1 INFO-VAX	Fri, 19 Aug 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 462       Contents: Re: 'Nuff said RE: 'Nuff said Re: 'Nuff said RE: 'Nuff said: Re: How many files can you have in a VMS directory without: Re: How many files can you have in a VMS directory without: Re: How many files can you have in a VMS directory without: Re: How many files can you have in a VMS directory without: Re: How many files can you have in a VMS directory without Re: Image restore fails  microVax3100-40 cpu number Re: microVax3100-40 cpu number( Re: Packet Trace Facility in DEC TCP/IP?$ Packet Trace Facility in DEC TCP/IP?( Re: Packet Trace Facility in DEC TCP/IP?( Re: Packet Trace Facility in DEC TCP/IP? Re: RAM  The SAMBA Saga at an end!  Re: Updated VMS Information F [TCPware V5.6-2,KERBEROS V2.1-72,VMS V7.3-2] TCPIP$IPC_SHR SHRIDMISMAT  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 08:08:10 -0500 ( From: Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com> Subject: Re: 'Nuff said / Message-ID: <00A4881D.9A1DB16A.1@tachysoft.com>   ( >From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> >X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms >Subject: Re: 'Nuff said& >Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 00:35:25 -0400   >Keith A. Lewis wrote: >> David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> writes in article <42F2CE08.C3C5B2B0@comcast.net> dated Thu, 04 Aug 2005 21:25:12 -0500: >>   >>>Richard Maher wrote:  >>> N >>>>Does no one mind that even HP couldn't be arsed to run DECnet on thier own >>>>test-drive cluster?  >>> J >>>Technically, we don't NEED DECnet at work, AFATG. It just makes certainF >>>aspects of life (like COPYing files between clusters) a bit easier. >>> ( >>>I don't currently run DECnet at home. >>   >>   >> To paraphrase NIN: # >> "DECnet's dead and noone cares."  >>  3 >> --Keith Lewis              klewis {at} mitre.org A >> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.  > & >Well, it's not dead here, and I care. > 5 >I'm using both DECnet and TCP/IP.  Each has a place.     L Yes, decnet is superior when going from vms to vms.  For instance, FAL makes$ file transfers extremely easy to do.  @ tcp/ip is how you connect with non-vms systems and the internet.   Wayne O =============================================================================== N Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738   wayne@tachysoft.com; http://www.tachysoft.com/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html    O =============================================================================== P Jake Blues:"You traded the Caddy for a microphone? ...... Okay, I can buy that."   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 10:51:32 -0400 ' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com>  Subject: RE: 'Nuff said R Message-ID: <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB6B1FDA@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----9 > From: Larry Kilgallen [mailto:Kilgallen@SpamCop.net]=20   > Sent: August 18, 2005 10:36 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com  > Subject: RE: 'Nuff said  >=20 > In article=20 @ > <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB6B1FAA@tayexc19.americas.cpqc5 > orp.net>, "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> writes:  >=20G > > In addition, from a security perspective, while hacking methods for D > > TCPIP are relatively well known, how many of the general hacking) > > community know anything about DECnet?  > >=20G > > Heck, if I wanted to increase the security of a system, one thing I < > > would do is not run tcpip at all on that system. File=20 > transfers would beA > > to a secondary system and that secondary system would only=20  > be linked to > > the primary via DECnet.  >=20< > Security through obscurity is inferior to _real_ security. >=20F > But DECnet has _real_ security, preventing non-privileged users fromD > accepting non-authenticated connections.  That goes to the core of6 > DECnet design (and to the core of TCP/IP design :-). >=20  F I agree - would even go so far as to say that obscurity adds even more to real security.=20  G Likely one of the reasons why banks do not open source their bank vault  plans ..   Sorry, could not resist ..   :-)    Regards   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax: 613-591-4477  kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20  4 OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Aug 2005 15:17:35 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: 'Nuff said , Message-ID: <3mmbgfF17277cU1@individual.net>  | In article <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB6B1FDA@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>, "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> writes: > H > I agree - would even go so far as to say that obscurity adds even more > to real security.    Only a false sense of security.    > I > Likely one of the reasons why banks do not open source their bank vault 
