There are 14 messages totalling 594 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. help for Ruben Medina
2. GULLIBILITY VIRUS
3. Juno subscribers missing ACCMAIL digests (2)
4. FTPMail, Agora, etc. statistics
5. Thank you, Bruce!! (2)
6. Accessing the internet beyond 1999; a possible and free solution for
some
7. Interruption
8. BITFTP Reply
9. How to decode the decoder. Was: <No subject given>
10. Mail Server
11. setting up mailing list through accmail?
12. Accessing the internet beyond 1999......
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ACCMAIL Info (automatically generated) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To UNSUBscribe: Send UNSUBSCRIBE ACCMAIL to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To get the ACCMAIL FAQ: Send e-mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
and enter only this line in the BODY of the note:
send usenet/news.answers/internet-services/access-via-email
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 21:25:32 -0300
From: GB&A <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: help for Ruben Medina
>Alguien me puede ayudar? Como hago para acceder a www con mi e-mail?
>How do to access www with e-mail?
in English:
There are several methods to access www by mail, all they are very
well detailed in the FAQ of this list.
To ask for a copy of the faq in spanish, one can send the following mail
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: send accmail.sp ((send accmail.faq for english copy)
In mail return you will receive the complete FAQ that need 60 k space.
Detail: the protocol of this list ask for a subject line ever.
in Spanish:
para acceder www por mail hay varios metodos, todos estan
bien explicados en la FAQ de la lista.
Para pedir la faq en castellano hay que enviar el siguiente mail:
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: send accmail.sp
A vuelta de correo se recibe la Faq completa que ocupa cerca de 60 K
Detalle: el protocolo de esta lista requiere siempre poner un "subject".
M. Garcia
Buenos Aires
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 21:39:53 EDT
From: David Ames <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: GULLIBILITY VIRUS
I heard that the word "gullible" is going to be removed from the
dictionary.
David Ames
--
My free E-mail does not support attachments or messages over 64K.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 21:39:53 EDT
From: David Ames <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Juno subscribers missing ACCMAIL digests
(Cross-posted to ACCMAIL and Juno_accmail)
I am one of the unlucky ones who had not received the ACCMAIL digest
since April 28. I noticed that ACCMAIL came from
[EMAIL PROTECTED], as did another subscription that also stopped
coming. Last weekend I sent an E-mail to Juno, suggesting that a Juno
server might have blocked mail that was coming from LISTSERV.AOL.COM.
Today I received three ACCMAIL digests and two posts from my other
subscription service. So it would appear that the missing posts were
being held up by Juno, and that my suggestion enabled Juno to discover
the problem..
David Ames
--
My free E-mail does not support attachments or messages over 64K.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 06:01:47 +0100
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: FTPMail, Agora, etc. statistics
FTPMail, Agora, etc. statistics for Fri 21 May 1999, posted Sat, 22 May 1999 05:00:35
GMT
Less than 1 hour
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
1-4 hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
4-10 hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
More than 10 hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Response within 4 hours in at least 5 out of 7 recent tests
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Note: [EMAIL PROTECTED] doesn't reply to .net or .com addresses.
This data is generated automatically around 0600 GMT/BST most
days. The performance reported is dependant on many factors and your
experience may vary. You can also access this list:
On the Web at http://www.netservs.com/mrcool/stats.htm
By FTP at ftp://ftp.cix.co.uk/pub/net-services/stats.txt
Mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and say
"get file stats.txt" (no quotes)
Want this list every day? Send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and in the
body of your message put "join statistics" (no quotes)
No liability is accepted for inaccuracies. Mirroring, links to and
copying of this entire file (not extracts) is permitted until further
notice.
Slow downloads? Try Mr. Cool!
See http://www.netservs.com/mrcool/
Copyright Net Services 1999.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 14:59:08 +0800
From: DJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Thank you, Bruce!!
Bruce, that was a great idea making that program for the y2k thingy. I'm glad you're
one of
those people who would like to see the fruits of thier labours to help other people
instead
of making even a few bucks! Way to go!
I'm just wondering if I need to download this though - my puter's a compaq deskpro
given to
me by my sister middle of last year (1998)? Will this computer be encountering
problems by
year 2000?
Anyway, Bruce and people like Bruce, keep it up!!=)
-DJ
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 11:22:31 +0100
From: Netmiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Accessing the internet beyond 1999; a possible and free solution
for some
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Cordero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 21 May 1999 16:54
Subject: Accessing the internet beyond 1999; a possible and free solution
for some
> Sorry if this may be stretching things a little to make this
>an on-topic post. But I think I've seen worse....
>
> I just enjoyed reading Mr. Boyd's article "The Millennium
>Bug: A programmer's story" found at
>
> http://members.tripod.co.uk/netmi
you have misquited the URL
it should be
http://members.tripod.co.uk/netmiser/index.htm
for the site or
http://members.tripod.co.uk/netmiser/y2k.htm
for Gerald's article.
yours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 20:18:04 PDT
From: "Jerel D. Arbaugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Interruption
}Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 07:25:32 +0300
}From: MS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
}Subject: Interruption
}
}Hi!
