Also, if google starts doing Evil Stuff with my mail, I just point the
MX records at my mail server and do some small reconfigurtions.
Main benefit: If the line(s) to my server are down, Google's servers
store my mail for me until the next fetchmail run.
Sampsa
OK,
I've gone with Sampsa's suggestions and have subscribed to google to
manage hecnet.eu's mail. Can I now pull that mail down into a local
archive on my VAX/VMS box - what program would I need to use (a
fetchmail equivalent for VMS)? Or can I transfer the mail into a local
IMAP server?
I will probably do the same for the linux box, but I'd prefer to have
access from my VMS box as this is my main external facing box.
Regards, Mark.
Also, if google starts doing Evil Stuff with my mail, I just point the
MX records at my mail server and do some small reconfigurtions.
Main benefit: If the line(s) to my server are down, Google's servers
store my mail for me until the next fetchmail run.
Sampsa
OK,
I've gone with Sampsa's suggestions and have subscribed to google to
manage hecnet.eu's mail. Can I now pull that mail down into a local
archive on my VAX/VMS box - what program would I need to use (a
fetchmail equivalent for VMS)? Or can I transfer the mail into a local
IMAP server?
I will probably do the same for the linux box, but I'd prefer to have
access from my VMS box as this is my main external facing box.
Regards, Mark.
Main benefit: If the line(s) to my server are down, Google's servers store my mail for me until the next fetchmail run.
Sampsa
On 5 Aug 2010, at 21:23, Joe Ferraro wrote:
As much as I can't stand Big Brother -- eh hem -- Google... if you're not talking a hobbyist solution, its just downright difficult to beat their imap / pop3 / web email solution -- especially when blasted SPAM is considered.
If you have trouble with the fact that google aggressively analyzes, stores and sells your data trends -- you might want to look at `exim` for linux.
Joe
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Fred <fcoffey at thrifty.misernet.net> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Mark Wickens wrote:
standard email clients but would also like to be able to ssh into a
local box and read mail via a character terminal.
I do both. I run Linux/Postfix and OpenVMS/PMDF. I can SSH into my Linux box and then check my mail with (al)pine (like I am doing now) and also telnet into my Alpha and read the mail with MAIL or PINE that is included with PMDF.
Fred
would like to use. If Multinet's DECnet-over-IP can be used, why
couldn't DEC's implementation be similarly usable? I know DECnet-
plus well and would like to stick to it as far as possible.
The second choice would be Cisco tunneling which is familiar to me
also.
The bridge software would be the third choice if the others don't
work.
In that case I would build it on Tru64unix. I guess it is doable.
Haven't tried though.
I really would like to have my own area - for a couple of reasons.
First, I do possess over 60 VMS systems which have their own DECnet
addresses and I wouldn't like to change them when I want to use them.
Second, the area routing is set up already and it would be a lot
easier to add an area than to reconfigure the whole routing.
Third, it is easy to add nodes to the area when it is needed if the
area is self managed.
I understand that Johnny is a busy man. Maybe he has time to give
me some advise about the (area) routers to which I should try to
connect (by DECnet-over-IP).
When I'm done with the connection and have it up and running, I'll
be happy to share my experiences with all of you.
Hi, Kari. I thought I had replied to you in the past. Maybe the mail
got lost somewhere.
Anyway, to try to answer your questions:
Your own area: no problem.
DECnet+ over IP: I have no idea if it is doable, but if it is, feel
free. HECnet as such is totally connection-agnostic. Anything that
works is acceptable. My experience (both from myself, and others) is
that DECnet+ is more of an headache than a win, but that's more from
an adminitrative point of view. Technically, it works just fine.
I'm uncertain if DECnet+ can act as an area router though, so you
might need to have atleast one DECnet node, in order to have your
own area.
Bridge on Tru64: I have no idea, but I think it should be possible.
What is required isn't that exotic. You need the normal packet
filter functionality in the system (I believe Tru64 have this), and
you need libpcap. Your hardware also needs to allow you to create
raw ethernet packets with different source address than what the
ethernet controller itself have. Apart from that, it's a simple C
program.
How to go about things: first you decide on how to connect, and find
someone that can be the other end of your connection. If you decide
on a bridge, then you can connect to me. For DECnet over IP in any
form, you'll have to find someone else around here who can do that
(I can't). Cisco requires that you find someone else with a Cisco box.
