INFO-VAX Tue, 27 Mar 2007 Volume 2007 : Issue 172 Contents: Re: 216 Trillion Lemmings Are Scientifically Literate (Part II) a cluster question Re: a cluster question Re: a cluster question AC-6 Least Privilege (was: Willing to bet this is Windows at its best) Re: end of DLT? Belluzzo strikes again FC SAN UDID Re: FC SAN UDID FS: DEC Alphaserver 8400 (Singapore) Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Re: New site for OpenVMS books Re: OSU update: soyMAIL v1.3 is now available Re: OSU update: soyMAIL v1.3 is now available Re: RSX-11M-Plus Pool questions Re: RSX-11M-Plus Pool questions Re: RSX-11M-Plus Pool questions Re: RSX-11M-Plus Pool questions Re: RSX-11M-Plus Pool questions Re: RSX-11M-Plus Pool questions Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Re: Willing to bet this is Windows at its best Re: Willing to bet this is Windows at its best Re: Willing to bet this is Windows at its best ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 27 Mar 2007 09:33:02 -0700 From: genius@marblecliff.com Subject: Re: 216 Trillion Lemmings Are Scientifically Literate (Part II) Message-ID: <1175013182.430622.89130@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> On Mar 26, 6:37 pm, "Neil Rieck" wrote: > wrote in message > > news:1174914265.096491.48920@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com... > > > On Mar 25, 11:37 pm, "Neil Rieck" wrote: > [...snip...] > > > they kept it out alright ... it is all over the preamble and the bill > > of rights, they started every session of congress with prayer ... > > they put "In God we trust" on our money ... > > > they said govt should not endorse any religion, but the atheist > > liberals and courts today have misinterpreted this and tried > > to force atheism on us instead and strip 200 years of God being > > mentioned in this country ... > > > you do not even understand the constitution ... > > You are an idiot with your head shoved so far up your wazoo you don't see > what is going on in the world. oh I understand perfectly what is going on ... you do not ... the world is being set up for global government ... what is going on now is the nazi and communist blueprint on how to destroy a democracy ... > But secondly, Christians such as yourself just don't get it. Consider this: > In North America today almost all business shut down for Christmas and/or > Good Friday. What about the Muslims and Jews you might say? (many Rush > Limbaugh listening idiots would say that's just tough!) But what happens to > the Christians when the Muslims have a 50.1% majority? Will you, or your > decedents, be happy observing the month of Ramadan? this is already happening ... Christianity is barred from schools but they are having kids in California dress up and recite muslim prayers all under the guise of diversity training ... where have you been? > p.s. There are some counties in the "Bible Belt" trying to force the > teaching of creationism as a theory of equal value to evolution. so we continue to teach them the lie of evolution that is being disproven more and more each day instead of the truth which is creation and which science is proving to be fact? ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 08:07:43 -0700 From: "Don.Zong@gmail.com" Subject: a cluster question Message-ID: <1175008063.221847.214330@p15g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> a 3 nodes cluster, boot off the same system disk, the expected_votes of all 3 nodes is 2, this cluster has been running for a few years, never had any problem. In theory, should be the expected_votes set to 3? ( we don't have any quorum disk) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:54:32 -0700 From: Ken Fairfield Subject: Re: a cluster question Message-ID: <56t0i9F2avl2cU1@mid.individual.net> Don.Zong@gmail.com wrote: > a 3 nodes cluster, boot off the same system disk, the expected_votes > of all 3 nodes is 2, this cluster has been running for a few years, > never had any problem. In theory, should be the expected_votes set to > 3? ( we don't have any quorum disk) Yes. Assuming no quorum disk, and 1 vote per node, quorum is 2 and expected_votes is 3. See various past posts, particularly by Hoff, concerning setting expected votes, etc., and potential trouble you can get into by mis-setting expected_votes. Also note that in situations where you might, for any number of reasons, want to boot just one node and not the other nodes, it is easy to do a conversational boot and set expected_votes to 1 *for that boot*. -Ken -- Ken & Ann Fairfield What: Ken dot And dot Ann Where: Gmail dot Com ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 10:44:10 -0700 From: "Don.Zong@gmail.com" Subject: Re: a cluster question Message-ID: <1175017450.156604.11060@r56g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> In our case( 3-node cluster) , if expected_vote is 2, quorum = (2+2)/ 2=2; if expected_votes is 3, quorum is still 2 -- (3+2)/2 = 2, seems there is no conflict with cluster theory, any comments on that? Thanks On Mar 27, 12:54 pm, Ken Fairfield wrote: > Don.Z...@gmail.com wrote: > > a 3 nodes cluster, boot off the same system disk, the expected_votes > > of all 3 nodes is 2, this cluster has been running for a few years, > > never had any problem. In theory, should be the expected_votes set to > > 3? ( we don't have any quorum disk) > > Yes. > > Assuming no quorum disk, and 1 vote per node, quorum is 2 > and expected_votes is 3. > > See various past posts, particularly by Hoff, concerning > setting expected votes, etc., and potential trouble you > can get into by mis-setting expected_votes. > > Also note that in situations where you might, for any > number of reasons, want to boot just one node and not > the other nodes, it is easy to do a conversational > boot and set expected_votes to 1 *for that boot*. > > -Ken > -- > Ken & Ann Fairfield > What: Ken dot And dot Ann > Where: Gmail dot Com ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 08:04:48 -0500 From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: AC-6 Least Privilege (was: Willing to bet this is Windows at its best) Message-ID: In article , koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: > In article , Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: >> >> Yes, that is the point. OPER is the _only_ extra privilege needed by >> operations staff. And NIST 800-53 AC-5 says those people should be >> separate from the system managers (who need more privilege). > > The operations staff does the backups. There's no sensitive data, > so readall is appropriate. Not according to the principle of Least Privilege. They don't need READALL to release a batch job, and batch jobs are the best way to ensure consistent backups. > But I worked in a lot of shops which were setup prior to the current > NIST standards and they'll fight tooth and nail that they "can't > get thier job done" if you take away a privilege they don't need to > do thier jobs. That is why well-considered security disciplines (even FISMA) put management buy-in as the top priority. In the case of FISMA that management is Congress, although unfortunately to date OMB has only provided Congress with the number of systems tested, not what average score each agency got. > Even when I proved that the only use of a certain privilege was to > cause problems for a non-privileged user the respinse was "we didn't > do that". You need some high price consultants (lawyers would do :-) making obscene (in the view of the users) fees who say "you cannot _prove_ you did not do it". Of course turning on auditing (another 800-53 requirement) would also do. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 07:59:31 +0200 From: Michael Unger Subject: Re: end of DLT? Belluzzo strikes again Message-ID: <56rtrmF2aebglU1@mid.individual.net> On 2007-03-27 04:04, "David J Dachtera" wrote: > Hhmmm... I guess "reasonably cheap" is a subjective judgement. Out of reach of > most hobbyists and well beyond the perceived value of the average PC user (for > backup). USD 1149 (tabletop, kit) or 949 (internal, drive only) according to the (PDF) "Product Guide" (November 2006 edition) ... Michael -- Real names enhance the probability of getting real answers. My e-mail account at DECUS Munich is no longer valid. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 13:03:21 +0100 From: Mark Iline Subject: FC SAN UDID Message-ID: Does anyone know if it is possible to access a Fibre Channel SAN disk's UDID via a SCSI sense mode or set mode command under OpenVMS ? It would be particularly useful if someone had code that would allow the reading and setting of the UDID field. [Please excuse any naive optimism in the above...] Mark Mark Iline, UCL Mech Eng, London ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 10:25:48 -0700 From: sean@obanion.us Subject: Re: FC SAN UDID Message-ID: <1175016348.421382.200580@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> It might help for you to give one or two examples of what you want to do, and which storage system you want to manage. But I think the short answer is: no. It's not the SCSI disk (that the host sees) that is managed, but the array controller. The HSG80 uses a pseudo disk (the controller tells the host there is a disk but no physical disk exists, a small amount of memory is used to hold data) to pass commands to the controllers that the StorageWorks Script Server (SWCC) application uses, but HS commands are sent to the controllers not SCSI mode commands. The XP12000 (like all of the XP line, I think) uses a dedicated LAN communication path for configuration management, and the EVAs use the SAN. Both use a specialized application on a Windows server (though there have been rumors of HPUX becoming a management server) that needs to be involed in configuration changes. There are remote managment applications for both of these array families that talk to the management applications via LAN / TCPIP, but that's not talking via SCSI mode from the host. Sean On Mar 27, 5:03 am, Mark Iline wrote: > Does anyone know if it is possible to access a Fibre Channel SAN disk's > UDID via a SCSI sense mode or set mode command under OpenVMS ? > > It would be particularly useful if someone had code that would allow the > reading and setting of the UDID field. > > [Please excuse any naive optimism in the above...] > > Mark > > Mark Iline, UCL Mech Eng, London ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 07:31:38 -0700 From: "major.chai@gmail.com" Subject: FS: DEC Alphaserver 8400 (Singapore) Message-ID: <1175005898.802560.50660@r56g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> We have the following system for sale: Alphaserver 8400 5/440 - 10x CPU 5/440 (440mhz/4mb cache) - 4GB RAM (2x2GB Modules) - One 9GB disk (UW-SCSI SE) - Two StorageWorks BA35x disk arrays (one 8Bit SE, one 16Bit SE) - 5 SCSI-Channels (4x FWD-SCSI, 1x UW-SCSI SE) - 2x Ethernet Adapter - DEC ATM PCI Adapter - KFE72 Keyboard/Mouse Adapter (for PS/2-devices) - Powerstorm 3D10 graphics adapter - CDROM - Integrated Battery Backup Unit (comes without batteries but with cables) Location of the system is Singapore. Major Chai c...@majorlinux.com ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 07:41:10 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Message-ID: In article , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= writes: > Bob Koehler wrote: > >> I'm not sure I'd be happy with a heat pump much further north. I am >> sure I'd be happy with a heat pump just about anywhere further south. > > My fathers heatpump had used it elec.power backup aprox 15 hours > over a whole year when we checked. The rest was "pure" > heatpump energy. This is mid-Sweden. I don't know how the heatpumps you have compare with ours, but in Maryland 24 to 200 hours is the usual range. Gas and oil heaters are available for heatpump backup systems, but a lot of houses built for heatpumps have no gas, no place to put a tank, and no chimeny for the exhaust. If I was replacing a gas or oil furnace in this area I'd almost certainly go with a heat pump and a gas or oil "heatpump helper". ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 07:44:46 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Message-ID: In article , John Santos writes: > > The three way socket has a center pin, a ring, and the outer > screw threads as the 3 contacts. I think the screw threads > are neutral, the center pin is hot for the bright filament, > and the ring is hot for the dim filament, and both are hot > for the "bright" position. (It's remarkably hard to find any > info on the web to confirm this. Lots of ads for light bulbs, > but mostly a swamp of stuff about wiring 3-way switches (two > switches to control a single permanent light fixture, e.g. > a stairway light controlled by switches at the top and bottom > of the stairs. This is a completely different topic. All > the "technical" info I could find just says 3-way bulbs have > 2 filaments.) The 3-way flourescent bulb may be picking up 110V from whichever contacts are live and internally switching according to which are live, instead of just letting the external switch control everything. I know this sounds more complex, but I'm sure the cheapest somewhat reliable cicruit is the one in use. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 07:47:52 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Message-ID: In article , Bill Todd writes: > > It's also why I assumed that the drilling approach which Jan suggested > required moving water to conduct heat to the hole: drilling cost around > $10/foot 17 years ago when we had our well drilled, and I doubt that > it's gone down since then - so even 165 m. of hole would cost a fair > amount, and I suspect that at least double that would be required (since > a 6"- 8" diameter hole probably wouldn't offer the space that a trench > does for multiple parallel pipe runs separated by sufficient distance to > allow good conduction to each). The several million dollar installation I know of, I'm told was drilled, so I assume the runs are near vertical. Some of the cost may have been to to the depth drilled (it was somewhat experimental so there may have been a thought to go unusually deep), and the number of wells drilled (they're heating a barn converted to commercial-like space). ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 07:56:10 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Message-ID: In article , JF Mezei writes: > Bob Koehler wrote: >> I'm not sure I'd be happy with a heat pump much further north. I am= > >> sure I'd be happy with a heat pump just about anywhere further south= > =2E > > > Most modern heat pumps, when sized properly, can maintain temperature in = > a home=20 > down to an external temperature of -10. After that it struggles a bit. > My first heat pump (ca. 1986) needed help at about 32 F, and had a manual switch which we sometimes forgot to turn off in the morning, but the cost was reasonably close to gas. My second heat pump (ca. 1988) needed help at about 0 F, and automatically switched, which I liked a lot better. My current heat pump (ca. 2000) needs help at about 0 F, but not as much of it. I inheritted a kerosene burner and when the power went off for more than a couple days I bought some kerosene for it, but I never did have to use it. Those things must have ventialation and will leave an odor for a long time. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 10:02:45 -0700 From: yyyc186@hughes.net Subject: Re: New site for OpenVMS books Message-ID: <1175014965.162546.144550@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> On Mar 26, 9:19 pm, David J Dachtera wrote: > Apologies in advance for the way this sounds... > > O.k. So we keep these books out of the mainstream, thus insuring that the masses > will never see them. > > This benefits OpenVMS ... how? > > I'm sure you have your reasons; however, in the scope of the bigger picture, you > may want to reconsider - unless those bridges were burnt and totally destroyed. > These books are available in the main stream. Barnes & Noble does stock them in their on-line store, though they stock out quite frequently. Our good friend David has always been the first to carry these books, thus providing a great community service. Various other on-line retailers are also listing them. Bridges do not exist for Amazon, nor will they ever be allowed to be rebuilt. Roland ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 09:23:19 -0700 From: genius@marblecliff.com Subject: Re: OSU update: soyMAIL v1.3 is now available Message-ID: <1175012599.476470.65040@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> On Mar 27, 6:20 am, Mark Daniel wrote: > Mark Daniel wrote: > > soyMAIL v1.3 is now available from the WASD download page > > > http://wasd.vsm.com.au/wasd/ > > > This version provides a list of general refinements along with a small > > number of significant changes: > > > o autogenous authentication (allowing a distinct > > login-usage-logout life-cycle) > > o improved multiple mail file management > > o composition 'delete all attachments when sent' checkbox > > o automatic and transparent 'sent items' folder > > o multiple 'draft items' management and folder > > > Full release notes: > > > http://wasd.vsm.com.au/soymail/-/release_notes.txt > > > Enjoy! > > OSU sites that downloaded the v1.3.1 kit and wish to > experiment/implement soyMAIL's autogenous authentication should obtain > the v1.3.2 kit from the above download URL. The v1.3.1 release was > hopelessly broken for OSU. It was tested against Apache and WASD (even > Purveyor before *the* problem be came obvious) but I cannot recall it > being test-benched against OSU (unlike the other functionality). Must > have been a senior moment. Thanks to Christoph Gartmann for being the > poor first illegitimate child to try it. > > -- > Odium theologicum ...