HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: mail.delivery question
From: "remo Iori - C.I.S.C.A. - Trento"
Date: 23 Dec 1992 11:22:23 +0000
Organization: The Internet
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 23 Dec 1992 11:22:23 +0000
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GSN0FFRHEA90NL2Y@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
X-Vms-To: IN%"info-pmdf@ymir"
X-Vms-Cc: IORI
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT


Hi,
We are setting up a 'special distribution list' (only 8 users, so far) on
our Vax; a special account (eg: DISTRIBUTOR) has got a mail.delivery file
as the following:

!from to subj | when action  param.     ! note
!=======================================================
*     *   *     A    J       "FAST"     ! submit this proc. on queue FAST
*     *   *     A    V                  ! deliver a copy of the message
*     *   *     A    L                  ! save the batch log
*     *   *undeliver*  T   Q            ! don't forward to the list if this
                                        ! message is a warning of problems
                                        ! occurred during delivery
*     *   *     A    F ""in%""""userA@vax.domain.it"""""   ! send to userA
*     *   *     A    F ""in%""""userB@vm.domain.de"""""    ! send to userB
etc.

Each user, from different sites in Europe, send message to the DISTRIBUTOR
and then the message is forwarded to the rest of the list; any suggestion
to admit only the registered users having access to this service ? (We
would like to filter 'occasionaly' message received by DISTRIBUTOR, e.g.
advertisement, greetings ecc.)

Thanks in advance
Remo Iori
From: lybye@odin.uniras.dk (Jens Lybye, Business Support Systems)
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: PMDF Source routing
Date: 21 Dec 92 17:24:29 GMT
Organization: The Internet
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 21 Dec 1992 17:24:29 +0000 (GMT)
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GSKKH56T5E90NCKG@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
X-Vms-To: IN%"info-pmdf@ymir.claremont.edu"
X-Vms-Cc: LYBYE
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT


Sourceroute  --- Help needed


Scenario:
A number of UNIX stations should be able to send (replyable) mails to the
outside world without being added in MX. A VAX/VMS system connected to the
Internet via SMTP over X.25 should act as relay.

Problem:
When EXPROUTE is specified on the outgoing channel a PMDF TEST will show the
expected from-address (@odin.uniras.dk:user@localhost) but it get's stripped
off again and thus the mail is non-replyable.

Any suggestions ?!

Best regards,
Jens Lybye

!-------------------------------------------------------------------!
! PMDF 4.1 configuration file for odin.uniras.dk                    !
!-------------------------------------------------------------------!
!
! Local host/cluster
!
odin                                    $U@odin.uniras.dk
odin.uniras.dk                          $U@odin.uniras.dk
!
! Local TCP/IP systems/domains
!
asmodeus                                 $U%$H@UTCP-DAEMON
asmodeus.uniras.dk                       $U%$H@UTCP-DAEMON
!
! Anything else goes to (UNI*C)
!
.                       $U%$H@vms2.uni-c.dk

!
!-------------------------------------------------------------------!
!								    !
! The channels. A blank line must separate rules from channels      !
!-------------------------------------------------------------------!
! The local channel
!
l 822 bidirectional nosendpost logging headeromit
odin.uniras.dk

!
! The TCP/IP channel
!
utcp_local single_sys smtp nox_env_to nomx
UTCP-DAEMON ODIN

!
! Incoming SMTP over X.25
!
xsmtp_local single_sys smtp user pmdf logging slave nosendpost
xsmtp-daemon

!
! Outgoing SMTP over X.25 for gateway vms2.uni-c.dk
!
xsmtp_vms2 single_sys smtp logging user pmdf nosendpost master daemon router exproute ip$use
vms2.uni-c.dk
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: RE: Talking about MCI, how about a SprintMail PMDF interface?
From: Ned Freed <ned@innosoft.com>
Date: 23 Dec 1992 02:11:54 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: The Internet
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 23 Dec 1992 02:11:54 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GSN014ZATU90NKHB@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
X-Vms-To: IN%"HARRIS@si-bas.si.com"
X-Vms-Cc: IPMDF
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

We'd have to know more about the protocols Sprint uses before we'd be
able to make an intelligent reply to this. At least one other site is
already pursuing the available protocol question. I suggest that you find
out from Sprint what standard (or nonstandard) protocols they support for
accessing their service.

As for using one mailbox to serve multiple local users, the concept of an
MTA-level mailbox is hardly new. PMDF has them (they're called channels),
Message Router has them (they're called mailboxes), and I'm quite sure
that the concept was understood even when these products were developed.
(PMDF in particular traces its use of channels back to MMDF.)

Multi-use mailboxes at the UA level are rarer but by no means unheard of.
Again, PMDF has them (username+use-specific-string@localhost), they'd
be easy to do if anyone wanted to in Message Router, and so on. And again,
the concept is not original; PMDF's facilities for this are copied from
similiar facilities in the Andrew Messaging System. I have no idea where they
got the idea from...