Once that is done, create the connection. Renumber your machines to
the right area, and away we go.
The other part you might want to do is sync up nodenames with me. I
have a master database for DECnet nodenames here, which people
normally copy, which helps us having a uniform view of the
nodenames. Not requires, but nice.
Johnny
Geen virus gevonden in het binnenkomende-bericht.
Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com
Versie: 9.0.830 / Virusdatabase: 271.1.1/2966 - datum van uitgifte: 06/27/10
08:35:00
The second choice would be Cisco tunneling which is familiar to me also.
The bridge software would be the third choice if the others don't work.
In that case I would build it on Tru64unix. I guess it is doable. Haven't tried though.
I really would like to have my own area - for a couple of reasons. First, I do possess over 60 VMS systems which have their own DECnet addresses and I wouldn't like to change them when I want to use them.
Second, the area routing is set up already and it would be a lot easier to add an area than to reconfigure the whole routing.
Third, it is easy to add nodes to the area when it is needed if the area is self managed.
I understand that Johnny is a busy man. Maybe he has time to give me some advise about the (area) routers to which I should try to connect (by DECnet-over-IP).
When I'm done with the connection and have it up and running, I'll be happy to share my experiences with all of you.
Hi, Kari. I thought I had replied to you in the past. Maybe the mail got lost somewhere.
Anyway, to try to answer your questions:
Your own area: no problem.
DECnet+ over IP: I have no idea if it is doable, but if it is, feel free. HECnet as such is totally connection-agnostic. Anything that works is acceptable. My experience (both from myself, and others) is that DECnet+ is more of an headache than a win, but that's more from an adminitrative point of view. Technically, it works just fine.
I'm uncertain if DECnet+ can act as an area router though, so you might need to have atleast one DECnet node, in order to have your own area.
Bridge on Tru64: I have no idea, but I think it should be possible. What is required isn't that exotic. You need the normal packet filter functionality in the system (I believe Tru64 have this), and you need libpcap. Your hardware also needs to allow you to create raw ethernet packets with different source address than what the ethernet controller itself have. Apart from that, it's a simple C program.
How to go about things: first you decide on how to connect, and find someone that can be the other end of your connection. If you decide on a bridge, then you can connect to me. For DECnet over IP in any form, you'll have to find someone else around here who can do that (I can't). Cisco requires that you find someone else with a Cisco box.
Once that is done, create the connection. Renumber your machines to the right area, and away we go.
The other part you might want to do is sync up nodenames with me. I have a master database for DECnet nodenames here, which people normally copy, which helps us having a uniform view of the nodenames. Not requires, but nice.
Johnny
The second choice would be Cisco tunneling which is familiar to me also.
The bridge software would be the third choice if the others don't work.
In that case I would build it on Tru64unix. I guess it is doable. Haven't tried though.
I really would like to have my own area - for a couple of reasons. First, I do possess over 60 VMS systems which have their own DECnet addresses and I wouldn't like to change them when I want to use them.
Second, the area routing is set up already and it would be a lot easier to add an area than to reconfigure the whole routing.
Third, it is easy to add nodes to the area when it is needed if the area is self managed.
I understand that Johnny is a busy man. Maybe he has time to give me some advise about the (area) routers to which I should try to connect (by DECnet-over-IP).
When I'm done with the connection and have it up and running, I'll be happy to share my experiences with all of you.
Hi, Kari. I thought I had replied to you in the past. Maybe the mail got lost somewhere.
Anyway, to try to answer your questions:
Your own area: no problem.
DECnet+ over IP: I have no idea if it is doable, but if it is, feel free. HECnet as such is totally connection-agnostic. Anything that works is acceptable. My experience (both from myself, and others) is that DECnet+ is more of an headache than a win, but that's more from an adminitrative point of view. Technically, it works just fine.
I'm uncertain if DECnet+ can act as an area router though, so you might need to have atleast one DECnet node, in order to have your own area.
Bridge on Tru64: I have no idea, but I think it should be possible. What is required isn't that exotic. You need the normal packet filter functionality in the system (I believe Tru64 have this), and you need libpcap. Your hardware also needs to allow you to create raw ethernet packets with different source address than what the ethernet controller itself have. Apart from that, it's a simple C program.
How to go about things: first you decide on how to connect, and find someone that can be the other end of your connection. If you decide on a bridge, then you can connect to me. For DECnet over IP in any form, you'll have to find someone else around here who can do that (I can't). Cisco requires that you find someone else with a Cisco box.