 > plans ..  B Actually because every bank I know has a commercially manufacturedC vault the plans are not secret. (Mandatory anecdote:  While serving @ in Germany with the Army in the early 70's we had a safe go bad.A It was a Mosler 4 drawer container considered good enough to hold C classified information.  One day it just could not be opened and it H was assumed the lock had slipped making the combination un-determinable.A We had to load it on a trailer and take it under guard to a local B german locksmith.  He came out, looked at it, wrote down the modelE number, returned to his office, pulled out a binder labeled "Mosler", F looked up the model and wrote down 2 numbers.  he then returned to theI safe with a crayon, a ruler and a cutting torch.  He made two measurments F and a crayon "X".  He then cut a hole right where the "X" was, twistedA the handle and opened the safe.  Total time less than 10 minutes. B Like most locks, they work best when you don't know what they lookB like on the inside (security by obscurity).  If you do, most locksI can be defeated remarkably easily.  Even "tough under fire" Masterlocks.)    >  > Sorry, could not resist ..  @ Too bad you proved the other persons point more than your owmn. G Security by obscurity is not security, it is a false sense of security.    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: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 13:23:36 -0400 ' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com>  Subject: RE: 'Nuff said R Message-ID: <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB6B200F@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----$ > From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu=20A > [mailto:bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Gunshannon   > Sent: August 19, 2005 11:18 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com  > Subject: Re: 'Nuff said  >=20 > In article=20 @ > <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB6B1FDA@tayexc19.americas.cpqc5 > orp.net>, "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> writes:  > >=20> > > I agree - would even go so far as to say that obscurity=20 > adds even more > > to real security.  >=20! > Only a false sense of security.  >=20 > >=20= > > Likely one of the reasons why banks do not open source=20  > their bank vault > > plans .. >=20D > Actually because every bank I know has a commercially manufacturedE > vault the plans are not secret. (Mandatory anecdote:  While serving B > in Germany with the Army in the early 70's we had a safe go bad.C > It was a Mosler 4 drawer container considered good enough to hold E > classified information.  One day it just could not be opened and it < > was assumed the lock had slipped making the combination=20 > un-determinable.C > We had to load it on a trailer and take it under guard to a local D > german locksmith.  He came out, looked at it, wrote down the modelG > number, returned to his office, pulled out a binder labeled "Mosler", H > looked up the model and wrote down 2 numbers.  he then returned to theB > safe with a crayon, a ruler and a cutting torch.  He made two=20
 > measurments H > and a crayon "X".  He then cut a hole right where the "X" was, twistedC > the handle and opened the safe.  Total time less than 10 minutes. D > Like most locks, they work best when you don't know what they lookD > like on the inside (security by obscurity).  If you do, most locks@ > can be defeated remarkably easily.  Even "tough under fire"=20 > Masterlocks.)  >=20 > >=20  	 [snip ..]     G So, you just made my point. Of course, every manufacturer has plans for H their products. The key point I was making is that Mosler do not publish> these plans on the Internet. Hence, these plans are not easilyG accessible or "well known" and hence, the overall security of the vault  is enhanced.=20    > > Sorry, could not resist .. >=20D > Too bad you proved the other persons point more than your owmn.=20B > Security by obscurity is not security, it is a false sense of=20 > security.  >=20 > bill >=20  F Nope - As I stated, "obscurity + real security" is imho, a good way toH further increase security. Having good security like Mosler safe exampleF you provided but with the Mosler plans available on the Internet would= not enhance the overall security of the Mosler safe solution.   E It would simply allow others to figure out how to do what that Mosler  technician did.    Regards   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax: 613-591-4477  kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20  4 OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Aug 2005 07:21:15 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) C Subject: Re: How many files can you have in a VMS directory without 3 Message-ID: <GHFh4$Fc6A13@eisner.encompasserve.org>   j In article <1124383736.566897.238890@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> writes: > B > Even better, it's an installed image. So it should already be in
 > memory, no?  >       No.   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Aug 2005 06:20:47 -0700$ From: "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com>C Subject: Re: How many files can you have in a VMS directory without C Message-ID: <1124457647.223607.327420@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    Bob Koehler wrote:l > In article <1124383736.566897.238890@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> writes: > > D > > Even better, it's an installed image. So it should already be in > > memory, no?  > >  >  >    No.     Oh.    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Aug 2005 10:19:21 -0500 From: briggs@encompasserve.orgC Subject: Re: How many files can you have in a VMS directory without 3 Message-ID: <CZVD9ZIN1uGh@eisner.encompasserve.org>   q In article <GHFh4$Fc6A13@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: l > In article <1124383736.566897.238890@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> writes: >>  C >> Even better, it's an installed image. So it should already be in  >> memory, no? >>   >  >    No.  F Forgive me father for I have sinned.  It's been 20 years since my last VMS internals course.   - DELETE.EXE is installed /OPEN /HEADER /SHARED   F This means that the code section is a read-only shared global section.A No matter how many people open up DELETE.EXE at once, you'll only . have one copy of each page in physical memory.  