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odium_theologicum- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - and it should still run under purveyor ... you said we are the only one running it and we are not having any problems with the way we are using it, so to "write out" purveyor sounds like an excuse not to support us ... which now puts you in the same company as Bill Gates and others who try to dictate to HP not to promote vms ... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 08:29:01 -0800 From: "Tom Linden" Subject: Re: OSU update: soyMAIL v1.3 is now available Message-ID: On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 08:23:19 -0800, wrote: > On Mar 27, 6:20 am, Mark Daniel wrote: >> Mark Daniel wrote: >> > soyMAIL v1.3 is now available from the WASD download page >> >> > http://wasd.vsm.com.au/wasd/ >> >> > This version provides a list of general refinements along with a small >> > number of significant changes: >> >> > o autogenous authentication (allowing a distinct >> > login-usage-logout life-cycle) >> > o improved multiple mail file management >> > o composition 'delete all attachments when sent' checkbox >> > o automatic and transparent 'sent items' folder >> > o multiple 'draft items' management and folder >> >> > Full release notes: >> >> > http://wasd.vsm.com.au/soymail/-/release_notes.txt >> >> > Enjoy! >> >> OSU sites that downloaded the v1.3.1 kit and wish to >> experiment/implement soyMAIL's autogenous authentication should obtain >> the v1.3.2 kit from the above download URL. The v1.3.1 release was >> hopelessly broken for OSU. It was tested against Apache and WASD (even >> Purveyor before *the* problem be came obvious) but I cannot recall it >> being test-benched against OSU (unlike the other functionality). Must >> have been a senior moment. Thanks to Christoph Gartmann for being the >> poor first illegitimate child to try it. >> >> -- >> Odium theologicum ...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odium_theologicum- >> Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > and it should still run under purveyor ... you said we are the > only one running it and we are not having any problems > with the way we are using it, so to "write out" purveyor > sounds like an excuse not to support us ... which now puts > you in the same company as Bill Gates and others who try > to dictate to HP not to promote vms ... > Hey Genius, how much are you paying for that support? -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 10:38:42 +0200 From: "Eberhard Heuser" Subject: Re: RSX-11M-Plus Pool questions Message-ID: <000a01c7704b$5390dfd0$05072286@vg2> Jeff, When I configured DECnet for RSX-11M I had to do a sysgen where the pool size is been configured. Hope this helps Eberhard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Cameron" To: Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:55 AM Subject: RSX-11M-Plus Pool questions > Since there is no comp.os.rsx group, and with all the old timer's, like > myself that have begun their VMS zealotness with PDP-11's and RSX, I am > posting this request for information on this comp.os.vms board. If you are > not interested in RSX-11M+, I would suggest you ignore this post. > > First, a little background. After leaving MTI, I have now landed another > job > with a company that uses PDP-11s running RSX-11M+ to monitor and track the > manufacturing of product lots. I am actually performing backups using BRU > to/from RA-92 disks and 9-Track tapes. While I know I will be receiving > many > responses of condolences, both sincere and sarcastic, they are paying me > well. In fact, very well! I have given myself the title of > "Paleocybernetic > Analyst". The fact that these 4 PDP-11 systems are still running after 30 > years, is a testament to the quality and reliability of DEC equipment. In > the past 10 years, the only hardware problems that we have had are a few > dead DZ-11 boards. > > I'm sure many of you will respond with "Why doesn't your company migrate > to > a more modern platform?" Don't worry, we are! But this migration is > embedded > into a complete factory floor modernization, complete with modern > manufacturing process monitoring and control systems, who's "Go-Live" date > is slated for late 2009 or Early 2010. My job is to maintain the 4 PDP-11 > systems through that time. > > Because of the nature of the company's business, our operations are bound > and monitored by Federal Regulations, so the data collected in the > manufacturing of the product must be maintained and accessible for 15 > years. > So besides maintaining the hardware for another 3 years, we will have to > maintain the data and be able to provide the ability to analyze the data > after the PDP-11s are finally retired. > > These PDP-11's are on a segregated DECNet network (thick ethernet with AUI > connections along with 1 VAX 4000 and several DECServer Terminal servers). > This DECNet backbone runs throughout our 3/4 square mile campus in several > buildings. Users who use the in house developed Reporting programs, which > are written in Macro-11, connect to the PDP-11 systems and single VAX, via > Serial lines connected from their PC's COM ports to these DECServers. > > My immediate project is to provide IP connectivity to this network, both > for > Telnet and FTP connectivity. Fortunately, Process Software does have > TCPWare > for the PDP-11/RSX. Not only will this allow us to remove the DECServers, > and localize the dedicated DECNet ethernet to a DELNI in the computer > room, > but it will give us connectivity to our large SAN storage on the corporate > LAN. Using FTP, I can then store the binary RSX data files (which are > currently offline on racks of 9track tapes) online and available to users > from their PCs. > > Here is where I need your help. First, I need a network bridge; one that > does AUI to either 10-Base-T, 100-Base-T, or Fiber. The bridge only needs > to > bridge IP traffic and not DECNet. Any recommendations for such a bridge > wold > be helpful. Since the Dedicated DECNet network only does 10 Megabits, a > 10-Base-T connection would be more than sufficient. > > My next question is more involved, as it pertains to available pool space > in > RSX. I have read all the RSX documentation I can find relating to pool > space, and I am still confused about a few things. I need to accurately > quantify the impact of the TCPWare on available pool space on one of our > PDP-11/RSX systems. I know that there are two types of pool in RSX, > Primary > and Secondary. I can quantify the situation of Secondary pool using the > MCR > command >SET /SECPOL or the DCL command >SHOW SECONDARY along with the > command >SHOW PARTITIONS. I think I have a good grasp on Secondary pool. > > The TCPWare documentation describes its pool usage very clearly, however > it > uses the term "POOL" and "INPOOL" instead of "Primary Pool" or "Secondary > Pool". The TCPWare "POOL" requirements are 700 to 1200 (no units > specified). > The TCPWare "INPOOL" usage is defined as: =(4*n)+24 where "n" is > the > number of TCP connections and the answer is in KBytes. > > Question 1 : Is "INPOOL" the same as "Primary Pool", "Secondary Pool", or > possibly something else? > > Next, the RSX documentation states that the "Primary Pool" values can be > determined from the MCR command >SET /POOL. This yields the following > results: > POOL=1200:01150.:01538. > According to the documentation, the results shown are: > POOL=:.: > Where: > = The first location for user partitions (in bytes) > = The longest free block (in words) > = The total pool space (in words) > > Based on the values shown from the SET /POOL command, I have 2300 bytes > (2.3 > Kbytes) of free space which is more than an order of magnitude smaller > than > the TCPWare requirements, which say that just one connection would require > 28 Kbytes. Also, the RSX programmer here that originally programmed the > system says we ar at the maximum of pool space