in his spam filter = 40,000 spam per day in his inboxn  L He has created a separate department, the sole work of which is to deal withN his spam problem...  Surely they could click away these 40k mails away for him :-)W  > > A Microsoft Outlook .pst file self-destructs at 4Gb in size.  8 And do you really think he'd use Microsoft products? ;-)   Thierryw   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:11:30 -0500t# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>y! Subject: Re: OT: Joke of the week , Message-ID: <RoidnTb4i-9Jtj_cRVn-1Q@igs.net>   Thierry Dussuet wrote:3 > On 2004-11-22, John Smith <a@nonymous.com> wrote:  >> Bob Koehler wrote:oG >>> In article <419EA6F9.30503@prodigy.net>, CJT <abujlehc@prodigy.net>a >>> writes:e >>>>>EC >>>>> Seems they are paying big bucks to Microsoft to configure allcD >>>>> their PCs. For an organisation which for years was so paraniodD >>>>> that it insisted on degrading GPS signals for civilians, it isG >>>>> ironic that they would choose the one company responsible for allqH >>>>> those viri and trojan horses to assure security of their computing >>>>> infrastructure.t >>>>D >>>> It would be comical except that it's such a gift to terrorists. >>>> >>> G >>>    Actually Microsoft does know something about thier own failures,  >>>    as well as others.- >>>-H >>>    Billy is the most spammed person on earth, getting hit about fourF >>>    million times a day.  Very little gets through the spam filter. >>H >> 1% failure rate in his spam filter = 40,000 spam per day in his inbox >eD > He has created a separate department, the sole work of which is toG > deal with his spam problem...  Surely they could click away these 40kV > mails away for him :-) > ? >> A Microsoft Outlook .pst file self-destructs at 4Gb in size.> >h6 > And do you really think he'd use Microsoft products?    G Maybe we should offer him a free e-mail account on an Alpha/VMS system.a   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Nov 2004 06:57:40 GMT2 From: "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow>3 Subject: Re: Programatically accessing HELP/MESSAGEl? Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-r3VShvYrHj1x@dave2_os2.home.ours>o  + On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 12:25:10 UTC, JF Mezei  % <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote:   N > Is there a documented access to the error messge text such as is provided by > HELP/MESSAGE ? > K > It seems to access an indexed file (SYS$HELP:MSGHLP$LIBRARY.MSGHLP$DATA).o > K > But there is also a TCPIP file with same extension. Does the HELP/MESSAGEi> > application have the smarts to look though all those files ?  F Isn't LIB$GETMSG and /or LIB$PUTMSG what you're looking for JF or have I misunderstood your question?   --   Cheers - Dave W.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 02:32:40 -0500A- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>o3 Subject: Re: Programatically accessing HELP/MESSAGEm, Message-ID: <41A195FA.D1878F45@teksavvy.com>   Dave Weatherall wrote:H > Isn't LIB$GETMSG and /or LIB$PUTMSG what you're looking for JF or have  > I misunderstood your question?  I The above two libraries translate the binary status code into a facility,v0 severity, name and short text. A one line thing.  N HELP/MESSAGE gets you a full explanation of the error message, many many lines of text.  L HELP/MESSAGE actually calls up a different image than HELP (MSGHLP$MAIN.EXE)L which in turns calls up MSGHLP$SHARE.EXE which then calls MSGHLP$ENGLISH.EXE/ and which then opens MSGHLP$LIBRARY.MSGHLP$DATAe  L MSGHLP$SHARE.EXE has 4 entry points defined MSHHLP$INSERT $DELETE $CALLBACKS and $MSGHELP   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 15:11:11 GMT 6 From: "Kenneth Farmer" <kfarmer@NOSPAM.spyderbyte.com>> Subject: Re-post on TechWorld of OpenVMS: Survives and Thrives< Message-ID: <jknod.4644$Fs1.462250@twister.southeast.rr.com>  I The ComputerWorld article OpenVMS: Survives and Thrives by Drew Robb has e been re-posted at TechWorld.  J Note: Although most of us have already read this article we still need to B click on it so TechWorld gets a good hit count.  Drew told me the M ComputerWorld article got a noticable amount of attention because of clicks.  G The editors have noticed, which will probably lead to further articles   related to OpenVMS.   @ http://www.techworld.com/opsys/features/index.cfm?featureid=1001       Keni   OpenVMS.orga% _____________________________________h Kenneth R. Farmer <>< & SpyderByte: http://www.SpyderByte.com    ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 09:44:50 -0100* From: "Michael Kraemer" <M.Kraemer@gsi.de>: Subject: Re: reporter inquiry: Is HP selling AlphaServers?0 Message-ID: <41A1B512.MD-1.4.4.M.Kraemer@gsi.de>   > JF Mezei wrote:0 > >  > > Keith Parris wrote:f > > > [snip]N > > > When Cerner sells its software to a hospital, 75% of the time it will be? > > >   on VMS. (The others have to suffer with AIX and pains.)  > > A > > http://www.cerner.com/technologies/technologies_3a.asp?id=684  > > N > > Shows AIX and VMS on equal footings. But the jobs section of that web site# > > shows AIX jobs and no VSM jobs.r > J > I have conference calls with the VMS folks at Cerner two and three timesH > a week. AIX takes vastly more human resources than VMS - that's common > knowledge.  . so which one is better for the IT job market ?  n >  > > While it is quite possible > 7 > ....but not likely, if they're on "equal footing"... s > 5 > > that 75% of existing Cerner customers are on VMS,  > J > Indications from Cerner are actually that AIX is more prevalent in their > customer base than VMS.N >   4 which might explain why AIX needs more resources :-)   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 02:33:55 -0500g( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>: Subject: Re: reporter inquiry: Is HP selling AlphaServers?, Message-ID: <41A19663.6030209@tsoft-inc.com>   > Rich Jordan wrote: >  >>[snip] >>As of this year companieseA >>have to be able to provide over $1,000,000.00 dollars in annualfC >>hardware/system sales in order to 'qualify' to resell OpenVMS andt >>Alpha systems. d   This is entirely reasonable.  O HP installed that stupid SAP system for their distribution, and to date I have u1 not heard of one successful SAP system, anywhere.a  K So since their application software has a hard time with having many small i- customers, they chop off the small customers.t  3 Makes as much sense to me as anything else HP does.e   Dave   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Roadt Vanderbilt, PA  15486e   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 08:10:07 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen).: Subject: Re: reporter inquiry: Is HP selling AlphaServers?3 Message-ID: <dxUWWQ4Cxydx@eisner.encompasserve.org>a  ` In article <41A15F16.AA02B1C0@comcast.net>, David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> writes: > Keith Parris wrote:1  D >> When OMX sets up a new exchange, there is a VMS disaster-tolerantI >> cluster at its core. International Securities Exchange was a brand-newd9 >> VMS customer. Singapore Exchange is one of the latest.r > ) > ...and that created HOW many U.S. jobs?   8 Fewer than if they had used another operating system :-)   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 08:32:27 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)i: Subject: Re: reporter inquiry: Is HP selling AlphaServers?3 Message-ID: <C$5J5IiY92sw@eisner.encompasserve.org>l  T In article <419E4035.40101@csdco.com>, John Nebel <john.nebel_vms@csdco.com> writes: > I > The system has horrid response time and doesn't scale very well.  That 8E > is a hardware problem.  Hopefully you are not saying that scalable o3 > hardware with VMS wouldn't be a better way to go!r  F    Scalability is not necessarily a hardware problem.  Software design2    goes a long way toward determining scalability.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 09:15:43 -0700r+ From: John Nebel <john.nebel_vms@csdco.com>i: Subject: Re: reporter inquiry: Is HP selling AlphaServers?( Message-ID: <41A210AF.2050808@csdco.com>   Bob Koehler wrote:  V > In article <419E4035.40101@csdco.com>, John Nebel <john.nebel_vms@csdco.com> writes: > I >>The system has horrid response time and doesn't scale very well.  That wE >>is a hardware problem.  Hopefully you are not saying that scalable s3 >>hardware with VMS wouldn't be a better way to go!l >  > H >    Scalability is not necessarily a hardware problem.  Software design4 >    goes a long way toward determining scalability.  H Yes, I guess that is true if one looks at something like Google.  I was C thinking more of the traditional model of database server and many i clients with real-time updates.   A For the database server one picks something like Oracle.  Not my eG personal choice, but there are a lot of Oracles around.  That software pD is a lot easier to set up in a single server environment and pretty G dependent on the hardware for scalability.  I guess you could say that  F the Oracle or whatever choice is part of the software design and that  proves your point.  F My own approach is to put as much as possible in memory where data is H easy to deal with.  This likely heavily colors my view of other systems $ where that could be done, but isn't.   JN   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 11:14:48 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen).: Subject: Re: reporter inquiry: Is HP selling AlphaServers?3 Message-ID: <jE7kxtehsvDJ@eisner.encompasserve.org>w  V In article <41A210AF.2050808@csdco.com>, John Nebel <john.nebel_vms@csdco.com> writes: >  >  > Bob Koehler wrote: > W >> In article <419E4035.40101@csdco.com>, John Nebel <john.nebel_vms@csdco.com> writes:f >> rJ >>>The system has horrid response time and doesn't scale very well.  That F >>>is a hardware problem.  Hopefully you are not saying that scalable 4 >>>hardware with VMS wouldn't be a better way to go! >> w >> rI >>    Scalability is not necessarily a hardware problem.  Software designa5 >>    goes a long way toward determining scalability.c > J > Yes, I guess that is true if one looks at something like Google.  I was E > thinking more of the traditional model of database server and many k! > clients with real-time updates.  > C > For the database server one picks something like Oracle.  Not my i9 > personal choice, but there are a lot of Oracles around.   C If you pick a database engine that is highly portable, you will getcC least-common-denominator results and the operating system might not B be so important.  I presume by Oracle you mean Oracle Classic.  