Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 04:30:13 PST
From: Advanced Amateur Radio Networking Group <tcp-group@ucsd.edu>
Errors-To: TCP-Group-Errors@UCSD.Edu
Reply-To: TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: TCP-Group Digest V93 #4
To: tcp-group-digest
TCP-Group Digest Mon, 4 Jan 93 Volume 93 : Issue 4
Today's Topics:
Comments, please
Mail delayed on sr.hp.com (queue id: AA01895)
Mail delayed on sr.hp.com (queue id: AA02554)
Mail delayed on sr.hp.com (queue id: AA02769)
NNTP message header list
packet driver for parallel port? (2 msgs)
routing in mixed network
TCP-Group Digest V93 #1 (2 msgs)
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu>.
Subscription requests to <TCP-Group-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>.
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the TCP-Group Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 23:13:59 -0800
From: karn@qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
Subject: Comments, please
To: 70730.220@CompuServe.COM, tcp-group@ucsd.edu
For the past several days, I've been running a copy of NOS that I
compiled with the -3 flag to Borland C++ 3.1. It has been absolutely
solid. However, I had to redo all of the interrupt handlers to save
all of each 32-bit general register. I'll be releasing this code soon.
The -3 flag did reduce the code size by something like 25K. Haven't
played with optimizer flags, that's next (the code I'm running now
is completely unoptimized).
Phil
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 23:32:34 -0800
From: Postmaster <postmaster@sr.hp.com>
Subject: Mail delayed on sr.hp.com (queue id: AA01895)
To: Advanced Amateur Radio Networking Group <tcp-group@UCSD.EDU>
After 5 days and 12 hours, your message to:
tcp-group-digest@UCSD.EDU
has not yet been fully delivered for the following reason:
Deferred: No route to host
Delivery is still pending for the following address(es):
glenne@srlr12
Your message was received Tuesday, 29 December 1992 10:57:36 PST
by sr.hp.com. sr.hp.com will continue to attempt to deliver
your message for an additional 9 days and 11 hours. If it has not
been delivered by the end of that time it will be returned to you.
No further action is required by you.
Your message began as follows:
--------------------
To: tcp-group-digest@UCSD.EDU
From: Advanced Amateur Radio Networking Group <tcp-group@UCSD.EDU>
Subject: TCP-Group Digest V92 #351
Message-Id: <9212291230.AA18640@ucsd.edu>
TCP-Group Digest Tue, 29 Dec 92 Volume 92 : Issue 351
Today's Topics:
FTP performance
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 23:42:09 -0800
From: Postmaster <postmaster@sr.hp.com>
Subject: Mail delayed on sr.hp.com (queue id: AA02554)
To: Advanced Amateur Radio Networking Group <tcp-group@UCSD.EDU>
After 5 days and 12 hours, your message to:
tcp-group-digest@UCSD.EDU
has not yet been fully delivered for the following reason:
Deferred: No route to host
Delivery is still pending for the following address(es):
glenne@srlr12
Your message was received Tuesday, 29 December 1992 11:14:01 PST
by sr.hp.com. sr.hp.com will continue to attempt to deliver
your message for an additional 9 days and 11 hours. If it has not
been delivered by the end of that time it will be returned to you.
No further action is required by you.
Your message began as follows:
--------------------
To: tcp-group-digest@UCSD.EDU
From: Advanced Amateur Radio Networking Group <tcp-group@UCSD.EDU>
Subject: TCP-Group Digest V92 #350
Message-Id: <9212281230.AA25532@ucsd.edu>
TCP-Group Digest Mon, 28 Dec 92 Volume 92 : Issue 350
Today's Topics:
MX in Domain.txt (2 msgs)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 23:47:41 -0800
From: Postmaster <postmaster@sr.hp.com>
Subject: Mail delayed on sr.hp.com (queue id: AA02769)
To: Advanced Amateur Radio Networking Group <tcp-group@UCSD.EDU>
After 5 days and 12 hours, your message to:
tcp-group-digest@UCSD.EDU
has not yet been fully delivered for the following reason:
Deferred: No route to host
Delivery is still pending for the following address(es):
glenne@srlr12
Your message was received Tuesday, 29 December 1992 11:23:48 PST
by sr.hp.com. sr.hp.com will continue to attempt to deliver
your message for an additional 9 days and 11 hours. If it has not
been delivered by the end of that time it will be returned to you.
No further action is required by you.
