HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"MITCHELL%UTHSCSA.BITNET@ymir.claremont.edu"
X-VMS-Cc: IPMDF
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date:         Wed, 12 Aug 92 18:58:10 GMT
From:         Ned Freed <NED@SIGURD.INNOSOFT.COM>
Subject:      RE: two minor points
X-To:         MITCHELL@UTHSCSA, IPMDF@YMIR
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l

> I hate to sound retrograde, but there are probably some sites that would
> prefer non-multipart notices.  Many people here won't have MIME-speaking
> UAs in the near future.  Novice users looking at these things sometimes
> despair before noticing that they contain readable information!

The advantages of using multipart messages for notices are huge. In particular,
the original message can easily be extracted and dealt with as an entity.

The notion that the format is terribly hard to understand (which I happen to
think is grossly exaggerated) is actually beneficial since it heightens the
need to install MIME-compliant user agents everywhere.

Finally, it is the current recommended practice. (See RFC1343 (number may be
wrong here) for details and an explanation.) It is very likely to become
standard practice in the near future, and any other format is likely to be
strongly deprecated.

The conclusion is clear -- while there will be some growing pains and problems
with user education, the MIME format for returned messages is the only way to
go, and any option for a different format would only make the problem last
longer.

                                Ned
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"KNAPKE%BUTLERU.bitnet@UICVM.UIC.EDU""David J. Knapke
          317/283-9420"
X-VMS-Cc: IN%"info-pmdf@INNOSOFT.COM"
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
X-Mts: smtp
Date:         Fri, 14 Aug 92 08:14:58 +1000
From:         andrewr@ITD.ADELAIDE.EDU.AU
Subject:      RE: Mail User agents
X-To:         "David J. Knapke 317/283-9420"
              <KNAPKE%BUTLERU.bitnet@UICVM.UIC.EDU>
X-cc:         info-pmdf@INNOSOFT.COM
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l
              <01GNIXWQBL7M8Y4XA1@BUTLERU.BITNET>

In message <01GNIXWQBL7M8Y4XA1@BUTLERU.BITNET> you write:

+ >        We use Novell servers, as they appear as AppleShare File
+ >Servers, so you have both Mac's and PC's accessing the same post
+ >office sitting on the Novell server.
+
+ You certainly cannot connect 350-400 mac's to a file server.  The cost
+ of installing 3 (100 Mac users per server) additional Novell file servers
+ would be slightly prohibitive.

        OK, in our case we have 14 Novell file servers scattered
around campus, with a cc:Mail post office on each. I would be hesitant
to put 350-400 Macs on any one machine no matter what it was. And
Novell file servers can be used for things other than just mail, but
then so can most of the other solutions presented.

        Andrew.

/*
 * Andrew Rutherford                 andrewr@itd.adelaide.edu.au
 * +61 8 228 5669            Real Programmers always confuse Christmas and
 * Room 1060, Adelaide Uni      Halloween because OCT 31 == DEC 25 !
 */
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: in%"Ipmdf@ymir.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date:         Thu, 13 Aug 92 19:26:55 GMT
From:         The PMDF Postmaster <MAC@GVG34.GVG.TEK.COM>
Subject:      RE: Mail User agents
X-To:         Ipmdf@YMIR
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l

The guy working on ccMail here downloaded the following document from the
ccMail BBS yesterday.

Bill MacAllister

================================================
DEC updates E-Mail, Provides cc:Mail Integration
================================================

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, U.S.A., 1992 JUN 10 -- Digital Equipment has
announced a new release of its local area network electronic mail
integration product, MailWorks Postmaster, that ties DEC's mail systems
in
with Lotus Development's PC-based cc:Mail.

MailWorks Postmaster version 2.0 also adds new security features,
including virus detection and the ability to protect mail messages from
being read using network analyzers that can monitor the flow of data over
a network, said Valerie White, product manager.

White told Newsbytes that cc:Mail users will now be able to communicate
with colleagues who use DEC's Mailworks e-mail. Directories will be
integrated so users will not have to worry about who is on which system.
The cc:Mail connection is a first step in providing greater integration
between DEC's e-mail offering and those of other vendors. White said a
similar link to Microsoft Mail will be next, and other e-mail products
will be tied in with Mailworks later.

