HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bruce@blilly.UUCP (Bruce Lilly)
Subject: Re: file locking after forks in sendmail 5.65
Organization: Bruce Lilly
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 23:41:30 GMT
Reply-To: lilb@sony.compuserve.com

In article <VIXIE.92Nov14195819@cognition.pa.dec.com> vixie@pa.dec.com (Paul A Vixie) wrote:
>
>Flock(2)-originated locks are inherited by child processes.  In
>other words, this code works fine on BSD and its derivatives.

It's hardly surprising that BSD sendmail works fine on BSD...

>Sendmail will mostly compile on V7 and V32 as well as any BSD box.
>If USL hacked the interface to death, don't blame sendmail.  Just
>because USL owns the "UNIX" name is no reason to put BSD down for
>maintaining upward compatibility.

In the case of the two specific issues mentioned, viz. file
locking and signal handling, I strongly suspect that vanilla BSD
sendmail either won't compile on V7 (because there's no flock(), for
example) or won't work (due to failure to re-enable signal
handlers, or lack of the appropriate signal).

Specifically regarding signal(2), V7, SV through at least
SVR3.0, and Tenth Edition UNIX(R) all have essentially the same
semantics and operation. For example, the V7 manual states
``Except as indicated [SIGILL and SIGTRAP], a signal is reset to
SIG_DFL after being caught. [ ... ] If a repeated signal
arrives before the last one can be reset, there is no chance to
catch it.''
The Tenth edition manual's wording is slightly different:
``Except as indicated [again, SIGILL and SIGTRAP], a signal is
reset to SIG_DFL after being caught.  Thus if it is desired to
catch every such signal, the catching routine must issue another
signal call.''
The SVR3.0 signal(2) man page states: ``Before entering the
signal-catching function, the value of func for the caught
signal will be set to SIG_DFL unless the signal is SIGILL,
SIGTRAP, or SIGPWR.''
The BSD signal handling is different from all of these.
Specifically regarding the ``death of child'' signal, V7 doesn't
have one (according to TFM).

The point is not that one is ``better'' or ``worse'' (or
``reliable'' vs. ``unreliable''), rather that they differ, and
because of the differences a significant amount of porting is
involved.

--
	Bruce Lilly		blilly!bruce@Broadcast.Sony.COM
					...uunet!sonyusa!sonyd1!blilly!bruce
-- 
	Bruce Lilly		blilly!bruce@Broadcast.Sony.COM
					...uunet!sonyusa!sonyd1!blilly!bruce
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: bruce@blilly.UUCP (Bruce Lilly)
Subject: Re: Anyone built IDA Sendmail on a Sys V Machine
Keywords: Sendmail, IDA, SysV
Organization: Bruce Lilly
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 14:34:06 GMT
Reply-To: lilb@sony.compuserve.com

In article <1992Nov12.172352.7173@zeus.swindon.rtsg.mot.com> williamm@zeus.swindon.rtsg.mot.com (Martin Williams) wrote:
>Has anyone managed to build IDA Sendmail 6.56/1.4.4.1 on a
>sytem V box, particularly the Motorola Delta/MPC series?
>
>I am attempting this at the moment and have hit what seems to
>be a rather nasty problem with the file daemon.c in that it
>relies heavily on Berkley Interprocess Communication
>primatives. The advice in the comments in this source
>file suggest chucking this source away and starting from scratch!
>
>Has anyone got any suggestions?

IDA sendmail runs on AT&T 3B1s (68010, SVR2.2 (more-or-less)).

If you don't have an emulation for BSD socket code, you might be
able to sucessfully compile by #undefining DAEMON (in the
configuration header file, of course). This will
leave out the code for listening on socket 25 for SMTP requests.
You won't be able to use the -bd flag to sendmail.  You can still
periodically run sendmail to process the queue (via cron, with a
crontab line like:
12,42 0,3,4,5,6,7,8,11,12,13,16,17,18,19,20,23 * * * /usr/lib/sendmail -q
). [One advantage of the crontab approach is that the timing of
the queue processing is synchronized with wall clock time; using
sendmail -q -bd<intvl> at boot time will result in the queue
being processed at some random time, determined by the last time
sendmail was invoked with a -bd arg and the system load since
that time. Synchronization with wall clock time may be useful in
conjunction with other mail-handling programs (e.g. UUCP's
uudemon.hour) which are started from cron. Running without the
DAEMON code also obviates killing and resarting the daemon
(since there isn't one) every time the configuration file is
changed.]