alowed. If so that would be > 1538 from the "total" value above. If TCPWare could take up 1200 of the > 1538, then it would be a big pool hog. Clearly something (if not my > reasoning) is not correct here. > > What if INPOOL refers to secondary pool? Here the RSX MCR command SET > /SECPOL results in: > SECPOL=804.:1024.:78% > According to the documentation, the results shown are: > SECPOL=:: > Where: > = Number of Free blocks in secondary pool (64 bytes/block) > = Size of secondary pool in blocks (64 bytes/block) > = Percentage of free secondary pool space. > > Based on these values, if INPOOL refers to secondary pool, then I might be > able to accommodate up to 6 IP connections. > > So I'm hoping INPOOL refers to Secondary pool. > > Question 2 : In regards to primary pool, do I consider the value as > the total amount of free primary pool space, even though it is listed as > the > "longest free block"? > > One thing to note. I cannot enable the PMT (Pool Monitor Task), because I > would have to write up documentation as to how this would impact the > production system and go through a lengthy approval cycle, since it is not > currently part of the system. I am already having enough problems > attempting > to write the "Change Requirements" just to test the TCPWare. > > Question 3 : What is the basic difference between Primary and Secondary > pool? Based on the chapter 8 on Memory Management in the RSX System > Management guide, I surmise that Primary pool is for internal RSX tables > and > data structures, and secondary pool is for shared application memory and > installed tasks. Is this a correct assessment? > > Final Question : Does the RSX system Generation utility alow you to > increase > Primary Pool and/or Secondary Pool? If so what are the limits (maximum > pool > size) for each? The doumentation always shows the MCR command >SET > /POOL=1200 as setting the top value to 120000 (octal). Is this the > all-time > maximum alowed in RSX? > > Thank you for your time in reading my long winded question, and any > insight > you might be able to provide. I have a strong background in VMS, so you > may > use comparisons and contrasts, if you wish. > > Thank you > Jeff Cameron = > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:14:52 GMT From: "Duncan Macdonald" Subject: Re: RSX-11M-Plus Pool questions Message-ID: If you are worried about the impact that the TCP/IP software might have on your RSX-11M+ systems then the cheapest answer might be to use a Linux box running both TCP/IP and DECnet to act as an access point to your network. (See http://linux-decnet.sourceforge.net/ for details of the DECnet support available to Linux) An alternative might be to buy a cheap Alpha VMS system (e.g. DS10L) from someone like Island Computers (http://www.islandco.com/) with DECnet and TCP/IP to act as the bridge but this will cost a few thousand dollars with the licenses. "Jeff Cameron" wrote in message news:C22DAB95.28536%roktsci@ca.rr.com... > Since there is no comp.os.rsx group, and with all the old timer's, like > myself that have begun their VMS zealotness with PDP-11's and RSX, I am > posting this request for information on this comp.os.vms board. If you are > not interested in RSX-11M+, I would suggest you ignore this post. > > First, a little background. After leaving MTI, I have now landed another > job > with a company that uses PDP-11s running RSX-11M+ to monitor and track the > manufacturing of product lots. I am actually performing backups using BRU > to/from RA-92 disks and 9-Track tapes. While I know I will be receiving > many > responses of condolences, both sincere and sarcastic, they are paying me > well. In fact, very well! I have given myself the title of > "Paleocybernetic > Analyst". The fact that these 4 PDP-11 systems are still running after 30 > years, is a testament to the quality and reliability of DEC equipment. In > the past 10 years, the only hardware problems that we have had are a few > dead DZ-11 boards. > > I'm sure many of you will respond with "Why doesn't your company migrate > to > a more modern platform?" Don't worry, we are! But this migration is > embedded > into a complete factory floor modernization, complete with modern > manufacturing process monitoring and control systems, who's "Go-Live" date > is slated for late 2009 or Early 2010. My job is to maintain the 4 PDP-11 > systems through that time. > > Because of the nature of the company's business, our operations are bound > and monitored by Federal Regulations, so the data collected in the > manufacturing of the product must be maintained and accessible for 15 > years. > So besides maintaining the hardware for another 3 years, we will have to > maintain the data and be able to provide the ability to analyze the data > after the PDP-11s are finally retired. > > These PDP-11's are on a segregated DECNet network (thick ethernet with AUI > connections along with 1 VAX 4000 and several DECServer Terminal servers). > This DECNet backbone runs throughout our 3/4 square mile campus in several > buildings. Users who use the in house developed Reporting programs, which > are written in Macro-11, connect to the PDP-11 systems and single VAX, via > Serial lines connected from their PC's COM ports to these DECServers. > > My immediate project is to provide IP connectivity to this network, both > for > Telnet and FTP connectivity. Fortunately, Process Software does have > TCPWare > for the PDP-11/RSX. Not only will this allow us to remove the DECServers, > and localize the dedicated DECNet ethernet to a DELNI in the computer > room, > but it will give us connectivity to our large SAN storage on the corporate > LAN. Using FTP, I can then store the binary RSX data files (which are > currently offline on racks of 9track tapes) online and available to users > from their PCs. > > Here is where I need your help. First, I need a network bridge; one that > does AUI to either 10-Base-T, 100-Base-T, or Fiber. The bridge only needs > to > bridge IP traffic and not DECNet. Any recommendations for such a bridge > wold > be helpful. Since the Dedicated DECNet network only does 10 Megabits, a > 10-Base-T connection would be more than sufficient. > > My next question is more involved, as it pertains to available pool space > in > RSX. I have read all the RSX documentation I can find relating to pool > space, and I am still confused about a few things. I need to accurately > quantify the impact of the TCPWare on available pool space on one of our > PDP-11/RSX systems. I know that there are two types of pool in RSX, > Primary > and Secondary. I can quantify the situation of Secondary pool using the > MCR > command >SET /SECPOL or the DCL command >SHOW SECONDARY along with the > command >SHOW PARTITIONS. I think I have a good grasp on Secondary pool. > > The TCPWare documentation describes its pool usage very clearly, however > it > uses the term "POOL" and "INPOOL" instead of "Primary Pool" or "Secondary > Pool". The TCPWare "POOL" requirements are 700 to 1200 (no units > specified). > The TCPWare "INPOOL" usage is defined as: =(4*n)+24 where "n" is > the > number of TCP connections and the answer is in KBytes. > > Question 1 : Is "INPOOL" the same as "Primary Pool", "Secondary Pool", or > possibly something else? > > Next, the RSX documentation states that the "Primary Pool" values can be > determined from the MCR command >SET /POOL. This yields the following > results: > POOL=1200:01150.:01538. > According to the documentation, the results shown are: > POOL=:.: > Where: > = The first location for user partitions (in bytes) > = The longest free block (in words) > = The total pool space (in words) > > Based on the values shown from the SET /POOL command, I have 2300 bytes > (2.3 > Kbytes) of free space which is more than an order of magnitude smaller > than > the TCPWare requirements, which say that just one connection would require > 28 Kbytes. Also, the RSX programmer here that originally programmed the > system says we ar at the maximum of pool space alowed. If so that would be > 1538 from the "total" value above. If TCPWare could take up 1200 of the > 1538, then it would be a big pool hog. Clearly something (if not my > reasoning) is not correct here. > > What if INPOOL refers to secondary pool? Here the RSX MCR command SET > /SECPOL results in: > SECPOL=804.:1024.:78% > According to the documentation, the results shown are: > SECPOL=:: > Where: > = Number of Free blocks in secondary pool (64 bytes/block) > = Size of secondary pool in blocks (64 bytes/block) > = Percentage of free secondary pool space. > > Based on these values, if INPOOL refers