INFO-VAX Sun, 27 May 2007 Volume 2007 : Issue 290 Contents: RE: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? DECwindows: PF key to bring an app to foreground ? Re: DECwindows: PF key to bring an app to foreground ? Re: Does NASA/JPL etc still use VMS? Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Re: DSSI allocation class puzzle Re: DSSI allocation class puzzle Re: DSSI allocation class puzzle Re: Interresting deadlock situation (Switch and cluster) RE: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? RE: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Re: Not on latest Roadmap: OpenVMS VAX Version 8.x "under investigation" RE: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out RE: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out RE: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Re: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Re: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Re: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Re: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Re: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Re: OpenVMS 2007 Bootcamp Re: OpenVMS 2007 Bootcamp Re: recognizing newly created device on HSG80 Re: SYSMAN: No SYS$SCRATCH/SYS$LOGIN ? Re: Terminating remote (Reflections) telnet sessions. Re: Terminating remote (Reflections) telnet sessions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 10:35:42 -0400 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Arne Vajh=F8j [mailto:arne@vajhoej.dk] > Sent: May 26, 2007 9:45 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? >=20 > Main, Kerry wrote: > >> Mass producing cars using an assembly line also brought the prices > >> of cars downs. > > > > Yeah, but how long would Toyota and Ford be in business if they gave > > away cars for free and only sold $1000/year support licenses? > > > > :-) >=20 > If the cars got build by enthusiasts which did it for fun, then > they would probably be in good shape. >=20 And we ignore that enthusiasts have to eat and to eat they need to make = money. > (we ignore the fact that cars require materials per copy, > because software does not) >=20 Software requires time and skilled resources. Both are limited = resources. As the old saying goes - "Linux is free as long as you value = your time as free as well." >=20 > > And as has been noted here in the past - if an OS platform has 5-20 > > security patches released each and every month, given the huge > > QA/testing for App certifications required, can a company actually > > afford that platform? >=20 > Apparently yes. >=20 Actually, you can not fault the Operations folks for not keeping the = hundreds of servers they maintain with 5-20 security patches per month. = The sheer volume is over whelming in many cases.=20 Remember that proper IT processes require their apps to be tested before = any new OS patches are released into production. > > Since most companies can not keep up with this huge volume of > > security patching, they tend to release patches with no testing or > > simply let the patches pile up thinking their firewall is good so > > they can get away with it. > > > > Unfortunately, as most security analysts will tell you, approx 50- > 60% > > of all security incidents are internal related. >=20 > How many of those use holes that should have been patched ?? >=20 See above - in many cases, it is not the fault of Operations staff. They = need to co-ordinate OS patches with application developers and Business = Units for down time. The sheer volume is amazing. I would be willing to bet that a large majority of IT shops today have = only a small fraction of the applicable (after review) RH Linux security = patches identified at the following RH site applied to all their = Dev/QA/Test/Prod systems. https://www.redhat.com/archives/enterprise-watch-list/ [click on thread for each month and add them up - 34 security patches so = far in May 2007.. 34!!!] Case in point - if you have RH Linux systems - have you reviewed the 34 = security patches released this month to see if they apply to your = environment? At what point does someone wake up and say "we can not afford this = platform!!" Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20 OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 11:10:31 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Message-ID: On 05/27/07 09:35, Main, Kerry wrote: [snip] > > And we ignore that enthusiasts have to eat and to eat they need > to make money. > >> (we ignore the fact that cars require materials per copy, >> because software does not) >> > > Software requires time and skilled resources. Both are limited > resources. As the old saying goes - "Linux is free as long as you > value your time as free as well." Unadulterated hog poop. There's a whole lot of paid worker bees in there, including some from your own company. http://lwn.net/Articles/222773/ Top lines changed by employer (Unknown) 66154 19.0% Red Hat 44527 12.8% (None) 38099 11.0% IBM 25244 7.3% Astaro 15306 4.4% Linux Foundation 13638 3.9% Qumranet 12108 3.5% Novell 11930 3.4% Intel 11652 3.4% SANPeople 9888 2.8% NetXen 9607 2.8% Sony 8497 2.4% Broadcom 8349 2.4% Tensilica 8195 2.4% Nokia 5581 1.6% MontaVista 4394 1.3% Uni. Aberdeen 4324 1.2% LWN.net 3975 1.1% Secretlab 3370 1.0% HP 3211 0.9% [snip] > I would be willing to bet that a large majority of IT shops today > have only a small fraction of the applicable (after review) RH > Linux security patches identified at the following RH site > applied to all their Dev/QA/Test/Prod systems. > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/enterprise-watch-list/ [click on > thread for each month and add them up - 34 security patches so > far in May 2007.. 34!!!] Not long. Is gimp installed on my server? No. Is vixie-cron installed? Maybe. Is Evolution installed? No. Is libpng installed? Maybe, probably not. Is squirrelmail installed? Maybe, probably not. Is bluez-utils installed? No. Is samba installed? Maybe. Is freeradius installed? No. Is php installed? Maybe. That took me 3 minutes, most of it typing. It would take me less time to eyeball-scan the list for my server's relevant apps. > Case in point - if you have RH Linux systems - have you reviewed > the 34 security patches released this month to see if they apply > to your environment? > > At what point does someone wake up and say "we can not afford > this platform!!" As someone who has used Linux for 7 years, and VMS for 16, I've got to say that your arguments just don't hold water. Ron ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 05:32:05 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: DECwindows: PF key to bring an app to foreground ? Message-ID: <7a82$46595034$cef8887a$9717@TEKSAVVY.COM> With traditional DECwindows (DECW$SESSION & MWM), is it possible to define a PFkey that is intercepted by the window manager to bring a an application to the foreground ? (eg: PF6 to bring session manager to foreground, PF7 to bring DECW$MAIL to foreground, PF8 to bring DECW$CLOCK etc etc) ?? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 05:26:40 -0500 From: Dan Foster Subject: Re: DECwindows: PF key to bring an app to foreground ? Message-ID: In article <7a82$46595034$cef8887a$9717@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei wrote: > With traditional DECwindows (DECW$SESSION & MWM), is it possible to > define a PFkey that is intercepted by the window manager to bring a an > application to the foreground ? > > (eg: PF6 to bring session manager to foreground, PF7 to bring DECW$MAIL > to foreground, PF8 to bring DECW$CLOCK etc etc) ?? Page 274 talks about key bindings in DECwindows Motif for OpenVMS: http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/732FINAL/documentation/pdf/dw_using.pdf Useful actions for focus-related stuff would be f.raise, maybe f.focus_key. Another useful action: to execute applications, use f.exec. For more information on how to customize the MWMRC configuration file, see page 275. You generally need to know: a) the key name, b) what context you want it to apply to, and c) what action it should perform. (Probably f.raise?) I haven't used Motif on OpenVMS for close to 15 years now, so my memory is fading but it does work great doing that stuff. The manual is from 1993 and for VMS V5.4 + DECwindows Motif 1.0, but that information should still apply to even today's version. -Dan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 08:02:30 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: Does NASA/JPL etc still use VMS? Message-ID: On 05/21/07 10:59, Tom Linden wrote: > On Mon, 21 May 2007 08:37:58 -0700, Chip Coldwell > wrote: > >> On Sun, 20 May 2007, tomarsin2015@comcast.net wrote: >> >>> Refering to the banking and health-care, is VMS still used in the >>> space/astronomy field. I can recall once that there was some software >>> written for VMS in the space industry, but now its all for either SUN/ >>> Windows/Unix. >> >> I had a job interview at the Chandra X-Ray Observatory (actually a >> satellite) a few years back and they were running a mix of SGI Irix and >> VAX/VMS. The job was to port the Irix code to Linux -- they were keeping >> the VAX. > > One of the NASA sites running a VAX6030 (PL/I code of course) have enough > spares that they plan to keep the system operational until 2020. Yes, but *why*? Some one-of-a-kind Q-Bus or DSSI adapter that mandates a real systems instead of Charon-VAX? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 08:29:40 -0400 From: "FredK" Subject: Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Message-ID: "Craig A. Berry" wrote in message news:mcSdnUd357Mhd8vbnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@speakeasy.net... > FredK wrote: >> "Craig A. Berry" wrote in message >> news:6oednbx4cPA0x8vbnZ2dnUVZ_ualnZ2d@speakeasy.net... > > Here's what I have: > > http://www.viewsonic.com/products/desktopdisplays/lcddisplays/optiquest/q22wg/ > > Screens are getter wider faster than they are getting taller, so I think > 1680 x 1050 is pretty common now in monitors bigger than 20". > Sure. The flat panel I am using right now for example is 1920x1200. It is the 1050 that is the oddball number - if they were trying to build a HD panel you would think it would be 1080. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 08:30:32 -0500 From: Dan Foster Subject: Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Message-ID: In article , FredK wrote: >> >> Screens are getter wider faster than they are getting taller, so I think >> 1680 x 1050 is pretty common now in monitors bigger than 20". > > Sure. The flat panel I am using right now for example is 1920x1200. > > It is the 1050 that is the oddball number - if they were trying to build a > HD panel you would think it would be 1080. Google search results for 'lcd resolution 1680x1050' returns about 463,000 hits for the English language alone. I'm typing this on a 1680x1050 19" widescreen LCD monitor. Saw quite a few others when researching, pre-purchase. 1680x1050 comes out to a 1.6:1 ratio, or, 8:5, as does the 1920x1200 that you pointed out. I suppose the lower resolution is a more commonly manufactured and sold one, perhaps? -Dan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 07:26:31 -0700 From: "Tom Linden" Subject: Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Message-ID: On Sun, 27 May 2007 06:30:32 -0700, Dan Foster wrot= e: > In article , FredK = > wrote: >>> >>> Screens are getter wider faster than they are getting taller, so I = >>> think >>> 1680 x 1050 is pretty common now in monitors bigger than 20". >> >> Sure. The flat panel I am using right now for example is 1920x1200. >> >> It is the 1050 that is the oddball number - if they were trying to = >> build a >> HD panel you would think it would be 1080. > > Google search results for 'lcd resolution 1680x1050' returns about > 463,000 hits for the English language alone. > > I'm typing this on a 1680x1050 19" widescreen LCD monitor. Saw quite a= > few others when researching, pre-purchase. > > 1680x1050 comes out to a 1.6:1 ratio, or, 8:5, as does the 1920x1200 > that you pointed out. I suppose the lower resolution is a more commonl= y > manufactured and sold one, perhaps? Is it coincidental that 1050 =3D 2 x 525 ? > > -Dan -- = Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 09:59:54 -0500 From: Dan Foster Subject: Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Message-ID: In article , Tom Linden wrote: > > Is it coincidental that 1050 = 2 x 525 ? Probably not. :) I was trying to think of the relationship; that does seem rather logical. -Dan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 06:02:08 GMT From: "John E. Malmberg" Subject: Re: DSSI allocation class puzzle Message-ID: gerry77@no.spam.mail.com wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I have two VAXen (4000-400 and 4000-500) that I would like to cluster > together by using DSSI bus 1 on each system. Both have 3 DSSI disks, > connected to their respective bus 0. > I would reserve bus 0 on both VAXen for internal disks and use bus 1 for > cluster communications, and set node allocation class accordingly on > each system (i.e. each system would get the same allocation class as the > disks into its cabinet). > > My idea is that cluster communications would have better perfomance if > occurring on a bus (bus 1) with no "local" disk data transfers (confined > to bus 0 on each system), is this right? First are you trying to solve a problem that you may not have? What