				Ned
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: RE: mail.delivery question
From: "Daniel C. Newman" <dan@innosoft.com>
Date: 23 Dec 1992 10:16:52 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: The Internet
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 23 Dec 1992 10:16:52 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GSNGYG9U0I90NMRN@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
X-Vms-To: IN%"IORI%ITNCISCA.BITNET@ymir.claremont.edu"
X-Vms-Cc: IPMDF
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

> We are setting up a 'special distribution list' (only 8 users, so far) on
> our Vax; a special account (eg: DISTRIBUTOR) has got a mail.delivery file
> as the following:
>
> !from to subj | when action  param.     ! note
> !=======================================================
> *     *   *     A    J       "FAST"     ! submit this proc. on queue FAST
> *     *   *     A    V                  ! deliver a copy of the message
> *     *   *     A    L                  ! save the batch log
> *     *   *undeliver*  T   Q            ! don't forward to the list if this
>                                         ! message is a warning of problems
>                                         ! occurred during delivery
> *     *   *     A    F ""in%""""userA@vax.domain.it"""""   ! send to userA
> *     *   *     A    F ""in%""""userB@vm.domain.de"""""    ! send to userB
> etc.
>
> Each user, from different sites in Europe, send message to the DISTRIBUTOR
> and then the message is forwarded to the rest of the list; any suggestion
> to admit only the registered users having access to this service ? (We
> would like to filter 'occasionaly' message received by DISTRIBUTOR, e.g.
> advertisement, greetings ecc.)

Your best bet would be to not use DELIVER and instead set up a mailing list in
accord with Section 3.3.2.2 of the V4.1 PMDF System Manager's Guide and then
use the special "named parameters" to control access to that list.  These
parameters are described in Section 3.3.2.2.1 of the online documentation.
(They were not documented in time to make it into the printed manuals.)  If you
cannot use Bookreader, then you can look at the documentation sources: search
for the string "named parameters" in the file
PMDF_ROOT:[DOC]GUIDE_COMPONENTS.SDML.

If you set up a mailing list this way, then you might also consider using the
mail/list server supplied with PMDF V4.1 to manage the list.  In a separate
messge I will send you information on how to use all of its access control
mechanisms to manage the list.

If you wish to stick with DELIVER, then you need to set up a command procedure
to be run by DELIVER with an E action.  This command procedure would then check
the From: address of a potential submission against the list of registered
users and then only submit the posting if a match is found.  To submit the
posting use the command

 $ PMDF SEND/HEADER/BLANK 'MESSAGE_HEADER','MESSAGE_FILE' "userA@vax.domain.it"

Dan
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: RE: POP server and All-in-1 Mail...
From: "Daniel C. Newman" <dan@innosoft.com>
Date: 03 Jan 1993 12:14:29 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: The Internet
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 03 Jan 1993 12:14:29 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GT2Y9YRS1U90OFFS@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
X-Vms-To: IN%"SMITH%NYUMED.BITNET@ymir.claremont.edu"
X-Vms-Cc: IPMDF
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

> A while back we switched from VMS mail to All-in-1 mail with PMDF-MR, etc. We
> like the X-windows interface and the multi-part capability.
>
> However, it would be good to be able to use Eudora from home to get mail over
> the weekend.  When we still ran VMS mail this was not a problem since the
> Multinet POP server linked to the VMS-mail for each user.
>
> Will the PMDF POP product allow you to get mail from an All-in-1 mail account?
> If not, is there a solution possible? probable? desirable?

Access to VMS MAIL mail boxes is made possible by the documented callable MAIL
interface (for which you need to use some undocumented item codes to get any
performance).  Until DEC make available a callable interface to ALL-IN-1 IOS,
MailWorks (a.k.a. A1MAIL), or other Message Router mail boxes, we cannot even
consider the feasibility of server access to those mail boxes.

Now, DEC does sell, at very reasonable prices, Macintosh and PC clients which
can access your MailWorks mail boxes.

Dan
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: RE: urgent - license problem
From: "Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr" <terry@spcvxa.spc.edu>
Date: 23 Dec 1992 13:27:37 -0500 (EST)
Organization: St. Peter's College, US
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 23 Dec 1992 13:27:37 -0500 (EST)
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
CC: IPMDF@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GSNHCADOW290NMTM@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
X-Vms-To: IN%"JIS@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu"
X-Vms-Cc: IPMDF@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU,TERRY
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

> I have just upgraded pmdf from v4.0 to v4.1 and got following license problem:
>
> $ set def pmdf_root:[table]
> $ pmdf cnbuild
> %SYSTEM-F-NOLICENSE, operation requires software license

  PMDF uses it's own license loader and doesn't use the DEC method for looking
up licenses. This is because PMDF uses different CPU ratings (for the "bun-
dles") than the DEC products.

