1 INFO-VAX	Sun, 28 May 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 295       Contents: Re: 2 Nameservers on 1 node  Re: 2 Nameservers on 1 node  Re: 2 Nameservers on 1 node $ Re: Compaq board member sent to jail! Re: Educating potential VMS users P Re: Educating potential VMS users (was: Re: Unix runs faster, maybe  (was: Re: EP Re: Educating potential VMS users (was: Re: Unix runs faster, maybe (was: Re: EdP Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says Inqu* So how representative is this experience ?D Re: Unix runs faster, maybe (was: Re: Educating potential VMS users)# VMS, XDM, and remote connections...  [Announce] FreeVMS 0.2.10   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 28 May 2006 10:14:49 -02006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)$ Subject: Re: 2 Nameservers on 1 node, Message-ID: <44797819$1@news.langstoeger.at>  \ In article <e5b4pc.8h.1@usenet.bachner.priv.at>, Hans Bachner <Hans@Bachner.priv.at> writes:8 >Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER <peter@langstoeger.at> wrote: > C >> I have 2 nameservers in my network. One for the outside/Internet D >> (external IP addresses, few nodes, non recursive) and one for theI >> inside/Intranet (RFC1918 addresses, more nodes, recursive). And due to G >> server consolidation I'd like to run them on the same Alpha. Problem  >> is the same domain name.  >>    >> Has anyone done this already?A >> What problems should I expect (except eventually unsupported)?  > I >I did not try to run two instances of the DNS server on a single node -  K >maybe usage of locks or something else will stp you already at this point.   L I don't think so. I only don't know, how to run/autostart (TCPIP or TCPware)0 2 DNS servers on 1 node. I still need to try ;-)  K >If not, you need to persuade one instance (serving the external names) to  I >listen on a different port, and forward port 53 on the firewall to this   >port on your Alpha.  ) This, or BIND9 (if the rumors are right).   J >Or use a big enough ALpha to run two Galaxy instances, and a name server  >in each of them :-)   Sorry, DS10 only.    --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------    Date: 28 May 2006 10:10:20 -02006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)$ Subject: Re: 2 Nameservers on 1 node, Message-ID: <4479770c$1@news.langstoeger.at>  \ In article <4478C4FF.DCAC1E1F@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: >Tom LINDEN wrote:' >> but why do you need two DNS servers?  > " >Say your domain is chocolate.com. > H >When I, from the internet, request translation of www.chocolate.com , I+ >am expected to get an internet IP address. C >But when a users on the intranet requests www.chocolate.com, he is 3 >expecting to get an intranet IP address (10.*.*.*)  > I >I had been told one that Bind 9 had that capability (providing different > >zone files based on IP of the requestor). But Bind 8 doesn't.  K This one is still interesting. But I'm not convinced yet. (I need to RTFM). ? If I can do it with one BIND9 server, then it would be perfect.    >Doesn't Alpha have Bind 9 ?  E Only on TCPIP, not on TCPware (promised for next version, which could ? be if you conclude from the last version in a couple of years).   I >To Phillip: the simplest solution is to outsource your public DNS server F >to an outside shop. This way, the DNS server you have in-house servesH >only the intranet and need not be concerned about serving requests from	 >the net.   . Who's Phillip? You can call me EPLAN or Peter.D And I won't outsource my Prim DNS server(s). (My ISP does my SecDNS)   --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 17:18:11 GMT @ From: "Schroeder, AJ" <aaron.schroeder-no-spam@tmscomputers.com>$ Subject: Re: 2 Nameservers on 1 node6 Message-ID: <nXkeg.7559$GM.6394@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com>  D "Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER" <peter@langstoeger.at> wrote in message & news:44784900$1@news.langstoeger.at...K >I have 2 nameservers in my network. One for the outside/Internet (external I > IP addresses, few nodes, non recursive) and one for the inside/Intranet @ > (RFC1918 addresses, more nodes, recursive). And due to server  > consolidation J > I'd like to run them on the same Alpha. Problem is the same domain name. >  > Has anyone done this already? @ > What problems should I expect (except eventually unsupported)?< > Do I need BIND9 (means TCPIP instead of TCPware) for this? >  > TIA  >  > --   > Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER ' > Network and OpenVMS system specialist  > E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atH > A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   Peter,  I BIND9 implemented a feature called "views" which basically allows you to  I have two separate versions of a zone running on the same machine. I have  M done this successfully on several BIND9 implementations and setting it up is   a snap!   L Here is a tutorial on how to set it up (it is written for *nix, but you can  fill in the blanks):  G http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/networking/news/views_0501.html    Hope that helps,  
