1 INFO-VAX	Thu, 03 Aug 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 428       Contents:' Re: Apache security flaw in mod_rewrite ' Re: Apache security flaw in mod_rewrite  Re: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft RE: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft Re: Linux on military aircraft; Re: OpenVMS, Alpha still rule roost in Intel fabs (2005-09) ; Re: OpenVMS, Alpha still rule roost in Intel fabs (2005-09) ; Re: OpenVMS, Alpha still rule roost in Intel fabs (2005-09) ) RE: strange problem: satellite won't boot ) Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot ) Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot ) Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot ) Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot ) Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot ) Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot ) Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot ) Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot ) Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot ) Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot & Sub directory tree size program needed* Re: Sub directory tree size program needed* Re: Sub directory tree size program needed* Re: Sub directory tree size program needed* Re: Sub directory tree size program needed* Re: Sub directory tree size program needed* Re: Sub directory tree size program needed* Re: Sub directory tree size program needed* Re: Sub directory tree size program needed. The cost of OpenVMS security vs securing linux  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  * Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 21:06:35 +0000 (UTC). From: klewis@LUMINA.MITRE.ORG (Keith A. Lewis)0 Subject: Re: Apache security flaw in mod_rewrite. Message-ID: <ear44r$c50$1@newslocal.mitre.org>   "Rich Jordan" <jordan@ccs4vms.com> writes in article <1154534145.231166.32380@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> dated 2 Aug 2006 08:55:45 -0700:+ >http://isc.sans.org/diary.php?storyid=1523  > > >Impacts 1.3, 2.0, and 2.2 versions, but only if the site uses> >mod_rewrite; there are additional conditions making it not soB >straightforward but upgrades are recommended as soon as possible. > ? >For now I guess this is just a heads-up for those of you using ? >mod_rewrite, since we'll have to wait on HP to provide an ECO.   J Does anybody know offhand if the vanilla installs of CSWS use mod_rewrite?  0 --Keith Lewis              klewis {at} mitre.org> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 22:55:06 GMT L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing)0 Subject: Re: Apache security flaw in mod_rewrite6 Message-ID: <00A599D4.7CD99D9F@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  _ In article <ear44r$c50$1@newslocal.mitre.org>, klewis@LUMINA.MITRE.ORG (Keith A. Lewis) writes:  >"Rich Jordan" <jordan@ccs4vms.com> writes in article <1154534145.231166.32380@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> dated 2 Aug 2006 08:55:45 -0700: , >>http://isc.sans.org/diary.php?storyid=1523 >>? >>Impacts 1.3, 2.0, and 2.2 versions, but only if the site uses ? >>mod_rewrite; there are additional conditions making it not so C >>straightforward but upgrades are recommended as soon as possible.  >>@ >>For now I guess this is just a heads-up for those of you using@ >>mod_rewrite, since we'll have to wait on HP to provide an ECO. > K >Does anybody know offhand if the vanilla installs of CSWS use mod_rewrite?   H mod_rewrite is included but it doesn't get used if you don't configure a   RewriteEngine On  ! in httpd.conf or .htaccess files.    --Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 20:02:11 +0200 + From: Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> ' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft = Message-ID: <44d0e88d$0$67262$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk>    geletine wrote: H > I mentioned not long ago that vms should open up, this is another push+ > in my argument towards a open source vms.   I I doubt VMS will benefit from chancing to an open source model where the  H license is free.  Linux clearly demonstrates that there is a market for I OSes under GPL, but that is not the same as GPL being a good license for  	 every OS.   H VMS is frequently used in environments where downtime must be kept to a I minimum and were the machines should be up and running 24/7.  Sites with  G such needs need to be capable of calling somebody when in trouble, and  I then it does not work that the developer of the part with an error is on  H a three week holiday.  The company supporting the OS must be capable of D helping with all show stopper errors on short notice.  Linux is put F together from hundreds of sources making it very difficult to provide  such a service.    ------------------------------   Date: 2 Aug 2006 18:58:52 GMT ( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft + Message-ID: <4jcavcF7cj7rU1@individual.net>   = In article <44d0e88d$0$67262$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk>, . 	Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> writes: > geletine wrote: I >> I mentioned not long ago that vms should open up, this is another push , >> in my argument towards a open source vms. > K > I doubt VMS will benefit from chancing to an open source model where the   > license is free.    I I believe this is true as well.  Neitehr OpenSource nor "Free" are silver G bullets.  There are a lot of very successful products that are neither.   I >                  Linux clearly demonstrates that there is a market for  K > OSes under GPL, but that is not the same as GPL being a good license for   > every OS.   M Actually, as I have said before, the only thing that Linux truly demonstrates L is the power of hype (marketing).  There are other Open Source OSes that areL Free-er than Linux.  But, having no marketing interest, they languish in the@ hands of their maintainers while Linux takes the world by storm.   > J > VMS is frequently used in environments where downtime must be kept to a ? > minimum and were the machines should be up and running 24/7.    I Although some here choose to argue it, VMS hardly has the market cornered G on 24/7 operation.  I run both Unix and Windows here and can't remember I the last time the system went down for anything other than a catastrophic < hardware failure (which would take out VMS just as easily!).  K >                                                               Sites with  I > such needs need to be capable of calling somebody when in trouble, and  K > then it does not work that the developer of the part with an error is on  J > a three week holiday.  The company supporting the OS must be capable of F > helping with all show stopper errors on short notice.  Linux is put H > together from hundreds of sources making it very difficult to provide  > such a service.   G A nice thought, but therer are people who provide that level of service F for Linux, just like there used to be for BSD. (There may still be forH BSD, but as I said above, they have no interest in pushing their product$ so the need is not nearly as great.)   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: 2 Aug 2006 19:04:45 GMT ( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft + Message-ID: <4jcbadF7cj7rU2@individual.net>   , In article <44D0EFE7.BAFC5FC6@teksavvy.com>,0 	JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: > Bill Gunshannon wrote:L >> Linux is no more secure or insecure than anything else.  It is an attemptI >> by a bunch of primarily amateurs to duplicate what professionals spent L >> years doing.  Security was not their primary focus.  You get what you pay >> for.  >  > 7 > There is one huge difference with Windows: packaging.  > I > Although Microsoft is slowly learning, its default behaviour is to have J > the vanialla install configure and enable a gazillion number of servicesH > which each *could* be a vulnerability and there aren't decent tools to > really know what is going on.   F Actually, there are.  But unless you do it for a living, your probablyG never going to see them or see them advertised.  