  You need to do a PMDF LICENSE LOAD to make the license visible to PMDF. This
_should_ be done for you as part of normal PMDF startup (giving you a message
like "X license units loaded").

  It is possible that PMDF's loader is becoming confused by the fact that your
PMDF license isn't in SYS$COMMON:[SYSEXE]LMF$LICENSE.LDB, but is instead in
another file. I think Portia from Innosoft will let us know if that might be
the case - I believe she handles the licensing aspects of PMDF code.

	Terry Kennedy		Operations Manager, Academic Computing
	terry@spcvxa.bitnet	St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA
	terry@spcvxa.spc.edu	+1 201 915 9381
From: xu@neuro.psycha.upenn.edu (Song Xu)
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: A Simple Question
Date: 31 Dec 92 03:37:56 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

Hi, I will appreciate if someone can answer this simple compatibility
question.

Does PMDF 4.0 works under VMS 5.5 and UCX 2.0 ?
		Or
What version PMDF works under VMS 5.5 and UCX 2.0 ?

Thank you very much.

Song
From: mats@rigel.efd.lth.se (mats akerberg)
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: AT&T
Date: 30 Dec 92 15:12:57 GMT
Reply-To: mats@rigel.efd.lth.se
Organization: Lund Institute of Technology,Lund, Sweden

Hi!

I have a problem when I'm sending mail to a friend
that have a X.400 adress.

What I get is this:

Not-Delivered-To: mhs!fws/S=zirbess/O=fws due to 13 Conversion Not Performed
 unable to transfer

But when I send from my DECstation It work's OK!

I guess the error is with AT&T (I send to @mhs.attmail.com)!

Is there a workaround or?????
Where do I bash on AT&T?

                  /Mats

____
  Mats Akerberg, System Manager (mats@rigel.efd.lth.se)
  Lund Institute of Technology ,School of Electrical Engineering and  
  Computer Sciences. Snail: Box 118  S-221 00 Lund Sweden
  Phone: + 46 46-109847 FAX: + 46 46-104013
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: unsubscribe
From: Juha Tolvanen SALCOM Finland Oy <juha.tolvanen@salcom.fi>
Date: 23 Dec 1992 13:58:06 +0200
Organization: The Internet
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 23 Dec 1992 13:58:06 +0200
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GSN3SOWOTU9BVCNG@INNOSOFT.COM>
X-Vms-To: in%"info-pmdf@innosoft.com"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

unsubscribe info-pmdf
From: bob@camb.com (Bob Tinkelman)
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: mailserv `unauthorized' rejection msgs
Date: 30 Dec 92 14:02:43 GMT
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 30 Dec 1992 10:02:43 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GSX28WIAF68WVYON@INNOSOFT.COM>
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

I have set up a number of mailserv managed mailing lists and on some am
trying to restrict the list of people allowed to issue the `subscribe'
command.  I am unsure about one point.  Which address does PMDF use
when checking against the file I specify?  Is it the From:-header,
Sender:-header, envelope-from, ... ?  The rejection message says only
	You are not authorized...
It would be helpful if it included the actual address it was trying to
match, as in
	You (bob@camb.com) are not authorized...

Needless to say, this question was prompted by a problem I have where
I thought I'd set things up correctly, but only some of the people I
wanted to authorize are able to issue the subscribe command.  The others
get the `not authorized' msg.

Thanks - Bob Tinkelman <bob@camb.com>
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: urgent - license problem
From: UF-IFAS Computer Network <jis@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu>
Date: 23 Dec 1992 11:15:40 -0500 (EST)
Organization: The Internet
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 23 Dec 1992 11:15:40 -0500 (EST)
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GSNCOIUBKI90NLT2@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
X-Vms-To: IN%"info-pmdf@ymir.claremont.edu"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT


I have just upgraded pmdf from v4.0 to v4.1 and got following license problem:

$ set def pmdf_root:[table]
$ pmdf cnbuild
%SYSTEM-F-NOLICENSE, operation requires software license

$ license list/full pmdf
Use CTRL/Z to exit, PF3-PF4 for Previous-Next Screen and Arrow Keys to scroll.
 License Management Facility

 License Database File:       SYS$COMMON:[SYSEXE]CAMPUSWIDE_SW_LICENSE_GRANT.LDB
 Created on:                  19-DEC-1991
 Created by user:             RIS
 LMF Version:                 V1.0

 -----------------------------------
 Issuer:                      INNOSOFT
 Authorization:               080692-15
 Product Name:                PMDF
 Producer:                    INNOSOFT
 Units:                       50
 Version:                     0.0
 Release Date:                30-JUN-1993
 PAK Termination Date:        (none)
 Availability:                0
 Activity:                     000000001
 Options:
 Product Token:               3240
 Hardware ID:

 Revision Level:              1

$ license load pmdf
%LICENSE-W-ALREADYLOADED, INNOSOFT PMDF has already been loaded


What's the problem?  I have even re-registered the license, but that
didn't help.

