INFO-VAX Tue, 11 Nov 2008 Volume 2008 : Issue 611 Contents: Re: /SYSTEM and /FOREIGN on a disk on the same MOUNT command Emulation Re: Emulation Re: Emulation RE: Emulation Re: Emulation Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of Re: Peek&Spy anyone ? Re: Peek&Spy anyone ? Re: Peek&Spy anyone ? Re: SFF (Send From File) Utility Re: SFF (Send From File) Utility Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:44:22 +0100 From: Jur van der Burg <"lddriver at digiater dot nl"> Subject: Re: /SYSTEM and /FOREIGN on a disk on the same MOUNT command Message-ID: <491945e6$0$191$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> > I think it *might* have something to do with official support > for Jur's LD (Logical Disk) ... No, not at all. It's already possible for a long long time (as long as I can remember :-)) Jur. R.A.Omond wrote: > IanMiller wrote: >> On 7 Nov, 22:10, Arne Vajh=F8j wrote: >>> R.A.Omond wrote: >>>> etmsr...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: >>>>> Just had an interesting one... >>>>> I'd always taken that /SYSTEM and /FOREIGN were mutually exclusive = - >>>>> you wouldn't be allowed to mount a volume system wide if you were >>>>> mounting it foreign as you'd only want one thread/process to be abl= e >>>>> to squirt data at the disk. >>>>> A colleague just tried doing the two qualifiers on the same command= >>>>> and it worked. Odd in my view! >>>>> Is this a bug or have I got it the wrong way round in my head? >>>> I see no reason whatsoever to even begin to consider this a bug. >>>> Why should you not be able to do that ? >>> Because for a couple of decades you could not. >> >> It's an improvement then :-) >> Although I wonder why. >=20 > Oh yes, it's very much an improvement. I'd go as far to say > it's fixed an, ahem, "misfeature". >=20 > I think it *might* have something to do with official support > for Jur's LD (Logical Disk) ... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:26:12 GMT From: "Tim Wilkinson" Subject: Emulation Message-ID: Well tell me how good/bad it is. At home I play with simh and have never had a problem. However, my employers still have a cluster with a pair of 6100 for legacy data and about 4 interactive users. It is costing us about £30,000 per annum to maintain/run. They are clustered for resilience but the HSC went down for 1/2 a day last month which is making the internal customer uneasy about reliability. We did have a spare HSC but the maintenance company insisted in shipping in parts rather than use an unknown controller that had been sat in a store room for 6 years. So the customer is asking about moving it all to virtualisation. Guess we have oversold our VMWare setup. First issue is that we should be clear of our legal requirement on data retention in about 18 months, and the only live app should have been replaced by then. Therefore it does not make sense to install new dedicated hardware for 18 months. We do not have sources for the two main legacy applications and the vendors ceased trading some years ago. Hence I have suggested to my employers the emulation route, and would guess they would opt towards a Charon solution as they are still very wary of open source and a perceived lack of support and/or problem ownership etc. What is the opinion out there in the land of real users, how quick/involved is it to set up an emulated VAX system? (I know I did it with simh in a couple of hours and I had not touched VMS for at least 10 years). What sort of host platform is required in the real world? What lessons did the people who have replaced VAX hardware with emulation learn? and what mistakes? I guess if we do opt for an emulation based replacement I would end up being the PM. and having raised the issue, suggested a potential solution I would be keen to avoid egg on my face if reliability/cost of ownership etc. fail to meet expectation. We have a history of under estimating project costs/ complexity in order to make the transition through mahogany row and I am keen that this is not another typical project by identifying all risk/costs early. Any advice you guys out there can offer would be appreciated. Remember this is very early days. No project has yet been identified/sanctioned etc. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 07:36:14 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Gezelter Subject: Re: Emulation Message-ID: <48e73ba6-a639-4bf0-8f72-d4f82cf478ed@v22g2000pro.googlegroups.com> On Nov 11, 6:26=A0am, "Tim Wilkinson" wrote: > Well tell me how good/bad it is. > > At home I play with simh and have never had a problem. However, my employ= ers > still have a cluster with a pair of 6100 for legacy data and about 4 > interactive users. It is costing us about =A330,000 per annum to maintain= /run. > > They are clustered for resilience but the HSC went down for 1/2 a day las= t > month which is making the internal customer uneasy about reliability. We = did > have a spare HSC but the maintenance company insisted in shipping in part= s > rather than use an unknown controller that had been sat in a store room f= or > 6 years. > > So the customer is asking about moving it all to virtualisation. Guess we > have oversold our VMWare setup. > > First issue is that we should be clear of our legal requirement on data > retention in about 18 months, and the only =A0live app should have been > replaced by then. Therefore it does not make sense to install new dedicat= ed > hardware for 18 months. We do not have sources for the two main legacy > applications and the vendors ceased trading some years ago. Hence I have > suggested to my employers the emulation route, and would guess they would > opt towards a Charon solution as they are still very wary of open source = and > a perceived lack of support and/or problem ownership etc. > > What is the opinion out there in the land of real users, how quick/involv= ed > is it to set up an emulated VAX system? (I know I did it with simh in a > couple of hours and I had not touched VMS for at least 10 years). What so= rt > of host platform is required in the real world? What lessons did the peop= le > who have replaced VAX hardware with emulation learn? and what mistakes? > > I guess if we do opt for an emulation based replacement I would end up be= ing > the PM. and having raised the issue, suggested a potential solution I wou= ld > be keen to avoid egg on my face if reliability/cost of ownership etc. fai= l > to meet expectation. > > We have a history of under estimating project costs/ complexity in order = to > make the transition through mahogany row and I am keen that this is not > another typical =A0project =A0by identifying all risk/costs early. > > Any advice you guys out there can offer would be appreciated. Remember th= is > is very early days. No project has yet been identified/sanctioned etc. Tim, An emulated environment can deal quite well with preserving access to environments without keeping the old hardware online. The first two questions that I always ask are: - What utilization is currently? - Are there any non disk peripherals involved? Hardware today is sufficiently fast that most circa-6100 VAX environments fit within a reasonable small server/blade package. I do recommend purchasing high quality hardware (e.g., ECC, etc.) as that can be a problem in the x86 world. I also recommend checking out the environment BEFORE committing to it to guard against unforeseen hazards. Many older systems are not documented and can produce surprises. - Bob Gezelter, http://www.rlgsc.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:21:51 +0000 From: "R.A.Omond" Subject: Re: Emulation Message-ID: <4919b1dc$0$90273$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Tim Wilkinson wrote: > Well tell me how good/bad it is. > > At home I play with simh and have never had a problem. However, my employers > still have a cluster with a pair of 6100 for legacy data and about 4 > interactive users. It is costing us about £30,000 per annum to maintain/run. > > They are clustered for resilience but the HSC went down for 1/2 a day last > month which is making the internal customer uneasy about reliability. We did > have a spare HSC but the maintenance company insisted in shipping in parts > rather than use an unknown controller that had been sat in a store room for > 6 years. > > [...rest snipped...] Tim, maybe my memory is fading, but I don't recall there ever having been a VAX 6100 (emphasis on 6*1*00). Perhaps, before going further, you can describe the exact current environment (including HSC model, and storage subsystems). As much detail as possible please. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:39:43 +0000 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: Emulation Message-ID: <9D02E14BC0A2AE43A5D16A4CD8EC5A593ED953104D@GVW1158EXB.americas.hpqcorp.net> > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Gezelter [mailto:gezelter@rlgsc.com] > Sent: November 11, 2008 10:36 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: Emulation > > On Nov 11, 6:26 am, "Tim Wilkinson" wrote: > > Well tell me how good/bad it is. > > > > At home I play with simh and have never had a problem. However, my > employers > > still have a cluster with a pair of 6100 for legacy data and about 4 > > interactive users. It is costing us about =A330,000 per annum to > maintain/run. > > > > They are clustered for resilience but the HSC went down for 1/2 a day > last > > month which is making the internal customer uneasy about reliability. > We did > > have a spare HSC but the maintenance company insisted in shipping in > parts > > rather than use an unknown controller that had been sat in a store > room for > > 6 years. > > > > So the customer is asking about moving it all to virtualisation. > Guess we > > have oversold our VMWare setup. > > > > First issue is that we should be clear of our legal requirement on > data > > retention in about 18 months, and the only live app should have been > > replaced by then. Therefore it does not make sense to install new > dedicated > > hardware for 18 months. We do not have sources for the two main > legacy > > applications and the vendors ceased trading some years ago. Hence I > have > > suggested to my employers the emulation route, and would guess they > would > > opt towards a Charon solution as they are still very wary of open > source and > > a perceived lack of support and/or problem ownership etc. > > > > What is the opinion out there in the land of real users, how > quick/involved > > is it to set up an emulated VAX system? (I know I did it with simh in > a > > couple of hours and I had not touched VMS for at least 10 years). > What sort > > of host platform is required in the real world? What lessons did the > people > > who have replaced VAX hardware with emulation learn? and what > mistakes? > > > > I guess if we do opt for an emulation based replacement I would end > up being > > the PM. and having raised the issue, suggested a potential solution I > would > > be keen to avoid egg on my face if reliability/cost of ownership etc. > fail > > to meet expectation. > > > > We have a history of under estimating project costs/ complexity in > order to > > make the transition through mahogany row and I am keen that this is > not > > another typical project by identifying all risk/costs early. > > > > Any advice you guys out there can offer would be appreciated. > Remember this > > is very early days. No project has yet been identified/sanctioned > etc. > > Tim, > > An emulated environment can deal quite well with preserving access to > environments without keeping the old hardware online. The first two > questions that I always ask are: > > - What utilization is currently? > - Are there any non disk peripherals involved? > > Hardware today is sufficiently fast that most circa-6100 VAX > environments fit within a reasonable small server/blade package. I do > recommend purchasing high quality hardware (e.g., ECC, etc.) as that > can be a problem in the x86 world. > > I also recommend checking out the environment BEFORE committing to it > to guard against unforeseen hazards. Many older systems are not > documented and can produce surprises. > > - Bob Gezelter, http://www.rlgsc.com If doing the Charon option, while it certainly is a good prod, if you want to avoid any surprises in the business case (as you indicated), I would also recommend getting a quote from a Charon partner as the costs are often far greater than what most expect e.g. for VAX 6xxx emulation, expect greater than $100K license + annual support costs for one VAX 6xxx server emulation license. 