}
}I am subscribed with my address as <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
}
}Last 1 week I ahve not been getting the mails from your list. Kindly
}arrange to send regularly.
}
}Thanks & Regards
}
}------------------------------
Some one other than juno was having problems?
--
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jerel.
---
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 20:14:52 PDT
From: "Jerel D. Arbaugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: BITFTP Reply
}Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 14:42:15 +0700
}From: Nguyen Duc Hoan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
}Subject: BITFTP Reply
}
}I sent a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as:
}
}FTP 203.162.7.146
}cd Software/TOOLS/Antivirus/BKAV
}get BKAV252.EXE
}
}I've received its reply as forwarded. Could you please help me did I
make
}any mistake or the reason that I was not success. Thanks in advance.
}
}---------------------- Forwarded by Nguyen Duc
[hugh cut]
}
}> get BKAV252.EXE
}>>>> Transfer mode forced to BINARY.
}>> GET BKAV252.EXE BKAV252.EXE.D ( REPLACE
}>>> PORT 128,112,129,99,85,187
}<<< 200 PORT command successful.
}>>> RETR BKAV252.EXE
}<<< 150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for BKAV252.EXE(72768
bytes).
}<<< In UntilOpen: Passive Open for Fd 2 Timeout
}<<< *** No data transferred
}<<< 426 Connection closed; transfer aborted.
}
}>> CLOSE
}>>> QUIT
}<<< 226 ABOR command successful.
}
}------------------------------
Looks like a server problem at pucc.Princeton.EDU to me.
Try again later, or with a different server.
--
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jerel.
---
.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 20:13:56 PDT
From: "Jerel D. Arbaugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: How to decode the decoder. Was: <No subject given>
First: SurprizE! I got two digests this afternoon!
}Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 11:10:18 +0300
}From: Ibrahim E Abdul-Hafiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
}Subject: <No subject given>
}
A subject would help.
}Dear Friend :
}
}I made the next command TO: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
}in the BODY: I put the following
} 'open ftp.ou.edu '
} 'cd /pub/simtelnet/msdos/decode '
} 'get uu33.zip'
} 'quit''
}
}What I received is something similar to the following
} "The following line should contain ASCII characters 0x20-0x5F:"
} "
!"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_"
}
}Kindly is there a way to covert the received file and but it in Zip or
Exe format
}in order to use it ?.
}
}Thank you in advance.
}
If you had quoted one extra line, you would have truncated the digest for
many users.
What you need is a bootstrap uu decoder, like MUDD.COM. This decoder
will decode the file above, but needs no decoder to transfer. There are
a number of places to get MUUD, including:
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: send muud
Body is ignored.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Body:
send progs/decoders/muud.txt
And a bunch of other places.
BTW: I like "uu41s.zip". It is a bit larger zip, but a good multi-file,
multi-part decoder, and about 1.5 years newer.
--
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jerel.
---
.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 20:13:12 PDT
From: "Jerel D. Arbaugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mail Server
}Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 20:20:22 +0300
}From: MS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
}Subject: Mail Server
}
}Hello!
}
}Despite my complaints to the server administrator, some times receiving
}of mails seems erratic. Looking for some advise on the following :
}
}1. If the mail server is down, does the mail get bounced back to the
}sender? Do the sender's server try again. If so how long?
}
This varries.
If the server is unreachable than your ISP, or another in route, MAY hold
the mail and try again later. The limit is configurable by the ISP and
is typicaly 3 to 5 days before a bounce. Some send a warnning bounce,
indicating that they are still trying, then another when/if they give up.
If the server is up, but the service process is not running/starting,
then your request MAY queue up at the server, to be processed when the
service is fixed. Often this queue is flushed first, but more often not.
}2. In case of over load or traffic on the net, do the mails get delayed.
}Is there a possibility of the mails getting lost also?
}
Delay, yes. Lost, unlikely, but it can happen. That would require an
intermediate mail server to loos it after it is received, or as above,
the destination to loos it. I have seen cases that a server solved
mailbos-full by killing old messages, in place of bouncing new ones, but
this is rare.
}3. Is there a sort of filter mechanism at the server holding some mails
}giving priority or cancelling certain mails etc.
}
On some, yes. Some set the priority based on who (ISP) is requesting,
others by how many resent requests from the same ISP or user. Many do
not filter other than quota.
}Thanks
}
Welcome
}------------------------------
--
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jerel.
---
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 08:49:58 -0700
From: "Gerald E. Boyd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Thank you, Bruce!!
At 02:59 PM 5/22/99 +0800, DJ wrote the following:
>I'm just wondering if I need to download this though - my puter's a
compaq deskpro given to
>me by my sister middle of last year (1998)? Will this computer be
encountering problems by
>year 2000?