is your goal on converting these systems to a cluster? What is leading you to think you have a cluster communications issue? Have you taken some measurements? What is causing you to need to reserve a DSSI bus for local disk activity? Are you currently maxing out the 4MB/Sec bandwidth on that bus? Are you even coming close? Are you maintaining two system disks? Do you want to? Are you using volume shadowing? Generally I have always connected both DSSI buses and disks between each system. If I was concerned about high availability, I would have used only external disks on HSD controllers, and volume shadowing. I think that all of that hardware is only on the used market now though. I think I configured my last VAXcluster well over 10 years ago. If you are maxing out the old DSSI buses, then you may be better off moving to I64 systems with warranties and modern disks, than trying to keep an older set of systems running. If not, I would be configuring for maximum redundancy in case of hardware failure, and it still may be cheaper to move to I64 than to keep purchasing spare parts on the used market. With the age of DSSI drives are getting to be, I am wondering how the spares market is holding up. I was recently surprised to find the demand for RD54 disks was high, considering that MicroVAX 2000/VAXstation 2000s are the only hardware platforms that require them. For all others, cheaper and better alternatives have been easily available for decades. And that was the case when Digital was still selling RD54 drives new. For the price of a slow 154 MB drive, you could get a third party controller that emulated an RQDX controller and at least 1 300+ MB drive that typically would run at 4 to 8 times the speed of the RD54. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 11:24:59 GMT From: gerry77@no.spam.mail.com Subject: Re: DSSI allocation class puzzle Message-ID: On Sun, 27 May 2007 06:02:08 GMT, "John E. Malmberg" wrote: > > I have two VAXen (4000-400 and 4000-500) that I would like to cluster > > together by using DSSI bus 1 on each system. Both have 3 DSSI disks, > > connected to their respective bus 0. [...] > What is your goal on converting these systems to a cluster? There's a little detail that disappeared from the final draft of my post: these are hobbyist systems, everything is just for fun and to learn something, the hardware is what we were able to pick up at the dumpster, and we operate them in the spare time :-) > What is causing you to need to reserve a DSSI bus for local disk > activity? Are you currently maxing out the 4MB/Sec bandwidth on that > bus? Are you even coming close? That was just a theory. > Are you maintaining two system disks? Do you want to? Yes, at least until we'll not find some more DSSI cables. Then we'll be able to add the DSSI tower to the cluster and we'll have a true quorum disk and maybe we'll migrate to a common system disk configuration. > Are you using volume shadowing? A common shadowed system disk with a member on each system would be feasible? That would not be my first system disk shadowing, but the first one across two nodes... I'll have to check the docs. > If I was concerned about high availability, I would have used only > external disks on HSD controllers, and volume shadowing. What about ethernet failover for cluster communications in the event of a DSSI cable failure? Again I'll have to check if that is possible. Thank you, G. P.S.: I'm not english native, sorry for any mistake. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 13:06:39 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: DSSI allocation class puzzle Message-ID: gerry77@no.spam.mail.com wrote: > Yes, at least until we'll not find some more DSSI cables. Then we'll be > able to add the DSSI tower to the cluster and we'll have a true quorum > disk and maybe we'll migrate to a common system disk configuration. Just be aware that DSSI drives tend to be power hungry and generate lots of heat. Adding a DSSI cabinet adds to the electricity cost (additional power supply and fans). > A common shadowed system disk with a member on each system would be > feasible? Yep. > What about ethernet failover for cluster communications in the event of > a DSSI cable failure? Again I'll have to check if that is possible. You would still very much want ethernet between the two nodes so you can access either node, run applications such as MONITOR and many others that rely on decnet or tcpip. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 11:37:58 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: Interresting deadlock situation (Switch and cluster) Message-ID: <4659B3E6.14544011@spam.comcast.net> JF Mezei wrote: > > David J Dachtera wrote: > > The switch's console should be able to support XON/XOF flow control, thus > > allowing a three-wire null-modem. > > factory default is modem control. So if you need to reset the switch to > factory defaults, you are stuck without console access. ...in which case you will likely have other (more pressing) issues. > on vms, you do a SET TERM/NOMODEM/PERM and this way, the Switch never > sends data to the VMS host (which would initiale a "login" sequence, > intrusion alarms at both ends in an endless loop. SET TERM/NOTYPEAHEAD should be the work-around for that. -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 10:46:56 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: RE: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Message-ID: On Mon, 21 May 2007 21:59:12 -0400, Main, Kerry wrote: [snip] > >> The big question is whether Oracle will succeed in making Linux a >> serious platform, acceptable to banks for serious applications. > > mmm... with 5-20 security patches released each and every month? > [snip] There were 72 *bug* fixes to RHAS4 between 01-DEC-2006 and 30-APR-2007. 50 were against packages that would typically sit on a server, the rest on client s/w. Not all of those 50 will be installed at every site. In that same span, there were 46 security patches: LOW MODERATE IMPORTANT CRITICAL --- -------- --------- -------- DESKTOP: 0 7 4 11 SERVER: 3 12 8 1 So, we see *one* critical server-related security patch in 6 months. Not bad, in my estimation. 