1 INFO-VAX	Tue, 12 Jul 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 386       Contents:0 Re: A tale of two macro libraries LIB vs STARLET0 Re: A tale of two macro libraries LIB vs STARLET0 Re: A tale of two macro libraries LIB vs STARLET9 Re: interchangeability of memory between various machines 9 Re: interchangeability of memory between various machines 9 Re: interchangeability of memory between various machines 9 Re: interchangeability of memory between various machines 9 Re: interchangeability of memory between various machines 9 Re: interchangeability of memory between various machines / Re: Less than 1 Gorham of VMS systems out there / Re: Less than 1 Gorham of VMS systems out there / Re: Less than 1 Gorham of VMS systems out there / Re: Less than 1 Gorham of VMS systems out there  Message to Eric Dittman  Re: MONO (.net for UNIX)% Re: MSCP Server on Multi-Site Cluster % Re: MSCP Server on Multi-Site Cluster 3 Need a UCX outbound SMTP refresher...... Arghhhhhh! 7 Re: Need a UCX outbound SMTP refresher...... Arghhhhhh! 7 Re: Need a UCX outbound SMTP refresher...... Arghhhhhh! 7 Re: Need a UCX outbound SMTP refresher...... Arghhhhhh! 7 Re: Need a UCX outbound SMTP refresher...... Arghhhhhh! 7 Re: Need a UCX outbound SMTP refresher...... Arghhhhhh! D Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacksD Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacksD Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacksD Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacksD Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacksD Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacksD Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacksD Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacksD Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacksD Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacksD Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacksD Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacksP Re: OT - Pillars of Islam (was:Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history oP OT - Pillars of Islam (was:Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of alM Re: Qlogic ISP12160 Ultra160, QLA12160/66 dual ultra wide SCSI PCI controller M Re: Qlogic ISP12160 Ultra160, QLA12160/66 dual ultra wide SCSI PCI controller * Re: Top Intel architect flees coop for AMD  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 06:59:05 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 9 Subject: Re: A tale of two macro libraries LIB vs STARLET 3 Message-ID: <axrk0HEqHIcN@eisner.encompasserve.org>   u In article <davmce$fcc$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>, "Richard Maher" <maher_rj@hotspamnotmail.com> writes: 
 > Hi Hoff, > J >>   You don't own the T3$ facility, based on a quick check of the currentI >>   list.  (If you want to register a facility prefix, the email address  >>   is in the FAQ.) > J > Oh yes I bloody do!. I'll dig out the original documentation tonight but > here's a summary.  >  > Product Id: TIER3  > Facility: 333 
 > Prefix: T3$  > Registration# PRO908 >  > registration circa 2000.  3 Then there has been an error, as on VMS V7.3 I get:    	$ exit 333*65536 , 	%NDS-W-NORMAL, normal successful completion 	$    % Although I do not know what "NDS" is.    ------------------------------  * Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 13:53:59 +0000 (UTC)3 From: "Richard Maher" <maher_rj@hotspamnotmail.com> 9 Subject: Re: A tale of two macro libraries LIB vs STARLET ? Message-ID: <dae3dm$j17$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>    Hi Charlie,   F Thanks very much for what appears to be the definitive on the subject.   Regards Richard Maher.   > (2)  > Please give up on VMSINSTAL!: > Use the POLYCENTER Software Installation (PCSI) utility.  K You had to throw that in though didn't ya. You couldn't just leave it alone  :-)   @ "Charlie Hammond" <hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com> wrote in message, news:33wye.7990$uk2.6080@news.cpqcorp.net...A > In article <da9jq1$5d5$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>, 7 > "Richard Maher" <maher_rj@hotspamnotmail.com> writes:  > F > >If I'm shipping a product that has a macro symbol definitions file, should I > >(at VMSINSTAL time) > >  > >a) Stick it in STARLET.MLB  > >b) Stick it in LIB.MLB  > >c) Ship my own macro library  > >d) a n other  >  > (1) C > Most files, including library files, that are part of the OpenVMS 	 operating I > system are replaced when OpenVMS is updated.  This includes STARLET.MLB  and I > LIB.MLB.  Thus any user/3rd-party/LP entries are LOST after an upgrade. 1 > (They can also be lost after applying a patch.)  > ; > User/3rd-party/LP entries are PRESERVED in the following:  >  >     STARLET.OLB  >     IMAGELIB.OLB >     HELP.HLB >     DCLTABLES.EXE  > H > In addition, various files, mostly command procedures, are provided asF > TEMPLATE files.  The .TEMPLATE files are replaced in an upgrade; the# > corresponding .COM files are not.  > 3 > This argues for NOT using STARLET.MLB or LIB.MLB.  >  > (2)  > Please give up on VMSINSTAL!: > Use the POLYCENTER Software Installation (PCSI) utility. >  >  > --L >       Charlie Hammond -- Hewlett-Packard Company -- Ft Lauderdale  FL  USAH >           (hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com -- remove "@not" when replying)L >       All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's. >    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 17:14:53 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) 9 Subject: Re: A tale of two macro libraries LIB vs STARLET 1 Message-ID: <hUSAe.8349$Cx.3769@news.cpqcorp.net>   c In article <axrk0HEqHIcN@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: v :In article <davmce$fcc$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>, "Richard Maher" <maher_rj@hotspamnotmail.com> writes: :> Hi Hoff,  :>  K :>>   You don't own the T3$ facility, based on a quick check of the current J :>>   list.  (If you want to register a facility prefix, the email address :>>   is in the FAQ.)  :>   :> Oh yes I bloody do!...     G   Y'all might want to ring up the registrar, as I (still) don't see the F   T3$ prefix listed.  (I've just sent along a question concerning thisF   to the registrar, too -- I don't know if I'm looking at stale prefixJ   data, but I do see a prefix I registered a couple of months back listed.  D   The 333 message facility code is registered to a DECmcc component,!   according to the listing I see.   N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 01:42:44 -0700# From: "H Vlems" <hvlems@freenet.de> B Subject: Re: interchangeability of memory between various machinesC Message-ID: <1121157764.514806.290040@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   $ The AS1200 takes ECC DIMMs in pairs.   Hans   ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 03:54:39 -0700# From: "H Vlems" <hvlems@freenet.de> B Subject: Re: interchangeability of memory between various machinesC Message-ID: <1121165679.261404.207530@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>   > Phillip, the amount of memory visible for VMS is set by SYSGEN parameter PHYSICALPAGES    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 12:11:08 +0100 * From: "Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk>B Subject: Re: interchangeability of memory between various machines2 Message-ID: <db08gc$9ic$1@blackmamba.itd.rl.ac.uk>  ] "Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply" <helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de> wrote in message  news:das71l$ut2$1@online.de...  H > Of course, when actually using the system, rather than just testing, IE > would do an AUTOGEN regularly anyway, especially after changing the G > memory configuration, whether it is "needed" or not.  However, out of C > curiosity, does VMS automatically detect decreased memory but not  > increased memory?   < Generally AUTOGEN sets PHYSICALPAGES to the amount of memoryI in the system, so yes. There were some pathological cases where you could I make a system so badly out of tune, by throwing huge quantities of memory B at it, that it would not boot. This behaviour was added to AUTOGEN< late in the VAX era when you could buy memory in big chunks.# None of the above applies to Alpha.    ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 05:31:37 -0700; From: "johnhreinhardt@yahoo.com" <johnhreinhardt@yahoo.com> B Subject: Re: interchangeability of memory between various machinesC Message-ID: <1121171497.671884.264800@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    H Vlems wrote:& > The AS1200 takes ECC DIMMs in pairs. >  > Hans  G I'll second that.  Mine have ECC Non-Registered PC100 CL2 DIMMS labeled A PC100-222-620.  I've been using Micron MT18LSDT3272AG-10xxx 256MB G DIMM's with no problem in an AS1200 and a white-box 5305. Both have 2GB A or more each installed in pairs - one stick on each of the memory  daughterboards.    ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 07:27:27 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) B Subject: Re: interchangeability of memory between various machines3 Message-ID: <aqHE3+6ewoHh@eisner.encompasserve.org>   i In article <1121165679.261404.207530@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, "H Vlems" <hvlems@freenet.de> writes: @ > Phillip, the amount of memory visible for VMS is set by SYSGEN > parameter PHYSICALPAGES  >   B    Which shuld normally be left at it's default value which allows+    physical memory to be sized during boot.   