And lots of stuff that ! doesn't come from Microsoft, too.    > H > On Linux, this isn't the case and you have to enable services you will > want enabled.   L Depends on which distro you use and what options you choose at install time.   >               Same with VMS.    H Well, if you consider offering less services as greater security, then IK guess VMS wins hands-down.  After all, it has only about 1/10 the available  portfolio to offer.  :-)  H >                              And guess what ? The tools on VMS to findF > out what TCPIP ports are being listened to are than same as on every8 > unix platform. So VMS has no inherent advantage there.  D Services are a lot more than what TCPIP ports are being listened to.   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: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 21:48:06 +0200 + From: Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> ' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft = Message-ID: <44d10160$0$60778$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>    Bill Gunshannon wrote:? > In article <44d0e88d$0$67262$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk>, 0 > 	Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> writes:K >> VMS is frequently used in environments where downtime must be kept to a  @ >> minimum and were the machines should be up and running 24/7.  > K > Although some here choose to argue it, VMS hardly has the market cornered I > on 24/7 operation.  I run both Unix and Windows here and can't remember K > the last time the system went down for anything other than a catastrophic > > hardware failure (which would take out VMS just as easily!).  ? Hmm.  then they must have kill filtered Andrew, because he has  E frequently been telling about Sun's solutions for high availability.  H Tandem is of course also in the high availability business, and even M$  is trying to sell clusters.   F Anyway, VMS has clusters, and that makes it possible to build systems H with no single point of failure.  It is the clusters that is the reason G why VMS should be considered for high availability.  VMS should not be  J considered for high availability because of the hardware it is running on.  I > A nice thought, but therer are people who provide that level of service H > for Linux, just like there used to be for BSD. (There may still be forJ > BSD, but as I said above, they have no interest in pushing their product& > so the need is not nearly as great.)  I Do you really believe that Redhat, Suse, etc. can help if a customer has  C a severe problem in, e.g., Firefox or OpenOffice?  They might have  D people ready to help customers, but can these people solve problems H within a reasonable period of time?  Please note that the many packages = are coded in different styles and could be better documented.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 15:33:34 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> ' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft , Message-ID: <44D0FE07.40ABF86E@teksavvy.com>   Karsten Nyblad wrote: I > VMS is frequently used in environments where downtime must be kept to a ? > minimum and were the machines should be up and running 24/7.    G And assuming that only VMS is able to do this is wrong. If the military H can go Linux on military aircraft, it means that Linux is stable enough.C If banks are starting to use Linux for a variety of customer facing C applications, it means that Linux is good enough. If NASDAQ xan use H Widnows and Microsoft web server as customer faciling inftastructure, noF matter how much we may all poo-poo Microsoft, it means that it is good enough to do the job.   G And guess what, if VMS were so great compared to the other, how come it # isn't growing be leaps and bounds ?   @ VMS needs to be marketed, VMS need to be ported to a competitiveG platform and its onwer must show *REAL* commitment to growth of VMS and H make it part of a long term growth plan. Not just a couple of statementsH now and then to quite down the naysayers who feel HP isn't doing enough.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 22:09:36 +0200 + From: Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> ' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft = Message-ID: <44d10669$0$67260$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk>    JF Mezei wrote:  > Karsten Nyblad wrote: J >> VMS is frequently used in environments where downtime must be kept to a@ >> minimum and were the machines should be up and running 24/7.  > I > And assuming that only VMS is able to do this is wrong. If the military J > can go Linux on military aircraft, it means that Linux is stable enough.E > If banks are starting to use Linux for a variety of customer facing E > applications, it means that Linux is good enough. If NASDAQ xan use J > Widnows and Microsoft web server as customer faciling inftastructure, noH > matter how much we may all poo-poo Microsoft, it means that it is good > enough to do the job.   G Linux is barely ready of high availability operations.  It is only the  C latest versions of the Linux kernel that has a cluster file system.   B Not all organizations are equally smart when it comes to choosing H platforms.  I was once asked to implement a 24/7 solution on Windows NT J 3.51.  Anyone should know that that crab is not suited for 24/7 operation.  I > And guess what, if VMS were so great compared to the other, how come it % > isn't growing be leaps and bounds ?  > B > VMS needs to be marketed, VMS need to be ported to a competitiveI > platform and its onwer must show *REAL* commitment to growth of VMS and J > make it part of a long term growth plan. Not just a couple of statementsJ > now and then to quite down the naysayers who feel HP isn't doing enough.  D That is not enough.  VMS must also be much more actively developed. G Linux and Windows are getting better and better, and they are catching   up on VMS's strongholds.   ------------------------------   Date: 2 Aug 2006 13:25:35 -0700  From: bob@instantwhip.com ' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft C Message-ID: <1154550334.966488.156460@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>    Main, Kerry wrote: > E > Its just that in order to keep that level of enhanced security, the H > sheer volume of so many security issues every month means that a greatI > deal of that SysAdmins time has to be spent on reviewing security patch F > release notes, and then testing and QA'ing applications to make sureJ > there are no issues before releasing these monthly security patches into
 > production.  > H > If that SysAdmin maintains systems being used by a number of differentD > Dev groups then the problem becomes even worse as they likely have% > different Apps that they are using.  > G > If the QA'ing and testing of these mission critical Apps is done by a G > separate QA/Test group (which is often the case with prod Apps), then ! > their time is impacted as well.  > J > These are part of the hidden costs you usually do not hear to much about; > (except from those in Operations and QA/Testing support).   3 and that is where the advantages of vms kick in ...   D our webserver has been running for over 7 years without a problem or patch ( or virus ... same for the mailserver ...  E so that means I can spend time doing other things instead of spending  timeE patching and watching every little hacker who comes along or hiring a  security admin ...  D OpenVMS is secure out the box pretty much, and once you use a few of its D many secuirty features and implement, you really never need to worry about , it again unless modifications are needed ...  C and that saves companies money which means they can pay me more for A doing more work and providing them an environment that NEVER goes  down to hacks or viruses ...  ' YOU CANNOT DO THE SAME ON ANY OTHER OS!    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 16:48:19 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> ' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft , Message-ID: <44D10F88.80738B49@teksavvy.com>   bob@instantwhip.com wrote:F > our webserver has been running for over 7 years without a problem or > patch   F How far is your webserver now ? Are you ever going to be able to bring& it back ? Must be ver far away by now.  