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: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:20:24 GMT From: "Tim Wilkinson" Subject: Re: Emulation Message-ID: Whoops yes it was a pair of 6610. However, I seriously doubt the load the have today would trouble anything more than a 3100 of some description. I need to get access to these systems to gauge current load/utilisation/configuration etc. However if it is only likely to cost us in the region of £45,000 for the required life, I doubt Charon is a viable option "R.A.Omond" wrote in message news:4919b1dc$0$90273$14726298@news.sunsite.dk... > Tim Wilkinson wrote: >> Well tell me how good/bad it is. >> >> At home I play with simh and have never had a problem. However, my >> employers still have a cluster with a pair of 6100 for legacy data and >> about 4 interactive users. It is costing us about £30,000 per annum to >> maintain/run. >> >> They are clustered for resilience but the HSC went down for 1/2 a day >> last month which is making the internal customer uneasy about >> reliability. We did have a spare HSC but the maintenance company insisted >> in shipping in parts rather than use an unknown controller that had been >> sat in a store room for 6 years. >> >> [...rest snipped...] > > Tim, maybe my memory is fading, but I don't recall there ever having > been a VAX 6100 (emphasis on 6*1*00). > > Perhaps, before going further, you can describe the exact current > environment (including HSC model, and storage subsystems). As > much detail as possible please. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Nov 2008 06:55:46 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of Message-ID: In article <11ec677e-e607-4133-b206-17f008687d7c@35g2000pry.googlegroups.com>, yyyc186 writes: > > How many non-US developers are working on the compilers and the OS? > It only takes one to no longer meet ITAR standards. IIRC the compilers and OS have been granted license for export to China et. al. They have probably been ruled not ITAR sensitive. Even under the Bush administration, not all technology is ITAR sensitive technology. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:36:43 GMT From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= Subject: Re: Peek&Spy anyone ? Message-ID: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > In article , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= writes: >> Hi. >> Anyone used Peek&Spy from "Networking Dynamics Corporation" ? >> Any comments on the product ? >> >> http://networkingdynamics.com/Peek.htm >> >> Jan-Erik. > > Yes, but RaxcoSuport/CONTRL is better! ;) > Completely mooth argument if I can't download a demo directly. I've downloaded a 30-day demo of Peek&Spy yesterday evening and had it up-n-running in a few minutes. Is there something like that for RaxcoSupport ? And I've still not heard anything from anyone about RaxcoSupport (apart from some info here on c.o.v). That makes it non-existant as far as I'm concerned... Jan-Erik. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:42:14 GMT From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= Subject: Re: Peek&Spy anyone ? Message-ID: Shael Richmond wrote: > Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote: >> Hi. >> Anyone used Peek&Spy from "Networking Dynamics Corporation" ? >> Any comments on the product ? >> >> http://networkingdynamics.com/Peek.htm >> > We have been using it for years on VAX, Alpha, and now Itanium. > Works as advertised and they have good support. > > > Shael Fine. I downloaded a copy (30-day demo) yesterday evening and it seems to work well. In our case I want to use it to "listen" to TNA and LTA connected production equipment such as barcode readers and PLC's. So it's not normal terminal based "users". In the test yesterday I used it to "spy" on a FTA terminal created from an SSH session. No particual problem apart from the default to exit the spy session that opened the "print" dialog in Reflection... :-) OK, I'll await the sales dept of the compny to supply me with prices... Jan-Erik. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 03:22:27 -0800 (PST) From: Rob Subject: Re: Peek&Spy anyone ? Message-ID: <0816a53b-337f-4f3f-9264-b63a268f3ca6@d42g2000prb.googlegroups.com> On Nov 10, 11:35=A0pm, Jan-Erik S=F6derholm wrote: > Hi. > Anyone used Peek&Spy from "Networking Dynamics Corporation" ? > Any comments on the product ? > > http://networkingdynamics.com/Peek.htm > > Jan-Erik. I would second Vaxman's suggestion of Raxco Control. If you're looking for a cheap and cheerfull method, you can do this with SET HOST :- ALPHA_ROB$ sh log *weigh* (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE) "NTA$WEIGH" =3D "LTA9033:" "NTA$WEIGHBAR" =3D "LTA9034:" (LNM$SYSCLUSTER_TABLE) ALPHA_ROB$ BETA_ROB$ set host /dte NTA$WEIGHBAR %REM-S-END, control returned to node BETA %SYSTEM-W-DEVALLOC, device already allocated to another user BETA_ROB$ gim share BETA_ROB$ set host /dte NTA$WEIGHBAR %REM-I-TOQUIT, connection established Press Ctrl/\ to quit, Ctrl/@ for command mode ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 03:10:30 -0800 (PST) From: Rob Subject: Re: SFF (Send From File) Utility Message-ID: On Oct 31, 10:51=A0pm, "Michael D. Ober" wrote: > Is there anyway to change the default behavior of the TCPIP v5.6 SFF > utility. =A0The change I'm looking for is to have it use a "smart host" f= or > forwarding emails. =A0The default behavior is that if you have an email g= oing > to multiple domains, SFF generates an email for each domain. =A0What I'd = like > to have it do is generate a single email with all the headers so that the > "smart host" can split the message to multiple domains. =A0For example: > > RCPT TO:<> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(Outlook Express woul= dn't allow > single brackets) > RCPT TO:<> > > generates two emails, one to each domain. =A0What I'd like it to do is se= nd a > single email and allow the smart host (in this case, an Exchange server w= ith > message journaling running) do the split into multiple messages. =A0Split= ting > into multiple messages causes additional work and storage requirements on > the Exchange Server. > > Thanks, > Mike Ober. Mike, I would recomment using MIME.EXE instead. That way, you can control the email yourself. This is an extract of our Email script, which allows HTML formatted, mixed-content, etc. Hopefully you should be able to decipher it, but let me know if not. Rob. $ OPEN /WRITE SCRIPTFILE SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMESCRIPT_'PRCPID'.TMP $ WRITE SCRIPTFILE "$ RUN SYS$SYSTEM:MIME.EXE" $ WRITE SCRIPTFILE "OPEN SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER_''PRCPID'.TMP / DRAFT" $ ! $PROCESS_LOOP: $ IF F$TYPE(FILEELEM_'COUNT') .EQS. "" THEN GOTO END_PROCESS_LOOP $ ! $ FILETEMP =3D FILEELEM_'COUNT' $ SH SYM FILETEMP $ ! $ FILETYPE =3D F$PARSE("''FILETEMP'",,,"TYPE") - "." $ FILENAME =3D F$PARSE("''FILETEMP'",,,"NAME") $ ! $ FILEMODE =3D "UNKNOWN" $ ! $ MIMESTRING =3D F$TRNLNM("WEBREPORT$MIMETYPE_''FILETYPE'",,0) $ MIMETYPE =3D F$TRNLNM("WEBREPORT$MIMETYPE_''FILETYPE'",,1) $ MIMETRANS =3D F$TRNLNM("WEBREPORT$MIMETYPE_''FILETYPE'",,2) $ MIMEACCELIO =3D F$TRNLNM("WEBREPORT$MIMETYPE_''FILETYPE'",,3) $ ! $ FILEMODE =3D "''MIMETYPE'" $ ! $ IF FILEMODE .EQS. "UNKNOWN" .OR FILEMODE .EQS. "" $ THEN $ STRING =3D "%UAM-E-UNKTYP, Unknown file type '" + FILETYPE + "' - must be a valid WEBREPORT$MIMETYPE_xxx type" $ ERRORMOD UTL_AUTOMAIL REQUEST "''STRING'" $ GOTO END $ ENDIF $ ! $ DUMMY =3D F$SEA("",28) $ ! $ IF F$SEA("''FILETEMP'",28) .EQS. "" $ THEN $ WS "%UAM-E-PFNF, Cannot find file ''FILETEMP'" $ ERRORMOD UTL_AUTOMAIL MAIL "%UAM-E-PFNF, Cannot find file ''FILETEMP'" "" "''ERRLIST'" $ GOTO END $ ENDIF $ ! $ IF FILEMODE .EQS. "BINARY" $ THEN $ WRITE SCRIPTFILE "ADD ''FILETEMP' /BINARY" $ ELSE $ WRITE SCRIPTFILE "ADD ''FILETEMP' /TEXT / ENCODING=3DQUOTED" $ ENDIF $ ! $ COUNT =3D COUNT + 1 $ ! $ GOTO PROCESS_LOOP $ ! $END_PROCESS_LOOP: $ WRITE SCRIPTFILE "SAVE" $ WRITE SCRIPTFILE "EXIT" $ CLOSE SCRIPTFILE $ ! $ CREATE SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER1_'PRCPID'.TMP Mime-version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=3DISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Content-Disposition: inline