Mailworks supports DEC's own Pathworks networks, as well as Novell's
NetWare, 3Com and Banyan Vines networks running on Ethernet or Token Ring
hardware.

Due to be available in September, Mailworks Postmaster version 2.0 for
local area networks will cost $1,995. The wide area network version will
sell for $4,995, and the cc:Mail connection will cost $30.
(Grant Buckler/19920610/Press Contact: Terri Slater, Digital Equipment,
603-884-0753 or 617-849-6010)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%INFO-PMDF
X-VMS-Cc: TINKELMAN
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date:         Fri, 21 Aug 92 04:26:35 GMT
From:         Bob Tinkelman <bob@CAMB.COM>
Subject:      PMDF-FAX installation and [ghostscript]fontmap.
X-To:         ipmdf@INNOSOFT.COM
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l

I have an edited version of the fontmap file to support additional
fonts purchased from Adobe.  When I install PMDF-FAX I need to remember
to keep a renamed version of this file because PMDF-FAX replaces my
exisiting version, and purges the old one (because that's the option
I selected).  [Clearly I'm writing this mail because I've forgotten
to do that, yet another time.]

I understand that you wouldn't want to have the install just leave a
fontmap.sample file around, because it might be that the fontmap that
worked for one version of PMDF-FAX won't work for the next.  But maybe
you could rename the existing fontmap to fontmap.previous_version, or
something like that.  *And*, maybe it could output a message when it's
done so, just to remind forgetful people like me.

Does this sound like a reasonable thing to do?
From: D.Nash@UTEXAS.EDU (Donald L. Nash)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l
Subject: RE: two minor points
Date: 12 Aug 92 20:04:18 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: in%"info-pmdf@ymir.claremont.edu"
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
X-To:         info-pmdf@YMIR

I'm inclined to agree with Scott on the matter of multipart bounce-o-grams.
Until we get MIME-compliant user agents, receiving multipart messages can be
annoying and/or confusing.  I don't think it is particularly fair to tell
people to just get used to it because that's the way it is.  However, I can
also understand Innosoft's position of wanting to get a MIME-compliant MTA
deployed as soon as possible.  If the much-heralded Innosoft MIME user agent
had shipped with PMDF V4.1 then I wouldn't have a problem with any of this.
But as the situation currently stands, it doesn't seem to make much sense to
send MIME messages if there aren't any MIME user agents to deal with them,
and there aren't any such agents for VMS (are there?).  Since V4.1 didn't
ship with the MIME user agent, I would like to have seen a setting which
would disable the use of MIME in bounce-o-grams (and maybe elsewhere).  This
would allow sites to ease into MIME as the user agents become available,
rather than forcing them to deal with MIME messages (and the "junk" they
contain), without a good user agent.  But I guess it's too late to retrofit
this into V4.1, and hopefully the Innosoft user agent will be available
before V4.2 comes out.

There, I'm glad I got that off my chest.  And lest anyone get confused and
think otherwise, let me say that I have nothing but good things to say about
Innosoft.  This whole MIME fracas is *minor* compared to the good stuff that
Innosoft has done for us.  Between their active participation in the IETF to
advance the state of the e-mail art and their contribution of real, working
code to implement that art, they have made significant contributions to the
Internet in general and to us poor VMS folks in particular.  It's nice to
see that Unix isn't always at the vanguard of progress.  Great work, guys!