E    Set PHYSICALPAGES to a non-default value only on systems that have E    problems picking up devices on the bus which look like RAM but are B    not.  Or when investigating the behaviour of a system with less%    memory than you actually paid for.    ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 12:04:22 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) B Subject: Re: interchangeability of memory between various machines3 Message-ID: <zRZlW+c2EGgp@eisner.encompasserve.org>   _ In article <db08gc$9ic$1@blackmamba.itd.rl.ac.uk>, "Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk> writes:  >  > > > Generally AUTOGEN sets PHYSICALPAGES to the amount of memoryK > in the system, so yes. There were some pathological cases where you could K > make a system so badly out of tune, by throwing huge quantities of memory D > at it, that it would not boot. This behaviour was added to AUTOGEN> > late in the VAX era when you could buy memory in big chunks.% > None of the above applies to Alpha.   H    I've never seen AUTOGEN set PHYSICALPAGES to anything but the default>    value (uses the boot time sizing), unless told to do so via    MODPARAMS.DAT   ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 08:21:06 +01006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)8 Subject: Re: Less than 1 Gorham of VMS systems out there, Message-ID: <42d37d72$1@news.langstoeger.at>  N In article <opstrxepmfzgicya@hyrrokkin>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes:J >DECstation was Mips, DACsystem was Alpha.  But there was a DECSystem 50009 >(or was it 6000) which was a mips server running Ultrix.   L No. DECstation (except the INTEL PCs) and DECsystem (except the DECsystem-10J and DECsystem-20 aka DECsystem-2020/2040/2060/2065) were MIPS/RISC-ULTRIX.K DEC was Alpha (dUNIX/VMS) and later there was AlphaStation and AlphaServer.   J I personally don't know a DECsystem 3000, only a DEC 3000 which was Alpha.  N All of the DECsystem 3000 occurences in the web seem to be a misunderstanding.H The server variant of the DEC 3000 which were named with an trailing "S"I were often erroneously described as a DECsystem 3000, eg. a DEC 3000-400S M (the graphicadapterless variant of the DEC 3000-400) was written as DECsystem - 3000-400 (or even as DECsystem 3000-400S ;-). , But AFAIK never by DEC, only by customers...  I I know of a DECstation 2100, a DECstation 3100 (don't confuse it with the E VAXstation 3100 and the MicroVAX 3100), a (Personal) DECstation 5000, G a DECsystem 5000, a DECsystem 5100, a DECsystem 5400, a DECsystem 5500, K a DECsystem 5800, a DECsystem 5900 and maybe a DECsystem 3100 (this I'm not  sure of). All of them MIPS.   O We had a DECsystem-2020, a Personal DECstation 5000-25 and a DECsystem 5000-240 N (and umpteen VAX and Alpha flavors, all with VMS) then (up to 23 years ago)...   --   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: 12 Jul 2005 07:08:24 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) 8 Subject: Re: Less than 1 Gorham of VMS systems out there3 Message-ID: <AlFrfSwUVIyw@eisner.encompasserve.org>   N In article <opstrxepmfzgicya@hyrrokkin>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes:  K > DECstation was Mips, DACsystem was Alpha.  But there was a DECSystem 5000 : > (or was it 6000) which was a mips server running Ultrix.  F    I had DECSYSTEM-10 (PDP-10), DECSYSTEM-20 (PDP-10), DECsystem 5400 M    (MIPS), DECsystem 5500 (MIPS), DECsystem <something I forgot> (Intel), ...    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:33:03 GMT * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>8 Subject: Re: Less than 1 Gorham of VMS systems out there1 Message-ID: <jEPAe.8326$dq.6654@news.cpqcorp.net>   5 "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message % news:3jfphiFp8pj4U1@individual.net...  >>H > >                                           But I but DECstations fromB > >    UMD loaded with Linux and write VMS over them all the time. > K > Ummmm.....  I thought DECStations were MIPS.  How do you run VMS on them? J > And if you meant VAXStations, Linux on VAX was never accomplished to theI > best of my knowledge. Their page on Sourceforge is still dated 2001 and I > seems to point to something less than functional.   So I am, again, not  > sure what you mean.   = 5000 = MIPS.  But 3000 = Alpha (Flamingo, Sandpiper, Pelican)    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 07:13:30 -0700 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> 8 Subject: Re: Less than 1 Gorham of VMS systems out there( Message-ID: <opsts0gsapzgicya@hyrrokkin>  K On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:33:03 GMT, FredK <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> wrote:    > 7 > "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message ' > news:3jfphiFp8pj4U1@individual.net...  >>> I >> >                                           But I but DECstations from C >> >    UMD loaded with Linux and write VMS over them all the time.  >>H >> Ummmm.....  I thought DECStations were MIPS.  How do you run VMS on   >> them?K >> And if you meant VAXStations, Linux on VAX was never accomplished to the J >> best of my knowledge. Their page on Sourceforge is still dated 2001 andJ >> seems to point to something less than functional.   So I am, again, not >> sure what you mean. > ? > 5000 = MIPS.  But 3000 = Alpha (Flamingo, Sandpiper, Pelican)  >  > J I had a DECstation (Mips running Ultix) ca. 1988 and I think it was a 3100   ------------------------------   Date: 12 Jul 2005 14:56:01 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)  Subject: Message to Eric Dittman+ Message-ID: <3ji400Fq4m6aU1@individual.net>   B Sorry for this, but I guess it's no worse than the other off topicB postings. At least it is in response to something on topic even if none of you saw it. :-)   C Eric, I'm not ignoring you but attempts to respond bounce back with  a "Host not found" message.    bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 07:21:52 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) ! Subject: Re: MONO (.net for UNIX) 3 Message-ID: <KR3+PRzr2xta@eisner.encompasserve.org>   N In article <slrndcuuva.e6n.danco@ns2.pebble.org>, danco@ns2.pebble.org writes:I > Is anyone out there working on porting mono (.net for UNIX) to OpenVMS?   H    I think there's already a commercial .net connection for VMS.  You're    looking for somthing free?    ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 07:23:44 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) . Subject: Re: MSCP Server on Multi-Site Cluster3 Message-ID: <jOm3EPxMXu8N@eisner.encompasserve.org>   u In article <20050712044122.69510.qmail@web81110.mail.yahoo.com>, "James J. O'Shea" <seamas_ose@ameritech.net> writes:  > 8 > Am I missing something basic or was there a bug in VMS > v6.2 with MSCP SERVER?  E    In VMS 6, only disks who's alloclass matched SYSGEN's were served. /    Not a bug, it was supposed to work that way.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:22:06 -0400 . From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot|@teksavvy.com>. Subject: Re: MSCP Server on Multi-Site Cluster+ Message-ID: <42D3FC3C.5F730FF@teksavvy.com>    Bob Koehler wrote:G >    In VMS 6, only disks who's alloclass matched SYSGEN's were served. 1 >    Not a bug, it was supposed to work that way.     N Out of curiosity, with a single physical node in a site (connected to the restM of the clusters elsewhere), what sort of conditions would result in that node J having drives on that site with allocation class different from the SYSGEN paremeter ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:56:27 -0400 * From: Chuck Chopp <ChuckChopp@rtfmcsi.com>< Subject: Need a UCX outbound SMTP refresher...... Arghhhhhh!7 Message-ID: <cZPAe.1697$ag7.431@bignews4.bellsouth.net>   I I just reconfigured my hobby system [OpenVMS Alpha v7.1, UCX v4.2 ECO 3]  M with a new IP address and domain name and new DNS servers for it to use when  : resolving names.  Now outbound SMTP messages addressed to J SMTP%"mailbox@some-domain.com" cannot be sent.  VMSMAIL gives an error as  follows:   $ MAIL
 MAIL> SEND! To: SMTP%"chuckchopp@rtfmcsi.com" ) %SYSTEM-F-NOLOGNAM, no logical name match  $   M I've been checking over the new DNS servers and they seem to have the proper  L MX records for internal email domains, and DNS connectivity out to the 'Net M seems OK in terms of using NSLOOKUP to resolve MX records for external email   domains.  M Is there something else subtle that needed to be reconfigured within UCX?  I  M must confess that I haven't had to touch this part of UCX in a few years and  K my memory of it is somewhat faded.  It looks like it's time to head on out  L to the off-site storage facility [my garage] and see if I can find that old  box full of UCX manuals.     --   Chuck Chopp   8 ChuckChopp (at) rtfmcsi (dot) com http://www.rtfmcsi.com  @ RTFM Consulting Services Inc.     864 801 2795 voice & voicemail2 103 Autumn Hill Road              864 801 2774 fax Greer, SC  29651  , Do not send me unsolicited commercial email.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 14:57:33 GMT & From: John Reagan <john.reagan@hp.com>@ Subject: Re: Need a UCX outbound SMTP refresher...... Arghhhhhh!1 Message-ID: <xTQAe.8333$Bs.5254@news.cpqcorp.net>    Chuck Chopp wrote:K > I just reconfigured my hobby system [OpenVMS Alpha v7.1, UCX v4.2 ECO 3]  J > with a new IP address and domain name and new DNS servers for it to use A > when resolving names.  Now outbound SMTP messages addressed to  I > SMTP%"mailbox@some-domain.com" cannot be sent.  VMSMAIL gives an error  