A So, in the case where someone else is already running DELETE.EXE, A chances are good that the page faults that you incur as you bring @ pages of DELETE.EXE into your working set will be "global valid"C soft faults.  You'll update your process page table to point to the 8 pages that the other guy already has in his working set.  > And in the case where the other guy was running DELETE.EXE but> image exit was 2 seconds ago, the physical pages that had been= mapped to DELETE.EXE are still on the free page list.  So the B page faults that you'll incur as you fault pages into your workingB set will be "free page list" soft faults.  You'll update your pageB table and the global section page table to point to the pages that were still on the free list.  C But if the other guy was running DELETE.EXE 30 seconds ago and your F free page list is reasonably small, chances are fair that the physicalD pages have been re-used and the PTEs in the global section that mapsA DELETE.EXE are pointing out to the DELETE.EXE image file on disk. A So as you fault pages in from DELETE.EXE, they'll be hard faults. B But, with any luck, the page fault cluster size will be big enoughB that only a few disk I/O's will suffice to bring in the code pages that you need.  H Is that summary reasonably correct or has my internals knowledge decayed
 too badly?   	John Briggs   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Aug 2005 09:12:44 -0700$ From: "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com>C Subject: Re: How many files can you have in a VMS directory without B Message-ID: <1124467964.790533.13470@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   briggs@encompasserve.org wrote: s > In article <GHFh4$Fc6A13@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: n > > In article <1124383736.566897.238890@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> writes: > >>E > >> Even better, it's an installed image. So it should already be in  > >> memory, no? > >> > > 
 > >    No. > H > Forgive me father for I have sinned.  It's been 20 years since my last > VMS internals course.  > / > DELETE.EXE is installed /OPEN /HEADER /SHARED  > H > This means that the code section is a read-only shared global section.C > No matter how many people open up DELETE.EXE at once, you'll only 0 > have one copy of each page in physical memory. > C > So, in the case where someone else is already running DELETE.EXE, C > chances are good that the page faults that you incur as you bring B > pages of DELETE.EXE into your working set will be "global valid"E > soft faults.  You'll update your process page table to point to the : > pages that the other guy already has in his working set. > @ > And in the case where the other guy was running DELETE.EXE but@ > image exit was 2 seconds ago, the physical pages that had been? > mapped to DELETE.EXE are still on the free page list.  So the D > page faults that you'll incur as you fault pages into your workingD > set will be "free page list" soft faults.  You'll update your pageD > table and the global section page table to point to the pages that > were still on the free list. > E > But if the other guy was running DELETE.EXE 30 seconds ago and your H > free page list is reasonably small, chances are fair that the physicalF > pages have been re-used and the PTEs in the global section that mapsC > DELETE.EXE are pointing out to the DELETE.EXE image file on disk. C > So as you fault pages in from DELETE.EXE, they'll be hard faults. D > But, with any luck, the page fault cluster size will be big enoughD > that only a few disk I/O's will suffice to bring in the code pages > that you need. > J > Is that summary reasonably correct or has my internals knowledge decayed > too badly? >  > 	John Briggs  > Well, regardless of all that, won't this only affect the firstC invocation of DELETE.EXE? I mean, you have a script that invokes it C repeatedly, each invocation right after the other. Wouldn't that be E enough to keep it in physical memory, thereby giving only soft faults  from the second invocation on?   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Aug 2005 11:39:20 -0500 From: briggs@encompasserve.orgC Subject: Re: How many files can you have in a VMS directory without 3 Message-ID: <HNE$IAALdKo4@eisner.encompasserve.org>   i In article <1124467964.790533.13470@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> writes: @ > Well, regardless of all that, won't this only affect the firstE > invocation of DELETE.EXE? I mean, you have a script that invokes it E > repeatedly, each invocation right after the other. Wouldn't that be G > enough to keep it in physical memory, thereby giving only soft faults   > from the second invocation on?   Yup.  That much seems clear.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 12:51:57 -0400  From: norm.raphael@metso.com  Subject: Re: Image restore failsQ Message-ID: <OFB1AF9764.F0406E65-ON85257062.005BEB7E-85257062.005CA5C6@metso.com>   H JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote on 08/18/2005 08:48:21 PM:   > Peter Sjoberg wrote:I > > I was going to play around with /Alias but soon discovered that under  6.2 C > > you aren't allow to have both /image and /alias to backup ("not  allowed,H > > check doc", but help backup didn't show anything about that) so that > > testing whas short lived.  > I > Your problem is not /ALIAS or /NOALIAS. The problem is that your backup - > is either flawed or your restore is flawed.  > J > Have you gone to the VMS download for patches to see if you can find the > patch for BACKUP at 6.* ?   