                                ++Don Nash

The University of Texas System              Internet:  D.Nash@utexas.edu
Office of Telecommunication Services        BITNET:    DON@THENIC
From: KLENSIN@INFOODS.MIT.EDU (John C Klensin)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l
Subject: Reverse address table
Date: 21 Aug 92 01:32:49 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"DAN@INNOSOFT.COM"
X-VMS-Cc: IN%"IPMDF@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU"
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(312)+TOPSLIB(155)+PMDF(4.1)@INFOODS.MIT.EDU>
X-To:         DAN@INNOSOFT.COM
X-cc:         IPMDF@YMIR

Dan,
   Following up the last part of this, since it addresses a slightly
different problem I'm having to deal with and the address reversal
database is less-than-astonishingly documented....
   Two questions, assuming a reversal database that contains
 user1@my.domain      user1@the.other.domain
 user2@my.domain      user2@the.other.domain
   and use_reverse_database and reverse_envelope both set to 1 (the defaults)

(1) When I use pmdf test/rewrite user1@my.domain, I get
    header From: address = user1@the.other.domain
as expected, but
    envelope From: address = user1@my.domain

Is this a problem in pmdf test/rewrite, or is the thing not going to
remap both addresses?

(2) Assuming that it does remap both addresses, or that it can be
persuaded to do so, there is a prohibition in RFC1123 (section 5.2.2) on
using anything but canonicalized names in MAIL FROM fields.  I  don't
have any problem with this in my application, but I could imagine
situations in which it would be necessary to apply a different rewrite
to the headers and the envelope to conform to this rule.  I infer that
one might be able to do this by specifying reversal before PMDF address
rewriting and then post-rewriting things using $B and $E, possibly in
conjunction with $R.  Is that the intent?


   --john
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"wdw3@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu"
X-VMS-Cc: IPMDF
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date:         Thu, 20 Aug 92 15:40:46 GMT
From:         Ned Freed <NED@SIGURD.INNOSOFT.COM>
Subject:      RE: question
X-To:         wdw3@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu, IPMDF@YMIR
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l

Sure -- anyone on the Internet can send to .BITNET addresses. It is very
easy; you just use something like:

    user%host.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu

The gateway host cunyvm.cuny.edu is just one of several possibilities.

The PMDF configuration procedure automatically generated a .BITNET rule
for hosts that aren't on BITNET directly, so you can actually type in

    user@host.bitnet


on a properly configured PMDF system that's only on the Internet and the
address will be handled properly. The rewrite rule is something like:

    .bitnet                  $U@$H.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu@MTCP-DAEMON

This will vary depending on the TCP/IP implementation you use.

                                Ned
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"DAN@INNOSOFT.COM"
X-VMS-Cc: IN%INFO-PMDF,TINKELMAN
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date:         Fri, 21 Aug 92 19:15:07 GMT
From:         Bob Tinkelman <bob@CAMB.COM>
Subject:      RE: PMDF-FAX installation and [ghostscript]fontmap.
X-To:         DAN@INNOSOFT.COM
X-cc:         ipmdf@INNOSOFT.COM
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l

> in V4.2 we'll make the installation dio what we do with things like
> master.com: rename the previous master.com to master.old.

Thanks.  That'll be an improvement.  But using the case of master.com
as an analogy, there you have made changes to avoid the necessity of
user editing of the command file.  Is there a way that you could do
the same thing here?

    Rough idea:  Have a file called local_fontmap which is in the same
    format as fontmap.  If it exists (in [ghostscript]) it is invoked
    either just before fontmap, or just after, depending on which makes
    the implementation easier.  If it's invoked before, then the functions
    that are used in fontmap would have to be changed so they would do
    nothing if the named font already existed.  If it's invoked after,
    then the functions could simply override prior font definitions.

Every time we can eliminate something that I need to remember to do after
running an installation, it's a *big* help.

Thanks for all your assistance - Bob
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"DMPM%DUKEMC.BITNET@ymir.claremont.edu"
X-VMS-Cc: IPMDF
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date:         Mon, 17 Aug 92 10:02:27 GMT
From:         Ned Freed <NED@SIGURD.INNOSOFT.COM>
Subject: RE: Help. Cannot install PMDF 4.1 -- %MOUNT-F-NOTLABELMT,
              tape is not labeled
X-To:         DMPM@DUKEMC, IPMDF@YMIR
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l

It sounds like the tape got damaged in transit. I'll forward your message
to the appropriate people here and see that a new tape is sent to you
ASAP.