Thanks,
jennifer
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: POP server and All-in-1 Mail...
From: smith%nyumed.bitnet@ymir.claremont.edu
Date: 03 Jan 1993 08:51:51 -0400 (EDT)
Organization: NYU Medical Center, 550 First Ave., New York, 10016
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 03 Jan 1993 08:51:51 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GT2KXCTQYQ90ODW7@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
X-Vms-To: in%"ipmdf@ymir.bitnet"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

A while back we switched from VMS mail to All-in-1 mail with PMDF-MR, etc. We
like the X-windows interface and the multi-part capability.

However, it would be good to be able to use Eudora from home to get mail over
the weekend.  When we still ran VMS mail this was not a problem since the
Multinet POP server linked to the VMS-mail for each user.

Will the PMDF POP product allow you to get mail from an All-in-1 mail account?
If not, is there a solution possible? probable? desirable?
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: RE: mailserv `unauthorized' rejection msgs
From: Bob Tinkelman <bob@camb.com>
Date: 01 Jan 1993 23:01:15 -0400 (EDT)
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 01 Jan 1993 23:01:15 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GT0M0GOCGI8WVYXF@INNOSOFT.COM>
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

> You'll have to strip the subaddresses from the actual authorization list
> entries or arrange it so users use the proper subaddress when submitting
> to the list.

What do you think of offering an option to allow
	Sender: bob@camb.com
to match an authorization list entry of the form
	bob+subaddress@camb.com

If such an option were available, I think I'd use it.  Does it imply
some sort of hole in the security of authorizations?
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: RE: mailserv `unauthorized' rejection msgs
From: Ned Freed <ned@sigurd.innosoft.com>
Date: 30 Dec 1992 10:24:02 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: The Internet
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 30 Dec 1992 10:24:02 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GT0OI1EHMO90OARS@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
X-Vms-To: IN%"bob@camb.com"
X-Vms-Cc: IPMDF
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

The proper choices of addresses for authorization checking are all
described in RFC822. Specifically, the Sender: address is used if present,
and failing that the From: address is used.

The debug output for the channel shows what addresses are used in great
detail as well. I'll consider adding this information to the response
messages too.

				Ned
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: Options for dealing with Mail-11 delivery errors
From: Bob Tinkelman <bob@camb.com>
Date: 21 Dec 1992 09:22:48 -0400 (EDT)
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 21 Dec 1992 09:22:48 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GSKG80F74Y8WW5P0@INNOSOFT.COM>
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

This is a followup to my previous posting regarding problems with
deliveries to the local channel failing due to one of the various
problems with VMSmail and/or the Mail-11 protocol.

We have the following situation.  We used to have a set of large
mailing list (some with several hundred entries).  These used to be
normal VMSmail distribution lists.  We've changed them to be PMDF
lists.  We're having an unanticipated problem which may cause us to
revert back, something I'd prefer not to do.

There have always been occasional problems with these lists. However,
the impact has changed since the changeover.

Once, one list member on another node forwarded his mail to his
secretary, who was on some of the same lists.  This caused mail to
hang when sending to the list.  There have been other problems,
probably not all caused by exactly the same situations.

The following is my analysis/guess at our current situation.  When a
problem like the above occured before, the sender would be using MAIL
interactively, MAIL would hang, and the user would eventually ^C.  At
that point he/she would figure that the mail had been actually sent,
possibly noticing his/her own delivery had arrived, and would just go
on about his/her business.

Now, when the same situation occurs, the PMDF batch job is running
mail/protocol=in_mailshr and it hangs.  Either
   (1) PMDF recognizes the problem and aborts the delivery, or
   (2) the job hangs forever.
[I'm not sure how often the first occurs.  I've seen the second.]

Following the second scenario, eventually I notice the hung batch job
and abort it.  If I forget to rename the problem queue entry, the
situation repeats, and each time the message is delivered to the list.
So people get multiple copies of the message.  I suspect that the
first case is happening also based on the number of cases of people
reporting receiving many copies of the same message.

My first question:  Is my guess correct that PMDF will time out in
certain cases (I think this is what you [Ned] posted in response to my
first question) and treat the delivery as a `temporary failure',
requeuing it for later?

My second question:  If that's the case, would it make sense for PMDF
to provide an option for treating this case differently?  At our site
we'd prefer to get Postmaster involvement ASAP in cases like this,
rather than waiting for user complaints about multiple deliveries.

And my third question:  Short of convincing the other VMS systems to
run PMDF, are there any suggestions as to how we can deal with this,
short of going back to VMSmail distibution lists?