INFO-VAX Mon, 25 Aug 2008 Volume 2008 : Issue 465 Contents: Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS RE: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Local VMS talent in Memphis, TN Phase V: it's not just the UI, U know. Re: Phase V: it's not just the UI, U know. Re: strange tcpip issue VMS Programmer Memphis ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 25 Aug 2008 12:08:19 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Message-ID: <6hflljFknuntU1@mid.individual.net> In article <00A7E7EB.AA4FA910@ssrl.slac.stanford.edu>, winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing) writes: > In article , koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: >>In article <6h5c4rFjdi7iU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >>> >>> You are not by any chance refering to "Safe-C" which was available for >>> the PDP-11 under Unix and other OSes as far back as the 70's, were you? :-) >> >> Safe-C, or SAFEC, or some similar name and I don't know of all the >> things they did that made it "safe". > > > As I vaguely recall, it was actually an interpreter rather than a compiler, > which meant they couldcatch runtime errors, buffer overflows, etc, etc. OK, got the book. Actually, there were two products. An Interpreter and a Compiler. The Interpreter is pushed as a development tool and not as a production runtime environment. The compiler boasts: "The sc differs from ordinary compilers in thre run-time checking, tracing, and profiling it provides for C programs. Code generated by the Safe C Compiler checks for: Misuse of functions: sc detects mismatched formal and actual parameters and checks the types and number of parameters. Array indexing out of bounds: sc checks for errant array indexes, including indexes in parameter arrays and in the argument kist to main. Stray pointers: sc checks for data pointers that point outside of a program's data area and for function pointers that point outside the text area. Arithmetic errors: sc checks for arithmetic overflow and division by 0. Misuse of standard I/O: sc checks the validity, types, and number of arguments to routines in the standard I/O library. In addition, sc compares the control string in calls to the formatted input and output routines to the actual arguments passed and checks arguments for valid values. Misuse of string functions: sc checks the types and values of arguments to the copy, catenate, and length functions for strings." Both were, apparently, also available for the VAX but it doesn't say for which OS. On the PDP-11 the Interpreter was available for Ultrix-11 and the Compiler was available for: RSTS, RSX, RT-11, Ultrix-11 and UNIX Version 7. It was from a company called "CATALYTIX CORP." in Cambridge, MA and the contact was someone called Donald D. French. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 25 Aug 2008 12:18:03 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Message-ID: <6hfm7rFknuntU2@mid.individual.net> In article , "Tom Linden" writes: > > > > Well I am aware of one organization operating for a government agency > a large multi cpu VAX with enough spares to last them through 2020, whic= > h > they plan to do. Don't know all the reasons why they won't switch but = > > H-float > and PL/I are two and the lifetime of the project another. Not by any chance headquartered out of Moffett Field, is it? bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 25 Aug 2008 12:21:19 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Message-ID: <6hfmduFknuntU3@mid.individual.net> In article <8f7d0af3-c42e-4f6b-8f5c-fdb560cfdcdd@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, jferraro writes: >> More seriously though: VAX 7000s in production? Has anyone looked at >> how much they're costing vs more recent kit? Maintenance, power, >> cooling and square-footage (?) on kit (including storage?) from that >> era won't be cheap; when I last looked, in most environments, moving >> to something current whilst staying with VMS (and therefore >> introducing relatively little risk) would typically have a very short >> payback time, maybe a year or two? How often can you get a payback >> time of that length? It can get more interesting if the business is >> organised in a way where revenue spend and capital spend come under >> separate stovepipes, but even that shouldn't be insurmountable. >> > It is interesting, I assure you. As it goes, several folks over the > years have put together business cases to port the existing COBOL (and > other) code to JAVA and the like, with the end goal in mind to > eliminate VMS. Costs to do so have been exorbitant and so it has made > more sense, so to speak, to put VMS back in the corner and forget > about it - and continue on our merry way. The cost of copnverting COBOL to JAVA is hardly justification for keeping VMS around. One could easily convert COBOL to COBOL on a less expensive to maintain platform. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 25 Aug 2008 12:24:40 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Message-ID: <6hfmk8FknuntU4@mid.individual.net> In article , clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP (Simon Clubley) writes: > In article , "Richard B. Gilbert" writes: >> >> Carly just wanted DEC Field Service! That was the center piece of the >> deal. VMS, Alpha technology and all the rest were just clutter that >> came with what she really wanted. > > And here in the UK, many (all ?) of those Field Service engineers, including > the one onsite today, promptly got outsourced to a third party supplier > called Phoenix. And that is becuase she didn't really want the "DEC Field Service" organization. All she really wanted was the customer base. This is a very common practice in the business world. Or do you really think that Cisco bought Linksys because they saw them as "competition"? bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 07:06:21 -0700 (PDT) From: johnwallace4@yahoo.co.uk Subject: Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Message-ID: <28aca8bb-29d0-4c1b-b559-a484f0bd82bc@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com> On Aug 25, 1:24 pm, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote: > In article , > clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP (Simon Clubley) writ= es: > > > In article , "Richard B. = Gilbert" writes: > > >> Carly just wanted DEC Field Service! That was the center piece of the > >> deal. VMS, Alpha technology and all the rest were just clutter that > >> came with what she really wanted. > > > And here in the UK, many (all ?) of those Field Service engineers, incl= uding > > the one onsite today, promptly got outsourced to a third party supplier > > called Phoenix. > > And that is becuase she didn't really want the "DEC Field Service" > organization. All she really wanted was the customer base. This > is a very common practice in the business world. Or do you really > think that Cisco bought Linksys because they saw them as "competition"? > > bill > > -- > Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolve= s > billg...@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. > University of Scranton | > Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include Customers I have known who knew both HP (classic) FS and DEC (classic) FS on the same site (and sometimes on the same kit, occasionally at the same time!) have generally thought more highly of the DEC (classic) FS. I'm now a bit out of touch in that respect (in just the same way as senior management would be out of touch with reality at the sharp end), so I don't know what the picture has been post-HP. I personally have no idea why Cisco bought Linksys, unless Cisco HQ thought their shareholders would think it was a good idea to be seen to be "doing something", or Linksys management saw an opportunity and made a few extra dollars out of it. In the UK, Linksys are now selling some of their stuff in the UK's biggest supermarket chain (no, not Wal- Mart, Tesco); I can't see how that makes sense either in volume (won't be high) or margin (very limited), unless they're planning to make the money back on =A31/minute support lines or daftness like that. Cisco buying Linksys makes about as much sense to me as Nortel buying Netgear in 1998. Then by 2002 Netgear had been sold off again, by which time I imagine two sets of corporate mergers+acquisitions advisors had made their megabonuses and moved on, leaving both Nortel and Netgear worse off by an equivalent amount, and with a few years of distractions at the top. The majority of corporate mergers and acquisitions end in failure, in the same way as most business startups end in failure. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:09:26 +0000 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS Message-ID: <9D02E14BC0A2AE43A5D16A4CD8EC5A593ED5E39909@GVW1158EXB.americas.hpqcorp.net> -----Original Message----- > From: Bill Gunshannon [mailto:billg999@cs.uofs.edu] > Sent: August 25, 2008 8:21 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: DEFCON 16 and Hacking OpenVMS > > In article <8f7d0af3-c42e-4f6b-8f5c- > fdb560cfdcdd@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, > jferraro writes: > >> More seriously though: VAX 7000s in production? Has anyone looked at > >> how much they're costing vs more recent kit? Maintenance, power, > >> cooling and square-footage (?) on kit (including storage?) from that > >> era won't be cheap; when I last looked, in most environments, moving > >> to something current whilst staying with VMS (and therefore > >> introducing relatively little risk) would typically have a very > short > >> payback time, maybe a year or two? How often can you get a payback > >> time of that length? It can get more interesting if the business is > >> organised in a way where revenue spend and capital spend come under > >> separate stovepipes, but even that shouldn't be insurmountable. > >> > > It is interesting, I assure you. As it goes, several folks over the > > years have put together business cases to port the existing COBOL > (and > > other) code to JAVA and the like, with the end goal in mind to > > eliminate VMS. Costs to do so have been exorbitant and so it has made > > more sense, so to speak, to put VMS back in the corner and forget > > about it - and continue on our merry way. > > The cost of copnverting COBOL to JAVA is hardly justification for > keeping > VMS around. One could easily convert COBOL to COBOL on a less > expensive > to maintain