F > OpenVMS is secure out the box pretty much, and once you use a few ofJ > its many secuirty features and implement, you really never need to worry4 > about it again unless modifications are needed ...    D YEP. VMS an an appliance. There is one problem with this though: theF internet is not a fixed service, it constantly evolves, and to provideE modern services, you often need to upgrade software and this is where % VMS lags behind the rest pf the pack.     ) > YOU CANNOT DO THE SAME ON ANY OTHER OS!   D The problem is that the other OSs are coming quite close to VMS, and; unlike VMS, they offer the modern state of the art service.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 17:31:30 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> ' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft 9 Message-ID: <msmdnZyf8MTWhUzZnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d@libcom.com>    Doug Phillips wrote: > Dave Froble wrote: >> Karsten Nyblad wrote: >>> Bill Gunshannon wrote:F >>>> And somehow, I doubt this is true either.  Why would someon Email# >>>> target coordinates to the B-2? I >>> During the attack on Iraq, half of the bombers took of before getting J >>> their targets.  In Afghanistan commanding officers can call in and askJ >>> for air support, and the enemies will be attacked by planes already inK >>> the air.  I do not know how the planes are getting the coordinates, but L >>> it would not surprise me if they get them by some messaging tool so thatG >>> they have them in writing.  I am a bit skeptical that they would be K >>> using ordinary E-mail considering that the people on the ground need to 1 >>> be sure that the pilots the information fast. G >> I don't know, but I'm also finding the e-mail claim hard to believe. D >> I'd think that such data would be desired to be fed directly intoH >> on-board systems.  Why would anyone want a human entering data that'sI >> already in electronic form?  A real chance of errors being introduced.  >>4 >> Yeah, it's got to be entered once, but not twice. >> > C > Well, sure I just made it up. God forbid anyone should google it. H > Here's a first-hand account published in the Christian Science Monitor  > (presuming they're not lying):  I It's to be hoped that there's not too much on this forum that's made up.  C   I'd not intended that.  It's possible that someone could pass on  H something on which they were misinformed.  I'm sure it's happened to me.  7 > <http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0512/p25s01-usmi.html>  >  > Here's an article on COTS: > / > <http://www.armada.ch/02-5/complete_02-5.pdf>  > G > For secure communications, it's not the application that matters, its H > the way the data is communicated; the level of encryption; the privacyG > of the channel. Military software is not exposed to the public in any F > way what-so-ever. While physical access to *anything* can compromiseD > security, planting a trojan, worm or virus in one of these systemsC > would be as likely as walking out of Fort Knox with a bar of gold  > stuffed down your trousers.  >   G It wasn't the security that bothered me.  I'd think that systems would  G be designed to decrease operator workload.  Loading data directly into  + on-board systems would have been my choice.    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com DFE Ultralights, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 17:38:57 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> ' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft 9 Message-ID: <msmdnZ-f8MSVh0zZnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d@libcom.com>    bob@instantwhip.com wrote: > Main, Kerry wrote:F >> Its just that in order to keep that level of enhanced security, theI >> sheer volume of so many security issues every month means that a great J >> deal of that SysAdmins time has to be spent on reviewing security patchG >> release notes, and then testing and QA'ing applications to make sure K >> there are no issues before releasing these monthly security patches into  >> production. >>I >> If that SysAdmin maintains systems being used by a number of different E >> Dev groups then the problem becomes even worse as they likely have & >> different Apps that they are using. >>H >> If the QA'ing and testing of these mission critical Apps is done by aH >> separate QA/Test group (which is often the case with prod Apps), then" >> their time is impacted as well. >>K >> These are part of the hidden costs you usually do not hear to much about < >> (except from those in Operations and QA/Testing support). > 5 > and that is where the advantages of vms kick in ...  > F > our webserver has been running for over 7 years without a problem or > patch * > or virus ... same for the mailserver ... > G > so that means I can spend time doing other things instead of spending  > timeG > patching and watching every little hacker who comes along or hiring a  > security admin ... > F > OpenVMS is secure out the box pretty much, and once you use a few of > its F > many secuirty features and implement, you really never need to worry > about . > it again unless modifications are needed ... > E > and that saves companies money which means they can pay me more for C > doing more work and providing them an environment that NEVER goes  > down to hacks or viruses ... > ) > YOU CANNOT DO THE SAME ON ANY OTHER OS!  >   C That's a rather strong statement.  One I'm sure is incorrect, even  0 without doing any research or offering examples.   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com DFE Ultralights, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  $ Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 17:41:45 -0400' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> ' Subject: RE: Linux on military aircraft T Message-ID: <FA60F2C4B72A584DBFC6091F6A2B86840182BC67@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----9 > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com]=20  > Sent: August 2, 2006 4:48 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com ) > Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft  >=20 > bob@instantwhip.com wrote:H > > our webserver has been running for over 7 years without a problem or	 > > patch  >=20H > How far is your webserver now ? Are you ever going to be able to bring( > it back ? Must be ver far away by now. >=20H > > OpenVMS is secure out the box pretty much, and once you use a few ofA > > its many secuirty features and implement, you really never=20  > need to worry 6 > > about it again unless modifications are needed ... >=20 >=20F > YEP. VMS an an appliance. There is one problem with this though: theH > internet is not a fixed service, it constantly evolves, and to provideG > modern services, you often need to upgrade software and this is where ' > VMS lags behind the rest pf the pack.  >=20 >=20+ > > YOU CANNOT DO THE SAME ON ANY OTHER OS!  >=20F > The problem is that the other OSs are coming quite close to VMS, and= > unlike VMS, they offer the modern state of the art service.  >=20  G Yep, I remember a ceratain Redmond company who stated the same thing 10 