to secondary pool, then I might be > able to accommodate up to 6 IP connections. > > So I'm hoping INPOOL refers to Secondary pool. > > Question 2 : In regards to primary pool, do I consider the value as > the total amount of free primary pool space, even though it is listed as > the > "longest free block"? > > One thing to note. I cannot enable the PMT (Pool Monitor Task), because I > would have to write up documentation as to how this would impact the > production system and go through a lengthy approval cycle, since it is not > currently part of the system. I am already having enough problems > attempting > to write the "Change Requirements" just to test the TCPWare. > > Question 3 : What is the basic difference between Primary and Secondary > pool? Based on the chapter 8 on Memory Management in the RSX System > Management guide, I surmise that Primary pool is for internal RSX tables > and > data structures, and secondary pool is for shared application memory and > installed tasks. Is this a correct assessment? > > Final Question : Does the RSX system Generation utility alow you to > increase > Primary Pool and/or Secondary Pool? If so what are the limits (maximum > pool > size) for each? The doumentation always shows the MCR command >SET > /POOL=1200 as setting the top value to 120000 (octal). Is this the > all-time > maximum alowed in RSX? > > Thank you for your time in reading my long winded question, and any > insight > you might be able to provide. I have a strong background in VMS, so you > may > use comparisons and contrasts, if you wish. > > Thank you > Jeff Cameron = > ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 04:26:19 -0700 From: "Bob Gezelter" Subject: Re: RSX-11M-Plus Pool questions Message-ID: <1174994779.665083.80910@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> On Mar 27, 5:14 am, "Duncan Macdonald" wrote: > If you are worried about the impact that the TCP/IP software might have on > your RSX-11M+ systems then the cheapest answer might > be to use a Linux box running both TCP/IP and DECnet to act as an access > point to your network. > (Seehttp://linux-decnet.sourceforge.net/for details of the DECnet support > available to Linux) > An alternative might be to buy a cheap Alpha VMS system (e.g. DS10L) from > someone like Island Computers (http://www.islandco.com/) > with DECnet and TCP/IP to act as the bridge but this will cost a few > thousand dollars with the licenses. > > "Jeff Cameron" wrote in message > > news:C22DAB95.28536%roktsci@ca.rr.com... > > > Since there is no comp.os.rsx group, and with all the old timer's, like > > myself that have begun their VMS zealotness with PDP-11's and RSX, I am > > posting this request for information on this comp.os.vms board. If you are > > not interested in RSX-11M+, I would suggest you ignore this post. > > > First, a little background. After leaving MTI, I have now landed another > > job > > with a company that uses PDP-11s running RSX-11M+ to monitor and track the > > manufacturing of product lots. I am actually performing backups using BRU > > to/from RA-92 disks and 9-Track tapes. While I know I will be receiving > > many > > responses of condolences, both sincere and sarcastic, they are paying me > > well. In fact, very well! I have given myself the title of > > "Paleocybernetic > > Analyst". The fact that these 4 PDP-11 systems are still running after 30 > > years, is a testament to the quality and reliability of DEC equipment. In > > the past 10 years, the only hardware problems that we have had are a few > > dead DZ-11 boards. > > > I'm sure many of you will respond with "Why doesn't your company migrate > > to > > a more modern platform?" Don't worry, we are! But this migration is > > embedded > > into a complete factory floor modernization, complete with modern > > manufacturing process monitoring and control systems, who's "Go-Live" date > > is slated for late 2009 or Early 2010. My job is to maintain the 4 PDP-11 > > systems through that time. > > > Because of the nature of the company's business, our operations are bound > > and monitored by Federal Regulations, so the data collected in the > > manufacturing of the product must be maintained and accessible for 15 > > years. > > So besides maintaining the hardware for another 3 years, we will have to > > maintain the data and be able to provide the ability to analyze the data > > after the PDP-11s are finally retired. > > > These PDP-11's are on a segregated DECNet network (thick ethernet with AUI > > connections along with 1 VAX 4000 and several DECServer Terminal servers). > > This DECNet backbone runs throughout our 3/4 square mile campus in several > > buildings. Users who use the in house developed Reporting programs, which > > are written in Macro-11, connect to the PDP-11 systems and single VAX, via > > Serial lines connected from their PC's COM ports to these DECServers. > > > My immediate project is to provide IP connectivity to this network, both > > for > > Telnet and FTP connectivity. Fortunately, Process Software does have > > TCPWare > > for the PDP-11/RSX. Not only will this allow us to remove the DECServers, > > and localize the dedicated DECNet ethernet to a DELNI in the computer > > room, > > but it will give us connectivity to our large SAN storage on the corporate > > LAN. Using FTP, I can then store the binary RSX data files (which are > > currently offline on racks of 9track tapes) online and available to users > > from their PCs. > > > Here is where I need your help. First, I need a network bridge; one that > > does AUI to either 10-Base-T, 100-Base-T, or Fiber. The bridge only needs > > to > > bridge IP traffic and not DECNet. Any recommendations for such a bridge > > wold > > be helpful. Since the Dedicated DECNet network only does 10 Megabits, a > > 10-Base-T connection would be more than sufficient. > > > My next question is more involved, as it pertains to available pool space > > in > > RSX. I have read all the RSX documentation I can find relating to pool > > space, and I am still confused about a few things. I need to accurately > > quantify the impact of the TCPWare on available pool space on one of our > > PDP-11/RSX systems. I know that there are two types of pool in RSX, > > Primary > > and Secondary. I can quantify the situation of Secondary pool using the > > MCR > > command >SET /SECPOL or the DCL command >SHOW SECONDARY along with the > > command >SHOW PARTITIONS. I think I have a good grasp on Secondary pool. > > > The TCPWare documentation describes its pool usage very clearly, however > > it > > uses the term "POOL" and "INPOOL" instead of "Primary Pool" or "Secondary > > Pool". The TCPWare "POOL" requirements are 700 to 1200 (no units > > specified). > > The TCPWare "INPOOL" usage is defined as: =(4*n)+24 where "n" is > > the > > number of TCP connections and the answer is in KBytes. > > > Question 1 : Is "INPOOL" the same as "Primary Pool", "Secondary Pool", or > > possibly something else? > > > Next, the RSX documentation states that the "Primary Pool" values can be > > determined from the MCR command >SET /POOL. This yields the following > > results: > > POOL=1200:01150.:01538. > > According to the documentation, the results shown are: > > POOL=:.: > > Where: > > = The first location for user partitions (in bytes) > > = The longest free block (in words) > > = The total pool space (in words) > > > Based on the values shown from the SET /POOL command, I have 2300 bytes > > (2.3 > > Kbytes) of free space which is more than an order of magnitude smaller > > than > > the TCPWare requirements, which say that just one connection would require > > 28 Kbytes. Also, the RSX programmer here that originally programmed the > > system says we ar at the maximum of pool space alowed. If so that would be > > 1538 from the "total" value above. If TCPWare could take up 1200 of the > > 1538, then it would be a big pool hog. Clearly something (if not my > > reasoning) is not correct here. > > > What if INPOOL refers to secondary pool? Here the RSX MCR command SET > > /SECPOL results in: > > SECPOL=804.:1024.:78% > > According to the documentation, the results shown are: > > SECPOL=:: > > Where: > > = Number of Free blocks in secondary pool (64 bytes/block) > > = Size of secondary pool in blocks (64 bytes/block) > > = Percentage of free secondary pool space. > > > Based on these values, if INPOOL refers to secondary pool, then I might be > > able to accommodate up to 6 IP connections. > > > So I'm hoping INPOOL refers to Secondary pool. > > > Question 2 : In regards to primary pool, do I consider the value as > > the total amount of free