10 various feature bugs per month, and 5 various security bugs per month. When you consider that there are pushing 8000 (or more?) packages in Red Hat (and 10000 in Debian), that's just not too shabby. And if you haven't installed squid or samba or nfs or dovecot or squirrelmail or, $DEITY forbid, uucp* on your particular server, then many of these patches didn't apply to you. * The UUCP "bug" wasn't that much of a bug, really. It wa a problem with the packaging. An improper dependency meant that you couldn't rebuild it. If you stuck with the official binary, there was no problem. Ron Johnson New Orleans LA ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 12:15:42 -0400 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Ron Johnson [mailto:ron.l.johnson@cox.net] > Sent: May 27, 2007 11:47 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: RE: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? >=20 > On Mon, 21 May 2007 21:59:12 -0400, Main, Kerry wrote: > [snip] > > > >> The big question is whether Oracle will succeed in making Linux a > >> serious platform, acceptable to banks for serious applications. > > > > mmm... with 5-20 security patches released each and every month? > > > [snip] >=20 > There were 72 *bug* fixes to RHAS4 between 01-DEC-2006 and 30-APR- > 2007. > 50 were against packages that would typically sit on a server, the > rest on > client s/w. Not all of those 50 will be installed at every site. >=20 > In that same span, there were 46 security patches: > LOW MODERATE IMPORTANT CRITICAL > --- -------- --------- -------- > DESKTOP: 0 7 4 11 > SERVER: 3 12 8 1 >=20 > So, we see *one* critical server-related security patch in 6 months. > Not > bad, in my estimation. >=20 Nice try, but the patches listed on the RH security web site are *security* patches - not bug fixes (although they do bundle fixes with their security fixes from what I can tell). An actual tally for each month: May 2007 - 34 April 2007 - 17 March 2007 - 19 February 2007 - 19 January 2007 - 13 (good month - *only* 13 security patches..) Total =3D 102 *security* not "bug" patches. And keep in mind that many (most?) of the security fixes they rate in applications as low, moderate etc, can result in elevated security priv's and/or the ability to access system protected data, so imho, that is pretty critical.=20 Keep in mind that most Cust environments do not have just one version of Linux. They have ES3, ES4, ES5 and various WS versions as well, then that means the Operations folks need to track what apps are running on what servers and then map out what security patches to apply to what systems. Does this not sound like a lot of work? (and this does not even discuss the re-cert and testing efforts of their App's with these monthly security patches) > 10 various feature bugs per month, and 5 various security bugs per > month. > When you consider that there are pushing 8000 (or more?) packages in > Red > Hat (and 10000 in Debian), that's just not too shabby. >=20 Looks like a hackers dream world to me.=20 Since it is very difficult for the Operations to keep up with all these security patches in all of their Dev / QA / Test / Prod environments, corp folks either ignore the patches and hope no one attacks them (remember internal users are biggest threat) or they arrange to set aside time to test their business app's against the monthly security patches which significantly reduces the resources available to do normal Dev/ Test / QA testing for new App functionality requests. So, these systems go unpatched for extended periods and hackers (external or internal) are left to do what they want since they know exactly the vulnerabilities they can capitalize on. Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20 OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 11:26:08 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Message-ID: On 05/23/07 09:00, John Smith wrote: [snip] > > Being *very* active in the financial services indusrty, I can assure you > that Oracle, notwithstanding its mult-patches per month, and Linux with its > patch du jour approach are in fact supplanting most things. > > There are very few customers still using VMS, and of those, some are fully > committed to VMS whilst most are looking to migrate to unix...usually to > Solaris or AIX. I can't recall the last time I saw a shop have any > significant PHUX in-house. We have a bunch of HP-UX boxes because the old CIO got into a big argument with Sun and replaced them all with HP-UX. (Don't know why he didn't go with AIX, since this is also a m/f shop.) He's gone now, and new management is convinced that Linux is "good enough", so any new mid-range kit is ProLinant and either Linux or Windows (dependent on the contract, the app & the specific manager). The development group is busily working to port a DEC C, (hack, spit) Forte' & Rdb app to Java, (gag, groan) Siebel & Oracle on Linux. (Don't ask why they chose Siebel.) Why? Our customers (we're a government contractor) specifically do not want their (the public's) data in an obscure format on a fading platform. Ron Johnson New Orleans LA ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 03:36:53 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: Not on latest Roadmap: OpenVMS VAX Version 8.x "under investigation" Message-ID: On 03/23/07 06:03, Bill Gunshannon wrote: > In article , > david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes: >> They should realise that that is a self defeating strategy. I'm sure that >> we are pretty typical in that we are planning on moving ALL our Unix systems >> to Linux starting with our Tru64 systems. > > Just out of curiosity, did you ever consider one of the BSD's (in particular > FreeBSD) instead of Linux? If not, why not? And, if so, why did you choose > Linux over BSD? Not trying to start YARW (Yet Another Religious War) but > really interested in why people who are used to using the best would pick > the obviously inferior choice when moving to a free Unix. Why Linux? Some (sometimes overlapping) reasons: 1. Momentum. Linux got mindshare first. The 386BSD port began in 1989, but was held up because Cal-Berkley believed that parts of it were /encumbered/. It wasn't released to the public until 1992. Linux had no such issues. 2. Culture of Openness vs. Culture of Insularity. Way Back When, Bill Jolitz didn't take patches from users. (Linus welcomes them.) Thus, the FreeBSD & NetBSD teams forked 386BSD. Strong odors of insularity, though, carried over into FreeBSD & NetBSD core teams. 3. Lawyers. If 386BSD could have been released in 1990, there would be no Linux. 4. Good leadership. Linus Torvalds has the correct disposition and ability to lead an open/distributed development. If Theo De Radt had sent that famous post to comp.os.minix in August 1991, development would have soon slowed as people realize what an abrasive personality he has. 5. The BSD License, which is fundamentally responsible for the Unix Wars, which spilt so much blood and encouraged h/w vendors to each have their own subtly incompatible versions of Unix. This was the opening that agressive MSFT needed to wedge it's way into the server business. The GPL, OTOH, prevents such incompatible forking. IBM, HP & Oracle all contribute to the kernel (and probably also the toolchain), and Sun contributes much userland code. Everybody benefits by getting a consistent system. 