3D"TBS

3D"GBS

 3D"Transworld

THIS EMAIL WAS SENT BY AN AUTOMATED SYSTEM
- PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE -



$ CREATE SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER3_'PRCPID'.TMP

Please find your report or data files attached.

We hope that this report reaches you in perfect condition. Should there be a problem, please contact the I.T. Helpdesk on helpdesk@xxx.com or via telephone on +900 stating the nature of the problem.

If you no longer require this report, please let us know.

Please remember that most Random House Distribution reports are now available in an electronic format. This means that your reports are delivered quicker. Having access to the data also means that you can manipulate the data yourself, to obtain the information that you require.

If you are interested in this, please contact the I.T. Helpdesk for more information.


Random House I.T. Department


Random House offers a 3rd party distribution service from 3 independent distribution sites; The Book Service based in North Essex, Grantham Book Services located in Lincolnshire and Transworld situated in Northamptonshire.

$ ! $ IF BODYTEXT .NES. "" $ THEN $ ! Create file for bodytext, so that it appears in the middle of the body. $ ! $ IF F$SEA(BODYTEXT,28) .NES. "" $ THEN $ ! Append the file if it exists $ ! $ OPEN /WRITE HEADERFILE SYS $TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER2_'PRCPID'.TMP $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
"
$                       CLOSE HEADERFILE
$                       !
$                       APPEND /LOG 'BODYTEXT' SYS
$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER2_'PRCPID'.TMP
$                       !
$                       OPEN /APPEND HEADERFILE SYS
$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER2_'PRCPID'.TMP
$                       WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ CLOSE HEADERFILE $ ELSE $ ! Create a file with the text in $ ! $ OPEN /WRITE HEADERFILE SYS $TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER2_'PRCPID'.TMP $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
"
$                       WRITE HEADERFILE "''BODYTEXT'"
$                       WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ CLOSE HEADERFILE $ ENDIF $ ENDIF $ ! $ COPY /LOG SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER%_'PRCPID'.TMP; SYS $TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER_'PRCPID'.TMP $ ! $ @SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMESCRIPT_'PRCPID'.TMP $ ! $ SET DEF SYS$TEMP: ! Don't run MAIL in [LIVE.DAT] as it can leave duff files sometimes $ ! $ DEFINE TCPIP$SMTP_FROM "repxxx@xxx.com (Random House IT Dept.)" $ MAIL /NOSIG SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER_'PRCPID'.TMP "''EXPANDED_ADDRESS'" /SUBJECT=3D"''SUBJECT'" $ DEASS TCPIP$SMTP_FROM $ ! $ IF F$SEA("SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMESCRIPT_''PRCPID'.TMP;*",28) .NES. "" THEN DELETE /LOG SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMESCRIPT_'PRCPID'.TMP;* $ IF F$SEA("SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER_''PRCPID'.TMP;*",28) .NES. "" THEN DELETE /LOG SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER_'PRCPID'.TMP;* $ ! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 05:49:11 -0700 From: "Michael D. Ober" Subject: Re: SFF (Send From File) Utility Message-ID: <-cqdnZFstdvU4oTUnZ2dnUVZ_rPinZ2d@earthlink.com> Rob, I have already modified the sendmail script from openvms.org to generate a "single" message per call, regardless of the number of recipients. What I need now is a way to get the message from VMS to Exchange as a single message so that our Exchange servers can journal the message properly. SFF appears to send a message per recipient domain even though we're using the alternate gateway in the SMTP configuration. Mike. "Rob" wrote in message news:c113a21b-0b36-4197-befe-27eff49d041d@o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com... On Oct 31, 10:51 pm, "Michael D. Ober" wrote: > Is there anyway to change the default behavior of the TCPIP v5.6 SFF > utility. The change I'm looking for is to have it use a "smart host" for > forwarding emails. The default behavior is that if you have an email going > to multiple domains, SFF generates an email for each domain. What I'd like > to have it do is generate a single email with all the headers so that the > "smart host" can split the message to multiple domains. For example: > > RCPT TO:<> (Outlook Express wouldn't allow > single brackets) > RCPT TO:<> > > generates two emails, one to each domain. What I'd like it to do is send a > single email and allow the smart host (in this case, an Exchange server > with > message journaling running) do the split into multiple messages. Splitting > into multiple messages causes additional work and storage requirements on > the Exchange Server. > > Thanks, > Mike Ober. Mike, I would recomment using MIME.EXE instead. That way, you can control the email yourself. This is an extract of our Email script, which allows HTML formatted, mixed-content, etc. Hopefully you should be able to decipher it, but let me know if not. Rob. $ OPEN /WRITE SCRIPTFILE SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMESCRIPT_'PRCPID'.TMP $ WRITE SCRIPTFILE "$ RUN SYS$SYSTEM:MIME.EXE" $ WRITE SCRIPTFILE "OPEN SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER_''PRCPID'.TMP / DRAFT" $ ! $PROCESS_LOOP: $ IF F$TYPE(FILEELEM_'COUNT') .EQS. "" THEN GOTO END_PROCESS_LOOP $ ! $ FILETEMP = FILEELEM_'COUNT' $ SH SYM FILETEMP $ ! $ FILETYPE = F$PARSE("''FILETEMP'",,,"TYPE") - "." $ FILENAME = F$PARSE("''FILETEMP'",,,"NAME") $ ! $ FILEMODE = "UNKNOWN" $ ! $ MIMESTRING = F$TRNLNM("WEBREPORT$MIMETYPE_''FILETYPE'",,0) $ MIMETYPE = F$TRNLNM("WEBREPORT$MIMETYPE_''FILETYPE'",,1) $ MIMETRANS = F$TRNLNM("WEBREPORT$MIMETYPE_''FILETYPE'",,2) $ MIMEACCELIO = F$TRNLNM("WEBREPORT$MIMETYPE_''FILETYPE'",,3) $ ! $ FILEMODE = "''MIMETYPE'" $ ! $ IF FILEMODE .EQS. "UNKNOWN" .OR FILEMODE .EQS. "" $ THEN $ STRING = "%UAM-E-UNKTYP, Unknown file type '" + FILETYPE + "' - must be a valid WEBREPORT$MIMETYPE_xxx type" $ ERRORMOD UTL_AUTOMAIL REQUEST "''STRING'" $ GOTO END $ ENDIF $ ! $ DUMMY = F$SEA("",28) $ ! $ IF F$SEA("''FILETEMP'",28) .EQS. "" $ THEN $ WS "%UAM-E-PFNF, Cannot find file ''FILETEMP'" $ ERRORMOD UTL_AUTOMAIL MAIL "%UAM-E-PFNF, Cannot find file ''FILETEMP'" "" "''ERRLIST'" $ GOTO END $ ENDIF $ ! $ IF FILEMODE .EQS. "BINARY" $ THEN $ WRITE SCRIPTFILE "ADD ''FILETEMP' /BINARY" $ ELSE $ WRITE SCRIPTFILE "ADD ''FILETEMP' /TEXT / ENCODING=QUOTED" $ ENDIF $ ! $ COUNT = COUNT + 1 $ ! $ GOTO PROCESS_LOOP $ ! $END_PROCESS_LOOP: $ WRITE SCRIPTFILE "SAVE" $ WRITE SCRIPTFILE "EXIT" $ CLOSE SCRIPTFILE $ ! $ CREATE SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER1_'PRCPID'.TMP Mime-version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Content-Disposition: inline

TBS Logo, The Book
Service

GBS Logo,
Grantham Boo

 Transworld
Logo

THIS EMAIL WAS SENT BY AN AUTOMATED SYSTEM
- PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE -



$ CREATE SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER3_'PRCPID'.TMP

Please find your report or data files attached.