IfA you choose Oracle Rdb, however, you get the advantage of a designeA aimed at getting the best performance from a particular operating G system and the way that operating system optimizes use of the hardware.r   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2004 08:49:52 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)c% Subject: Re: Strange VMS related spamt3 Message-ID: <AVJWRBk0DY8G@eisner.encompasserve.org>w  ] In article <41A17724.65A021AE@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:  6 > I received a very interesting email today (sunday).  >  gJ > It was allegedly adressed to private3921@teksavvy.com and allegedly From$ > user_info@eisner.encompasserve.org    H   Lot's of spam comes to and through eisner.  I think the user list has E   been grabbed repeatedly.  It's not hard since almost anyone can get,9   an acount on Eisner and lie about following the canons.i  E   Sometimes these spam contain virii, and I get a bounce message fromtC   someone else's email system claiming I sent the virus.  That justeF   means the spammers are using the user list for both spam targets and   false headers.   ------------------------------   Date: 22 NOV 2004 16:25:41 GMT+ From: Dave Greenwood <greenwoodde@ornl.gov> % Subject: Re: Strange VMS related spam 2 Message-ID: <22NOV04.16254183@feda01.fed.ornl.gov>  E In a previous article, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote:u5 > I received a very interesting email today (sunday).l >  em > It was allegedly adressed to private3921@teksavvy.com and allegedly From user_info@eisner.encompasserve.orgi >  fN > I didn't get the contents because my ISP's spam filtering service  allegedly7 > removed the virus and sent me a virus warning report.. >   L > Normally, I just discard spam. But this one is puzzling since it allegedlyN > originated from a decus USA (is encompasserve still their name this week ?),2 > in fact, eisner is the former decusserve system. >  rN > However, one IP listed in an untrustable Received: line mentions xbfnaai.orgQ > (non existant) and 203.217.30.254  (which is some australian IP at iinet.net.aua >  tL > The presence of the US DECUS current name makes me suspect harvesting fromI > comp.os.vms, but berpahs also suspect the perpetrator is well versed in I > dec/decus/vms context for him/her/it to know about eisner and user_info-E > account (is that a valid account in the former decusserve system ?)o  I This is typical of many (most?) virii/worms these days.  The worm infects H a system and collects email addresses from various types of files on theF infected host.  Those files can be not only address books but also anyG text or html file on any local and network drive.  Once email addressesiH are collected, the worm attempts to spread by using one of the addressesH as the "to" address and one as the "from" address.  So this sounds to meJ like someone who has a VMS/decus interest (or is connected to someone withI a VMS/decus interest) has an infected PC.  It *might* be that the addressnG in the untrusted received line is the address of the infected PC.  ThenyG again it might not.  It doesn't sound like harvesting from c.o.v itself ? and it doesn't mean that the "perpetrator" knows anything about  dec/decus/vms or c.o.v.      Dave --------------9 Dave Greenwood                Email: Greenwoodde@ORNL.GOVmH Oak Ridge National Lab        %STD-W-DISCLAIMER, I only speak for myself   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:35:13 +0100d+ From: Wilm Boerhout <w3.boerhout@planet.nl>.% Subject: Re: Strange VMS related spam 5 Message-ID: <41a22606$0$3673$ba620dc5@nova.planet.nl>r   JF Mezei wrote: 5 > I received a very interesting email today (sunday).0 > m > It was allegedly adressed to private3921@teksavvy.com and allegedly From user_info@eisner.encompasserve.orgs >   = Same thing happened to me yesterday, for the first time ever.6   -- 1
 Wilm Boerhouts Zwolle, The Netherlandsn   wilmOLD@PAINTboerhout.nl2    (remove OLD PAINT from this address before use)   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:45:03 +0000 (UTC)a, From: lewis@PROBE.MITRE.ORG (Keith A. Lewis)% Subject: Re: Strange VMS related spamr. Message-ID: <cnt8iv$50h$2@newslocal.mitre.org>   JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes in article <41A17724.65A021AE@teksavvy.com> dated Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:20:58 -0500:e4 >I received a very interesting email today (sunday). >pI >It was allegedly adressed to private3921@teksavvy.com and allegedly Fromy# >user_info@eisner.encompasserve.org  >mM >I didn't get the contents because my ISP's spam filtering service  allegedlyp6 >removed the virus and sent me a virus warning report.  L Sounds like a virus to me (as opposed to spam).  Somebody who reads c.o.v is probably infected.  J If you want to be a good citizen, you could look at the e-mail headers andH try to figure out what the real originating IP address is, and then lookK here and see if you can find a match in the nntp-posting-host headers, thenr4 inform that person that their system is compromised.  0 --Keith Lewis              klewis {at} mitre.org> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2004.649 ************************f travel andL > adjust current time according to Einstein's theories to display "accurate"O > time. In fact, it should be able to display 2 relative times, the one for the J > environment th