[BTW, sendmail w/o the DAEMON code can also be used to handle
SMTP requests, if you have inetd. In that case, the appropriate
inetd.conf line is:
smtp	stream	tcp	nowait	root	/usr/lib/sendmail	sendmail -bs
For machines with a modest SMTP load, this may be a performance
advantage, since sendmail doesn't occupy a process table slot,
memory buffers, swap space, etc. until/unless it is needed. On
the other hand, a machine which recieves a large number of SMTP
requests per unit time may well be better off (performance-wise)
with a sendmail daemon, since each inetd-spawned sendmail has to
read the (possibly-frozen) configuration file. (for portability,
performance, and security reasons, the freeze/thaw code should
probably be rewritten.)]

-- 
	Bruce Lilly		blilly!bruce@Broadcast.Sony.COM
					...uunet!sonyusa!sonyd1!blilly!bruce
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: Best choice: pathalias/sendmail or smail?
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
	<BxqCFr.298@rahul.net> <Bxs77I.Ep1@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 03:41:10 GMT

Leslie> == Leslie Mikesell <les@chinet.chi.il.us> 

 Leslie> Smail release 3.1.28 adds support for somewhat arbitrary
 Leslie> header-munging with contional string manipulation and database
 Leslie> lookups but I don't know if it handles everything IDA can do.
 Leslie> The configuration files are certainly easier to read, though.

Easier than the .cf, or easier than the .m4 (assuming you use the canned
Sendmail.mc)?  I find the .m4 *really* easy to read, especially given
that it fits in an 80x24 window...
--
Christopher K. Davis      | ``Usenet seems to run much like the Kif (or,
<ckd@eff.org>   EFF #14   |   for the TV generation, Klingon) high command.
System Administrator, EFF |   Whoever takes action and can be heard wins.''
+1 617 864 0665  [CKD1]   |   --Peter da Silva <peter@ferranti.com>
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: robichau@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov (Paul Robichaux)
Subject: Internet -> UUCP, MX, and different root domains
Reply-To: robichau@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov
Organization: New Technology, Inc.
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:15:16 GMT


Stupid sendmail question #27,905:

I have a small, one-machine registered domain (fairgate.com) which
receives MX forwarding services from a local Well-Connected Site
(acatt.aidt.edu.) The two machines have been connecting via uucp for
some time with no major problems.

However, now that the DNS recognizes fairgate.com and can route mail
to acatt for further distribution, no mail is making it past acatt.
Outbound mail from fairgate does work, but appears with a
"Return-path" of fairgate.aidt.edu.

Question 1: If I understand Neil Rickert's post in this group, the
Return-Path header is generated at the mail's destination and is not
significant for mail routing. Thus, if anyone complains I can
cheerfully tell them that they need to update their mail software,
right? 

Question 2: I suspect that I'll need a Cm line added to sendmail.cf on
my MX forwarder, perhaps
	Cmfairgate.com fairgate.uucp
Is this required so that mail to the old-form uucp address still makes
it through?

Question 3: Will a Cm line in sendmail.cf allow acatt to recognize and
forward mail to a system in a different domain? Will its absence
forbid it?

Posts here, or direct e-mail, are fine. If you tell me to RTFM, please
specify which FM. The SunOS sysadmin's guide hasn't helped too much so
far. Then again, it could be me.