Grab this web page for a list of more third-party testing tools
http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag/special/y2k/testing.html
Y2K Tool
http://www.y2ktool.com/
To test your BIOS, do the following from a DOS prompt:
1) c:>date
Set your date,
Current date is: Sat 5-22-99
Enter the new date: (mm-dd-yy) 12-31-99
2) Set your time,
Current time is: 8:01:37.03
Enter the new time: 23:59:59
3) Wait a second for the clock to roll over,
4) Check the date , it should show Saturday as Jan 1, 2000
5) Check for leap year, change date to Feb 29, 2000
Current date is: Sat 1-01-00
Enter the new date: (mm-dd-yy) 02-29-2000
NOTE: When entering dates past 1999 you will have to enter the year as a
four-digit value.
If correct, the date should be Tuesday, Feb 29, 2000.
To further check your PC, do the date and time setting as shown above,
however, in this case, shutdown your PC and allow the clock-timer to
roll over the time and date. Restart your PC and check the date and
time. If the BIOS is not year 2000 compliant, the date will be Jan 1,
1980 which will be a Tuesday. It could be another date.
NOTE: You will probably have to change the time to something like
23:59:00 to give yourself a minute to shutdown your PC.
If the BIOS is not year 2000 compliant, you can still use your PC but
you will have to set the date each and every time you restart your PC.
Remember, the year must be entered as a four-digit number.
--
Gerry Boyd -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 12:25:29 EDT
From: William C Andrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Juno subscribers missing ACCMAIL digests
Also X-posted ACCMAIL and Juno_accmail
On Fri, 21 May 1999 David Ames <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>(Cross-posted to ACCMAIL and Juno_accmail)
....
>Today I received three ACCMAIL digests and two posts
>from my other subscription service. So it would appear that the
>missing posts were being held up by Juno, and that my suggestion
>enabled Juno to discover the problem..
The header info of the 3 ACCMail digests shows that the hold up
was at the AOL server not Juno (at least on the copies that I
received).
I was unsuccessfull in obtaining the LOG files through the
LISTSERV using the split command (only got blank messages).
I still am wondering how the HELP-NET digest has the 'special
issues' generated that keep the size down.
>David Ames
>--
>My free E-mail does not support attachments or messages over 64K.
(Don't forget UUencoded 'attachments' work.)
William Andrews
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 10:01:14 -0700
From: "Gerald E. Boyd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: setting up mailing list through accmail?
At 07:10 PM 5/20/99 +0800, wang wenjie wrote the following:
>envious of mr. boyd's success, I also would like to run a mailing list
>of my own. is there an accmail approach to set up one and maintain it?
Various methods to attack this problem. If you wish to use LISTSERV
software you must find a site to sponser the list. If you use the Lite
version of LISTSERV you could run it on your own machine. Note,
however, that most mailing lists should be run in a 24/7 fashion which
pre-supposes that you would have a full-time connection to the 'net.
Another method is to use OneList. However, you must use the web to set
up the list. After that you can use E-mail methods to subscribe,
unsubscribe, change options etc.
The low-tech non-24/7 type of mailing list can be setup using your
E-mail program. Pegasus or Eudora Pro would be your best bets. In this
fashion, it would be best if you could get another E-mail address. You
would have the users send mail to the new address where upon receipt
you can configure Pegasus or Eudora Pro to filter the mail into separte
folders and also reply. This option would be best for small lists as
the work involved is tremendous.
On this list, I only have to monitor the postings and problems. Another
member monitors the bounces. The LISTSERV software does all the rest,
that is, subscribe, unsubscibe, archiving and digest making.
Another option, is to look for a list that you might like to help out
with and become a co-owner. At some given time the real owner might
turn it over to you. This is what happened to me on this list. Bob
Rankin turned the moderation of the list over to me in October 1997. I
then took over the list and FAQ in January 1999.
--
Gerry Boyd -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 14:34:15 -0500
From: Bruce Cordero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Accessing the internet beyond 1999......
It was very politely drawn to my attention by netmiser@cryo-
gen.com, just now, that I misquoted the URL for Gerald's article.
The correct URL is:
http://members.tripod.co.uk/netmiser/y2k.htm
My apologies, especially to Gerry, for being so careless.
It embarrasses me that I was so egotistical as to take care in
explaining my own item but be sloppy with his.
Gerry's article is good because it gave good insight into a
challenge we are now forced to face. I call it a challenge
rather than a flaw. As the article pointed out so well; the
programmers of those days, so few years ago, did the best they
could with their resources. Resources these days upgrade very
quickly so it is easy for people now to complain as though some
sort of great mistake was made.
Your article did a good job of rounding out our point of
view, Gerry.
Please bear with me a little more and it will probably be
quite a while before you hear from me again.
It dawned on me after yesterday's post that I also got
sloppy by saying I did some research but without citing my source
specifically. Bad form, to be sure.
My information came from
http://www.RighTime.com
from which site you can obtain YEAR2000.ZIP. It has the file
YEAR2000.TXT which covers the information I had in mind.
Incidentally, while I can not fault our uncle programmers
for the y2k bug, I do have to wonder about company's that put out
y2k troubled BIOS as late as they did. Well, maybe I should not
criticise them either.
Thank you for your indulgence.
Sincerely,
Bruce Cordero
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
End of ACCMAIL Digest - 21 May 1999 to 22 May 1999 (#1999-143)
**************************************************************