platform. > > bill > Yeah, and what about the mountains of supporting DCL, RMS ACL's, SYSUAF rights identifiers, third party support utilities, licenses, backup environments, code management systems, clustered print queues etc that one typically has on a Cobol/Fortran/Basic/C/PL1 - OpenVMS environment? Also, what about the active-active system clustering that might be in place on the local cluster? Whenever someone says "lets just migrate", its like an iceberg i.e. what you see above the water are the easy to see techie issues. What is below the water are the issues I mentioned above which will sink the project because they were not properly understood and/or estimated correctly. Regards Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-254-8911 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT) OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:42:17 -0700 (PDT) From: 8675309jl <8675309JL@gmail.com> Subject: Local VMS talent in Memphis, TN Message-ID: CIBER is currently recruiting for a VMS Analyst in Memphis, TN. This is a Permanent position with our client company in Memphis. Responsibilities will involve supporting a Sales management system for a large industrial company that is based on a Open VMS / Dec Alpha System. Job Related Qualities: =95 Working knowledge of VMS =95 Knowledge of Oracle, Powerhouse and SQL or able to consult manuals to gain skill set needed =95 General understanding of EDI =95 Quickly understand business issues and data challenges of users =95 Develop functional specifications and/or documentation for requested projects =95 Manage time/resources in accordance with project schedule =95 Able to break down programs specification into its simplest elements and translate into a programming language =95 Handles critical issues with ease, reacting to problems and correcting the program(s) if needed Professional Qualities: =95 Lead testing issues =95 Consistently deliver high-quality services to our customers =95 Assists in enforcement of project deadlines and schedules =95 Ensure issues are identified, tracked, reported on and resolved in timely manner =95 Work with users to identify required changes =95 Good troubleshooting skills, recreating steps taken by the user to locate source of the problem =95 Able to work with a team as well as individually =95 Excellent communication skills APPLY http://career-advisor.jobamatic.com/a/jbb/job-details/25771 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 02:28:47 -0700 (PDT) From: johnwallace4@yahoo.co.uk Subject: Phase V: it's not just the UI, U know. Message-ID: <92621488-06bd-4e49-aebb-219cc5c0d108@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> On Aug 24, 9:46 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" wrote: > Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: > > > > > In article <8iWrk.47097$E41.38...@text.news.virginmedia.com>, "Tim > > Wilkinson" writes: > > >>True, normally I would have assigned a static address to devices I class as > >>"Servers", but as my "VAX" is a simh on my laptop which moves round with me, > >>it was convienient to use DHCP. I have not tried it, but would guess even > >>static assigned would not cope with the subnet mask my network people have > >>supplied for my home network. > > > Why? I used to have an ISDN connection with my own subnet (8 > > addresses, one for the router, one for the subnet, one broadcast, so 5 > > for machines). Why couldn't you use one of the addresses on the subnet > > your network people have provided? Of course, static doesn't mean so > > static that you can't change it depending on your network. :-) > > >>I find it surprising that DEC never "Got it" as they were at the forefront > >>of embracing networking. But for some reason seemed very reluctant to pick > >>up on TCP/IP. I remember running Wollongong to allow terminal server > >>attached users to connect to some of my microvaxes in the 80/90s. Other kit > >>had unibus hardware boards from Bridge (Later part of 3com) to allow TCP/IP > >>connected terminal servers to communicate. Even in that era, we were using > >>VLSM to allocate our allocated "Class B" network across the UK sites. > > > DEC manufactured DECnet, which was superior. Why should they have > > pushed something inferior? Non-DEC stuff could speak DECnet as well, so > > it wasn't clear that TCPIP would win in the end. > > DECNet Phase IV or Phase V? It was clear almost from day one that > DECNet V would not fly! TCP/IP had already conquered the world! NCL > and its documentation were enough of a PITA that I installed phase IV > rather than V on all of my machines. I'm still running Phase IV > whenever two or more of my home DEC systems are powered up. > > DEC networking never seemed to realize that most people were NOT running > all the weird point-to-point protocols that they supported. Phase IV > on the LAN, for the WAN/Internet TCP/IP all the way! "It was clear almost from day one that DECNet V would not fly!" Tell that to the folks in charge at GM, Boeing, Siemens, British Telecom, and many others in the mid 1980s and early 1990s. Put to one side the NCL user interface - unfamiliar it may have been, unusable it wasn't, once you got used to it (hmm, just like the Windows addicts say today about Linux, or