-Paul

-- 
Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG              | May explode if disposed of improperly.
Mission Software Development Div.   | Printed on recycled phosphors.
New Technology, Inc.		    | ** PGP 2.0 key available on request **
From: tal@Warren.MENTORG.COM (Tom Limoncelli)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: sendmail+IDA host hiding question
Date: 18 Nov 1992 18:16:02 -0500
Organization: Mentor Graphics -- IC Group
NNTP-Posting-Host: milk.warren.mentorg.com

A number of people sent me answers but nobody has a quick and easy
solution like Neil.  Thanks to all that wrote to me!

In <1992Nov17.135459.17270@mp.cs.niu.edu> rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) writes:

>I recommend that you add a MAILERTABLE to your setup, and insert in that
>table the single entry:

>	value			key

>LOCAL!localhost			.my.do.main

>This will cause any mail for 'anyhost.my.do.main' to be delivered by
>the local mailer.  There are other ways to do this which don't require
>a MAILERTABLE, but in practice the mailertable approach is the simplest >to use.

That was the exact info I was looking for!  Thanks!  I'm implementing
this tonight!

>>At first I thought that sendmail was ignoring the MX records.  Then I
>>realized that what's happening is even worse than ignoring them.
>>
>>The MX record isn't saying "deliver to mailhub", it is saying, "mailhub
>>knows how to get the message to node1".  So, sendmail figures, "yes I
>>do know how to get to node1, I send it via TCP!" and doing just that.

>I don't see this as "worse than ignoring" the MX.  It just happens to
>be inappropriate for your application.  As you surmise, the MX record

That's what I meant.  It was a 'centric statement. :-)

>>Who ever explains this to me gets a free lock of hair.  I've been
>>pulling so much out of my head over this I have tons to give away!

>Thanks, but no thanks.

Well, I'll buy you a drink at the next Usenix, ok?

Thanks again!
Tom
-- 
Tom Limoncelli -- tal@warren.mentorg.com (work) -- tal@plts.uucp (play)
Reality is stranger than fiction #943247:  The IRS granted
ANS approval as a 501c3 "charity" on September 14, 1992.
From: davidh@CIS.Prime.COM (Dave Hill)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Is it list_name-owner or owner-list_name?
Date: 20 Nov 92 18:08:06 GMT
Organization: Computervision R&D LTD.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

Does this actually work in Sun sendmail at all?? Even with patch 100377-05
I can't actually get owner-list_name to do anything!

--
Dave Hill						    davidh@cis.Prime.COM
Computervision R&D Ltd					    +44 223 872377 x352
Harston Mill, Harston, CB2 5NH, UK
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: bruce@blilly.UUCP (Bruce Lilly)
Subject: Re: file locking after forks in sendmail 5.65
Organization: Bruce Lilly
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 00:07:59 GMT

In article <VIXIE.92Nov14195819@cognition.pa.dec.com> vixie@pa.dec.com (Paul A Vixie) wrote:
>Flock(2)-originated locks are inherited by child processes.

How does that work with exclusive locks? According to ``The
Design and Implementation of the 4.3BSD UNIX(R) Operating
System'', by Leffler et. al., ``Only one process may have an
exclusive lock on a file'' (p. 177).

It would therefore seem that
a)	flock(2)-originated exclusive locks can not be inherited
	by child processes
or
b)	more than one process may have an exclusive lock on a
	file (which seems self-contradictory)
or
c)	the nature of a lock changes when it is inherited by a
	child process
.

In any event, file locking under BSD is advisory locking only,
which means that it is ineffective at preventing random
processes (e.g. cat(1), vi(1), sh(1), csh(1), etc.) from
modifying a locked file while it is being written
to or read from by the process holding the lock. In the context
of the original poster's question (queue file processing) that
should not be a problem under normal circumstances, since one
would not expect any program other than sendmail to access the
queue files.  However it may be a problem when sendmail is
updating a database (e.g. the aliases database), since it is
quite possible that the text version of the database may be
modified by a program other than sendmail, and one that doesn't
check for locks (such as those named above). That's why the SV
code submitted for UIUC/IDA sendmail incorporates mandatory file
locking for the database files for automatic update.
-- 
	Bruce Lilly		blilly!bruce@Broadcast.Sony.COM
					...uunet!sonyusa!sonyd1!blilly!bruce
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: umngai06@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Lun Yuen Ngai)
Subject: mail sending?
Keywords: mail
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 04:09:05 GMT

Hi everynetter

I have a question about mail sending.  If I want to send a same mail
to many people, any simple way I can do instead of tying many times
the same message?  Thank you.