Your message began as follows:
--------------------
To: tcp-group-digest@UCSD.EDU
From: Advanced Amateur Radio Networking Group <tcp-group@UCSD.EDU>
Subject: TCP-Group Digest V92 #349
Message-Id: <9212271230.AA23305@ucsd.edu>
TCP-Group Digest Sun, 27 Dec 92 Volume 92 : Issue 349
Today's Topics:
MX in Domain.txt
------------------------------
Date: 03 Jan 93 15:20:31 CST
From: Jack Snodgrass <kf5mg@vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: NNTP message header list
To: <TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu>
Are there any version of NNTP for nos that have a list command for
nntp message headers. Also, what are the advantages on NNTP over the
BBS message areas? Thanks.
73's de Jack - kf5mg
AMPRnet - kf5mg@kf5mg.ampr.org - 44.28.0.14
AX25net - kf5mg@kf5mg.#dfw.tx.usa.na - work (817) 962-4409
Internet - kf5mg@vnet.ibm.com - home (817) 488-4386
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 23:37:38 PST
From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: packet driver for parallel port?
To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu
has anyone seen a packet driver for the parallel port?
(if one existed, I'm thinking of the possibility of chaining PC's
together, since parallel ports are common, and we have a scarce amount
of ethernet cards and PI cards. I guess I could just use SLIP...yuck)
__________________________________________________________________________
John Paul Morrison |
University of British Columbia, Canada |
Electrical Engineering | .sig file without a cause
jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca VE7JPM |
________________________________________|_________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 1:33:15 PST
From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: packet driver for parallel port?
To: MIKEBW@ids.net, tcp-group@ucsd.edu
MIKEBW@ids.net> mumbles words to the effect:
>
> This issue of using the parallel port came up about 6-9 months ago.
> There was a lot of back and forth discussion about whether parallel
> ports are really bidirectional, what sort of performance hit you
> take by changing the direction of data flow, using the four-bit
> nybbles in a split arrangement with four bits in one direction and
> four bits in the other, and so on. I don't think anything was really
> resolved, except that using the parallel port would be a lot of work.
> -- Mike Bilow, <mikebw@ids.net> (Internet)
>
considering how file shuttle (I think that's one), Laplink etc. perform,
I think it could get very decent send speed, and slower receive speeds.
Some parallel ports are bidirectional, but only half duplex (8 bits send
OR receive). There are definitely 5 inputs, although I played with mine,
and found that the control register was bidirectional (which I don't
expect to be portable).
__________________________________________________________________________
John Paul Morrison |
University of British Columbia, Canada |
Electrical Engineering | .sig file without a cause
jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca VE7JPM |
________________________________________|_________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 11:45 EST
From: gws@n8emr.cmhnet.org (Gary Sanders)
Subject: routing in mixed network
To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu
Here is my home network. I am having a few problems with routing
of both ip packets and email. The sat and laptop machines will be
in house use only machine and will require no outside the home.
Machine gate has no problem talkint to any of the inhome
machines or machines outside the home on the RF side.
How do a setup routing on both the ISC and Sun machine to
route almost all 44.x.x.x packets to the gateway, but not
route the inhouse machines to the gateway. On the ISC
machine I dont seem to be able to have more than one route
starting with 44. If I do a route add net 44.70.4.0 to the gateway
I get a netstat -nr that looks like this!
Routing tables
Destination Gateway Flags Refcnt Use Interface
44.70.0.1 44.70.0.1 UH 5 28278 lo0
44 44.70.0.1 U 6 333215 wd0
70.4 44.70.0.2 UG 0 0 wd0
Also How in sendmail can you setup a "smart host" I need the Sun to
route all mail to n8emr for further processing.