 > as follows:  >  > $ MAIL > MAIL> SEND# > To: SMTP%"chuckchopp@rtfmcsi.com" + > %SYSTEM-F-NOLOGNAM, no logical name match  > $  > H > I've been checking over the new DNS servers and they seem to have the I > proper MX records for internal email domains, and DNS connectivity out  H > to the 'Net seems OK in terms of using NSLOOKUP to resolve MX records  > for external email domains.  > G > Is there something else subtle that needed to be reconfigured within  I > UCX?  I must confess that I haven't had to touch this part of UCX in a  G > few years and my memory of it is somewhat faded.  It looks like it's  K > time to head on out to the off-site storage facility [my garage] and see  1 > if I can find that old box full of UCX manuals.  >  >   = Look at SET CONFIG SMTP /GATEWAY=ALTERNATE=hostname and /ZONE    --   John Reagan / HP Pascal/{A|I}MACRO for OpenVMS Project Leader  Hewlett-Packard Company    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 11:21:59 -0400 * From: Chuck Chopp <ChuckChopp@rtfmcsi.com>@ Subject: Re: Need a UCX outbound SMTP refresher...... Arghhhhhh!8 Message-ID: <AdRAe.1766$ag7.1712@bignews4.bellsouth.net>   John Reagan wrote:  ? > Look at SET CONFIG SMTP /GATEWAY=ALTERNATE=hostname and /ZONE   L Yes, I've been reviewing the SMTP configuration and nothing seems to be out K of place.  The actual SMTP servers used to perform relaying of messages to  I outside domains have changed, and I did specify the FQDN of the new SMTP  J server as the alternate gateway.  Still, no success in getting VMSMAIL to ! even attempt to send the message.   E I'm still getting that logical name error and it makes me think that  I something more basic has gone wrong.  Maybe something in the UCX startup  M itself is failing to execute properly.  I can see that MAIL$PROTOCOL_SMTP is  E defined to the value "UCX$SMTP_MAILSHR", and UCX$SMTP_MAILSHR.EXE is  M installed as a shareable image.  The NOLOGNAME error is occurring regardless  = of whether I address a mail message to mailbox@domain.com or  I SMTP%"mailbox@domain.com", and it happens immediately upon hitting ENTER  K after typing in the address.  I suspect that something has broken in terms  ? of UCX's SMTP service being defined as a foreign mail protocol.      --   Chuck Chopp   8 ChuckChopp (at) rtfmcsi (dot) com http://www.rtfmcsi.com  @ RTFM Consulting Services Inc.     864 801 2795 voice & voicemail2 103 Autumn Hill Road              864 801 2774 fax Greer, SC  29651  , Do not send me unsolicited commercial email.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 11:42:18 -0400 2 From: "Stanley F. Quayle" <squayle@insight.rr.com>@ Subject: Re: Need a UCX outbound SMTP refresher...... Arghhhhhh!. Message-ID: <42D3AC9A.3535.32661D04@localhost>  * On 12 Jul 2005 at 9:56, Chuck Chopp wrote: > $ MAIL > MAIL> SEND# > To: SMTP%"chuckchopp@rtfmcsi.com" + > %SYSTEM-F-NOLOGNAM, no logical name match  > $   A Here's what's set up on my system.  Do you have the same logical  5 names?  (You might need UCX$... instead of TCPIP$...)    $ sh log mail$*    (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE)     "MAIL$EDIT" = "Callable_TPU"$   "MAIL$INTERNET_TRANSPORT" = "SMTP"-   "MAIL$PROTOCOL_SMTP" = "TCPIP$SMTP_MAILSHR"    "MAIL$SYSTEM_FLAGS" = "2"   
 --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) "OpenVMS, when downtime is not an option"    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:38:53 -0400 . From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot|@teksavvy.com>@ Subject: Re: Need a UCX outbound SMTP refresher...... Arghhhhhh!, Message-ID: <42D40029.F92F6FC7@teksavvy.com>  Q Another thing to consider the "logical name not found" message may be misleading.   G MAIL calls the SMTP% callable image twice when you first enter an smtp% I address (one to "connect" (aka: start of message), and then once for each   receipient to verify its syntax.  M once your message has been completed, it calls the routine with either a file L or repeatedly calls it with lines of text, and once the shareable image has C been given all the info, it then calls it once per recipient to get  confirmation it has been sent.  I So the early "no logical name match" could be an indication that the SMTP J shareable image isn't finding some logical it expects to see, OR that MAIL- itself is unable to find the shareable image.    However, try this:  
 MAIL> SEND TO: jf%chocolate  W And you'll see that the message about the jf transport not existing is quite different.   J Try SET WATCH FILE/CLASS=ALL before invoking MAIL, and after your type theM SMTP% , check out which files it successfully accesses and which one it isn't  accessing properly.   L Also, check your full UCX logicals to see if there are any still pointing to the old domain name.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:28:04 -0400 . From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot|@teksavvy.com>@ Subject: Re: Need a UCX outbound SMTP refresher...... Arghhhhhh!+ Message-ID: <42D3FDA1.16D27B7@teksavvy.com>    Chuck Chopp wrote: > J > I just reconfigured my hobby system [OpenVMS Alpha v7.1, UCX v4.2 ECO 3]N > with a new IP address and domain name and new DNS servers for it to use when; > resolving names.  Now outbound SMTP messages addressed to K > SMTP%"mailbox@some-domain.com" cannot be sent.  VMSMAIL gives an error as 
 > follows: >  > $ MAIL > MAIL> SEND# > To: SMTP%"chuckchopp@rtfmcsi.com" + > %SYSTEM-F-NOLOGNAM, no logical name match     L Am not familiar with UCX vintage. Did you try to use UCX config to shutdown,* reconfigure and restart the SMTP service ?  N With TCPIP Services, you can define the domain that will be used in the From: J (for instance, so that in a 20 node cluster, messages would appear to come@ from "user@chocolate.com" instead of "user@pastry.chocolate.com"  L Perhaps your SMTP config still has an old domain name and it can't translate it ?  P (although the message seems to indicate it is a logical name it can't translate)  L Do you have a another system running with the ancient UCX software ? perhapsN comparing the output from SHOW LOG UCX$SMTP* would reveal what is missing from your new config ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:50:20 +0200 3 From: "Dr. Dweeb" <NOSPAM_5msg0h202@sneakemail.com> M Subject: Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacks = Message-ID: <42d3763e$0$78288$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>   0 "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> wrote in message = news:1121136596.651151.280980@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...  >  >  > JF Mezei wrote: L >> re: long term good for short term pain during north/south war in the USA. >>J >> The same could be said of Hussein gassing the Kurds into submission so  >> they D >> would be quiet, or Hittler gasing Jews because he felt they were  >> disruptive of >> proper German culture/race. >> >>L >> But the USA/UK invasion of Iraq has a major difference: Bush/Bliar/HowardK >> acted outside their own jurisdiction without any international mandate.   >> It isJ >> an agression against another country, another culture and an agression 
 >> into anH >> area that already dislikes and fears the west and whose only possible( >> complaint mechanism is to blow bombs. > G > Let's see. How many were killed in the Iraq/Iran war? No one seems to E > care about that. I don't see any terrorists getting upset about the C > biggest mass murder of Muslims/Arabs of recent times. Where's the 
 > outrage? > B > Agression against another country? Well, yes and no. Most IraqisI > appeared to be glad to be rid of Saddam. They were also brave enough to I > resist the insurgents when they voted. So Iraq is not of one voice like G > you make it out to be. The vast majority of Iraqis aren't complaining H > by blowing bombs. They clearly expressed their desire to vote, despiteI > the dangers from the insurgents. And they'd never get to vote if Saddam  > were still in power. > G > What if no Iraqis became insurgents? What if they all participated in I > forming a govt? What would be so terrible about that that blowing bombs % > becomes the "only possible option"?  > H > Was it a good idea for US to invade Iraq? Certainly not the way it was, > done, but your words are still inaccurate. > F > The only way to complain is to blow bombs? Why not just take part in > the emerging govt? > & > Most Iraqis are not "blowing bombs". > I > Admittedly, the US screwed this up big time by not securing the country C > and other missteps. But that's no excuse for the behaviour of the . > insurgents. They're killing fellow Iraqis!!! >   5 And now fellow religious cohorts from other nations !   L Perhaps after the insurgents kill enough fellow "muslims", the Muslim world L will actually put some actions behind words and help rid the world of theze  bozos.  K >> Their own government do not take those complaints to the USA/UK because   >> they M >> fear that the USA will retaliate. So the people of the middle east really   >> have L >> no way to vent their frustration at the inept meddling of USA into their  >> own affairs.  > F > The Iraqi govt? The one that wouldn't even exist had it not been forF > the US invasion? Huh? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you! AndH > what kind of retaliation are you talking about? That wouldn't make any > sense! > E >> The government of Egypt is a very good example. They receive huge   >> subsidiesJ >> from the USA. But in exchange, they are expected to be moderate in the 	 >> middle F >> east, and to do so, they have a very careful balancing act to make 