Once that is done, create the connection. Renumber your machines to the right area, and away we go.
The other part you might want to do is sync up nodenames with me. I have a master database for DECnet nodenames here, which people normally copy, which helps us having a uniform view of the nodenames. Not requires, but nice.
Johnny
The second choice would be Cisco tunneling which is familiar to me also.
The bridge software would be the third choice if the others don't work.
In that case I would build it on Tru64unix. I guess it is doable. Haven't tried though.
I really would like to have my own area - for a couple of reasons. First, I do possess over 60 VMS systems which have their own DECnet addresses and I wouldn't like to change them when I want to use them.
Second, the area routing is set up already and it would be a lot easier to add an area than to reconfigure the whole routing.
Third, it is easy to add nodes to the area when it is needed if the area is self managed.
I understand that Johnny is a busy man. Maybe he has time to give me some advise about the (area) routers to which I should try to connect (by DECnet-over-IP).
When I'm done with the connection and have it up and running, I'll be happy to share my experiences with all of you.
Regards,
Kari
And the switch don't know if it is a single machine sitting on a port, or another switch, or whatever, so it has the capacity to associate a whole bunch of addresses with a single port.
No need for EDT clones when you have EDT... :-)
EDT is excellent but being jailed to 24 lines is terrible nowdays.
I guess it's just me being so retro. :-)
We have succesfully recovered data from DC600 cartridges written circa 90,
but my tapes were written in 1985 so chances are low. They have been stored
in a dry and cold place, however.
We might very well be able to read that data back...
The 11/60 don't need 3-phase.
I'm puzzled here.
There is nothing in an 11/60 that needs 3-phase power. The only reason it has that is to be able to use a lot of power, and to distribute it evenly. If you look at the power distribution, you'll see that everything inside the machine is just connected to one of the phases. You can replace the power distribution with another DEC power distribution box, which connects to a normal wall plug, and run the whole thing one just one phase just as well. Just make sure you have enough power to not blow a fuse. :-)
But I don't think the 11/60 draws that much, so I would suspect a 10A will be enough.
A general question: this is HECNET list, are non-networking RSX questions
off topic? I have a lot, but i don't want to bother :-)
I think we should draw a limit somewhere. If it gets too much into the innards of RSX we should probably do it offlist.
Feel free to write to me directly if you want to.
But if you think this might interest others, and perhaps have some bearing on HECnet as well, then I think it should be ok to post it here.
Johnny
SOL (59.10) =>NI-0-0 / QNA-0 <= STUPI (59.58) 2.49 -1 -1 1.26
STUPI (59.58) =>TCP-0-4 / TCP-0-4 <= CODA (2.7) 0.51 -1 -1 0.37
CODA (2.7) =>TCP-0-7 / TCP-0-0 <= GORVAX (1.400) 2.50 -1 -1 1.44
GORVAX (1.400) =>QNA-0 / ISA-0 <= ORAC (1.250) 1.50 4 1 1.50
Any chance you talk "multinet" or "cisco" encapsulation of DECnet over
IP, as I think we are making a detour Sweden-UK...
..and, why not talk smtp over DECnet transport, we used to do that
1988 or so to avoid having -not-needed- rewites of addresses...
-P
Ps; SOL is also Sol.Stupi.SE
Hi Peter,
Sorry, you'll have to explain what you're asking me. Johnny set up ORAC
connectivity - I don't think there is anything unusual going on, but if
you tell me how to look for it I can investigate.
Regards, Mark.
SOL (59.10) =>NI-0-0 / QNA-0 <= STUPI (59.58) 2.49 -1 -1 1.26
STUPI (59.58) =>TCP-0-4 / TCP-0-4 <= CODA (2.7) 0.51 -1 -1 0.37
CODA (2.7) =>TCP-0-7 / TCP-0-0 <= GORVAX (1.400) 2.50 -1 -1 1.44
GORVAX (1.400) =>QNA-0 / ISA-0 <= ORAC (1.250) 1.50 4 1 1.50
Any chance you talk "multinet" or "cisco" encapsulation of DECnet over
IP, as I think we are making a detour Sweden-UK...
..and, why not talk smtp over DECnet transport, we used to do that
1988 or so to avoid having -not-needed- rewites of addresses...
-P
Ps; SOL is also Sol.Stupi.SE