Bob

Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: jns@ace.nas.nasa.gov (John N. Stewart)
Subject: [5.61] SGI running 4d.4.0 and Sendmail 5.61
Organization: NAS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 01:41:53 GMT
Distribution: usa


ARCH: SGI/{SPS,Indigo,4D*} running 4d.4.0 and sendmail 5.61
Problem: spurious problem with email lists


We have a series of email lists on SGI platforms, and 5.61 seems to
have this curious notion that the delivery child should die every once
and awhile, and then sendmail tries to resend all over again.

The final result is that numerous people on these lists receive the
email multiple times. So far, there has been absolutely no pattern
whatsoever -- near as I can tell. It has also happened with a single
user recipient, but far more rarely.

A cohort of mine is evaling 5.67 to solve all of this, but for the
interim we are stuck. Does _anyone_ else have this problem, or better
yet, seen a solution?

Unacceptable answers: 1) move the lists to a Sun 2) disban all lists
:)))) 


Thanx for any help...

--Ace
From: pnta@warren.med.harvard.edu (Patrick Nta)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: RE: Limiting file size in Sendmail
Date: 16 Nov 92 14:41:36 GMT
Followup-To: comp.mail.sendmail
Organization: Harvard Medical School

Sorry, the previous question had a typo from me ( The missing '=' after M).
OK, this is the modified version:

Mtcp,  P=[IPC],  F=CDFMXImue,  S=11,  R=21,  E=\r\n,  M=150000, A=IPC $h

Unfortunately, it still doesn't work. I tested this option by e-mailing a
300kbyte file through the relay.
Sendmail was downed ( -bk option) and  sendmail.fc file deleted, and the
system was started again with the -bd option and sendmail.fc recreated.

More suggestions are welcome.

Thanks.
From: mjo@slee01.srl.ford.com (Mike O'Connor)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Sendmail configuration for Apollos
Date: 18 Nov 1992 20:32:21 GMT
Organization: Not an official spokesperson for Ford Motor Co.
Reply-To: "Mike O'Connor" <mjo@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slee01.srl.ford.com

In article <922318172312@ibm3090.bham.ac.uk> David
Letsche<D.J.LETSCHE@UK.AC.BHAM> writes:

:Does anybody have a working sendmail configuration for Apollo Domain/OS
:SR10.  If so I could you supply a copy of the sendmail.cf file?

Last I remember, the stock Apollo sendmail was MX-ignorant, and no
amount of configuration short of replacing the sendmail binary would
correct that situation.

						...Mike

--
 Michael J. O'Connor           |  Internet:  mjo@FMSRL7.SRL.FORD.COM
 Ford Motor Company, OPEO      |  UUCP:      ...!{backbone}!fmsrl7!mjo
 20000 Rotunda, Bldg. 1-3001   |  Phone:     +1 (313) 248-1260
 Dearborn, MI  48121           |  Fax:       +1 (313) 323-6277
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail,comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.uucp
From: ehrlich@cs.psu.edu (Dan Ehrlich)
Subject: Is it list_name-owner or owner-list_name?
Followup-To: poster
Organization: Computer Science Department, Penn State University
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 19:17:13 GMT

If I have a mailing list "list_name" is the alias for the owner supposed to
be "list_name-owner" or "owner-list_name"?  Or does it matter not?  I did
not come across anything in my quick check of the RFCs, but that does not
mean it's not in there.

Thanks in advance.