 >> because > 8 > You would prefer that Egypt start wars left and right? >   L Egypt got with the program and chose peace.  It seems to have lasted over 3  decades now.  L >> internally, a lot of Egyptians do not like to see their government being  >> so M >> nice to the americans. But the egyptian govt isn't about to criticise the   >> USA > I > I'm really tired of your not capitalizing Americans. You obviously have % > nothing but contempt for Americans.   H Indeed, I have suggested the same previously, though Mr. Todd disagrees  rather strongly.1 Worse, JF thinks *everyone* in c.o.v is from USA.    Dweeb  >  > [...]  > G >> Now, Egypt has some of the more moderate people in the middle east.  
 >> ImagineA >> how bad it gets in the more activist middle eastern countries.  > ( > Yep, more apologizing for the crazies. > I > While I think the invasion was a bad idea I think your remarks are also  > bad. >    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 18:47:38 +1000 6 From: "O'Brien Paddy" <Paddy.O'Brien@transgrid.com.au>M Subject: Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacks X Message-ID: <8BAD914A0B8CA84C9E94187103A1AB9E05BE64@EX-TG2-PR.corporate.transgrid.local>  , This is a multi-part message in MIME format.  ' ------_=_NextPart_001_01C586BE.5B911812 . Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"+ Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable    [everything snipped]  L This is way OT from the original title, which was also way OT for this news= group.  L Why can't Messrs Feldman, Mezie, Todd and Gunshannon, conduct this betwixt =L themselves.  I enjoy all their contributions to VMS related topics, but thi=L s is going overboard.  Sue's contribution on this issue was more to the poi= nt.    Regards, Paddy    G ***********************************************************************   C "This electronic message and any attachments may contain privileged @ and confidential information intended only for the use of the=20D addressees named above.  If you are not the intended recipient of=20C this email, please delete the message and any attachment and advise D the sender.  You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,=207 distribution, reproduction of this email is prohibited.   C If you have received the email in error, please notify TransGrid=20 C immediately.  Any views expressed in this email are those of the=20 ? individual sender except where the sender expressly and with=20 C authority states them to be the views of TransGrid.  TransGrid uses > virus-scanning software but excludes any liability for viruses contained in any attachment.  < Please note the email address for TransGrid personnel is now$ firstname.lastname@transgrid.com.au"  G ***********************************************************************     ' ------_=_NextPart_001_01C586BE.5B911812 - Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" + Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable   1 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">  <HTML> <HEAD>L <META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-= 1"> K <META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7226.0"> L <TITLE>Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacks= </TITLE> </HEAD>  <BODY>) <!-- Converted from text/plain format -->   * <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>[everything snipped]<BR> <BR>L This is way OT from the original title, which was also way OT for this news=
 group.<BR> <BR>L Why can't Messrs Feldman, Mezie, Todd and Gunshannon, conduct this betwixt =L themselves.&nbsp; I enjoy all their contributions to VMS related topics, bu=L t this is going overboard.&nbsp; Sue's contribution on this issue was more = to the point.<BR>  <BR> Regards, Paddy<BR> </FONT>  </P>   <FONT SIZE=3D3><BR>  <BR>K ***********************************************************************<BR>  <BR>G "This electronic message and any attachments may contain privileged<BR> B and confidential information intended only for the use of the <BR>F addressees named above.  If you are not the intended recipient of <BR>G this email, please delete the message and any attachment and advise<BR> F the sender.  You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, <BR>; distribution, reproduction of this email is prohibited.<BR>  <BR>E If you have received the email in error, please notify TransGrid <BR> E immediately.  Any views expressed in this email are those of the <BR> A individual sender except where the sender expressly and with <BR> G authority states them to be the views of TransGrid.  TransGrid uses<BR> B virus-scanning software but excludes any liability for viruses<BR>  contained in any attachment.<BR> <BR>@ Please note the email address for TransGrid personnel is now<BR>( firstname.lastname@transgrid.com.au"<BR> <BR>K ***********************************************************************<BR>  </FONT>  </BODY>  </HTML> ) ------_=_NextPart_001_01C586BE.5B911812--    ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 06:09:47 -0500 (CDT) * From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)M Subject: Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacks 2 Message-ID: <05071206094724_20200298@antinode.org>  6 From: "O'Brien Paddy" <Paddy.O'Brien@transgrid.com.au>  N > Why can't Messrs Feldman, Mezie, Todd and Gunshannon, conduct this betwixt =N > themselves.  I enjoy all their contributions to VMS related topics, but thi=N > s is going overboard.  Sue's contribution on this issue was more to the poi= > nt.   B    It's difficult to be sure, but I've always assumed that they'veE driven away all the people in their physical neighborhoods with their E tiresome tirades, so that now the only people who will listen to them ? (or at least who will respond to them) are, much to our sorrow,   participants in this news group.  F    Collectively, they make a powerful argument for moving lock, stock,1 and barrel to the (moderated, I assume) HP forum.   F    And, while I'm complaining, could some of you _please_ learn how to use an apostrophe properly?          she is = she's (not hers)        he is  = he's  (not his)       it is  = it's  (not its)  B If this seems too complicated, try a Google search for "apostrophe< panda truss", and follow the links to a more thorough guide.  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 07:14:23 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) M Subject: Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacks 3 Message-ID: <jGzhGrpfh4PP@eisner.encompasserve.org>   s In article <42d2f653$0$78282$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>, "Dr. Dweeb" <NOSPAM_5msg0h202@sneakemail.com> writes:  > O > Has anybody actually bothered to find out what the optimal speed for minimum  M > fuel consumption is for modern vehicles.  I have a sneaking suspicion that  O > it may be somewhat higher than 55 mph. but have not investigated.  The 55mph  M > was a 70s value, and might have been accurate then.  I doubt that it still   > is.   G    40-something MPH was the '70s number, based on friction and air drag G    of the models then produced.  The air drag has been reduced somewhat G    for many of today's sedans, but is very likely worse for the typical E    SUV.  This varies tremendously, the Honda Element is intentionally :    boxy looking but those odd curves make it pretty slick.  F    Drag due to tire and bearing friction hasn't changed all that much,H    and depends greatly on keeping proper inflation. The typical V8 stillI    needs 6 cylinders firing at idle just to maintain idle due to internal     friction.   ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 07:18:34 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) M Subject: Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacks 3 Message-ID: <O7dWMbYsMTgl@eisner.encompasserve.org>   s In article <42d2f7f2$0$78282$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>, "Dr. Dweeb" <NOSPAM_5msg0h202@sneakemail.com> writes:   A > The "inland ice" volume continues to rise as far as I am aware.       Then you are unaware.   ------------------------------   Date: 12 Jul 2005 14:35:41 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)M Subject: Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacks + Message-ID: <3ji2psFq63qbU1@individual.net>   B In article <1121133429.394226.14760@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,' 	"AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> writes:  >  > Dr. Dweeb wrote:> >> "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spoamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message) >> news:42D151ED.3DD354DC@teksavvy.com... ? >> > Re: Solar panels covering vegetation on a planetary scale. 