6. Selfishness. Many developers don't want to see their code taken "private". The "pay" that they want (for the code which they have freely donated) is for other people to donate their own code. This ties in with item #5. Is Linux perfect? Of course not. Are there bugs? Sure. But all software has bugs, even OpenVMS & Rdb (both of who's quality I've seen sink over the past 5 years). Example: just the other day at work, THREE Alphas (2 clustered and one stand-alone, all running v8.2) crashed during a network hiccup while one of the clustered boxes and the stand-alone box were writing to an NFS drive. The third box (the other cluster member) crashed *hard* when it lost cluster connectivity. Ron Johnson New Orleans LA ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 10:12:20 +0000 (UTC) From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) Subject: RE: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Message-ID: In article , "Main, Kerry" writes: > > Essentially, one can only cut costs in such a merger (and cost-cutting > > is the main reason for a merger) by cutting salary costs. The main > > way > > to do that is to move stuff to a common platform (which, of course, > > might increase costs in the short run). I doubt the buyer would be > > willing to give up his own software in favour of that of the buyee. > > As you said - it depends on the applications and the strategic > advantages it has. Typically, the sole reason for buying a software > company is the strategic software that it has. But OM isn't "just" a software company. Yes, they do sell their software to various stock exchanges, but they also run some stock exchanges themselves. There have been many stock-exchange mergers recently, and many more attempted mergers and rumours of mergers, as well as smaller purchases, collaborations etc which don't make the news. In most cases, the motivation isn't "let's buy this company since their software is so good" but rather "let's buy this company, move all stuff to a common platform and thus save costs (at least in the mid- to long-term)". Many of these mergers are due to pressure from hedge funds, whose main goal is profit in the foreseeable future, not long-term investment and certainly not the long-term health of the companies involved. > Do you really think those making the merger decisions care what platform > the application is running on? Some do, some don't, depending on their technical savvy and how the platform decision will affect the primary goal of cost-cutting. > Do you think they want to spend 2-4 years > re-writing and/or porting it just so they can say it runs on X platform? Not for that reason, but if they can spend, say, 200 man-years now for the port, and when the port is done fire, say, 300 people, then the port will pay for itself within a reasonably short time. Whether the target platform is the best platform in the long term is another question, but long-term questions aren't what interest hedge funds. > As someone said earlier - its all about the $'s and market share and > competitiveness. Period. True. These days, competitiveness means, more and more, low costs in the foreseeable future. One route to that is cutting costs buy moving everything to one platform. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 09:24:03 -0400 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply > [mailto:helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de] > Sent: May 27, 2007 6:12 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: RE: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out >=20 > In article > t>, > "Main, Kerry" writes: >=20 > > > Essentially, one can only cut costs in such a merger (and cost- > cutting > > > is the main reason for a merger) by cutting salary costs. The > main > > > way > > > to do that is to move stuff to a common platform (which, of > course, > > > might increase costs in the short run). I doubt the buyer would > be > > > willing to give up his own software in favour of that of the > buyee. > > > > As you said - it depends on the applications and the strategic > > advantages it has. Typically, the sole reason for buying a software > > company is the strategic software that it has. >=20 > But OM isn't "just" a software company. Yes, they do sell their > software to various stock exchanges, but they also run some stock > exchanges themselves. There have been many stock-exchange mergers > recently, and many more attempted mergers and rumours of mergers, as > well as smaller purchases, collaborations etc which don't make the > news. > In most cases, the motivation isn't "let's buy this company since > their > software is so good" but rather "let's buy this company, move all > stuff > to a common platform and thus save costs (at least in the mid- to > long-term)". Many of these mergers are due to pressure from hedge > funds, whose main goal is profit in the foreseeable future, not > long-term investment and certainly not the long-term health of the > companies involved. >=20 As I mentioned, $'s, market share and profit are the motivators. If the company spends 2-3 years porting that Application to platform X, then that is 2-3 years where they are not focusing on adding major new features as the resources to port, test and certify and application are typically the same ones needed to add major new functionality.=20 This new functionality and integration with existing and new systems is the real competitive carrot.=20 In addition, these applications are not the type where you just throw kids out of coding school at - they need to understand the environment which is mission critical, very secure and highly scalable. > > Do you really think those making the merger decisions care what > platform > > the application is running on? >=20 > Some do, some don't, depending on their technical savvy and how the > platform decision will affect the primary goal of cost-cutting. >=20 > > Do you think they want to spend 2-4 years > > re-writing and/or porting it just so they can say it runs on X > platform? >=20 > Not for that reason, but if they can spend, say, 200 man-years now for > the port, and when the port is done fire, say, 300 people, then the > port > will pay for itself within a reasonably short time. Whether the > target > platform is the best platform in the long term is another question, > but > long-term questions aren't what interest hedge funds. >=20 I highly doubt that changing from platform X to platform Y will produce a head count savings of any significant number. You won't be saving any App resources, so you are only talking about a small number of Sys Admin head count and some additional number