 years ago.=20    :-)   E Sure every platform gets better with each release. One new feature in A W2003 that was a big promotion item was "an improved command line E interface that would enhance Operations batch type environments." =20   F As I understand it, another really big feature being planned for VistaE (many delays, but I heard early next year for sure) is the ability to 1 assign a few different priv's to different users.   * This is really ground breaking stuff here.   :-)   F However, many keep forgetting that the bar is constantly being raised.= In a week or two, check out the new VMS 8.3 new features doc.    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: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 17:48:53 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> ' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft 9 Message-ID: <59-dnfq2GPbDgUzZnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d@libcom.com>    Karsten Nyblad wrote:  > geletine wrote: I >> I mentioned not long ago that vms should open up, this is another push , >> in my argument towards a open source vms. > K > I doubt VMS will benefit from chancing to an open source model where the  J > license is free.  Linux clearly demonstrates that there is a market for K > OSes under GPL, but that is not the same as GPL being a good license for   > every OS.  > J > VMS is frequently used in environments where downtime must be kept to a K > minimum and were the machines should be up and running 24/7.  Sites with  I > such needs need to be capable of calling somebody when in trouble, and  K > then it does not work that the developer of the part with an error is on  J > a three week holiday.  The company supporting the OS must be capable of F > helping with all show stopper errors on short notice.  Linux is put H > together from hundreds of sources making it very difficult to provide  > such a service.   B The errors in the above is that you try to associate two entirely ; different things as if they were dependent upon each other.   / Using the term 'open source' should be avoided.   > If you mean, free or low cost access to source code, say that.  & If you mean no license fees, say that.  D In either of the above cases, there could still be an HP 'approved' ' distribution, which is fully supported.   H You do mention a problem with Linux.  I'm not commenting on how much of I a problem it is, nor even if it's a problem.  All I'm saying is that VMS  # doesn't need to have such problems.    So, for an example:   ; 1) Say VMS on a new system includes a 'source listings' CD. % 2) Say the OS license fee is nothing. B 3) Say it comes with 3 years of basic support, for a fee of $4000.  F That would be about the same for HP as selling the license for $1000, G and basic support for $750 per year.  Actually a bit better for HP, as  I the $4000 is more, and it's possibly up front.  Since user licenses seem  4 to be no more, such would work.  It's all packaging.   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com DFE Ultralights, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------   Date: 2 Aug 2006 23:05:23 GMT ( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft + Message-ID: <4jcpdiF7dag1U1@individual.net>   = In article <44d10160$0$60778$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>, . 	Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> writes: > Bill Gunshannon wrote:@ >> In article <44d0e88d$0$67262$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk>,1 >> 	Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> writes: L >>> VMS is frequently used in environments where downtime must be kept to a A >>> minimum and were the machines should be up and running 24/7.   >>  L >> Although some here choose to argue it, VMS hardly has the market corneredJ >> on 24/7 operation.  I run both Unix and Windows here and can't rememberL >> the last time the system went down for anything other than a catastrophic? >> hardware failure (which would take out VMS just as easily!).  > A > Hmm.  then they must have kill filtered Andrew, because he has  G > frequently been telling about Sun's solutions for high availability.  J > Tandem is of course also in the high availability business, and even M$  > is trying to sell clusters.  > H > Anyway, VMS has clusters, and that makes it possible to build systems J > with no single point of failure.  It is the clusters that is the reason I > why VMS should be considered for high availability.  VMS should not be  L > considered for high availability because of the hardware it is running on.  H Clusters are nice, but the majority of places still run just one machineG and that includes people who you would think need 24/7 operation.  And, 2 for the most part, they get it.  even without VMS.   > J >> A nice thought, but therer are people who provide that level of serviceI >> for Linux, just like there used to be for BSD. (There may still be for K >> BSD, but as I said above, they have no interest in pushing their product ' >> so the need is not nearly as great.)  > K > Do you really believe that Redhat, Suse, etc. can help if a customer has  5 > a severe problem in, e.g., Firefox or OpenOffice?     F Firefox and OpenOffice are not Linux.  Can VMS Engineering help you ifC you have a problem with Oracle or NetVault or any other third party @ product?  Actually, you will get more help from RedHat for thirdA party products that they ship than you will from HP for any third  party product.  E >                                                    They might have  F > people ready to help customers, but can these people solve problems ' > within a reasonable period of time?     I Can HP?  What makes you think that if you call HP with a problem tomorrow E that they will even think you matter enough to give it consideration?   J >                                      Please note that the many packages ? > are coded in different styles and could be better documented.   I I am sure the thrid party applications on VMS are also coded in different K styles and languages.  After all, they weren't all done by the same person. A And one can only guess at anything beyond the user documentation.    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: 2 Aug 2006 23:12:11 GMT ( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft + Message-ID: <4jcpqbF7dag1U3@individual.net>   = In article <44d10669$0$67260$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk>, . 	Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> writes: > JF Mezei wrote:  >> Karsten Nyblad wrote:K >>> VMS is frequently used in environments where downtime must be kept to a A >>> minimum and were the machines should be up and running 24/7.   >>  J >> And assuming that only VMS is able to do this is wrong. If the militaryK >> can go Linux on military aircraft, it means that Linux is stable enough. F >> If banks are starting to use Linux for a variety of customer facingF >> applications, it means that Linux is good enough. If NASDAQ xan useK >> Widnows and Microsoft web server as customer faciling inftastructure, no I >> matter how much we may all poo-poo Microsoft, it means that it is good  >> enough to do the job. > I > Linux is barely ready of high availability operations.  It is only the  E > latest versions of the Linux kernel that has a cluster file system.   < What percentage of commercial operations today use clusters?   > D > Not all organizations are equally smart when it comes to choosing J > platforms.  I was once asked to implement a 24/7 solution on Windows NT L > 3.51.  Anyone should know that that crab is not suited for 24/7 operation.  ; And yet, more businesses ran on it than on VMS.  Go figure.    > J >> And guess what, if VMS were so great compared to the other, how come it& >> isn't growing be leaps and bounds ? >>  C >> VMS needs to be marketed, VMS need to be ported to a competitive J >> platform and its onwer must show *REAL* commitment to growth of VMS andK >> make it part of a long term growth plan. Not just a couple of statements K >> now and then to quite down the naysayers who feel HP isn't doing enough.  > F > That is not enough.  VMS must also be much more actively developed. I > Linux and Windows are getting better and better, and they are catching   > up on VMS's strongholds.  K Not really, bu then, some of VMS's strongholds are really rather irrelevant  in the real world.   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: 2 Aug 2006 23:18:34 GMT ( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft + Message-ID: <4jcq69F7dag1U4@individual.net>   C In article <1154550334.966488.156460@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,  	bob@instantwhip.com writes: >  > Main, Kerry wrote: >>F >> Its just that in order to keep that level of enhanced security, theI >> sheer volume of so many security issues every month means that a great J >> deal of that SysAdmins time has to be spent on reviewing security patchG >> release notes, and then testing and QA'ing applications to make sure K >> there are no issues before releasing these monthly security patches into  >> production. >>I >> If that SysAdmin maintains systems being used by a number of different E >> Dev groups then the problem becomes even worse as they likely have & >> different Apps that they are using. >>H >> If the QA'ing and testing of these mission critical Apps is done by aH >> separate QA/Test group (which is often the case with prod Apps), then" >> their time is impacted as well. >>K >> These are part of the hidden costs you usually do not hear to much about < >> (except from those in Operations and QA/Testing support). > 5 > and that is where the advantages of vms kick in ...  > F > our webserver has been running for over 7 years without a problem or > patch * > or virus ... same for the mailserver ... > G > so that means I can spend time doing other things instead of spending  > timeG > patching and watching every little hacker who comes along or hiring a  > security admin ... > F > OpenVMS is secure out the box pretty much, and once you use a few of > its F > many secuirty features and implement, you really never need to worry > about . > it again unless modifications are needed ... > E > and that saves companies money which means they can pay me more for C > doing more work and providing them an environment that NEVER goes  > down to hacks or viruses ... > ) > YOU CANNOT DO THE SAME ON ANY OTHER OS!   I Just keep living in your private dream world, Bob.  I do it all the time. I The only time I have touched our mailserver in the last 10 years has been J to add more disk space as email become more and more prevalent and my userK base grows.  As for the Web server, I have even stopped looking at the logs H as it is just too boring for words.  And neither of them is on VMS.  YouJ really need to get over this notion that no other OS can get the job done.   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: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 00:32:44 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> ' Subject: Re: Linux on military aircraft 9 Message-ID: <h_KdnUQZi6aY5kzZnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@libcom.com>    Bill Gunshannon wrote:? > In article <44d10669$0$67260$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk>, 0 > 	Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> writes: >> JF Mezei wrote: >>> Karsten Nyblad wrote: L >>>> VMS is frequently used in environments where downtime must be kept to aB >>>> minimum and were the machines should be up and running 24/7. K >>> And assuming that only VMS is able to do this is wrong. If the military L >>> can go Linux on military aircraft, it means that Linux is stable enough.G >>> If banks are starting to use Linux for a variety of customer facing G >>> applications, it means that Linux is good enough. If NASDAQ xan use L >>> Widnows and Microsoft web server as customer faciling inftastructure, noJ >>> matter how much we may all poo-poo Microsoft, it means that it is good >>> enough to do the job. J >> Linux is barely ready of high availability operations.  It is only the F >> latest versions of the Linux kernel that has a cluster file system. > > > What percentage of commercial operations today use clusters? > E >> Not all organizations are equally smart when it comes to choosing  K >> platforms.  I was once asked to implement a 24/7 solution on Windows NT  M >> 3.51.  Anyone should know that that crab is not suited for 24/7 operation.  > = > And yet, more businesses ran on it than on VMS.  Go figure.  > K >>> And guess what, if VMS were so great compared to the other, how come it ' >>> isn't growing be leaps and bounds ?  >>> D >>> VMS needs to be marketed, VMS need to be ported to a competitiveK >>> platform and its onwer must show *REAL* commitment to growth of VMS and L >>> make it part of a long term growth plan. Not just a couple of statementsL >>> now and then to quite down the naysayers who feel HP isn't doing enough.G >> That is not enough.  VMS must also be much more actively developed.  J >> Linux and Windows are getting better and better, and they are catching  >> up on VMS's strongholds.  > M > Not really, bu then, some of VMS's strongholds are really rather irrelevant  > in the real world. >  > bill >   H You keep saying that many of us just don't understand education.  I can  accept that.  F Then you start saying what business needs.  What do you base this on? + Some of us are close to the business world.   H There are many more users of computers today than in the past.  Many of E them are going to hang themselves over the edge of a cliff and don't  F even know it.  I don't think you can judge serious business users who = are aware of some of the dangers based upon the casual users.   H There are real world businesses who are serious about their operations, F whether or not they're using VMS.  There are some of us who feel that F VMS would give an advantage to some of these users, whether they know 1 it, or will acknowledge it, or just aren't aware.   G Disasters occur to others, until it's your turn.  It may never be your  % turn, but can you really count on it?    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com DFE Ultralights, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 23:55:18 GMT 1 From: Keith Parris <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> D Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Alpha still rule roost in Intel fabs (2005-09)1 Message-ID: <GXaAg.1483$lo.1195@news.cpqcorp.net>    Neil Rieck wrote: ? > I wonder if OpenVMS on Alpha is used to manufacture Itaniums?   G I had the pleasure of working at an Intel site in 2003 on a consulting  G assignment and they were most definitely using OpenVMS on Alpha to run  C the fab, having completed a successful migration from VAX to Alpha.    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 00:03:00 GMT 1 From: Keith Parris <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> D Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Alpha still rule roost in Intel fabs (2005-09)0 Message-ID: <U2bAg.1485$Y9.529@news.cpqcorp.net>   JF Mezei wrote: H > What would be more interesting to know vis-a-vis Intel's perception ofD > the future of Itanium is the state of Intel's plans for the futureN > i.e. are they planning on replacing VMS on Alpha systems with VMS on Itanium
 > systems.  G I can't speak for Intel, but having already chosen to migrate from VAX  G to Alpha, and since VMS is now available on Intel's own Itanium chips,  F and that new Alpha systems will soon no longer be sold, and given the I ease of migration from Alpha to Itanium (much easier than VAX-to-Alpha),  C I expect VMS on Itanium would be the most logical direction moving  I forward, should their existing Alpha systems run out of capacity at some   point in the future.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 16:51:59 -0700 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> D Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Alpha still rule roost in Intel fabs (2005-09)) Message-ID: <op.tdokkxd6zgicya@hyrrokkin>   3 On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 16:55:18 -0700, Keith Parris  =   % <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:    > Neil Rieck wrote: @ >> I wonder if OpenVMS on Alpha is used to manufacture Itaniums? > I > I had the pleasure of working at an Intel site in 2003 on a consulting=    =   I > assignment and they were most definitely using OpenVMS on Alpha to run=    =   E > the fab, having completed a successful migration from VAX to Alpha.   @ Do you recall what the source language of their application was?   ------------------------------  $ Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 13:57:38 -0400' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> 2 Subject: RE: strange problem: satellite won't bootT Message-ID: <FA60F2C4B72A584DBFC6091F6A2B86840182BB33@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----3 > From: Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply=20 - > [mailto:helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de]=20  > Sent: August 2, 2006 10:51 AM  > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com 4 > Subject: Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot >=20F > In article <eaqdr9$5sg$1@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de7 > (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:=20  >=20A > > Today, for the first time since then, I wanted to boot the=20  > satellite.D > > (It hadn't been booted since a few days before the problem above? > > occurured.)  