 >> clip .. >>K >> > Consider this: the Internatinal Energy Agency had released a paper not 	 >> > long I >> > ago about emergency measures that could be taken to reduce WORLD oil  >> > demand N >> > should the need arise. The first recommendation is an immediate reduction >> > of N >> > the maximum speed in USA highways to 55 mph, which would reduce US demand >> > for" >> > foreign oil by 3% right away. > O >> Has anybody actually bothered to find out what the optimal speed for minimum M >> fuel consumption is for modern vehicles.  I have a sneaking suspicion that O >> it may be somewhat higher than 55 mph. but have not investigated.  The 55mph M >> was a 70s value, and might have been accurate then.  I doubt that it still  >> is. > I > 55mph was likely *never* the optimal speed. It was a compromise between F > the real optimal speed (prob. between 30 and 40 mph) and what people  E 30 to 40!!  I doubt that seriously.  I drive an old MG (dates back to D that period of time.) and at 30 MPH I wouyld be driving it around in@ 3rd gear.  Surely that wouldn't provide the optimal gas mileage.  G > wanted to drive at. Remember: the first energy conservation speed was I > 50 mph but Congress didn't want to give Nixon anything he asked for, so + > it was upped to 55 mph (or so I've read).  > C > While I often disagree with JF, and his record on physics in this G > newsgroup is not great, to say the least (but he's quoting a study in H > this case), I have to call 'em as I see 'em. And as much as I hate theG > 55 mph speed limit, the physics of the matter favors lower speeds for  > higher mileage.   D That makes no sense. It's just no that simple.  The optimal speed isF totally dependant on the gearing of the car.  Any speed that keeps you$ out of your top gear is sub-optimal.  I >                 The amount of work you have to do to get from A to B is E > equal to the average force times the distance travelled. So given a I > fixed distance, the amount of work the engine has to do to push the car F > is proportional to the average force. And at highway speeds the mainG > force is drag due to air resistance which varies approx. as the speed H > (v). IIRC, it varies more like v**2 at higher speeds. So the drag on aE > car going at 70mph is greater than at 55mph, period. Therefore, the D > work expended by the engine is greater, period. That's a matter of > physics, not technology.  E And too simplistic.  Good aerodynamic design can make a car traveling  very fast efficient as well.   > G > (I actually confirmed this by experiment in the early 80's. If you do I > try this experiment, you must be very careful that you measure what you D > think you're measuring and that all factors are taken into accountF > (head winds and tail winds are an obvious possible complication, for< > one -- accurately measuring the gas consumed is another).) > D > The best mileage is probably at the lowest speed you can go in the4 > highest gear available without lugging the engine.  ? And that might be true if the road was always totally flat, but A when you factor in things like hills, I would expect that inertia 5 begins to play a very big part in overall efficiency.    > C > Higher revs with the same load (same speed, hence same drag) only G > create more heat (by burning more gas, and that extra power has to go G > somewhere!), which is wasted energy, which of course reduces mileage. . > So a higher gear at a given speed is better.  @ Which is what most of the car manufacturers did to meet federalyD mandated mileage requirements.  For example, while my MG has 4 gearsD the two Miata's I am currently looking at have 5 and 6 respectively.? (because I have had to travel a lot recently and don't see that > ending, I am opting for the 6 speed.)  There are very few carsE being manufactured today that do not have at more gears or overdrive. H That means the old "double nickel" which may have made sense in the 70'sC (and I am not saying it did, because I don't believe the government H has the knowledge to make a technical decision like that) today it wouldH make no sense at all.  My 25 year old car gets it's best mileage runningC at 60-65 MPH.  I know that because I measure my mileage on all long G trips and in the past couple years I have made a number of trips up and J down the eastern seaboard.  Of course, the route can make a big differenceK as well.  I used to run up and down I81.  Going to the same place using I95 G was (according to mapping software) about 50 miles longer.  Guess what. H Turns out the I95 route is not only faster, but requires less gas.  Why?F Because it's mostly flat, being close the coast and all while I81 goesD up and down through the mountains. Route planning can be a big help.   > C > There are various factors: gear ratio, engine speed, drag, engine G > efficiency (at burning gasoline). But the physics of the situation is F > against you at higher speeds as far as mileage goes. Whatever you toH > technology-wise to make things more efficient at the higher speed, the8 > same thing will help you even more at the lower speed.      I >t efficient speed is the engine turning at a specific RPM in the highest I gear.  Car manufactureres don't provide that information and most drivers H would be incapable of actually maintining it.  Of course, thast's why myI new car is going to have cruise-control too.  There are a  lot of factors I in fuel economy.  Simply picking an arbitrary speed won;t do it.  And, as H was proven after the last mandated 55 limit, it doesn't reduce accidents or highway deaths either.   ? > Sorry, but that's the way it is. Hey, I'm just the messenger!  > @ > The question then is: what speed should we drive at to balanceE > competing interests: better times and less driving agony on the one F > hand, vs. better mileage on the other. That's where opinion comes inI > and mine is against limiting speeds to 55 mph because I've been through F > that and I hated it. Others may disagree. But the physics is what it > is.   B Sorry, it is not just a matter of physics unless you eliminate theC human element and while CMU did it in a single test, we are still a  long way from doing that.    > H > I'd guess that the most efficient speed is somewhere between 30 and 40 > mph.    E As stated above, that wasn't true of 70's cars and would be much less  true today.   I >       I am not familiar enough with overdrive cars to say what it would D > be for them. So for this I ask: What's the typical lowest speed atH > which you can go into overdrive without lugging the engine? Can anyone > supply that?  E The point at which the engine "lugs" is already way below the optimum F engine speed.  And that is a matter of physics.  Why do you think whenE the specs are published (seldom anymore) they specify the torque  and H horsepower at a particular RPM?   For example, my 1978 MGB generates itsC peak BHP at 4600 RPM.  Without Overdrive (my car) top gear speed is G 18 MPH/1000 RPM.  A little limple math and we see that the engine would H be generating optimum power at 82.8 MPH.  If it had overdrive that wouldG increase to 22 MPH/1000 RPM or 101.2 MPH.  What does this mean?  Simply H that most people are already driving at less than optimum speed and thatJ the general design of the car did not take any of this into consideration.F Personally, I tend to drive with the RPM's between 3500 and 4000 whichD keeps me around 65 MPH. Speeds above this feel uncomfortable (again,H because the government got involved in automotive engineering and reallyG messed the car's design up) and speeds below that would require driving I in 3rd gear.  The same calculation can be made for every car.  If you do, J what you will find is that there is no optimum highway speed because every@ car is different and some of them are different by large ranges.   > H > I'm sure there are people who will say "But MY car/truck/whatever gets< > better mileage at 70 than at 55 mph." I don't believe it.   F Doesn't matter wether you believe it or not.  You can do the math justC like I just did (if you can find those numbers for any modern car). G You cited the laws of physics above, this is a part of those same laws. B All engines have an optimum speed at which they are generating theI most power for energy consumed.  That point combined with the gear ratios H of the transmission and rearend will give you the optimum speed.  No twoG cars are the same.  And, of course, this does not take the human factor  into effect at all.   G >                                                            If that is I > the case for someone's car, then there's something very wrong with that  > car at lower speeds!    