primary pool space, even though it is listed as > > the > > "longest free block"? > > > One thing to note. I cannot enable the PMT (Pool Monitor Task), because I > > would have to write up documentation as to how this would impact the > > production system and go through a lengthy approval cycle, since it is not > > currently part of the system. I am already having enough problems > > attempting > > to write the "Change Requirements" just to test the TCPWare. > > > Question 3 : What is the basic difference between Primary and Secondary > > pool? Based on the chapter 8 on Memory Management in the RSX System > > Management guide, I surmise that Primary pool is for internal RSX tables > > and > > data structures, and secondary pool is for shared application memory and > > installed tasks. Is this a correct assessment? > > > Final Question : Does the RSX system Generation utility alow you to > > increase > > Primary Pool and/or Secondary Pool? If so what are the limits (maximum > > pool > > size) for each? The doumentation always shows the MCR command >SET > > /POOL=1200 as setting the top value to 120000 (octal). Is this the > > all-time > > maximum alowed in RSX? > > > Thank you for your time in reading my long winded question, and any > > insight > > you might be able to provide. I have a strong background in VMS, so you > > may > > use comparisons and contrasts, if you wish. > > > Thank you > > Jeff Cameron = Jeff, It has been a while, but I have done a significant amount of RSX-11 work (S/M/M-PLUS) in the past (down to the Executive and driver level). And I am writing this from memory, without dragging out my Executive Listing (still on the shelf in my library) or my documentation set (co-located near the executive listings). The restrictions on the two pools are based on the memory mapping hardware of the PDP-11 processors. The mapping of primary pool must be within the first five mapping regions (KISAR5-6 are reserved for loadable executive components) and the lowest part of the memory map is reserved for the Executive itself. Secondary pool is mapped differently. As I am sitting here, I would have to review the listings for the guidelines. Secondary pool can get large (at least by PDP-11 standards). By VAX, ALPHA, and Integrity standards, it is small (the limits of the PDP-11 memory space are, IMHO, the reason for the jokes about "Non-Paged Ocean" occasionally heard at OpenVMS sessions). Should you be able to support some TCP connections reasonably without a problem, yes. Hundreds or thousands, probably not. Also, I would have to check things, but I suspect that secondary Pool can be expanded without serious problem. Secondary pool can be re-done without a SYSGEN. If I can be of further assistance, please let me know. - Bob Gezelter, http://www.rlgsc.com ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 08:08:38 -0500 From: lederman@encompasserve.org (B. Z. Lederman) Subject: Re: RSX-11M-Plus Pool questions Message-ID: >> >> "Jeff Cameron" wrote in message >> >> news:C22DAB95.28536%roktsci@ca.rr.com... >> >> > Since there is no comp.os.rsx group, and with all the old timer's, like >> > myself that have begun their VMS zealotness with PDP-11's and RSX, I am >> > posting this request for information on this comp.os.vms board. If you are >> > not interested in RSX-11M+, I would suggest you ignore this post. >> It's been a while, but here's what I can remember. First, hopefully, you know about RMD (RMDEMO), which will display what's on a running system, including the amount of pool available. There are some secondary pages that also give good information in addition to the default display. You don't say what kind of system you're running on, but if you're running M+ it should be one of the 'larger' systems, with a fair amount of memory. You do need to do a System Generation to change the amount of pool available. As a general rule, you should always set them to the maximum available: at least the primary pool should be there. There are lot's of old "tricks" to maximizing the available pool, and many of the old "Multitasker" DECUS newsletters should still be around somewhere. I don't know how many are available on-line, but at least some should be. Glen Everheart has done a really good job of preserving all of the old DECUS SIG Tape collections of RSX and other materials. Also, the ENCOMPASServe system has a lot of old RSX materials and library collections on line. Subscription is free, just telnet to encompasserve.org and follow the login screen instructions. There are several of us there who knew RSX, and all of the old NOTES conferences are kept on-line and searchable. I might be able to dig up some of my old materials, and I know of at least one other 'old timer' who reads this group who still has some, but try ENCOMPASServe and a web search first. Having said all of that: I agree with what some other people have said: it may be a lot easier to add in an OpenVMS system that has both DECnet and TCP/IP on it, and use it as the gateway. You could easily put two network cards in it, and have DECnet connected to the old 10 MB network on one card, and TCP/IP talking to the new 100Base-T or 1000Base-T network on another card. I think this would solve a number of problems for you all at once. -- B. Z. Lederman. My personal opinions. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 22:27:12 +0800 From: Paul Repacholi Subject: Re: RSX-11M-Plus Pool questions Message-ID: <87tzw6g3sv.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com> Jeff Cameron writes: ... > Because of the nature of the company's business, our operations are > bound and monitored by Federal Regulations, so the data collected in > the manufacturing of the product must be maintained and accessible > for 15 years. So besides maintaining the hardware for another 3 > years, we will have to maintain the data and be able to provide the > ability to analyze the data after the PDP-11s are finally retired. Step one is to fix the media/format age problem. You have vaxen, so unloading the BRU tapes onto ODS-1 disks and running BACKUP to get the data onto more robust media would be a good idea. > These PDP-11's are on a segregated DECNet network (thick ethernet > with AUI connections along with 1 VAX 4000 and several DECServer > Terminal servers). This DECNet backbone runs throughout our 3/4 > square mile campus in several buildings. Users who use the in house > developed Reporting programs, which are written in Macro-11, connect > to the PDP-11 systems and single VAX, via Serial lines connected > from their PC's COM ports to these DECServers. > My immediate project is to provide IP connectivity to this network, > both for Telnet and FTP connectivity. Fortunately, Process Software > does have TCPWare for the PDP-11/RSX. Not only will this allow us to > remove the DECServers, and localize the dedicated DECNet ethernet to > a DELNI in the computer room, but it will give us connectivity to > our large SAN storage on the corporate LAN. Using FTP, I can then > store the binary RSX data files (which are currently offline on > racks of 9track tapes) online and available to users from their PCs. NO, NO, and FH NO! How are you going to store the BRU files on the SAN? And what are they going to run on the PCs to read the data? > My next question is more involved, as it pertains to available pool > space in RSX. On what type of machine? and Is it an I/D kernel? What are your RT response time limits? BTW, you are killing yourself if you don't include PMT for set up. Do you have the SIG tape collections for RSX and VMS? ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 07:29:33 -0700 From: "Bob Gezelter" Subject: Re: RSX-11M-Plus Pool questions Message-ID: <1175005773.569374.267990@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> On Mar 27, 8:08 am, leder...