It does a MOP boot.  This doesn't work.  It=20  > keeps trying.=20= > > The LAN is OK as far as I can tell (LEDs flashing when=20  > expected etc).=20 F > > The console settings (BOOTDEF_DEV etc) on the satellite are OK.=20 >=20% > The error message on the console is  >=20. >    ..file open failed for bootp/ewa0.0.0.4.1 >=20  H Nothing to do directly with this issue, but brings back a semi-humourous story:  C As part of a previous life time, a call came into the support group @ saying that the "computer set of lights" was not working .. TheyD scratched their heads thinking about various led display issues etc.  G It was only after a call to the Customer to clarify what lights on what C computer were not working when it was discovered that what the Cust G originally reported, but was mis-entered by the Compaq CRR at the time, 9 was "one of their computer satellites" was not working ..    :-)   ( Back to the regular scheduled program ..   Regards   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax: 613-591-4477  kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20  4 OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.   ------------------------------  * Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 17:54:45 +0000 (UTC)P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)2 Subject: Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot$ Message-ID: <eaqot5$r4f$1@online.de>  @ In article <eaqgsm$lhb$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>, "R.A.Omond"& <Roy.Omond@BlueBubble.UK.Com> writes:   I > >>Today, for the first time since then, I wanted to boot the satellite. D > >>(It hadn't been booted since a few days before the problem aboveK > >>occurured.)  It does a MOP boot.  This doesn't work.  It keeps trying.  J > >>The LAN is OK as far as I can tell (LEDs flashing when expected etc). D > >>The console settings (BOOTDEF_DEV etc) on the satellite are OK.  > >  > > ' > > The error message on the console is  > > 0 > >    ..file open failed for bootp/ewa0.0.0.4.1 > = > I seem to remember you asking about putting a switch in the < > LAN topology ... have you done that ?  If so, what kind of > switch is it ?  H No, haven't done that yet, no hardware work before holidays.  :-)  It's  just a hub.    ------------------------------  * Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 17:58:47 +0000 (UTC)P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)2 Subject: Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot$ Message-ID: <eaqp4n$r4f$2@online.de>  H In article <1154535811.792693.186820@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>, "Ian Miller" <ijm@uk2.net> writes:   G > some Cisco switches are known to drop ethernet frames that are not IP  > when they are busy :-(  0 It's just a hub I've been using for a while now.   ------------------------------  * Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 18:00:38 +0000 (UTC)P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)2 Subject: Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot$ Message-ID: <eaqp86$r4f$4@online.de>  @ In article <eaqgsm$lhb$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>, "R.A.Omond"& <Roy.Omond@BlueBubble.UK.Com> writes:   = > I seem to remember you asking about putting a switch in the < > LAN topology ... have you done that ?  If so, what kind of > switch is it ?  H Since I needed the satellite, I bit the bullet and did a cluster reboot.F (Rebooting the boot server might have been enough, but since at least C one of the others also had a dirty reboot, I decided to reboot the  	 cluster.)    Everything works fine now.  :-|    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 18:49:20 GMT , From: Hoff Hoffman <hoff-remove-this@hp.com>2 Subject: Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot1 Message-ID: <Qs6Ag.1458$qF7.429@news.cpqcorp.net>   / Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:  > my main user disk I > (which also contains SYSUAF etc) had gone into mount verification (the  . > shadow set, not individual members of it)...  E    This looks like either a shadowing problem, or a disk hardware or  E connectivity problem.  If the disks are served, this could also be a   network.  I > I'd like to know what caused this problem---which I haven't seen in the 9 > 5 years or so I've had the cluster in this or a similar K > configuration---but it was more important to get it back up than to do a   > post-mortem.  D    The usual approach here is to force crashes, as after-the-reboot ' troubleshooting is difficult.  At best.   G > Today, for the first time since then, I wanted to boot the satellite. B > (It hadn't been booted since a few days before the problem aboveI > occurured.)  It does a MOP boot.  This doesn't work.  It keeps trying.  H > The LAN is OK as far as I can tell (LEDs flashing when expected etc). B > The console settings (BOOTDEF_DEV etc) on the satellite are OK.   F    Anything on the boot server console?  Are the MOP requests getting  through?  > > I don't know if the second problem is a result of the first.  G    The two could be related -- networking problems -- or the two could  ! be distinct and isolated changes.   H > I've never had any MOP problems before.  Is there any way to find out I > what the problem is?  Apparently, G is ignoring the boot requests from  K > the satellite.  Of course, the directory tree for the satellite is still   > on disk etc.  C    If G is getting the download requests, it will generally try to  F service them until and unless some other host beats G to the service. B (And that produces a line open error service failure or some such : message, when some other node was faster on the download.)  G > Is there some way, from any of the boot servers, to see if these MOP  G > requests are making it as far as the other nodes on the LAN?  If so,  ( > what could make the ALPHA ignore them?  I    The MOP messages usually pop out on an appropriately-enabled operator  G terminal by default, in my experience.  (I know I always saw them, and  I back when I was working in the Mill, I saw gazillions -- every time some  I gizmo anywhere in the building did a MOP request, every console chirped.  I   Well, ever console chirped up until I put a LANbridge in and segmented  E the local LAN and its satellites off from the rest of the activities  E within the building.  With one of the networking groups working just  D next door, we saw gazillions of MOP requests.  Worse, after a power E failure recovery, we could and would see MOP storms.)  If you're not  I seeing the messages and you're enabled as an all-classes operator, check  ? your DECnet console settings, and see if the default messaging  9 connection over into OPCOM has been modified or disabled.    	--   D    As others have commented, I would not expect a bootp error to be F generated for a MOP operation, BTW.  Is it possible that some console B configuration is mis-set within the console enviromment, or is it / possible that some NVRAM or battery has failed?    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 14:37:15 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 2 Subject: Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot, Message-ID: <44D0F0D7.EE67EAFB@teksavvy.com>  / Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: % > The error message on the console is  > . >    ..file open failed for bootp/ewa0.0.0.4.1  0 Which console ? The satellite or the boot node ?  G Do the boot nodes issue any opcome message to signal they've received a $ MOP request and will respond to it ?  E In the boot node's LANCP (or NCP) database, does the satellite node's ' config point to an exsiting boot file ? > (aka: is it possible that the boot node is configured to serveB "sys$system:chocolate.exe" to the satelite node, but chocolate.exe doesn't exist ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 15:54:57 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 2 Subject: Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot, Message-ID: <44D10309.BB46303C@teksavvy.com>   Hoff Hoffman wrote: E >    As others have commented, I would not expect a bootp error to be % > generated for a MOP operation, BTW.   