F Not necessarily, it might be a Ferrari.  Designed to be driven at muchA higher speeds and sold based on the status that ability gives it.   I >                      The efficiency of the engine may increase a little D > with revs, but that's not enough to overcome the increase in drag.  H Aerodynamics has changed that considerably over time (except for some ofH the recent boxes coming out of Japan that seem to have decided that dragE is not enough to offset uniqueness of design in selling cars.)  Trust A me, that Ferrari has less drag at 200 MPH than a Prius at 55 MPH.    > E > Then there's the old question: Which is better for mileage: windows G > open or air conditioning? This was done on Mythbusters but they did a G > lousy experiment. They compared windows open with A/C cranked way up. I > Unless there's something wrong with your A/C, you're not going to drive = > with it cranked up while driving at a steady highway speed. I > Furthermore, due to safety concerns, they were allowed to drive only 45 F > mph on the track. Moreover, I don't trust their gasoline measurementE > methodology. Still further, it applies only to their test vehicles.  > G > Anyway, at zero mph, windows open gets better mileage. (Of course you D > don't get any cooling, and you're not getting anywhere, but at lowD > speeds, windows open wins.) As speed increases, the drag from openG > windows increases, but then the efficiency of the A/C also increases. E > So there is probably a crossover point such that driving above some G > speed for a given car gives better mileage with A/C running than with F > windows open. What that speed may typically be I will not venture to > guess.  D I'll let someone else argue this one.  Personally, I don't much likeB air conditioning, which is why I like to drive roadsters.  Even inE my wife's Jeep Wagon I prefer the windows open over air conditioning, J but that has nothing to do with fuel efficiency. Just personal preference.   bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------   Date: 12 Jul 2005 14:42:19 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) M Subject: Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacks + Message-ID: <3ji36bFq63qbU2@individual.net>   = In article <42d3749b$0$78279$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>, 6 	"Dr. Dweeb" <NOSPAM_5msg0h202@sneakemail.com> writes: > 2 > "Lurker" <nowhere@nothing.com> wrote in message - > news:HhJAe.493$Qu4.34126@news.xtra.co.nz... 2 >> "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> wrote in message? >> news:1121133429.394226.14760@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...  >>>  >>> Dr. Dweeb wrote:A >>> > "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spoamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message , >>> > news:42D151ED.3DD354DC@teksavvy.com... >>J >>> > Has anybody actually bothered to find out what the optimal speed for
 >> minimumK >>> > fuel consumption is for modern vehicles.  I have a sneaking suspicion  >> that L >>> > it may be somewhat higher than 55 mph. but have not investigated.  The >> 55mphJ >>> > was a 70s value, and might have been accurate then.  I doubt that it >> still	 >>> > is.  >>% >> Result from a quick Google search:  >>> >> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/07/we_want_fuel_ec.php >> >> [Note the site name btw]  >> >> Here is the quote:  >>M >> By paying attention, you can calibrate specific speeds and conditions with K >> various milages. It turns out that a steady state 85mph yields about the K >> same milage as 65mph, though it dips substantially at speeds in between.  >>F >> Older studies determined that maximum fuel milage is obtained with  >> constant,M >> moderate throttle settings at speeds between 35 - 45 mph, and avoidance or J >> braking and acceleration. The key is to maximize (or optimize) velocityK >> while minimizing wind drag and tire rolling resistance. In the '70's BMW H >> determined that optimum fuel consumption could be achieved by rapidly? >> shifting to the highest gear feasible, given road conditions  >> >> > I > IIRC, I rememeber reading a car magazine article in the 70s, back when  N > economy runs were an "item".  They determined by careful measurement that a N > Jag XJ12 got best mileage at 30 something mph *and* something just under 70 O > mph.  It seemed that there were 2 points where the factors peaked.  Needless  M > to say they tried to drive at the higher speed as much as possibile (which  7 > was perfectly legal on the given roads at that time).   G Seems rather dubious to me as at 30MPH the Jag would be in second gear. F Again, from personal experience, I spent quite a bit of time this pastC year on Ft. Gordon, GA.  Speedlimit 25 MPH, strictly enforced (what J else do the MP's have to do now that physical security has been contractedK out?)  My car usually gets between 22-24 mpg combined highway/city driving. E During thise times when I would consume an entire tank of gas without G going off post that dropped to about 15mpg.  I even ran out of gas once B because I am so used to buying gas based on my mileage rather thanG relying on a very inaccurate gas guage!  Theonly way that Jag could get : good gass mileage at 30MPH would be drifting downhill. :-)   bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 07:53:48 -0700$ From: "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com>M Subject: Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacks C Message-ID: <1121180028.095729.222790@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   
 Lurker wrote: 1 > "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:1121133429.394226.14760@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > >  > > Dr. Dweeb wrote:A > > > "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spoamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message , > > > news:42D151ED.3DD354DC@teksavvy.com... > J > > > Has anybody actually bothered to find out what the optimal speed for	 > minimum K > > > fuel consumption is for modern vehicles.  I have a sneaking suspicion  > thatL > > > it may be somewhat higher than 55 mph. but have not investigated.  The > 55mph J > > > was a 70s value, and might have been accurate then.  I doubt that it > still 	 > > > is.  > $ > Result from a quick Google search: > = > http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/07/we_want_fuel_ec.php  >  > [Note the site name btw] >  > Here is the quote: > L > By paying attention, you can calibrate specific speeds and conditions withJ > various milages. It turns out that a steady state 85mph yields about theJ > same milage as 65mph, though it dips substantially at speeds in between.    You forgot to include this part:  C My SAAB 9000 has a fuel milage feature as part of a digital readout C feature located beneath the speedometer. In addition to the overall E fuel consumption, there is also a dynamic horizontal bar readout that D gives intantaneous fuel comsumption data. This enables you to adjustF your driving style to maximize mpg. another advantage of the system isC that it will accurately predict miles-until-empty. This has been an D option or standard equipment since 1986, and is available on current 9-5 models and possibly 9-3's.    B Now just how accurate is this fuel consumption meter? I doubt it'sC accurate enough for this purpose. It could be as simple as a vacuum  gauge.    Do a real test, and do it right.  F Additionally, this is just some random individual's post to a bulletin board. His name is Tony.  C Now let's say you are running low on gas and you decide you need to G head straight for a gas station? Are you going to drive at 65 or 85? Or  slower?      > N > Older studies determined that maximum fuel milage is obtained with constant,L > moderate throttle settings at speeds between 35 - 45 mph, and avoidance orI > braking and acceleration. The key is to maximize (or optimize) velocity J > while minimizing wind drag and tire rolling resistance. In the '70's BMWG > determined that optimum fuel consumption could be achieved by rapidly > > shifting to the highest gear feasible, given road conditions  E Of course a steady speed is needed for optimal mileage. But you can't C get around the fact that the engine needs to do more work at 85 mph  than at 65 mph. That is fact.    ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 08:12:33 -0700# From: "WhoDat?" <whohe@whoever.com> M Subject: Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacks C Message-ID: <1121181153.193248.227630@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    Bill Todd wrote: > WhoDat? wrote: >  > ...  > 0 > > The Qur'an supports jihad. Do your homework. > B > You appear to be every bit as much a moron and/or bigot as thoseH > Christian fundies who selectively quote those parts of the Bible whichI > they'd like to believe support their world-view and blithely ignore the B > rest.  And to put icing on the cake, you clearly (just from yourJ > statements which I didn't find worth quoting above, let alone elsewhere)/ > can't follow (or present) coherent positions.  >  > 'Bye.  >  > - bill >   E Well, so as not to leave this bit of mr. bill's bliss hanging at this @ end of the thread, I'll make this one last posting so that thoseF interested in basing their opinions on fact rather than bliss won't beD misled. Here are a couple concise definitions (look it up yourself):    6 http://faculty.juniata.edu/tuten/islamic/glossary.html ##F jihad: sometimes called the "sixth pillar of Islam," this word has two	 meanings: E 1. The "greater jihad" is "striving" of any kind, particularly moral; A the struggle to be a better person, a better Muslim, the struggle ; against drugs, against immorality, against infidelity, etc. D 2. Holy war in agreement with the Shari'ah: only undertaken when theE faith is threatened and at the approval of a religious authority such @ as a mullah, though this is a difficult distinction (the "lesser jihad"). ##  * http://www.religioustolerance.org/gl_j.htm ##? Jihad: A striving for perfection, frequently used within Islam. G Usually, the term refers to an internal struggle that a person has with G their imperfections. The term is also used to refer to a defensive war. ? Some radical Fundamentalist Muslims and the Western media often = interpret the term as a synonym for an aggressive "holy war."  ##  G I am not a Muslim. I study religion to gain understanding of the people  who profess to be religious.   [EOB]    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 17:16:49 +0200 3 From: "Dr. Dweeb" <NOSPAM_5msg0h202@sneakemail.com> M Subject: Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacks = Message-ID: <42d3dee3$0$78288$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>   I "Bob Koehler" <koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org> wrote in message  - news:O7dWMbYsMTgl@eisner.encompasserve.org... L > In article <42d2f7f2$0$78282$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>, "Dr. Dweeb" + > <NOSPAM_5msg0h202@sneakemail.com> writes:  > B >> The "inland ice" volume continues to rise as far as I am aware. >  >   Then you are unaware.  >   ) Well, I was aware as of 2002 apparently,  M http://www.earthsky.com/shows/showsmore.php?t=20021020 but I see very recent  * headlines indicate a *predicted*  melting M http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/11/1109_041109_polar_ice.html ,  K though this is clearly the dire type of news NG loves, it is a best guess,  & that not all data apparently support, M http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Library/PolarIce/polar_ice2.html and plenty  L of other stuff.  I did not go chasis the results of the EOS readings, so if 3 anyone bothers they can let me know what they are.   L Ice age theories are not too good actually, so one has to take with a grain C of salt the dire predictions.  Theories that cannot, given perfect  K hindsight, predict the known past are not a reliable source of prediction.  G http://www.peter-thomson.co.uk/ice-ages/Ice_age_theories.html for some  0 random commentary.  There is plenty to be found.  K Like everything geological, time will tell, and the jury seems to be still  G out and will be for a while, as the cyclical nature of many geological  H processes makes the choice of reference point the deciding factor as to K whether you want answer (a) or (b).  The politics of gelogical research is    no different from anywhere else.    	 Dr. Dweeb    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 17:34:32 +0200 3 From: "Dr. Dweeb" <NOSPAM_5msg0h202@sneakemail.com> M Subject: Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacks = Message-ID: <42d3e309$0$78288$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>   8 "Steven M. Schweda" <sms@antinode.org> wrote in message , news:05071206094724_20200298@antinode.org...8 > From: "O'Brien Paddy" <Paddy.O'Brien@transgrid.com.au> > F >> Why can't Messrs Feldman, Mezie, Todd and Gunshannon, conduct this  >> betwixt =K >> themselves.  I enjoy all their contributions to VMS related topics, but   >> thi= K >> s is going overboard.  Sue's contribution on this issue was more to the   >> poi=  >> nt. > C >   It's difficult to be sure, but I've always assumed that they've G > driven away all the people in their physical neighborhoods with their G > tiresome tirades, so that now the only people who will listen to them A > (or at least who will respond to them) are, much to our sorrow, " > participants in this news group. >   I Maybe its because there is so little to discuss with respect to VMS, and  ' less and less as days go by ?  Sigh ...   G >   Collectively, they make a powerful argument for moving lock, stock, 3 > and barrel to the (moderated, I assume) HP forum.  > G >   And, while I'm complaining, could some of you _please_ learn how to  > use an apostrophe properly?  >   >      she is = she's (not hers) >      he is  = he's  (not his)  >      it is  = it's  (not its)  > D > If this seems too complicated, try a Google search for "apostrophe> > panda truss", and follow the links to a more thorough guide. > J > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > 5 >   Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-9818 4 >   382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org >   Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547     ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 12:12:51 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) M Subject: Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al quiada attacks 3 Message-ID: <oCaJEaKOe3ix@eisner.encompasserve.org>   V In article <3ji2psFq63qbU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: > G > And too simplistic.  Good aerodynamic design can make a car traveling  > very fast efficient as well.  B    You can make a car more efficient than another car, and you can?    make the efficiency curve differ between cars, but you can't C    make the car require less energy to go faster than it uses going C    slower once your reach a reasonable RPM in top gear.  Even using C    reverse drag (results in a look once called streamlining) can't      change that.    > B > Which is what most of the car manufacturers did to meet federalyF > mandated mileage requirements.  For example, while my MG has 4 gearsF > the two Miata's I am currently looking at have 5 and 6 respectively.A > (because I have had to travel a lot recently and don't see that ' > ending, I am opting for the 6 speed.)   ?    Although lower ratio top gears have become common, often the E    difference between 4, 5, and 6 is spacing rather than the extreems G    of the available ratios.  Even more so between 5 and 6 than 4 and 5.    ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 09:55:27 -0700# From: "WhoDat?" <whohe@whoever.com> Y Subject: Re: OT - Pillars of Islam (was:Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history o C Message-ID: <1121187327.267980.266570@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    Brad Hamilton wrote: > WhoDat? wrote: > <snip> > F > I promised myself I wouldn't inject myself in this discussion, but I > have to answer the following:  > I > > Well, so as not to leave this bit of mr. bill's bliss hanging at this D > > end of the thread, I'll make this one last posting so that thoseJ > > interested in basing their opinions on fact rather than bliss won't beH > > misled. Here are a couple concise definitions (look it up yourself): > >  > > : > > http://faculty.juniata.edu/tuten/islamic/glossary.html > > ##J > > jihad: sometimes called the "sixth pillar of Islam," this word has two