will likely be required in the new environment anyway. Especially when you look at the significant costs of 2-3 years development with minimal new changes in application functionality which the business will be screaming for. What I see these days is the business stating "how can we better integrate what we have today with these other applications that we have?" That is really what is driving some of the new web services integration technologies. The reality is that while IT might care what the platform is, the Business Units (BU) could not care less. In addition, it is the BU's who are paying the bills and setting or heavily influencing IT strategies and directions. Heck, while some might say skills are an issue, the reality is that all major platforms today are manageable on a day to day basis by level 1 staff with some form of Web or client based GUI. Hence, if someone says that their level 1 staff can not use a properly setup GUI environment to manage OpenVMS (or any other platform with a Web based GUI) , I would say they have some serious staff skill issues. > > As someone said earlier - its all about the $'s and market share and > > competitiveness. Period. >=20 > True. These days, competitiveness means, more and more, low costs in > the foreseeable future. One route to that is cutting costs buy moving > everything to one platform. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 10:35:40 -0400 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Arne Vajh=F8j [mailto:arne@vajhoej.dk] > Sent: May 26, 2007 9:36 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out >=20 > Main, Kerry wrote: > >> Essentially, one can only cut costs in such a merger (and cost- > cutting > >> is the main reason for a merger) by cutting salary costs. The main > >> way > >> to do that is to move stuff to a common platform (which, of course, > >> might increase costs in the short run). I doubt the buyer would be > >> willing to give up his own software in favour of that of the buyee. > > > > As you said - it depends on the applications and the strategic > > advantages it has. Typically, the sole reason for buying a software > > company is the strategic software that it has. >=20 > OMX is not a software company. >=20 > > Do you really think those making the merger decisions care what > platform > > the application is running on? Do you think they want to spend 2-4 > years > > re-writing and/or porting it just so they can say it runs on X > platform? > > > > As someone said earlier - its all about the $'s and market share and > > competitiveness. Period. >=20 > I would think the CIO would have a hard time justifying maintaining > two systems doing basically the same thing. >=20 Overlapping systems is one thing. Porting a critical app that is not = overlapping to another platform just to save on a few IT systems admin = head count is a totally different matter. > And they care about the platform - both what it cost in operational > and development expertise and whether it has a long term future. >=20 The IT shop certainly cares. However, the Business Units could not care = less. Especially if the funding for IT is out of a corporate budget and = not their budget. They care about the huge back log of new functionality requests and = add-ons that are piling up. They care about how these new functionality = features will make them more competitive and increase revenues. If the CIO tells the BU's that IT wants to minimize any new = functionality adds in the next 2-3 years, spend a large sum of $'s, just = so they can save a few head count in systems administration by running = on a common platform, that CIO will not be around long.=20 Regards Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20 OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 17:26:45 +0200 From: "Dr. Dweeb" Subject: Re: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Message-ID: <4659a337$0$21930$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk> "JF Mezei" wrote in message news:413e0$4658f236$cef8887a$14755@TEKSAVVY.COM... > Main, Kerry wrote: >> As you said - it depends on the applications and the strategic >> advantages it has. Typically, the sole reason for buying a software >> company is the strategic software that it has. > > > The sole reason Compaq bought Digital wasn't for its software or hardware, > it was for its sales offices and support infrastructure. It didn't care > about the rest. > > NASDAQ and NYSE saw european markets tbecoming more important than the USA > and felt the only way to survive was to buy into the european markets. > NASDAQ tried the big jewel (London) and failed miserably. NYSE went for > the less important Euronext and unfortunatly got it. So NASDAQ is > desperate to get its hands on anything european. It can't afford the > German one, so it is going for the nordic ones. Not sure NASDAQ had any > goals of acquiring a software company. It just wanst a foot in the > european door of stock exchanges. > > The chairman of OMX would have told the chairman of NASDAQ about OMX's > succesful software and hosting business. (OMX operates some data centres > that run many stock exchanges). > > Whether the chairman of NASDAQ cares or not is a different story. NASDAQ > just wants to be able to claim some european victory. Any victory. If they > fail with OMX, they'll try some smaller exchange until they manage to get > one, even if its just the Belgian Chocolate Exchange. > > New York bankers work with their gonads, not their brains. Being better > than the guy next door is extremely important to them. They think they > know everything, but they actually don't know that much, except what lunch > buddies (other new york bankers) tell them. > > New York senior bankers live in their own world of corporate dining room > deals with their buddies. They are detached from actual logic, unless some > grunt manages to send a short enough document to them outlining how > decision X can make them more money (as long as decision X doesn't wreck > relationship with their customers). Note that Microsoft is a customer of > NASDAQ (and vice versa). > > One reason IBM has done well with banks is that it has always known about > the care and feeding of new york bankers. It is "inside" that loop and > holds a lot of influence. Digital wasn't anywhere near. Tandem has a small > toe in the door because of its technologically unique product. > > I don't know if HP has any idea about banks. It is a Kalifornia company > that went from being scientific to being Hollywodian (with Carly). > > > > > > > > Logically, if NASDAQ did not develop its own software, it would make sense > for it to move to the OM software since payments for licences and support > would stay within the family instead of