>>However, if I try to  do anything like: FOR [log in to unmask] Query
>>* I get two different replies:
 
>You are cheating! :-) In the first case, you have sent the request to your own
>LISTSERV, for which you  are a postmaster. In the second case,  you sent it to
>another LISTSERV, for which you are not  a postmaster. You can't expect to get
>the same result in both cases :-)
 
Well, not on purpose.  I just happened to check with other Listservs to be sure
they were acting like mine..... ;-)    Gotta include the right one next time.
 
>>1. If I  use: TELL LISTSERV FOR [log in to unmask] Query  * the user
>>   is notified as the mail included below  shows. But, no messages come to my
>>   VM console.
 
>After 30 minutes  of investigations, I eventually found that  the cause of the
>problem is the lack of an ADDRESS COMMAND in LSVFOR, which causes some GLOBALV
>stuff to be set in uppercase. I don't know how that can have happened, since I
>always put an  ADDRESS COMMAND on top of  all my execs, but I have  sent you a
>fix. In  any case, for your  own LISTSERV you should  use the QUERY *  FOR u@n
>syntax, which will not send mail to the person in question.
 
The new LSVFOR EXEC works fine (a message to me in both cases).
And the 'QUERY * FOR u@n' gives no user response.
Thanks.   (This save user aggravation as well as my own.)
Others should note this in case they do a global query for someone via a
Listserv Job.  I learned the hard way.... :-(
 
>>Well back on  earth ;-), since LISTSERV checks DOMAIN  NAMES for valid domain
>>addresses already, what about the NAD for a whole domain as per DOMAIN NAMES:
>>
>>   :nick..UAKRON.EDU :gatemast.SPONSELL@AKRONVM
 
>For years, I have been complaining  about the serious consequences of the lack
>of a  ':internet.xx.yy.zz' field  in BITEARN NODES,  which would  have allowed
>LISTSERV to know that AKRONVM  == AKRONVM.UAKRON.EDU (or whatever). For years,
>I have been  saying that we need  that function RIGHT NOW, but  we still don't
>have it.
>
>DOMAIN NAMES is not the place where this info should be.
 
Agreed.
 
>That info should  be in BITEARN NODES.  There is a ":internet" tag  in the new
>BITEARN NODES format  (but God knows when this new  format will be available),
>which will solve most of the  problems related to domain addresses. This still
>doesn't address your needs.  What you would like is a tag at  the site (or was
>that called  member?) level, defining the  name of the local  network (if any)
>and a default NAD address for it, in  case the node in question does not match
>any of the ":internet" tags. Well, I  suppose that could be discussed, but I'm
>afraid that's going to take a lot of time.
 
Well, my problem is temporarily resolved.  I think that the Tags Committee
on Node Management still have things to iron out.  However, I also agree that
this needs attention as more and more local (campus) domains sprout up on
Bitnet/Earn/Netnorth/etc.
 
>  Eric
 
Gary