                                        Ned
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"ipmdf@ymir.bitnet"
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 92 10:48:45 GMT
Comments:     EARN/BITnet: ADRIAANS@HNYKUN52, DECnet: KUNRC1::ADRIAANS
From:         "Th.W.A. Adriaansen, System Manager" <Tom.Adriaansen@UCI.KUN.NL>
Subject:      OPENVMS 1.0 and PMDF 4.x
X-To:         ipmdf@YMIR
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l

Hi,

We are thinking of migrating our VAX 6210 to a VAX 6510 or VAX 4400 (new type),
and DEC told me that the VAX 4400 has to run OPENVMS V1.0.

Now I'm curious if PMDF V4.x runs under OPENVMS V1.0.
Is there anyone out there who has any experience with this?
Is there anyone out there who already runs OPENVMS V1.0 with PMDF V4.x?

M.vr.Gr.
Tommy,

 ...................
 .            _+_  .  Tom Adriaansen : System Manager / Postmaster (.KUN).NL
 .           (***) .  Address        : University Computer Centre (KUN/UCI)
 ............/===\..                 : Geert Groote Plein Zuid 41
 . KKKKKUUUUUNNNNN .                 : 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands
 . KKK  UUUUU NNNN .  Phone          : +31-(80)-617958  (bgg 617957/617959)
 . K    UUUUU  NNN .  FAX            : +31-(80)-617979
 . KKK  UUUUU   NN .  E-MAIL         : Internet : Tom.Adriaansen@UCI.KUN.NL
 . KKKKK UUU     N .                 : X400     : G=Tom; S=Adriaansen; OU=UCI;
 ...................                 :          : O=KUN; P=SURF; A=400NET; C=NL
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: in%"info-pmdf@ymir.claremont.edu"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date:         Tue, 18 Aug 92 01:56:42 GMT
From:         Bruce Tanner <TANNER@CERRITOS.EDU>
Subject:      V4.1-10 mailserv questions
X-To:         info-pmdf@YMIR
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l

I have a few questions about the mailserv channel in V4.1-10:

* Where do I define the COMMAND_LIMIT, MAXBLOCKS and MAXLINES options?

* What is the format of the MAILSERV_ACCESS file?

* Mailserv appears to reply to the envelope From: rather than the header From:
  field.  I modified the V4.0 mailserv to use the header field and had much
  better control over processing UUCP return addresses.

* If I request a file /MODE=BLOCK/ENCODING=UUENCODE I get back (1) a foreign
  file format message and (2) a FDL message that contains:

Content-transfer-encoding: X-UUENCODE
Comments: These headers describe a message previously delivered in foreign file
 format.

  Has the file been decoded automatically from uuencode format to foreign file
  format for me, or is it not being uuencoded at all?

Thanks,
-Bruce
--
Bruce Tanner        (310) 860-2451 x 596    Tanner@Cerritos.EDU
Cerritos College    Norwalk, CA             DoD #0161  NOMAD #007
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"wdw3@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu"
X-VMS-Cc: IPMDF
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date:         Thu, 20 Aug 92 19:57:53 GMT
From:         "Daniel C. Newman" <DAN@INNOSOFT.COM>
Subject:      RE: question (thanks). More question
X-To:         wdw3@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu, IPMDF@YMIR
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l

 I run PMDF on a two-node VAXcluster. Each node has a valid internet host
> name. PMDF images are loaded on both nodes but there is only one cluster-
> wide MAIL$BATCH queue. I want different local host appear on the return
> address when people send mail from different node. So I create a PMDF.CNF
> for each node with the host name for l channel pointing to each node. This
> works fine when I send mail from the node on which the MAIL$BATCH is running.
> But when I send mail from the other node, the local host name apprears twice
> in the return address, like
>       From: user@localhost@localhost
> Any idea how this happen? Or is there other better way to do this? Thanks.

The user@localhost@localhost sounds like you have something misconfigured.
I'll leave that for Ned to answer.

Now, if you want to run as though you have two distinct machines then you need
two distinct PMDF configurations (separate PMDF_ROOT:[TABLE] and
PMDF_ROOT:[QUEUE...] directories), and a way of ensuring that mail processing
for host A runs on host A and not host B.  This means two separate MAIL$BATCH
queues.  (Yes, you'll have to use different names for them and edit the proper
pieces of PMDF_STARTUP.COM and PMDF_SUBMIT_JOBS.COM so as to relflect these
changed queued names.)