We hope that this report reaches you in perfect condition. Should there be a problem, please contact the I.T. Helpdesk on helpdesk@xxx.com or via telephone on +900 stating the nature of the problem.

If you no longer require this report, please let us know.

Please remember that most Random House Distribution reports are now available in an electronic format. This means that your reports are delivered quicker. Having access to the data also means that you can manipulate the data yourself, to obtain the information that you require.

If you are interested in this, please contact the I.T. Helpdesk for more information.


Random House I.T. Department


Random House offers a 3rd party distribution service from 3 independent distribution sites; The Book Service based in North Essex, Grantham Book Services located in Lincolnshire and Transworld situated in Northamptonshire.

$ ! $ IF BODYTEXT .NES. "" $ THEN $ ! Create file for bodytext, so that it appears in the middle of the body. $ ! $ IF F$SEA(BODYTEXT,28) .NES. "" $ THEN $ ! Append the file if it exists $ ! $ OPEN /WRITE HEADERFILE SYS $TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER2_'PRCPID'.TMP $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
"
$                       CLOSE HEADERFILE
$                       !
$                       APPEND /LOG 'BODYTEXT' SYS
$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER2_'PRCPID'.TMP
$                       !
$                       OPEN /APPEND HEADERFILE SYS
$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER2_'PRCPID'.TMP
$                       WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ CLOSE HEADERFILE $ ELSE $ ! Create a file with the text in $ ! $ OPEN /WRITE HEADERFILE SYS $TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER2_'PRCPID'.TMP $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
"
$                       WRITE HEADERFILE "''BODYTEXT'"
$                       WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ WRITE HEADERFILE "
" $ CLOSE HEADERFILE $ ENDIF $ ENDIF $ ! $ COPY /LOG SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER%_'PRCPID'.TMP; SYS $TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER_'PRCPID'.TMP $ ! $ @SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMESCRIPT_'PRCPID'.TMP $ ! $ SET DEF SYS$TEMP: ! Don't run MAIL in [LIVE.DAT] as it can leave duff files sometimes $ ! $ DEFINE TCPIP$SMTP_FROM "repxxx@xxx.com (Random House IT Dept.)" $ MAIL /NOSIG SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER_'PRCPID'.TMP "''EXPANDED_ADDRESS'" /SUBJECT="''SUBJECT'" $ DEASS TCPIP$SMTP_FROM $ ! $ IF F$SEA("SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMESCRIPT_''PRCPID'.TMP;*",28) .NES. "" THEN DELETE /LOG SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMESCRIPT_'PRCPID'.TMP;* $ IF F$SEA("SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER_''PRCPID'.TMP;*",28) .NES. "" THEN DELETE /LOG SYS$TEMP:UAM_MIMEHEADER_'PRCPID'.TMP;* $ ! ------------------------------ Date: 11 Nov 2008 07:03:45 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? Message-ID: In article <6nr500Ff2ikU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: > > Not enough of them to even count. The pretty much depends on which niche your application fits in. If your application fits in that niche, it very much counts. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Nov 2008 14:13:30 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? Message-ID: <6nti8aFqqchU1@mid.individual.net> In article , koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: > In article <6nr500Ff2ikU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >> >> Not enough of them to even count. > > The pretty much depends on which niche your application fits in. > If your application fits in that niche, it very much counts. > As usual you cut a most important prt of the context. > But there are niches where VMS and not UNIX, Windows, or > even Tandem is an option. Name them!! Exactly what "niche" can only be filled by VMS? And if one actually exists then why isn't HP making this very publicly known and pushing VMS into the public eye by very vocally filling this niche? These questions are, of course, rhetorical. The owners of VMS do not see it as strategic to any niche but merely a cash cow. And that cow gets leaner every day. Hardly worth slaughtering at this point. Probably just letr it die in the pasture. 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 ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2008.611 ************************