going to some 3rd party. > New York bankers often disregard logic and go with what other new york > bankers have decided. > > > If the software NASDAQ uses is owned by a company that is trading on the > NASDAQ exchange, then it may prefer that over using its own (OMX) sofwtare > because helping struggling NASDAQ companies is important to the stock > exchange. > > > On the other hand, NASDAQ may decide to spin off the OM software arm, > returning money to NASDAQ shareholders, And after a while, get the nordic > exchanges to switch its own Tandem/Microsoft platform. (i.i. one it has > sold the sofwtare company and gotten its money, it won't care if it dies). > > > This is the reason that VMS management must get a crash course > ****NOW****, and I mean THIS WEEKEND, on how to wine and dine new york > bankers and start to talk to NASDAQ chairman about the great future of VMS > and tell him not to listen to folks like Stallard and Livermore who have > an agenda to try to save their faltering HPUX. > > If I were Ann McQuaid, I would be calling on Lou Gerstner this weekend and > hire him as a consultant to help secure VMS's position with the now > enlarged NASDAQ family. > > We all know that Hurd, Livermore and Stallard aren't going to lift a > finger to try to save VMS. For all we know, they may have already told the > NASDAQ chairman that VMS was dead the day IA64's long planned retirement > is made public. JF, why do you believe any of the people in HP actually care? They don't. For them, the quicker VMS is buried, the quicker they can move to more interesting positions in HP. AFAIK the OM software is not capable of supporting a NASDAQ sized exchange, but I may be wrong. Dweeb. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 11:40:55 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Message-ID: <4659B497.5DDB9B62@spam.comcast.net> Simon Clubley wrote: > > In article <97c47$4656dd61$cef89d8d$19181@TEKSAVVY.COM-Free>, "John Smith" writes: > > > > According to what I hear this morning, VMS will be phased out. > > > > I don't suppose anyone from HP can go and have a chat ? OH, NO!!! If that were to happen, HP would to to sell THEM on migrating to UX, just like they did Cerner, MiSys, & co.! No help there... -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 13:02:31 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Message-ID: Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: > Some do, some don't, depending on their technical savvy and how the > platform decision will affect the primary goal of cost-cutting. It also depends on whether the buyer has been told by the computer manufacturer that the platform the newly acquired software runs on is a dead end. This is why the VMS management must hire some big gun like Lou Gerstner to not only talk to NASDAQ and convince them to stick with VMS, but also internally tell people like Stallard to stop destroying the profitable VMS marketplace to try to save his struggling HPUX one because in the end, it will hurt both when you try to shift customers from one to the other. Imagine the publicity if NASDAQ's CEO were to announce that not only would NASDAQ move to the VMS based software developped by OM, but also leverage its name to sell this software and services to even more stock exchanges around the world. Compare this with: "NASDAQ will move existing OM customer/exchanges from a legacy VMS platform with no future to its own platform." Or: NASDAQ has struck a marketing arrangement with Microsoft to help port its OM software currently running on the legacy VMS platform to a modern Windows server environment and then market this software to all exchanges around the world. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 13:15:45 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Message-ID: Main, Kerry wrote: > As I mentioned, $'s, market share and profit are the motivators. If the > company spends 2-3 years porting that Application to platform X, then > that is 2-3 years where they are not focusing on adding major new > features as the resources to port, test and certify and application are > typically the same ones needed to add major new functionality. Don't forget the unwanted forced port to that IA64 whose future is uncertain. This would cause any major VMS vendor to rethink. Many already have and in the last few weeks, we have seen a steady stream of ISVs abandonning VMS. Don't discount the possibility that some management at HP could have been telling OM that VMS was dead and that they should port to HPUX instead. (Not sure how HP feels about Tandem, but that might be another target from VMS). Yes, all things being equal, it would be logical for NASDAQ to look at the profitable OM software and not only adopt it for itself, but also promote the hell out of it to grow that business. Yes, all things being equal, it would be logical for HP to look at the profitable VMS software and not only adopt it for itself, but also promote the hell out f it to grow that business. If HP can get away with squandering VMS, then it is not difficult to imagine NASDAQ squandering the VMS based OM software too. And your argument also does not factor in the potential for an influx of money from some partner. Intel gave HP/Compaq some nice deal to kill off Alpha. Microsoft could give NASDAQ some nice wad of money to help port the OM software to Windows, and this would be enough to get the Nasdaq CEO to publically approve this project and spend whatever it takes to get it running on Windows because you can't cancel a publically announced project, especially one with a partner such as Microsoft. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 13:22:16 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: OM Group acquired by Nasdaq - VMS probably out Message-ID: Main, Kerry wrote: > Overlapping systems is one thing. Porting a critical app that is not >overlapping to another platform just to save on a few IT systems admin >head count is a totally different matter. When you are told that the platform you are based on is a dead end, you have no choice but the bear the cost of a port to another platform. And HP is stupid enough to go tell its ISVs that VMS is a dead end platform. And while HP still denies IA64 is a dead end, the rest of the world knows it. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 11:31:49 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: OpenVMS 2007 Bootcamp Message-ID: <4659B275.B3A9CE62@spam.comcast.net> sean@obanion.us wrote: > > This may line wrap... > > http://picasaweb.google.com/SeanOBanionPictures/OpenVMSBootcamp2007 I wish the picture had included the urinal - would have been more convincing and, hence, more humorous. -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 11:34:30 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: OpenVMS 2007 Bootcamp Message-ID: <4659B316.72AFAE0A@spam.comcast.net> Galen wrote: > > > > > >Still dreaming about VMS on your TRS-80 or Sinclair, eh? ;-) > > > > No... but if it would run on my old trusty slide rule I'd pull mine out from > > the mothballs. > > How about on an abacus? (It would have to be a very large one > indeed. :-) Ever seen Gallagher's (the comic) "Apple" computer? ;-) -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 11:29:39 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: recognizing newly created device on HSG80 Message-ID: <4659B1F3.DC39D60@spam.comcast.net> BaxterD@tessco.com wrote: > > On May 24, 10:27 pm, David J Dachtera > wrote: > > Baxt...@tessco.com wrote: > > > > > On May 23, 10:28 pm, David J Dachtera > > > wrote: > > > > > > Are they not enabled for all connections by default? > > > > > Now that would be scary! > > > > Not necessarily, unless you've been unusually generous with your FCSW and > > decided to side-step the zoning issue (possible, but recommendation is > > questionable). > > > > > I would even be wary of using the enable=all, particularly if you have > > > multiple OS's, or even multiple VMS clusters or systems. > > > > Same comment, even for multiple clusters. Multi-o.s. including Whinebloze is > > never recommendable, for well-known reasons (C/H/S-0 corruption). > > > > However, there are situations where zoning is not necessarily a good > idea, and Selective Presentation is much better. For example, if > you have 2 VMS clusters/systems, one Production and one (say) > Certification, it is much easier to pass disks between systems by just > enabling/disabling connections at the controller level, than trying to > move between zones at the switch level. At work we take that a slightly different way: the production BCV's are "visible" to both the production and development systems. At backup time, we quiesce the database, split the BCVs and run BACKUPs onthe development cluster. The production cluster has the ability to run backups should that be necessary: it can "see" both the BCVs and the FC tape drives, and has the necessary software available. > Zoning is primarily to segregate OS's. I would say "domains" ratherthan "o.s.'s", that would likely be the case in any event. > Selective > Presentation primarily gives you control over who sees what. ...which could also be true within a zoning "domain", if you think about it. > Of course, it is necessary to have started with an > "Identifier" numbering convention to ensure that all identifiers are > unique, (also makes it easy to determine at the OS level, which > devices are just on loan from other systems.) ...from VMS's perspective. Other OS's may not require the identifier, though off-hand I do not know of any where such is the case. -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 11:48:48 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: SYSMAN: No SYS$SCRATCH/SYS$LOGIN ? Message-ID: <4659B670.5E1F00D0@spam.comcast.net> JF Mezei wrote: > > $ mc sysman > SYSMAN> set env/node=velo > %SYSMAN-I-ENV, current command environment: > Individual nodes: VELO > Username JFMEZEI will be used on nonlocal nodes > > SYSMAN> do show log sys$scratch > %SYSMAN-I-OUTPUT, command execution on node VELO > %SHOW-S-NOTRAN, no translation for logical name SYS$SCRATCH > SYSMAN> > > There is also no SYS$LOGIN defined. > > (VAX 7,3 and Alpha 8.3) > > What is the reason behind the lack of those logicals ? Perhaps this will shed some light: DJAS01::DDACHTERA$ mc sysman do write sys$output f$getj( 0, "mode" ) %SYSMAN-I-OUTPUT, command execution on node DJAS01 OTHER SYS$SYLOGIN does indeed get executed... DJAS01::DDACHTERA$ sear sys$sylogin:.com tt_devname $ tt_devname = f$trnlnm("TT") (f$locate("WSA",tt_devname) .ne. f$len(tt_devname)) (f$locate("MBA",tt_devname) .ne. f$len(tt_devname)) $ define/job tt_devname &tt_devname DJAS01::DDACHTERA$ mc sysman do sho log/job %SYSMAN-I-OUTPUT, command execution on node DJAS01 (LNM$JOB_80DC7DC0) "TT_DEVNAME" = "_MBA3662:" I'd be careful about conditioning logical name assignments and such based on a MODE of OTHER, BTW... -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: 27 May 2007 07:03:00 -0500 From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: Terminating remote (Reflections) telnet sessions. Message-ID: In article <1180243401.912025.99760@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, BaxterD@tessco.com writes: > I appear to have a situation occurring whereby employees who > connect to our system from an outside location, using telnet, through > Reflections, can be disconnected, without the VMS process being > removed. > > I am not clear at this point how the disconnection is being > caused, maybe it is a FireWall "idle time-out" of some kind, or maybe > they are just shutting down their PC/Laptops without logging off. > > Anyway, the question is: Is there someway that I can ensure > that these sessions are properly shutdown? (either at the VMS level, $ MCR SYSGEN HELP Sys_Parameters TTY_TIMEOUT > or within Reflections). Since Reflections is no longer connected, that would be hard. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 12:00:17 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: Terminating remote (Reflections) telnet sessions. Message-ID: <4659B921.9D241968@spam.comcast.net> BaxterD@tessco.com wrote: > > If this is a repeat of an old question then I apologise in > advance. > > I appear to have a situation occurring whereby employees who > connect to our system from an outside location, using telnet, through > Reflections, can be disconnected, without the VMS process being > removed. > > I am not clear at this point how the disconnection is being > caused, maybe it is a FireWall "idle time-out" of some kind, or maybe > they are just shutting down their PC/Laptops without logging off. > > Anyway, the question is: Is there someway that I can ensure > that these sessions are properly shutdown? (either at the VMS level, > or within Reflections). To start with, the product name is "Reflection" - singular, not plural. It is, however, frequently confused with the songs titled, "Reflections" of many years ago. There are a number of reasons, as you noted, why these get disconnected. Using VTA's may be useful in some cases, but not desirable in others. There really is no practical way to do this that I know of. The process will eventually be run down through various timers that will expire in the IP stack and possibly other levels. Without VTAs, there is little possibility of gaining control of that process via IP. So, security risks are minimal. -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2007.290 ************************