Now, my questionfor you is, if there is the same SYSUAF and mail profile for
the two hosts, then why do you want to distinguish between the two systems
in the first place?

If you can distinguish on a per user basis whether their address should
always be user@hosta or user@hostb, thene there is another approach which
you can take which involves only a single PMDF configuration.  This approach
involves the use of the address reversal database.

Dan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"MIKE%UCDHEP.BITNET@ymir.claremont.edu"
X-VMS-Cc: IPMDF
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date:         Fri, 21 Aug 92 22:28:05 GMT
From:         "Daniel C. Newman" <DAN@INNOSOFT.COM>
Subject:      RE: Mail delivery stopped
X-To:         MIKE@UCDHEP, IPMDF@YMIR
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l

> I noticed yesterday that I had very few network mail messages, considering all
> the mailing lists I'm on.  Also, one of our users complained that he had not
> received Internet mail that he sent to himself from an outside site.  At that
> time the VAX had been up for about 153 days, so I figured that this was no big
> deal.  I.e., s**t happens, very large buffers eventually fill up, etc., etc.
> So I rebooted the VAX, expecting to clear up the problem.  The reboot didn't
> help.
>
> I have been receiving and sending Internet, Bitnet, and HEPnet mail on a daily
> basis from and to sites all over the world, so I had no reason to expect
> problems with PMDF.  But I noticed that PMDF_ROOT:[QUEUE.L] had over 1700 file
   s
> in it, so I executed the command:
>
>                         $ @pmdf_root:[exe]master L
>
> This caused me to get hundreds of mail messages, some dated as long ago as May
> of this year.  Apparently a large number of messages also went out over the ne
   t.

At some point you lost the periodic and return jobs from your MAIL$BATCH queue.
You should check this from time to time.

> I continued to test, and messages did not get delivered unless I executed
> MASTER.COM by hand.

Sounds like the immediate delivery jobs for PMDF are dying for some reason.
I suggest you check the log files.  If there are no log files, then you'll
have to look at the system accounting records and see what the "final status
code" is for the batch jobs.

>  I then did:
>
>                         $ @sys$startup:pmdf_submit_jobs
>
> This caused messages to be processed, but only at the default time interval of
> four hours.  I now have this job run automatically every half hour, by setting
> the logical name PMDF_POST_INTERVAL to 00:30:00.  This is tolerable, I guess,
> but I'm pretty sure I didn't do that before.

This further confirms that something is causing the immediate delivery jobs to
fail.  Have you also checked the version numbers for the L_MASTER.LOG and
other log files?  It could be that it has reached 32,767.

Note that PMDF V4.1 is a lot more robust about dealing with version number
problems.

Dan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"TIHOR%NYUACF.BITNET@ymir.claremont.edu"
X-VMS-Cc: IPMDF
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date:         Mon, 17 Aug 92 10:26:08 GMT
From:         Ned Freed <NED@INNOSOFT.COM>
Subject:      RE: Mail User agents
X-To:         TIHOR@NYUACF, IPMDF@YMIR
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l

Marshall Rose has recently proposed a way to use the SMTP TURN (or
something like it) in a way that really makes a lot of sense. It eliminates
the terrible security risk associated with TURN to the point where TURN is
no more or less secure than SMTP ever was.

I plan to implement the capability to do this in PMDF if there's enough
need for it.

                                Ned
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Errors-to: epmdf@YMIR.BITNET
X-Envelope-to: PMDF-L@IRLEARN.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"tkslen@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu"
X-VMS-Cc: IPMDF
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date:         Thu, 13 Aug 92 19:54:29 GMT
From:         "Daniel C. Newman" <DAN@INNOSOFT.COM>
Subject:      RE: vms v5.5-1 and pmdf v4.1-1 problems.
X-To:         tkslen@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu, IPMDF@YMIR
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pmdf-l

PMD V4.1 works just fine with VMS 5.1-1.

Dan