J Have VAXes ever been able to issue bootp requests at the >>> prompt ??????  E Does LANCP on alpha have the ability to handle bootp requests ? or is - that purely a TCPIP services responsability ?   C Since he had disk problems, is it possible that LANCP no longer had H access to the disk on which the boot file aas located and hence couldn't respond to the MOP request ?  6 Would there be log files showing such error messages ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 16:35:11 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 2 Subject: Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot, Message-ID: <44D10C75.514236B7@teksavvy.com>  G Philip, since you don't use DECNET, did you try to go into LANCP of the F boot node to ensure the satellite node ws properly configured and that" the service was properly enabled ?  H If you temporarily lost access to some disks, perhaps LANCP got disabled3 ? (which would explain why a revboot fixed things).    ------------------------------   Date: 2 Aug 2006 16:07:57 -0500 ; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) 2 Subject: Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot3 Message-ID: <K1hyS4EnYofc@eisner.encompasserve.org>   w In article <eaqp6e$r4f$3@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes: D > In article <1154540149.070991.189590@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,4 > "Volker Halle" <volker_halle@hotmail.com> writes:  >  >> Phillip,  >>  1 >> >    ..file open failed for bootp/ewa0.0.0.4.1  >>  I >> This does not look like an error messages associated with MOP boot. Is + >> the satellite trying to boot via BOOTP ?  > A > That's the error message.  I might not have all the terminology B > straight, but it's the standard setup for a LAVC without DECnet.  >    DECnet is irrelavent since MOP and DECnet are different LAN
    protocols.    ------------------------------   Date: 2 Aug 2006 16:12:38 -0500 ; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) 2 Subject: Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot3 Message-ID: <owM6MJIVSX5A@eisner.encompasserve.org>   \ In article <44D10309.BB46303C@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: > Hoff Hoffman wrote: F >>    As others have commented, I would not expect a bootp error to be& >> generated for a MOP operation, BTW. > L > Have VAXes ever been able to issue bootp requests at the >>> prompt ??????  F    I've never seen a VAX with any kind of IP protocol in its boot ROM.D    bootp is an IP application.  By bootp "request" I assume you meanD    a client trying to boot from a server.  Most VAXen aren't servingD    anything at the >>> prompt, after the VAX-11 series VAXen tend to(    halt when you request the >>> prompt.   G > Does LANCP on alpha have the ability to handle bootp requests ? or is / > that purely a TCPIP services responsability ?   E    LANCP is a separate protocol from IP.  bootp runs over UDP/IP, not 
    TCP/IP.  E > Since he had disk problems, is it possible that LANCP no longer had J > access to the disk on which the boot file aas located and hence couldn't > respond to the MOP request ?  4    Yep.  But why would that look like a bootp error?   8 > Would there be log files showing such error messages ?  2    Depends on how the system admin set up logging.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 22:26:11 GMT , From: Hoff Hoffman <hoff-remove-this@hp.com>2 Subject: Re: strange problem: satellite won't boot0 Message-ID: <7E9Ag.1479$On.456@news.cpqcorp.net>   Bob Koehler wrote:y > In article <eaqp6e$r4f$3@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:   B >> That's the error message.  I might not have all the terminologyC >> straight, but it's the standard setup for a LAVC without DECnet.  > @ >    DECnet is irrelavent since MOP and DECnet are different LAN >    protocols.   E    So you're really booting cluster satellite nodes over bootp/tftp?  I Cool.  I had no idea that even worked (for cluster satellite bootstraps)  I prior to the work that was recently added into OpenVMS in support of the  @ EFI console (and its use of bootp/tftp) required by OpenVMS I64 C satellites (and InfoServer client bootstraps) on Integrity servers.   H    I'd tend to expect to see the SRM console set to OpenVMS, and to see D the satellite bootstraps to use MOP.  SCS-based clusters have never E operated over DECnet and have never needed DECnet, but clusters have  H long used MOP (whether part of DECnet, or part of LANCP) to perform the A satellite bootstraps, and (prior to V6.2) for cluster management  0 purposes and particularly tools such as MONITOR.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 16:12:28 -0400 & From: Thomas Wirt <twnews@kittles.com>/ Subject: Sub directory tree size program needed E Message-ID: <e260a$44d1072e$4367aba2$31917@msgid.meganewsservers.com>   I Does anyone know of any DCL or other freeware program that will find and  I show the total sub directory tree size for all of the directories in the  F current directory (in VMS of course).  I need a tool to help me track E down where all of my disk space is being consumed on some of my more  G cluttered disks.  If I must I feel pretty confident that I could write  H something in DCL in an hour or 2, but I would rather use something that + is already written than start from scratch.    TIA    Thomas Wirt  Operations Manager Kittle's Home Furnishings    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 16:22:13 -0400 # From: sol gongola <sol@adldata.com> 3 Subject: Re: Sub directory tree size program needed 0 Message-ID: <1154550222.458427@nntp.acecape.com>   Thomas Wirt wrote:K > Does anyone know of any DCL or other freeware program that will find and  K > show the total sub directory tree size for all of the directories in the  H > current directory (in VMS of course).  I need a tool to help me track G > down where all of my disk space is being consumed on some of my more  I > cluttered disks.  If I must I feel pretty confident that I could write  J > something in DCL in an hour or 2, but I would rather use something that - > is already written than start from scratch.  >  > TIA  > 
 > Thomas Wirt  > Operations Manager > Kittle's Home Furnishings      dir [...]/total    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 16:32:36 -0400 & From: Thomas Wirt <twnews@kittles.com>3 Subject: Re: Sub directory tree size program needed * Message-ID: <44D10BE4.4020104@kittles.com>   sol gongola wrote:   > Thomas Wirt wrote: > H >> Does anyone know of any DCL or other freeware program that will find I >> and show the total sub directory tree size for all of the directories  J >> in the current directory (in VMS of course).  I need a tool to help me I >> track down where all of my disk space is being consumed on some of my  I >> more cluttered disks.  If I must I feel pretty confident that I could  B >> write something in DCL in an hour or 2, but I would rather use = >> something that is already written than start from scratch.  >> >> TIA >> >> Thomas Wirt >> Operations Manager  >> Kittle's Home Furnishings >  >  >  dir [...]/totalG I appreciate the thought, but this shows the total for every directory  @ in the whole tree.  I want just the grand total for each of the I directories in the current directory.  This is easy enough to do for one  F dir with "dir/siz/grand [.xxx...]", but is very tedious to do by hand G for 700 directories.  I know, I should not have 700 directories in one  H place, but one can not always correct the mistakes of ones predecessors.   Thomas Wirt    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 20:48:14 GMT + From: Ryan Moore <rmoore@rmoore.dyndns.org> 3 Subject: Re: Sub directory tree size program needed < Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608021347320.32024@jaipur.local>   How about this:   8 $! How many blocks are in each top-level directory tree? $! $ set default 'p1  $!