@encompasserve.org (B. Z. Lederman) wrote: > >> "Jeff Cameron" wrote in message > > >>news:C22DAB95.28536%roktsci@ca.rr.com... > > >> > Since there is no comp.os.rsx group, and with all the old timer's, like > >> > myself that have begun their VMS zealotness with PDP-11's and RSX, I am > >> > posting this request for information on this comp.os.vms board. If you are > >> > not interested in RSX-11M+, I would suggest you ignore this post. > > It's been a while, but here's what I can remember. > > First, hopefully, you know about RMD (RMDEMO), which will > display what's on a running system, including the amount of pool > available. There are some secondary pages that also give good > information in addition to the default display. > > You don't say what kind of system you're running on, but if > you're running M+ it should be one of the 'larger' systems, with > a fair amount of memory. You do need to do a System Generation > to change the amount of pool available. As a general rule, you > should always set them to the maximum available: at least the > primary pool should be there. > > There are lot's of old "tricks" to maximizing the available > pool, and many of the old "Multitasker" DECUS newsletters should > still be around somewhere. I don't know how many are available > on-line, but at least some should be. Glen Everheart has done a > really good job of preserving all of the old DECUS SIG Tape > collections of RSX and other materials. Also, the ENCOMPASServe > system has a lot of old RSX materials and library collections on > line. Subscription is free, just telnet to encompasserve.org and > follow the login screen instructions. There are several of us > there who knew RSX, and all of the old NOTES conferences are kept > on-line and searchable. I might be able to dig up some of my old > materials, and I know of at least one other 'old timer' who reads > this group who still has some, but try ENCOMPASServe and a web > search first. > > Having said all of that: I agree with what some other people > have said: it may be a lot easier to add in an OpenVMS system > that has both DECnet and TCP/IP on it, and use it as the gateway. > You could easily put two network cards in it, and have DECnet > connected to the old 10 MB network on one card, and TCP/IP > talking to the new 100Base-T or 1000Base-T network on another > card. I think this would solve a number of problems for you all > at once. > > -- > B. Z. Lederman. My personal opinions. Bart, WADU I disagree with the comment "you will need to do a SYSGEN". A VMR $ perhaps, but without looking at the systems, a SYSGEN is not indicated without additional information. - Bob Gezelter, http://www.rlgsc.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 08:39:34 +0200 From: Michael Unger Subject: Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Message-ID: <56rtruF2aebglU2@mid.individual.net> On 2007-03-27 05:40, "Steven M. Schweda" wrote: > [...] > > The clutter here does make the ITRC forum more attractive, in spite > of its erratic operation and the thought police, which is no small > achievement. HP's ITRC isn't an alternative for those restricted to modem/ISDN access and therefore to time-based fees. Michael -- Real names enhance the probability of getting real answers. My e-mail account at DECUS Munich is no longer valid. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 07:51:19 +0000 (UTC) From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk Subject: Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Message-ID: In article <4608555a$0$90268$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: >Doug Phillips wrote: >> Time yet for subgroups in COV? >> >> It's been discussed before, but with all of the OT posts and "this is >> a technical forum" whining, maybe the Wise and Ancient ones have some >> new thoughts? > >comp.os.vms.user for normal user questions (like DCL) >comp.os.vms.sysmgmt for system manager questions >comp.os.vms.programmer for programmer questions >comp.os.vms.advocacy for why VMS is the best OS in existence >comp.os.vms.misc for everything that does not fit in the other > >A news-group split will need to be coordinated with the mail-list ! > This pretty much already exists in the form of the vmsnet heirarchy. The problem is that they are of such low volume that people don't use them preferring to use comp.os.vms because of the number of people using this group. Hence apart from a few like vmsnet.mail.mx, vmsnet.mail.pmdf, vmsnet.networks.tcp-ip.* most of the rest just attract spam. vmsnet.admin vmsnet.alpha.* (1) vmsnet.announce.* (2) vmsnet.databases.* (1) vmsnet.decus.* (2) vmsnet.employment vmsnet.epsilon-cd vmsnet.groups vmsnet.infosystems.* (2) vmsnet.internals vmsnet.mail.* (3) vmsnet.misc vmsnet.networks.* (11) vmsnet.pdp-11 vmsnet.sdk.* (1) vmsnet.sources.* (3) vmsnet.sysmgt vmsnet.test vmsnet.tpu vmsnet.uucp vmsnet.vms-posix In my experience most Usenet newservers carry the vmsnet heirarchy. David Webb Security team leader CCSS Middlesex University >Arne ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 19:36:03 +0930 From: Mark Daniel Subject: Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Message-ID: <130hra9ott9e833@corp.supernews.com> Doug Phillips wrote: > Time yet for subgroups in COV? > > It's been discussed before, but with all of the OT posts and "this is > a technical forum" whining, maybe the Wise and Ancient ones have some > new thoughts? C.o.v. is intended as a technical forum. If these changes were to further group technical discussion into meaningful subtopics then that would be sensible. However I think it would be obvious to blind freddy that the issue is not one of representative subdivision but of self-discipline and common courtesy to one's fellow forum particpants. C.o.v, by name, is intended to provide a place for discussion around VMS and associated topics. It is an unmoderated group which relies, or should rely on the cooperation of it's participants. Obviously some are uncooperative and/or discourteous. Some people just have a hard time conducting themselves according to the expected mores of the society they choose to particpate in. Some seem to be filling the c.o.v. 'inbox' with SPAM. That's what it is of course - newsgroup SPAM. Unsolicited and irrelevant items. Unthinkingly perhaps, but filling it with SPAM all the same. There are other fora in which to conduct discussions not related to VMS. Perhaps they are concerned about losing their captive audience. Perhaps in other fora they would get a literate audience willing to participate in a rigorous discussion on-topic. Perhaps they would feel vulnerable in such an environment. It's all well and good to suggest kill-files and the like but the basic issue still remains. Most of us only look at this forum when we want to ask or read about VMS. Most of us have other groups we subscribe to for our pet interests. Obviously there will always be a couple of hoons on the train making the journey less comfortable than it should be for everyone else but that shouldn't be (a generic) you. I agree with Steven Schweda wrt the ITRC fora. I doubt I'd go back to a private forum with it's puerile system of rewards (sorry guys) and subject to arbitrary and unexplained article posting losses. IMO a public, yet distributed forum, as represented by USENET and c.o.v. all these years, is far preferable than a multitude of BBSes, particularly for a small community like VMS. Of course you can understand why people with a need for technical discussion have migrated away from c.o.v. My regrets over sounding like a weasle-wording moralizer. -- Odium theologicum ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odium_theologicum ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 12:50:50 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Message-ID: <00A653CD.1A4F9208@SendSpamHere.ORG> In article <07032622402207_202002DA@antinode.org>, sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda) writes: > The clutter here does make the ITRC forum more attractive, in spite >of its erratic operation and the thought police, which is no small >achievement. ITRC is unattractive in that I cannot use my favorite/familiar editor to post a comment there. It forces me to use a browser on a non-VMS platform and enter my text in a text box. Search? Sheesh, forget it. -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 09:38:37 -0700 From: genius@marblecliff.com Subject: Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Message-ID: <1175013517.822113.302270@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> On Mar 26, 11:40 pm, s...@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda) wrote: > From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= > > > Last time I checked it was still comp.os.vms not > > social.old.vms.buddies ! > > > It seems rather obvious to me that it is those that want to use > > the group for something other than it was created for that > > should leave and create their own forum and not those > > that actually want to use it for what it was created for. > > Obvious to several of us, it seems, but apparently far from obvious > to the people who really ought to get a clue. A person who thinks that > he can rightfully "chime in if [he] feel[s] like it", and apparently > any_where_ he feels like it, appears to me to be a small-scale > sociopath, rather like someone who discards litter in a public park. so you want to be able to say what you want to and no one else should be able to challenge you ... sounds just like liberals, nazis, elitists, or alot of other people today who say they are for debate, but just do not debate what I say ... ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 09:40:21 -0700 From: genius@marblecliff.com Subject: Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Message-ID: <1175013621.274151.240020@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> On Mar 26, 11:40 pm, s...@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda) wrote: > From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= > > > Last time I checked it was still comp.os.vms not > > social.old.vms.buddies ! > > > It seems rather obvious to me that it is those that want to use > > the group for something other than it was created for that > > should leave and create their own forum and not those > > that actually want to use it for what it was created for. > > Obvious to several of us, it seems, but apparently far from obvious > to the people who really ought to get a clue. A person who thinks that > he can rightfully "chime in if [he] feel[s] like it", and apparently > any_where_ he feels like it, appears to me to be a small-scale > sociopath, rather like someone who discards litter in a public park. > Sadly, this seems to suggest little hope for improvement in my lifetime. > > The clutter here does make the ITRC forum more attractive, in spite > of its erratic operation and the thought police, which is no small > achievement. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Steven M. Schweda sms@antinode-org > 382 South Warwick Street (+1) 651-699-9818 > Saint Paul MN 55105-2547 I got an idea ... why don't you by your own alpha and start your own vms site, and post to yourself ... then you will not have to deal with being challenged ... ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 09:44:59 -0700 From: genius@marblecliff.com Subject: Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Message-ID: <1175013899.159571.135410@p15g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> On Mar 27, 12:01 pm, JF Mezei wrote: > Mark Daniel wrote: > > Of course you can understand why people > > with a need for technical discussion have migrated away from c.o.v. > > I think that there are far more important issues that have made c.o.v. less > populated. For one, access to NNTP is not as widespread as it used to be as many > ISPs no longer provide access to it. > > Secondly, and more importantly, one must not discount the shrinking VMS > community as a whole. > > As a community, I would say that C.O.V. has shown a tremendous amount of > patience and tolerance with regards to "social discussions" and manages to > usually retain a very professional attitude despite controversial posts. > > Yeah, the past couple of weeks has seen its fair share of off topic discussions. > but if this group can start to have discussions on religion and keep it fairly > civil, it is quite a testament (no pun intended) to the professionalism of this > group. but this group cannot be civil ... they call out conservatives and Christians with their constant cracks, then they get rebutted and resort to name calling and CENSORSHIP ... ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 16:46:54 GMT From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Time for C.O.V.subgroups ? Message-ID: <56t03uF2a1vv2U1@mid.individual.net> In article <8b15e$46093fd1$cef8887a$28803@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei writes: > Mark Daniel wrote: >> Of course you can understand why people >> with a need for technical discussion have migrated away from c.o.v. > > I think that there are far more important issues that have made c.o.v. less > populated. For one, access to NNTP is not as widespread as it used to be as many > ISPs no longer provide access to it. Hardly an excuse when you have things like news.individual.de that provide a very good (and well spam filtered) service for a trivial charge. > > Secondly, and more importantly, one must not discount the shrinking VMS > community as a whole. This is most likely the cause. > > As a community, I would say that C.O.V. has shown a tremendous amount of > patience and tolerance with regards to "social discussions" and manages to > usually retain a very professional attitude despite controversial posts. > > Yeah, the past couple of weeks has seen its fair share of off topic discussions. > but if this group can start to have discussions on religion and keep it fairly > civil, it is quite a testament (no pun intended) to the professionalism of this > group. And easily filtered if you really don't want to see it. But in general, this group is a real gem. The only groups I read frequentlyi, everyday are the PDP-11 groups and this one!! And even though I disagree with the ideas and politics of a number of the members here it is still the place where I find the largest number of people who's opinions I think are worth listening to. As for creating sub-groups of comp.os.vms, I would not get my hopes up. The current USENET model would require that you convince a large number of people who have never heard of VMS that it was worthwhile. It is much more likely to result in them starting a vote on wether or not to kill c.o.v. Some things are best left alone. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 07:32:30 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Willing to bet this is Windows at its best Message-ID: In article , Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: > > Yes, that is the point. OPER is the _only_ extra privilege needed by > operations staff. And NIST 800-53 AC-5 says those people should be > separate from the system managers (who need more privilege). The operations staff does the backups. There's no sensitive data, so readall is appropriate. But I worked in a lot of shops which were setup prior to the current NIST standards and they'll fight tooth and nail that they "can't get thier job done" if you take away a privilege they don't need to do thier jobs. Even when I proved that the only use of a certain privilege was to cause problems for a non-privileged user the respinse was "we didn't do that". ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 07:36:30 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Willing to bet this is Windows at its best Message-ID: In article <56q0irF29v44kU1@mid.individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: > > Shouldn't you have said something along the lines of, "The programs here > are junk and don't work properly regardless of the OS they run on." No. I've seen too many problems with the UNIX way of doing all or nothing (either you're root or your not), and using suid/sgid for file access control. It's too easy to get it wrong and to easy to leave a gaping hole that was never intended. I know some UNIX have looked into finer grained privileges, but something propietary to Solaris (for example), isn't "UNIX" in the sense of portability and availability. And I think they're still relying on those suid/sgid bits. The standard UNIX security design dates to the late 1960s/early 1970s and it needs to be replaced. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2007 09:16:19 -0700 From: "AEF" Subject: Re: Willing to bet this is Windows at its best Message-ID: <1175012179.500251.182350@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> On Mar 27, 12:04 pm, JF Mezei wrote: > Bob Koehler wrote: > > The operations staff does the backups. There's no sensitive data, > > so readall is appropriate. > > But doesn't the operator need write privilege if the backup has a /RECORD > qualifier in it ? or is that a special case for VMS security that allows the > backup recoding date to be modified without write access to the file ? No, yes: >From the online security manual: READALL Privilege (Objects) The READALL privilege lets the process bypass existing restrictions that would otherwise prevent the process from reading an object. However, unlike the BYPASS privilege, which permits writing and deleting, READALL permits only the reading of objects and allows updating of such backup-related file characteristics as the backup date. See the HP OpenVMS System Management Utilities Reference Manual and the HP OpenVMS System Manager's Manual for a discussion of backup operations. READALL is intended to be an adequate privilege for backing up volumes, so grant this privilege to operators so they can perform system backups. ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2007.172 ************************