--
Dan Ehrlich - Sr. Systems Programmer - Penn State Computer Science
"Universities should be safe havens where ruthless examination of
 realities will not be distorted by the aim to please or inhibited
 by the risk of displeasure." - Kingman Brewster
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: mbl900@lunch (Mathew BM LIM)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: IDA sendmail and vacation problem
Date: 18 Nov 1992 05:40:29 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.5.22

I'm running sendmail-5.65b+IDA-1.4.3 under SunOS 4.1.2 and can't get the 
vacation program to work any more. After setting up my .vacation.msg and other 
files as per the SunOS vacation man page, then run /usr/ucb/mail -v, this 
is what I see :

"|/usr/ucb/vacation rks900"... Connecting to anusf.anu.edu.au (prog)...
sh: 4526 Memory fault
"|/usr/ucb/vacation rks900"... Sent

When I replace /usr/lib/sendmail with the SunOS version, all seems to work
again. So is there a know problem with vacation and IDA sendmail or is there
a more general problem with aliasing to shell commands in IDA?

-- 
Mathew Lim, Unix Systems Programmer, ANU Supercomputer Facility,	
Australian National University,	GPO Box 4, Canberra City, ACT, Australia 2601.
Telephone : +61 6 249 2750 	| 
Fax       : +61 6 247 3425	| E-Mail  : M.Lim@anu.edu.au
From: in1012@uk.ac.wlv.ccub ("M.B.Caines")
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Problems with relaying
Date: 20 Nov 92 10:46:45 GMT
Organization: Glasgow University Computing Science Dept.
Return-Path: <local-uk-sendmail-workers-request@dcs.gla.ac.uk>
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4dev PL32], mail-news 2.0.5

We  are using uk-sendmail (1.4) on a Sun (uk.ac.wlv. ccub)  which
has mail coming in from both the Ethernet, using SMTP, and on  YB
X25 from both JANET and our own PRIME Grey Book systems. We  want
the Sun to act as a gateway between these environments. 

We  have a problem, because any mail that comes in via SMTP  over
our  Ethernet, and then leaves via Grey Book, acquires a  'Via: '
line that specifies the name of the Ethernet SMTP system in world
order, e.g.

	Via: scitsc.wlv.ac.uk

rather   than the other way round. If a reply is sent to  such  a
mail  item,  then when uk.ac.wlv.ccub attemts to forward  it,  it
gives up with a 'host not known in domain' error, as it  reverses
it again before use (assuming it to be a standard UK-order name).
BTW, (a) we are running DNS via NIS; (b) our Ethernet systems are
listed in the 'ether.chn' file.

Can  you tell me how to fix this - my knowledge of 'sendmail'  is
not up to it!

Thanks

Max Caines
From: z_rasmusseam@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: FAQ anyone? + How to send mail to compuserve?
Date: 19 Nov 92 08:13:33 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

Anybody know where I can get the FAQ for this group?  (I really wanna know this)
How can I send mail (smtp) to Compuserve?  I looked thru the previous posts
(that I could access) and didn't see anything (in the subjects) about it.
Sorry, if you guys see this all the time...
    
    ------=====*****=====*****======*****=====*****=====------
    | Adam Murrell Rasmussen                                 |
    |   -- Lpc, C, Pascal, COBOL, Programmer                 |
    |      LINC Network Technician, Steen Library Computing. |
    |      Lotus Software Specialist.                        |
    |      Currently taking NCE tests.                       |
    | E-Mail: z_rasmusseam@ccsvax.sfasu.edu                  |
    |                qclaw@brick.pvv.unit.no                 |
    ------=====*****=====*****======*****=====*****=====------    

PS. I still want the FAQ ;)
From: e07@nikhefh.nikhef.nl (Eric Wassenaar)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Limiting file size in Sendmail
Date: 17 Nov 92 00:24:11 GMT
Organization: Nikhef-H, Amsterdam (the Netherlands).

In article <pnta-161192094041@134.174.142.252>, pnta@warren.med.harvard.edu (Patrick Nta) writes:
> Sorry, the previous question had a typo from me ( The missing '=' after M).
> OK, this is the modified version:
> 
> Mtcp,  P=[IPC],  F=CDFMXImue,  S=11,  R=21,  E=\r\n,  M=150000, A=IPC $h
> 
> Unfortunately, it still doesn't work. I tested this option by e-mailing a
> 300kbyte file through the relay.