 AJ Schroeder     ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 15:28:14 +0200 / From: Paul Sture <paul.sture.nospam@hispeed.ch> - Subject: Re: Compaq board member sent to jail ; Message-ID: <adbd7$4479a56f$50db5015$25460@news.hispeed.ch>    etmsreec@yahoo.co.uk wrote: $ > How long did he get sent down for? >   H Sentencing is planned for September 11; meanwhile Lay is out on bail of  $5 million.   . For a discussion of the likely sentences, see:  & http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/enron_trial   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 07:19:40 -0400 ) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> * Subject: Re: Educating potential VMS users5 Message-ID: <gHfeg.30$EF1.2453@news20.bellglobal.com>   / "Tom LINDEN" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message  # news:op.s98g341mlvpiaf@hyrrokkin... @ On Sat, 27 May 2006 14:16:37 -0700, <davidc@montagar.com> wrote:  B >Do They Have "Engineering a Compiler, VAX-11 Code Generation and  >Optimization" >Also from Digital Press?   ] http://www.bookfinder.com/search/?ac=sl&st=sl&qi=LzZkQCtQK.4WnFFTyvCP5maruas_5487287889_2:9:7   K (sometimes it is better to search for a shorter string like "Engineering a  J Compiler" then pick from a list of returns; in this instance they had the ( book listed as VAX-II instead of VAX-11)  
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada.8 http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html9 http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/openvms_demos.html    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 15:17:47 +0200 / From: Paul Sture <paul.sture.nospam@hispeed.ch> Y Subject: Re: Educating potential VMS users (was: Re: Unix runs faster, maybe  (was: Re: E : Message-ID: <f33d$4479a2fc$50db5015$24773@news.hispeed.ch>   Bob Harris wrote: 5 > In article <Qur1LzKESdrf@eisner.encompasserve.org>, ? >  koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:  >  > D >>In article <Koldg.16$me1.1074@news.uswest.net>, "Michael D. Ober" ( >><obermd.@.alum.mit.edu.nospam> writes: >>M >>>That and all the bashing of every other OS in use on the planet.  It's one E >>>thing to compare different OS's, but what frequently passes for OS 0 >>>comparison here reminds me of a religous war. >>D >>   OS is not the only kind of software that tends to inspire "ture >>   believers". >  > D > Of course not.  Lets start a My Editor is Better than Yours War!   > Yea!!!!  :-) >  >   B Of course if we _really_ want a religious war about software, the 9 Vatican is running Apache on Solaris for their webserver.   A http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://www.vatican.va    ;-)   E (According to reports here back in 1999, they were using Tru64 then.)    ------------------------------    Date: 28 May 2006 06:40:04 +01002 From: "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow>Y Subject: Re: Educating potential VMS users (was: Re: Unix runs faster, maybe (was: Re: Ed ? Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-rDkBQNUqJxoh@dave2_os2.home.ours>   7 On Sat, 27 May 2006 01:01:15 UTC, "Richard B. Gilbert"   <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote:    > Bob Harris wrote:  > 7 > > In article <Qur1LzKESdrf@eisner.encompasserve.org>, A > >  koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:  > >  > > F > >>In article <Koldg.16$me1.1074@news.uswest.net>, "Michael D. Ober" * > >><obermd.@.alum.mit.edu.nospam> writes: > >>O > >>>That and all the bashing of every other OS in use on the planet.  It's one G > >>>thing to compare different OS's, but what frequently passes for OS 2 > >>>comparison here reminds me of a religous war. > >>F > >>   OS is not the only kind of software that tends to inspire "ture > >>   believers". > >  > > F > > Of course not.  Lets start a My Editor is Better than Yours War!   > > Yea!!!!  :-) > >  > > 6 > >                                         Bob Harris >  > EDT forever!!!!  ;-)   I thought Bob was joking :-)    A SEDT rocks... Thanks Anker - I'm almost ready for an IA64 port...    --   Cheers - Dave W.   ------------------------------    Date: 28 May 2006 07:28:54 +01002 From: "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow>Y Subject: Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other cpus on the market says Inqu ? Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-oghpvGdS13Vt@dave2_os2.home.ours>   F On Sat, 27 May 2006 14:16:51 UTC, "Tom LINDEN" <tom@kednos.com> wrote:  L > On Sat, 27 May 2006 06:38:57 -0700, Main, Kerry <Kerry.Main@hp.com> wrote: >  > >  > >  > >> -----Original Message----- B > >> From: Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER [mailto:peter@langstoeger.at] > >> Sent: May 24, 2006 8:28 PM  > >> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComA > >> Subject: Re: OT: Woodcrest (X86-64) will ouperform all other & > >> cpus on the market says Inquirer. > >>; > >> In article <kC2dg.1034$D77.765@news.cpqcorp.net>, Hoff . > >> Hoffman <hoff-remove-this@hp.com> writes:@ > >> >                                                   (I know > >> I'm working to : > >> >make OpenVMS I64 an attractive target, if and when a > >> customer needs to: > >> >move from an OpenVMS VAX or an OpenVMS Alpha system. > >>< > >> Needs to move away is clear as there is no newer/bigger > >> system than a Marvel.= > >> When to move away is unclear as there is still no Itanic  > >> application for us.B > >> Not even Oracle (now planned for later this year, was planned > >> for last year) > > >> despite the application itself which needs Oracle Classic > >> (9?) beside/beneath. ? > >> I hope we can wait that long for the Itanic version, but I  > >> see Solaris coming. > >>< > >> And as our application still doesn't run with the TCPIP > >> scalable kernel, the ? > >> end of support for V7.3-2 at the end of this year is a big  > >> road block, too!  > >> > > L > > Peter .. As can be seen from the following chart, V7.3-2 will have priorL > > version support (PVS) until at least 2011 and after that, with a minimum  > > 24 month notice requirement. > > ? > > http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/openvms_supportchart.html  > > ( > > (web site describes what PVS offers) > >  > > Regards  > >  > D > I find it interesting that VAX 5.5-2 and 6.2 have PVS sustaining  
 > engineering M > thru 2011.  From which one must conclude that there are still a number of    > VAXen L > that never went to Alpha.  Question is, will they go to IA64?  We have oneN > large customer just now moving from VAX to Alpha, and of course, they have   > no8 > interest in Itanium since there is no PL/I there, yet.  @ Anything developed with VAX/ELN can't move. To my knowledge the B builder never made it to Alpha let alone IA64.  I once considered D Vesting but the compilers are still VAX. A pity they never finished E that port. (I think hear a Charon reseller moving to the keyboard...)    --   Cheers - Dave W.   ------------------------------    Date: 28 May 2006 08:57:36 -0700  From: "mas" <mas769@hotmail.com>3 Subject: So how representative is this experience ? C Message-ID: <1148831856.192788.179300@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   G http://www.aceshardware.com/forums/read_post.jsp?id=115165893&forumid=1    " E Well I can tell you of one company I know off who have decided NOT to D go with Itanuim. It is a company that I used to work for (its in theC FTSE 100) who currently has thousands of Alphas (some the new, some B old), and a few old VAX system worldwide that need to be upgraded.  G The software was ported from VAX/VMS to Alpha/VMS in the 90's, this was > typically done very poorly, but it worked and gave significant performance increases.  C After spending a few months in attempts to port to Itanium/VMS they D decided that the problems were far to great. The problems being thatE the performance was lower (significantly) than the system they needed B to replace (ie: lastest Alphs ES40, ES45, and a few ES47), and the5 problems caused by compilers optimisations were vast.   = As a result they decided it would be easier and less risky to % re-impliment from scratch on Windows.   G On a side note: The original versons on Windows ran quite poorly on the F 2.8Ghz Xeon' (4 CPU's) in that they were still slower than the lastestG Alpha's, although much closer than the IPF ever came. They eventualy go B managment to try dual socket, dual-core opterons and instantly gotC double the perfromance, at nearly half the system cost and half the E power usage. These platforms then quickly became the standard for all F new x86 servers throughout the company. Luckerly for HP they still getE the proviode the Opteron boxes, but at about 20% the price of the old  Alpha systems. "    ------------------------------    Date: 28 May 2006 07:28:52 +01002 From: "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow>M Subject: Re: Unix runs faster, maybe (was: Re: Educating potential VMS users) ? Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-eHnQGC3qXUIR@dave2_os2.home.ours>   7 On Sat, 27 May 2006 14:36:16 UTC, "Richard B. Gilbert"   <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote:    > Dave Weatherall wrote:; > > On Thu, 25 May 2006 22:12:40 UTC, "Richard B. Gilbert"  # > > <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote:  > >    > > D > >>Strangely enough, Unix, or at least Solaris, tends to be pretty M > >>reliable.  It is not as user friendly as VMS and is laden with traps for     < SNIP >   > >  > > J > > It seems to help if you reboot 'em twice a week - well ours anyway :-) > >    > H > My Solaris (8 & 9) systems here at home generally run from the end of J > one power outrage to the beginning of the next, as does my Alphastation H > 200 (VMS V7.2-1).  Power outrages are frequent here and last anywhere K > from 2 to 21 hours.  I have UPS's but all they really buy me is time for  K > a clean shutdown.  (I keep promising to treat myself to a 3KVA Generator  H > to keep a few essentials running until the power company gets its act 7 > together but I'm on a fixed income these days. . . .)   A To be honest Richard, it surprises me too. It is a mature OS now.   F I'm not sure what it is that consumes the resources, Apex, Clearcase, D StarOffice or some of the home grown stuff we run. The SysOps don't F seem to know either, hence the simple soloution of rebooting. ActuallyE while I think about  it, I wouldn't be surprised of it were Netscape  + 4.71 !! No idea why we don't use Firefox...    --   Cheers - Dave W.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 17:09:35 GMT @ From: "Schroeder, AJ" <aaron.schroeder-no-spam@tmscomputers.com>, Subject: VMS, XDM, and remote connections...6 Message-ID: <jPkeg.7558$GM.7544@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com>   Hello group,  H I just installed VMS 8.2 Alpha and I am attempting to configure XDM for I remote connections. I installed HP TCP/IP and DECWindows as well. I have  H been googling this quite a bit and I think I have set up the XDM server F correctly. By setting it up I mean I copied the follwing templates in  SYS$SPECIFIC:[TCPIP$XDM]  #     XACCESS.TEMPLATE -> XACCESS.TXT *     XDM_CONFIG.TEMPLATE -> XDM_CONFIG.CONF%     XDM_KEYS.TEMPLATE -> XDM_KEYS.TXT   I After I copied those templates over, I went through TCPIP$CONFIG.COM and  I enabled and started the XDM server. It seemed to start up alright then I  K went to a Sun machine. I can see my machine in the remote server list, but  I it says "Willing to Manage" So then I tried to connect to my VMS machine  J from the Sun machine and it doesn't bring up the login window. I tried to K connect to another Sun machine and that worked properly - just to rule out  K if it was the Sun machine or not. A quick look at the log files on the VMS  B machine reveals where the problem lies (helios is my Sun machine):   $ TYPE helios_0.err 0 Xlib: connection to "helios:0" refused by server3 Xlib: Client is not authorized to connect to Server F [432 1148654977] xdm error: server open failed for helios:0, giving up $   9 I also verified the TCPIP is listed as a valid transport:   I $ SEARCH SYS$MANAGER:DECW$PRIVATE_SERVER_SETUP.COM DECW$SERVER_TRANSPORTS L $ !  DECW$SERVER_TRANSPORTS             YES *   STRING          LOCAL,DECNET $ ! DECW$SERVER_TRANSPORTS2 $ ! decw$server_transports == "DECNET,LOCAL,TCPIP") $ decw$server_transports == "TCPIP,LOCAL"  $   M Hmm, I am not interested in security at this point since I am just trying to  L get remote connections working so I am not sure if XDM_KEYS.TXT is screwing F me up or not. Of course, I am not sure what "Willing to Manage" means.  0 I also tried to bring up the clock by using SET I DISPLAY/TRANSPORT=TCPIP/NODE=helios and that worked! Not quite what I am  > looking for, but I am sure I am missing something very simple.  C If anyone has any ideas or suggestions on how to accomplish remote  @ connections how I am describing it would be greatly appreciated.   Thanks,   
 AJ Schroeder     ------------------------------  + Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 10:51:40 +0000 (UTC) $ From: JKB <knatschke@koenigsberg.fr>" Subject: [Announce] FreeVMS 0.2.10; Message-ID: <slrne7j05t.e10.knatschke@rayleigh.systella.fr>    	Hello,   2 	FreeVMS 0.2.10 has been released and available at. 	http://rayleigh.systella.fr/~bertrand/FreeVMS  	 	Regards,    	JKB   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.295 ************************