 but given:  K Peter Sjoberg <peters38@techwiz.spamno.ca> wrote on 08/17/2005 05:24:15 PM:  [snip]B > When digging around I did remember that on a separate disk I had	 installed A > 6.2-1H3 (the last 6.x ?)  specifically for the purpose of image F > backup/restore. After booting there and doing a normal image restore: > everything came back to normal and the system booted up.  7 I think JF's comment is out of sync with what happened.    ===   H If I am reading correctly, then the backup image from V6.2* was requiredA to restore the V6.2* system image backup, and from earlier posts, ? the V7.* backup image was not backward-compatible in this case.   B I thought the primary idea of backward-compatibility would be most	 inviolate # in a backup restore implementation.    Am I missing something?    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Aug 2005 08:53:04 -0700( From: John.Martin_At_Home@BTInternet.com# Subject: microVax3100-40 cpu number C Message-ID: <1124466784.277761.129040@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    A simple question ? ? A need my microVAX3100-40 cpu number in order to get my openVMS 	 licences. B How do you find it out? - Is it the multidigit number separated by/ hyphens ever 2 digits displayed by the console?    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 12:17:30 -0400 - From: William Webb <william.w.webb@gmail.com> ' Subject: Re: microVax3100-40 cpu number 6 Message-ID: <8660a3a10508190917e76c685@mail.gmail.com>  A On 19 Aug 2005 08:53:04 -0700, John.Martin_At_Home@btinternet.com + <John.Martin_At_Home@btinternet.com> wrote:  > A simple question ? A > A need my microVAX3100-40 cpu number in order to get my openVMS  > licences. D > How do you find it out? - Is it the multidigit number separated by1 > hyphens ever 2 digits displayed by the console?  >=20 >=201 Use the serial number on the back of the chassis.    --=20 C NOTE: This email address is only used for noncommerical VMS-related  correspondence. C All unsolicited commercial email will be deemed to be a request for 8 services pursuant to the terms and conditions located at# http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/e/webbww/    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:56:03 +0200  From: S <soterroatyahoodotcom>1 Subject: Re: Packet Trace Facility in DEC TCP/IP? & Message-ID: <4305e4ee$1@news1.ethz.ch>   Christopher Story wrote:M > Is there a packet trace facility in DEC TCP/IP like the Multinet "TCPDUMP"?   " TCPIP v5.5 does include a TCPDUMP.   S    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 08:47:27 -0500 ? From: "Christopher Story" <ke6rwj@spam-eater-remove-me-msn.com> - Subject: Packet Trace Facility in DEC TCP/IP? ( Message-ID: <snlNe.613$cO6.251@fe04.lga>  K Is there a packet trace facility in DEC TCP/IP like the Multinet "TCPDUMP"?    Thanks   Chris    ------------------------------   Date: 19 Aug 2005 14:04:57 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)1 Subject: Re: Packet Trace Facility in DEC TCP/IP? , Message-ID: <3mm789F17gqaqU1@individual.net>  ( In article <snlNe.613$cO6.251@fe04.lga>,B 	"Christopher Story" <ke6rwj@spam-eater-remove-me-msn.com> writes:M > Is there a packet trace facility in DEC TCP/IP like the Multinet "TCPDUMP"?  >    HELP TCPIP TRACING   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: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:56:58 +0100 * From: "Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk>1 Subject: Re: Packet Trace Facility in DEC TCP/IP? 2 Message-ID: <de4ofb$8vq$1@blackmamba.itd.rl.ac.uk>  J "Christopher Story" <ke6rwj@spam-eater-remove-me-msn.com> wrote in message" news:snlNe.613$cO6.251@fe04.lga...  M > Is there a packet trace facility in DEC TCP/IP like the Multinet "TCPDUMP"?    Yes.   