even as some of them say about XP vs Vista...). OSI networking (which was the foundation for Phase V) solved loads of problems that the IP world has hardly noticed yet (and at least one which will be all too familiar with folks around the world). Like the VMS world vs the PC world, VMS and OSI benefit from an "architecture", rather than from an anarchic growth over decades. Same goes for properly designed VMS-based and OSI-based applications. The mail protocols SMTP and POP date back to an era of 110 baud teletypes and computers with 32kwords of memory. When X.400 OSI email came out, in the 1980s (?), it had reliable proof of identity, reliable proof of delivery, and anti-tamper mechanisms built in, but needed a bit of extra connectivity and compute power and admin to make them work. If I remember rightly, it even had support for "compound documents" (y'know, DEC-CDA-derived things like embedded pictures and spreadsheets etc) before Internerd email provided widespread support for MIME-encoding. Today, there's more than enough connectivity and compute power around to make these X.400 things work with no significant extra cost (today's average domestic DSL router has more bandwidth and compute power than an early-1980s VAX), but perhaps because most folks' email service is provided by folks who are providing it "free", or by software providers whose users mostly wouldn't understand "security" if it hit them in the face, there's zero visible incentive for investment to improve the email user experience. The result: years after spam became a problem, we're still stuck with SMTP and an email/ spam nightmare which is only partly mitigated by dozens of incomplete and un-co-ordinated Band-Aids. Funny way to run a network, where the needs of the folks *ab*using it (for spam) outweigh the needs of the legitimate users (the ones who are paying, albeit only a tiny amount, for the service). ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:51:45 -0400 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: Phase V: it's not just the UI, U know. Message-ID: <1c2dnRwKYo5hJS_VnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d@comcast.com> johnwallace4@yahoo.co.uk wrote: > On Aug 24, 9:46 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" > wrote: >> Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: >> >> >> >>> In article <8iWrk.47097$E41.38...@text.news.virginmedia.com>, "Tim >>> Wilkinson" writes: >>>> True, normally I would have assigned a static address to devices I class as >>>> "Servers", but as my "VAX" is a simh on my laptop which moves round with me, >>>> it was convienient to use DHCP. I have not tried it, but would guess even >>>> static assigned would not cope with the subnet mask my network people have >>>> supplied for my home network. >>> Why? I used to have an ISDN connection with my own subnet (8 >>> addresses, one for the router, one for the subnet, one broadcast, so 5 >>> for machines). Why couldn't you use one of the addresses on the subnet >>> your network people have provided? Of course, static doesn't mean so >>> static that you can't change it depending on your network. :-) >>>> I find it surprising that DEC never "Got it" as they were at the forefront >>>> of embracing networking. But for some reason seemed very reluctant to pick >>>> up on TCP/IP. I remember running Wollongong to allow terminal server >>>> attached users to connect to some of my microvaxes in the 80/90s. Other kit >>>> had unibus hardware boards from Bridge (Later part of 3com) to allow TCP/IP >>>> connected terminal servers to communicate. Even in that era, we were using >>>> VLSM to allocate our allocated "Class B" network across the UK sites. >>> DEC manufactured DECnet, which was superior. Why should they have >>> pushed something inferior? Non-DEC stuff could speak DECnet as well, so >>> it wasn't clear that TCPIP would win in the end. >> DECNet Phase IV or Phase V? It was clear almost from day one that >> DECNet V would not fly! TCP/IP had already conquered the world! NCL >> and its documentation were enough of a PITA that I installed phase IV >> rather than V on all of my machines. I'm still running Phase IV >> whenever two or more of my home DEC systems are powered up. >> >> DEC networking never seemed to realize that most people were NOT running >> all the weird point-to-point protocols that they supported. Phase IV >> on the LAN, for the WAN/Internet TCP/IP all the way! > > "It was clear almost from day one that DECNet V would not fly!" > > Tell that to the folks in charge at GM, Boeing, Siemens, British > Telecom, and many others in the mid 1980s and early 1990s. > > Put to one side the NCL user interface - unfamiliar it may have been, > unusable it wasn't, once you got used to it (hmm, just like the > Windows addicts say today about Linux, or even as some of them say > about XP vs Vista...). > > OSI networking (which was the foundation for Phase V) solved loads of > problems that the IP world has hardly noticed yet (and at least one > which will be all too familiar with folks around the world). Like the > VMS world vs the PC world, VMS and OSI benefit from an "architecture", > rather than from an anarchic growth over decades. Same goes for > properly designed VMS-based and OSI-based applications. The mail > protocols SMTP and POP date back to an era of 110 baud teletypes and > computers with 32kwords of memory. > Somehow, I can't get excited about a product that solves problems I didn't have when it was introduced, and which, ten or so years later, I still don't have. SMTP and POP may be "obsolete" but they have been delivering mail for the last 25 years or so and may be good for another ten or twenty years. DECnet Phase IV may be obsolete but it does the job I need done! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:42:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Rich Jordan Subject: Re: strange tcpip issue Message-ID: <779b6def-2820-4126-b967-61e0ae612396@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com> On Aug 24, 3:46=A0pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" wrote: > Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: > > > > > In article <8iWrk.47097$E41.38...@text.news.virginmedia.com>, "Tim > > Wilkinson" writes: > > >>True, normally I would have assigned a static address to devices I clas= s as > >>"Servers", but as my "VAX" is a simh on my laptop which moves round wit= h me, > >>it was convienient to use DHCP. I have not tried it, but would guess ev= en > >>static assigned would not cope with the subnet mask my network people h= ave > >>supplied for my home network. > > > Why? =A0I used to have an ISDN connection with my own subnet (8 > > addresses, one for the router, one for the subnet, one broadcast, so 5 > > for machines). =A0Why couldn't you use one of the addresses on the subn= et > > your network people have provided? =A0Of course, static doesn't mean so > > static that you can't change it depending on your network. =A0:-) > > >>I find it surprising that DEC never "Got it" as they were at the forefr= ont > >>of embracing networking. But for some reason seemed very reluctant to p= ick > >>up on TCP/IP. I remember running Wollongong to allow terminal server > >>attached users to connect to some of my microvaxes in the 80/90s. Other= kit > >>had unibus hardware boards from Bridge (Later part of 3com) to allow TC= P/IP > >>connected terminal servers to communicate. Even in that era, we were us= ing > >>VLSM to allocate our allocated "Class B" network across the UK sites. > > > DEC manufactured DECnet, which was superior. =A0Why should they have > > pushed something inferior? =A0Non-DEC stuff could speak DECnet as well,= so > > it wasn't clear that TCPIP would win in the end. > > DECNet Phase IV or Phase V? =A0It was clear almost from day one that > DECNet V would not fly! =A0TCP/IP had already conquered the world! =A0NCL > and its documentation were enough of a PITA that I installed phase IV > rather than V on all of my machines. =A0I'm still running Phase IV > whenever two or more of my home DEC systems are powered up. > > DEC networking never seemed to realize that most people were NOT running > =A0 all the weird point-to-point protocols that they supported. =A0Phase = IV > on the LAN, for the WAN/Internet TCP/IP all the way! I was working for a government contractor (under DOE) back in 1986-1990 when the very preliminary OSI stuff was being bandied about as the wave of the future. It was supposed to be mandatory for government contracts. That in itself was enough to drive a great deal of effort in implementing and 'selling' it. I went to at least three seminars by DEC about the transition. It was the government weaseling out of the POSIX and OSI mandates that pulled the rug out from under DEC and the other folks that had bothered to implement it. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:54:33 -0700 (PDT) From: 8675309jl <8675309JL@gmail.com> Subject: VMS Programmer Memphis Message-ID: CIBER is currently recruiting for a VMS Analyst in Memphis, TN. This is a Permanent position with our client company in Memphis. Responsibilities will involve supporting a Sales management system for a large industrial company that is based on a Open VMS / Dec Alpha System. Job Related Qualities: =95 Working knowledge of VMS =95 Knowledge of Oracle, Powerhouse and SQL or able to consult manuals to gain skill set needed =95 General understanding of EDI =95 Quickly understand business issues and data challenges of users =95 Develop functional specifications and/or documentation for requested projects =95 Manage time/resources in accordance with project schedule =95 Able to break down programs specification into its simplest elements and translate into a programming language =95 Handles critical issues with ease, reacting to problems and correcting the program(s) if needed Professional Qualities: =95 Lead testing issues =95 Consistently deliver high-quality services to our customers =95 Assists in enforcement of project deadlines and schedules =95 Ensure issues are identified, tracked, reported on and resolved in timely manner =95 Work with users to identify required changes =95 Good troubleshooting skills, recreating steps taken by the user to locate source of the problem =95 Able to work with a team as well as individually =95 Excellent communication skills http://career-advisor.jobamatic.com/a/jbb/job-details/25771 ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2008.465 ************************