No, this does not work because of the 'e' in the 'F=' mailer flags,
which causes the mail to be queued, and delivered on a subsequent
queue run. Unfortunately, during queue runs, the maximum message size
is not honoured.

A couple of weeks ago I posted a fix for this in this newsgroup.
This posting follows here again:

Ref:	All versions of sendmail

Problem:
	If you have established a maximum message size for a particular
	mailer (using the M=maxsize mailer option in sendmail.cf), this
	measure can be circumvented by forcing the mail to be queued
	first and to be delivered during a subsequent queue run.

Analysis:
	The message size is computed during collect() and stored in
	e_msgsize. It is checked against the mailer m_maxsize during
	actual delivery. When the message is queued, the message size
	is not saved, nor restored later, and will be zero after
	readqf() during queue runs.

Fix:
	Reset e_msgsize to some reasonable value during queue runs,
	e.g. to the size of the data file containing the message body,
	in module readqf() in queue.c.

*** queue.c.original	Mon Oct 19 14:26:56 1992
--- queue.c	Mon Oct 19 14:27:42 1992
***************
*** 914,921 ****
--- 914,926 ----
  		  case 'D':		/* data file name */
  			if (!full)
  				break;
  			e->e_df = newstr(&buf[1]);
  			e->e_dfp = fopen(e->e_df, "r");
  			if (e->e_dfp == NULL)
  				syserr("readqf: cannot open %s", e->e_df);
+ 			{
+ 				struct stat st;
+ 				if (stat(e->e_df, &st) >= 0)
+ 					e->e_msgsize = st.st_size;
+ 			}
  			break;

Eric Wassenaar
-- 
Organization: NIKHEF-H, National Institute for Nuclear and High-Energy Physics
Address: Kruislaan 409, P.O. Box 41882, 1009 DB Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Phone: +31 20 592 5012, Home: +31 20 6909449, Telefax: +31 20 592 5155
Internet: e07@nikhef.nl
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: e07@nikhefh.nikhef.nl (Eric Wassenaar)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: IDA Sendmail does not check for aliases for fuzzy match names
Keywords: ida sendmail fuzzy aliases
Date: 23 Nov 92 12:16:17 GMT
Organization: Nikhef-H, Amsterdam (the Netherlands).

In article <1992Nov20.172728.25706@Synopsys.Com>, arnold@synopsys.com (Arnold de Leon) writes:
> When IDA matches a name for using the "FUZZY" code it sends
> it directly for the mailbox corresponding to that login name.
> No further alias expansion is done.

sendmail should do an extra alias lookup in case the user was
found via a gecos match. Below is an excerpt of what my sendmail
does in this case. It requires adaptation of the finduser() routine
to return a status indicating how the user was found.

recipient.c:
			/*
			 * pw != NULL
			 *	rcode == EX_OK if found via getpwnam()
			 *	rcode == EX_NOUSER if matched via gecos.
			 * pw == NULL
			 *	rcode == EX_NOUSER if not matched at all.
			 */
			pw = finduser(buf, &rcode);
			if (pw == NULL)
			{
				a->q_flags |= QDONTSEND|QBADADDR;
				giveresponse(rcode, m, CurEnv);
			}
			else
			{
				[ code deleted ]

				/* do extra alias lookup if found via gecos */
				if (rcode != EX_OK)
					alias(a, sendq);

				/* forward if still being sent */
				if (!bitset(QDONTSEND, a->q_flags))
				{
					if (!quoted)
						forward(a, sendq);
				}
			}

Eric Wassenaar
-- 
Organization: NIKHEF-H, National Institute for Nuclear and High-Energy Physics
Address: Kruislaan 409, P.O. Box 41882, 1009 DB Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Phone: +31 20 592 5012, Home: +31 20 6909449, Telefax: +31 20 592 5155
Internet: e07@nikhef.nl