 > > meanings:  > C > There is _no_ "sixth pillar of Islam" - there are only five.  The H > website you refer to is a college originally founded by by a Christian > group known as the "Brethren"  > 3 > (<http://www.brethren.org> for more information).  > I > The quote above contains a link with the term "pillar of Islam"; if one ' > follows the link, one is referred to:  > 9 > <http://faculty.juniata.edu/tuten/islamic/pillars.html>  > H > which reinforces the notion that there are only five pillars of Islam.* > A further link on _that_ page refers to: > 2 > <http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/pillars.shtml> > E > which again reinforces the notion of five Pillars of Islam.  So the 1 > Juniata website cited above contradicts itself.  > <snip> >  > -- > Bradford J. Hamilton > "All opinions are my own" , > "Lose the MAPS, and replace '-at-' with @"    9 I promised myself I was finished with this thread, but...   E Yes there are only five pillars of Islam in the Sunni faith. Read the  first bit again. It says:   0 'sometimes called the "sixth pillar of Islam," '  E it does not say jihad *is* a pillar. The concept of pillar is a Sunni B one. The Shiia and some other sects do not refer to pillars but toG beliefs and practices. The concept of the greater jihad (not the lesser ? jihad) is so fundimental and engrained in Islam that, while not E specified in the Sunni sect as a pillar, it is sometime refered to as F such by scholars and is considered equal to other beliefs and praticesG by many sects. A bit more searching and you should be able to find many / other references to the "sixth pillar of Islam"   = The references above were selected because they concisely and  accurately define the word.    Now, really, that's it for me.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 12:18:05 -0400 6 From: Brad Hamilton <brMadAhaPmiSlton@coMmcAasPt.Snet>Y Subject: OT - Pillars of Islam (was:Re: Now the UK Has it's own date in the history of al 0 Message-ID: <BPGdnTY_vY2jcE7fRVn-uA@comcast.com>   WhoDat? wrote: <snip>  E I promised myself I wouldn't inject myself in this discussion, but I   have to answer the following:   G > Well, so as not to leave this bit of mr. bill's bliss hanging at this B > end of the thread, I'll make this one last posting so that thoseH > interested in basing their opinions on fact rather than bliss won't beF > misled. Here are a couple concise definitions (look it up yourself): >  > 8 > http://faculty.juniata.edu/tuten/islamic/glossary.html > ##H > jihad: sometimes called the "sixth pillar of Islam," this word has two > meanings:   B There is _no_ "sixth pillar of Islam" - there are only five.  The G website you refer to is a college originally founded by by a Christian   group known as the "Brethren"   1 (<http://www.brethren.org> for more information).   H The quote above contains a link with the term "pillar of Islam"; if one % follows the link, one is referred to:   7 <http://faculty.juniata.edu/tuten/islamic/pillars.html>   G which reinforces the notion that there are only five pillars of Islam.  ( A further link on _that_ page refers to:  0 <http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/pillars.shtml>  D which again reinforces the notion of five Pillars of Islam.  So the / Juniata website cited above contradicts itself.  <snip>   --   Bradford J. Hamilton "All opinions are my own" * "Lose the MAPS, and replace '-at-' with @"   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 06:54:22 -0400 ? From: "David Turner, Island Computers US Corp" <david@hpaq.net> V Subject: Re: Qlogic ISP12160 Ultra160, QLA12160/66 dual ultra wide SCSI PCI controller0 Message-ID: <11d7883beeo1n4b@corp.supernews.com>   Use a KZPCM-DA  L It's not much use getting a faster card as the backplane on the internal bus. for AS1200 supports UW SCSI (40Mb/sec) maximum  J The KZPCM-DA is a dual UW SCSI Controller wth 32Bit PCI interface. It alsoA includes a built in`10/100 ethernet based on the DE500-AA chipset    DT   --     David B Turner Island Computers US Corp 2700 Gregory St, Suite 180 Savannah GA 31404  Tel: 912 447 6622 X201 Cell: 912 447 6622 X252  Fax: 912 201 0402  Email: dbturner@icusc.com  Web: http://www.islandco.com% ===================================== < All orders are subject to the following terms and conditions. of sale. These should be read before ordering.% http://www.islandco.com/warranty.html   L "Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply" <helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de>/ wrote in message news:daufk0$rcg$1@online.de... G > I managed to get an ALPHAserver 1200.  Unfortunately, it has just the D > short-bus SCSI controller for the CD and one internal device.  TheH > BA35x-style shelf in the front is apparently split-bus, so I suppose IH > could install a couple of PCI-card SCSI controllers, each one allowingF > me to use part of the front shelf and whatever I hook up at the back* > (total of 15 devices per bus, I assume). > I > I could get a Qlogic (QLA12160/66) dual ultra wide SCSI PCI controller.  >  > A search turned up this: >  >  http://groups.google.de/group/comp.os.vms/browse_thread/thread/bfe902f65434ab56/f1fe61ad9d0ff639?q=%2212160%22&rnum=4&hl=de#f1fe61ad9d0ff639 > 4 > $ search SYS$COMMON:[SYSEXE]SYS$CONFIG.DAT;1 12160 >  > on VMS 7.3-2 returns > 1 >    device          = "Qlogic ISP12160 Ultra160"  > C > So, what are my chances of plugging the Qlogic (QLA12160/66) dual B > ultra wide SCSI PCI controller into the ALPHAserver 1200 running# > VMS 7.3-2 and getting it to work?  > I > What would be the easiest/cheapest possibility to install a PCI card in H > this machine?  It's just a hobbyist machine so official support is notI > an issue, as long as it works reliably.  Allegedly the newer ALPHAs use G > "industry standard PC-style PCI hardware", whatever that means.  Do I J > stand a chance of buying a controller at a department store or somewhere3 > like that at a reasonable price and have it work?  >    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:30:42 GMT * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>V Subject: Re: Qlogic ISP12160 Ultra160, QLA12160/66 dual ultra wide SCSI PCI controller2 Message-ID: <6CPAe.8325$3_7.6040@news.cpqcorp.net>  + <johnhreinhardt@yahoo.com> wrote in message < news:1121128126.887112.97030@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...  E > After reading this I went trolling through SYS$CONFIG.DAT I noticed A > there are quite a few devices listed that don't have drivers in H > SYS$LOADABLE_IMAGES.  This is on a fresh 7.3-2 isntall with no patchesH > applied.  What happened to the drivers?  Were they not quite ready for > prime time?  Just curious. >   I The configuration file is used to build tables that formerly were "baked"  intoL the bus support logic and hung off the ADPs.  Now, during boot the files areG read, parsed and the tables are constructed on the fly and hung off the F appropriate ADPs (with the exception of a handful of class drivers andE other devices - like USB - which don't go into a ADP, but are used by . other software to do their own configuration).  G Essentially, I created the base configuration files by a combination of  using I the "baked in" tables, the device driver registry we maintain internally,  and : other odds & ends (like the graphics drivers from Open3D).  G Some of these devices do not come with the base OS, but are provided by D other layered products.  For example, SYS$MSBDRIVER comes with MMOV.H There may also from time to time be devices that have been pre-added forH new devices that will ship in the future.  But by-and-large, most of the entries % have real drivers on the base OS kit.   > User developed devices should be added to SYS$USER_CONFIG.DAT.B The tables can be rebuilt at runtime using SYSMAN IO REBUILD.  The@ setting of NOAUTO in SYSGEN at boot will prevent the USER config file from being read BTW.   I If you plug in a device that has an entry, but the driver is missing, the  loadG simply fails when it can't find the driver.  Unless it is a device used  during$ the boot - this is generally benign.  H There are still some layered products that continue to provide their ownD ICBMs - even though 99% of all auto-configuration can simply be doneH by adding a few lines of test to the config files.  (ICBMs were the onlyG way to add new auto-config support for a device prior to the file based  configuration).    ------------------------------    Date: 12 Jul 2005 07:10:24 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) 3 Subject: Re: Top Intel architect flees coop for AMD 3 Message-ID: <HqSYx7lIs$kx@eisner.encompasserve.org>   a In article <3jg2j2Fphns2U1@individual.net>, Michael Unger <spam.to.unger@spamgourmet.com> writes: + > On 2005-07-11 20:55, "Bob Koehler" wrote:  > F >>    Meanwhile Green Hills (an RTOS vendor) as just announced support >>    for Itanium. > G > A RTOS running on a *high* power CPU?? Strange, really. Usually RTOSs 0 > are running on embedded, i.e. low-power, CPUs.  A    A couple GHz PPC is not unusual these days.  It depends on the     application.    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.386 ************************