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Aug 2005 10:41:34 -0700 From: jordan@ccs4vms.com Subject: Re: RAMC Message-ID: <1124473294.338200.297770@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>    healyzh@aracnet.com wrote:$ > Crabs <Crabs@ihatespam.com> wrote:L > > All PWS's (433-500-600) came with 168 pin DIMM ECC CL222 66mhz or 100mhzK > > (I've heard of 133mhz working but have never seen it with my own eyes).  >  > > Good luck! > J > I've seen PC133 RAM *not working* in my 433au.  It led to massive systemJ > unstability.  As soon as I removed it and went to nothing but PC100 RAM, > everything was fine. > H > Who knows, it might work for some people, but don't be surprised if it
 > doesn't. >  > 		Zane  A Supposedly the 'early' PC133 memory was made with chips that were E backwards compatible with PC100, and sometimes even with PC66.  Later D manufacture with newer processes made it more economic to tighten upF the tolerances, which cost the compatibility with lower speed systems.A Or so I've heard.  Even some late PC100 memory won't work on PC66  systems for the same reason.   Rich   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Aug 2005 16:17:07 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)" Subject: The SAMBA Saga at an end!, Message-ID: <3mmf03F178rj5U1@individual.net>  < OK, I have it working.  Probably not the right way to do it,8 but all I have time for at the moment.  At the end of my> SYSTARTUP_VMS.COM  I added a SAMBA_SHUTDOWN and SAMBA_STARTUP. That makes it work.   " Thanks to everyone for their help.   bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------    Date: 19 Aug 2005 11:57:05 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) $ Subject: Re: Updated VMS Information3 Message-ID: <52RLr4m$taON@eisner.encompasserve.org>   W In article <3mlta9F17e36eU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:  > Sue,2 >   You probably missed it the first time I asked,  = To avoid such problems, I suggest email rather than postings.    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Aug 2005 14:29:08 +01006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)O Subject: [TCPware V5.6-2,KERBEROS V2.1-72,VMS V7.3-2] TCPIP$IPC_SHR SHRIDMISMAT , Message-ID: <4305ecb4$1@news.langstoeger.at>  J Since upgrading KERBEROS (you know, you should keep your security productsI always as current as possible ;-) from V2.0-6 (comes with OpenVMS V7.3-2) K to V2.1-72 (downloaded from HPQ) my TCPware SSH client&server unfortunately C is no longer working (no problem on my TCPIP [V5.4 ECO 5] systems).   K Please note, that I've KERBEROS only installed, but not used [explicitely].   @ Error is, SSH server simply doesn't work (hangs forever) and the# SSH client shows the likely cause:    5 %DCL-W-ACTIMAGE, error activating image TCPIP$IPC_SHR I -CLI-E-IMGNAME, image file DSA0:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.][TCPWARE]UCX$IPC_SHR.EXE : -SYSTEM-F-SHRIDMISMAT, ident mismatch with shareable image   $ AN/IM TCPIP$IPC_SHR shows   )                 image name: "UCX$IPC_SHR" <                 image file identification: "5.6-2 PATCH 4.0"3                 image file build identification: "" 7                 link date/time:  8-APR-2005 22:14:42.41 /                 linker identification: "A13-02"   J which is quite right as I installed some TCPware and VMS ECOs at this day.G (OTOH, I installed SSH ECO V6 yesterday and this .EXE didn't change !?)   I If nobody has an explaination and hopefully a (fast) fix for this, I will G need to downgrade KERBEROS (from V2.1-72 to V2.0-6) again (which I hate G to do because KERBEROS is referenced by the plaform product OPENVMS and > therefor can't be that easily uninstalled and installed again)   Many TIA   --   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   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.462 ************************