Thinnet network
<-|------------|---------------|---------------|---------------|------------->
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
44.70.0.1 44.70.0.4 44.70.0.5 44.70.0.2 44.70.0.3
n8emr sat yaub gate laptop
ISC UNIX DOS/PCNFS SunOS UNIX DOS/NET DOS/ncsa
| | |
| | |
| | |
| Oscar statellite |
| tracking station |
| |
To To know
Internet via 44.70.0.x where x > 10
UUCP gateway/ 44.70.4.x
Dialup BBS 44.70.8.x
44.70.12.x
44.70.14.x
44.70.16.x
44.x.x.x
via RF
Gary W. Sanders gws@n8emr.cmhnet.org, 72277,1325
N8EMR @ N8JYV (ip addr) 44.70.0.1 [Ohio AMPR address coordinator]
HAM BBS 614-895-2553 (1200/2400/V.32/PEP) Voice: 614-895-2552 (eves/weekends)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 09:54:27 PST
From: "Jeffrey D. Angus" <jangus@skyld.tele.com>
Subject: TCP-Group Digest V93 #1
To: TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu
> Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 6:52:35 -0500 (EST)
> From: MIKEBW@ids.net (Mike Bilow, <MIKEBW@ids.net>)
> Subject: MX to yourself as alternative to SMTP gateway to yourself
> To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu
>
> From: IDS::MIKEBW "Mike Bilow, <mikebw@ids.net>" 1-JAN-1993 05:16:33.86
> To: SMTP%"crompton@NADC.NADC.NAVY.MIL"
> CC: MIKEBW
> Subj: RE: MX in Domain.txt
>
> Setting the smtp gateway to yourself is a very bad thing to do. What
> this really means is, "Whenever you have a piece of mail to an unknown
> host, send it to yourself." Obviously, if the host was unknown once,
> it should be unknown again and every time the mail is processed, giving
> an endless mail loop. But the rewrite file changes the destination
> "host" so that the mail goes somewhere different on successive steps.
BZZZZT! Wrong. It delivers the mail to user@yourself.
i.e. hoser@notfound.ampr.org gets placed as ~/spool/mail/hoser.txt
Rewrite will place it to specified@yourself if given a single name for a match.
If there is a match, "*@notfound* lost" then the mail gets delevered locally
as ~/spool/mail/lost.txt (great way of masking undeliverable mail that
keeps me from having to do a directory listing every so often.)
Or if you want to pass it along to some other poor sod, use this as an
example; "*@notfound* $1%$2@mailgate" I use a variant of this for processing
intenet gateway mail.
73 es GM from Jeff
--
netcom!bongo!jangus@skyld.tele.com < the winter solstice is here >
US Mail: PO Box 4425 Carson, CA 90749-4425 1 (310) 324-6080
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 4:06:06 -0500 (EST)
From: MIKEBW@ids.net (Mike Bilow, <MIKEBW@ids.net>)
Subject: TCP-Group Digest V93 #1
To: jangus@skyld.tele.com, tcp-group@ucsd.edu
I stand by my position that defining oneself as an smtp gateway is not an
objectively good idea. Yes, you can use this approach to force mail to be
run through the rewrite file, and you can use the rewrite file to deal with
problems in mail addressing or routing. Further, many people define their
hosts to be their own smtp gateways in order to get certain related things
to happen. But I still can't see any reason for the code to be written to
make such an awful kludge necessary to accomplish anything.
I contend that there are good reasons for my position. The proper meaning
of the smtp gateway is that it is a system which is to be sent mail for
hosts which are not known. Mail addressed to a known thing which is not
a host should be handled differently than mail for a completely unknown
thing. For example, let's say I get a piece of mail with an RFC-822
address of "ka1az@ka1az". My system will append my current domain suffix
and try to resolve "ka1az.ampr.org" as a hostname, finding 44.104.0.36.
But it so happens that KA1AZ.#SORI.RI.USA.NOAM is a known mail receiver
(PBBS) which is not a host. The smtp gateway kludge will prevent mail
from being addressed to users at the KA1AZ BBS, since the kludge depends
on the BBS name being unresolvable as a hostname.
Of course, this can be metakludged by assigning a different domain name
instead of ka1az.ampr.org, but that sort of thing should not be needed.
Besides, that sort of absurdity starts to involve a good amount of
administrative hassle. As far as SMTP should be concerned, these types
of mail recipients -- hosts and things which are known but not hosts --
should be made easily distinguishable.
i would readily concede that the existing code does not handle this in
any appropriate way, and that the use of the smtp gateway kludge to force
use of the rewrite file has a certain pragmatic attractiveness. But it
is a kludge, it is nothing but a kludge, and always will remain a kludge.
-- Mike Bilow, <mikebw@ids.net> (Internet)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 12:07:48 GMT
From: Alan Cox <iiitac@pyr.swan.ac.uk>
To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu
I definitely agree. I've taken to working mail from smtp->ip addresses
by tacking on .ax25, much the same way as the .uucp is used to hack uucp
networks onto the internet mail arena. It seems to work and at the moment
mail to user@foobbs.ax25 gets forwarded to the local bbs as an
SPS user @ foobbs <sender $gw4pts_<bid>
A standard approach like this has a lot going for it.
Alan
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 12:08:31 GMT
From: Alan Cox <iiitac@pyr.swan.ac.uk>
To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu
Erk minor braino I mean from smtp->ax25 addresses of course.
Alan
------------------------------
End of TCP-Group Digest V93 #4
******************************
******************************