 $ dirloop: $	d = f$search("*.dir")  $	if d .eqs. "" then goto done $	n = f$parse(d,,,"NAME") ' $	if n .eqs. "000000" then goto dirloop  $	cdir = p1 - "]" + ".''n'...]" & $	write sys$output "Directory ''cdir'"! $	directoryx/size=all/grand 'cdir  $ goto dirloop $! $ done:  $ exit    & On Wed, 2 Aug 2006, Thomas Wirt wrote:P > I appreciate the thought, but this shows the total for every directory in the N > whole tree.  I want just the grand total for each of the directories in the P > current directory.  This is easy enough to do for one dir with "dir/siz/grand P > [.xxx...]", but is very tedious to do by hand for 700 directories.  I know, I O > should not have 700 directories in one place, but one can not always correct  $ > the mistakes of ones predecessors.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 16:57:04 -0400 & From: Thomas Wirt <twnews@kittles.com>3 Subject: Re: Sub directory tree size program needed * Message-ID: <44D111A0.5040601@kittles.com>   Ryan Moore wrote:    > How about this:  > : > $! How many blocks are in each top-level directory tree? > $! > $ set default 'p1  > $! > $ dirloop: > $    d = f$search("*.dir")# > $    if d .eqs. "" then goto done  > $    n = f$parse(d,,,"NAME"), > $    if n .eqs. "000000" then goto dirloop$ > $    cdir = p1 - "]" + ".''n'...]"+ > $    write sys$output "Directory ''cdir'" & > $    directoryx/size=all/grand 'cdir > $ goto dirloop > $!	 > $ done:  > $ exit0 This is exactly what I was looking for.  Thanks!   --     Thomas Wirt  Operations Manager, IS Dept. Kittle's Home Furnishings  Indianapolis, IN   ------------------------------  * Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 21:13:04 +0000 (UTC). From: klewis@LUMINA.MITRE.ORG (Keith A. Lewis)3 Subject: Re: Sub directory tree size program needed . Message-ID: <ear4h0$c50$2@newslocal.mitre.org>   Thomas Wirt <twnews@kittles.com> writes in article <e260a$44d1072e$4367aba2$31917@msgid.meganewsservers.com> dated Wed, 02 Aug 2006 16:12:28 -0400: J >Does anyone know of any DCL or other freeware program that will find and J >show the total sub directory tree size for all of the directories in the G >current directory (in VMS of course).  I need a tool to help me track  F >down where all of my disk space is being consumed on some of my more H >cluttered disks.  If I must I feel pretty confident that I could write I >something in DCL in an hour or 2, but I would rather use something that  , >is already written than start from scratch.  6 $! /* SPACE.COM Keith Lewis  2-OCT-1997 14:06:51.08 */ $!L $! This procedure does a command for each subdirectory.  The default command6 $! can be overridden by making it the first parameter. $! $ command := dir/size=all/grand " $ if p1 .nes. "" then command = p1 $! $loop: $ subfile = f$search("*.dir;0")  $ if subfile .eqs. "" then exit & $ sub = f$parse(subfile, , , "NAME", )7 $ write sys$output "Checking files under ''subfile'..."  $ command [.'sub'...]  $ write sys$output ""  $ write sys$output ""  $ goto loop   0 --Keith Lewis              klewis {at} mitre.org> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.   ------------------------------  * Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 16:28:56 -0500 (CDT)* From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)3 Subject: Re: Sub directory tree size program needed 2 Message-ID: <06080216285666_20200290@antinode.org>  + From: Ryan Moore <rmoore@rmoore.dyndns.org>    > [...]  > $	d = f$search("*.dir")  > [...]   . From: klewis@LUMINA.MITRE.ORG (Keith A. Lewis)   > [...] ! > $ subfile = f$search("*.dir;0")  > [...]     D    Note that a legitimate (functional) directory is always ";1", andD will pass a "f$file_attributes( dir_spec, "DIRECTORY")" test.  WhileH they won't occur normally, it's easy to create non-directory files which  will match "*.dir" or "*.dir;0".  E    And we all seem to be assuming an ODS2 file system or "SET PROCESS " /CASE_LOOKUP = BLIND".  Of course:  E        HP strongly recommends that you use caution when enabling case %        sensitivity in your processes.   H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  3    Steven M. Schweda               sms@antinode-org 4    382 South Warwick Street        (+1) 651-699-9818    Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 17:44:06 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 3 Subject: Re: Sub directory tree size program needed , Message-ID: <44D11C98.28B82B4B@teksavvy.com>   Thomas Wirt wrote: > >  dir [...]/totalH > I appreciate the thought, but this shows the total for every directoryA > in the whole tree.  I want just the grand total for each of the ( > directories in the current directory.     5 Well if you want the grand total only, why not use :  * DIR/SIZE/GRAND_TOTAL [...]*.*;*     ??????    G Also, you may wish to use /SIZE=ALL so that it uses the ALLocated space G instead of the used space. (someone could allocate a 100,000 block file F and only hage one line of text in it. In terms of disk management, you# want to know how much is allocated.     D Anothert thing to consider is to enable disk quotas. You can let theC system calculate how much disk space each user is using on a disk.    ! MC DISKQUOTA  and then DISQ> HELP    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 22:20:15 GMT , From: Hoff Hoffman <hoff-remove-this@hp.com>3 Subject: Re: Sub directory tree size program needed 0 Message-ID: <zy9Ag.1478$Dn.177@news.cpqcorp.net>  > If you wanted to be sneaky, use a resource identifier for the H directories involved, and set up quotas to charge against it/them, then L set the quotas to a value larger than the disk size.  Then watch the quotas.  I As for your request for a tool, it's about ten lines of DCL for the core  H loop, and rather more to customize it for your particular requirements. E   700 directories?  Yuck.  That's heading toward a second-level loop  : that either reads in the list, or that scans for whatever < characteristics are used to identify one of the directories.  B Off the top, the following pseudo-DCL is what the loop looks like:  	 $ alq = 0  $ fn = f$search(wildcard)  $ if fn .eqs. "" then goto done  $loop: $ falq = f$file(fn,"ALQ")  $ alq = alq + falq $ fn = f$search(wildcard)  $ if fn .nes. "" then goto loop  $done:' $ write sys$output "allocation: ''alq'"  $ exit  F Any and all politics and policies to the contrary aside...  The other = question is around disk usage and disk structure and storage  G organizations.  Just because somebody made a decision eons ago doesn't  I mean you can't incrementally improve the storage configuration.  Whether  G re-organizing directories, upgrading to newer disks -- massive efforts  E and optimizations to fit everything on a (now ancient) 4GB disk only  I make sense in very limited contexts, for instance, and particularly only  , in those where disk upgrades are infeasible.   ------------------------------   Date: 2 Aug 2006 13:37:24 -0700  From: bob@instantwhip.com 7 Subject: The cost of OpenVMS security vs securing linux B Message-ID: <1154551044.501017.26540@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>   Main, Kerry wrote:  E > Its just that in order to keep that level of enhanced security, the H > sheer volume of so many security issues every month means that a greatI > deal of that SysAdmins time has to be spent on reviewing security patch F > release notes, and then testing and QA'ing applications to make sureJ > there are no issues before releasing these monthly security patches into
 > production.     H > If that SysAdmin maintains systems being used by a number of differentD > Dev groups then the problem becomes even worse as they likely have% > different Apps that they are using.     G > If the QA'ing and testing of these mission critical Apps is done by a G > separate QA/Test group (which is often the case with prod Apps), then ! > their time is impacted as well.     J > These are part of the hidden costs you usually do not hear to much about; > (except from those in Operations and QA/Testing support).       3 and that is where the advantages of vms kick in ...   D our webserver has been running for over 7 years without a problem or patch ( or virus ... same for the mailserver ...    E so that means I can spend time doing other things instead of spending  timeE patching and watching every little hacker who comes along or hiring a  security admin ...    D OpenVMS is secure out the box pretty much, and once you use a few of its D many secuirty features and implement, you really never need to worry about , it again unless modifications are needed ...    C and that saves companies money which means they can pay me more for A doing more work and providing them an environment that NEVER goes  down to hacks or viruses ...    ' YOU CANNOT DO THE SAME ON ANY OTHER OS!    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.428 ************************