The  hardware problems  are  eventually  fixed, and  the  french strikes  are
eventually  over (3h+  a day  to come  to FRECP11  was really  TOO MUCH).  I am
slowly starting to process the zillions of  files queued on my reader, but with
the snow  spell that  is currently  plaguing France I  cannot stay  at Centrale
too late in the night so it might take time :-(
 
  I have  not been  reading the LSTSRV-L  discussion at all,  except for  a few
randomly selected items. I  will reply to your questions later,  but let me say
that:
 
- The LISTFOWN  MEMO you  can obtain  with info  fileo is  not yet  written :-(
- The NAD(s)  could be recognized  as authorized users  for their nodes  and be
  allowed to  issue SIGNOFF commands for  their users. I'll develop  later when
  I've read all the  details of what you're asking for.  Nodes which don't have
  a NAD will see their complaints logged  to a DUMMY filedef unless they have a
  serious reason not to have one :-)
 
I found a few bugs and fixed them:
 
- It seems that some  nodes have a :fformat of DISKDUMP,  not DISK. This caused
  an error 32 sending file because the  format was not recognized and PUNCH was
  attempted.
 
- An improved version  of LSVXMAIL which goes much, much  deeper in the process
  of supporting RFC822  (everything is not yet supported, but  it's really much
  better) has been written. It fixes a lot of problems.
 
- The HOLD and FREE (GLobal commands did not work.
 
- The GET  (GLOBAL command did not  work either, for another  reason, depending
  on the release of the server who received the request.
 
A new peer has been added to the LSTSRV-L list (at DEARN). RUTVM1's copy of the
list has  been destroyed in  the PUT process,  probably because its  A-disk was
full and  LISTSERV did not  realize it (I  just found a missing  if rc ^=  0 in
LSVSORT XEDIT). Ross,  please RENAME LSTSRV-L OLDLIST to LIST  and TRANSFER the
LISTSERV  RUTVM1 file  from me  back to  LISTSERV after  fixing the  disk space
problem (assuming that was the cause).
 
The BYUADMIN  peer has been  renamed to LISTSERV and  I've sent out  an updated
PEERS NAMES  file. It  got rejected at  RUTVM1 with a  COPYFILE error  (256, ie
probably disk full again),  so all the servers queued off  RUTVM1 will not have
received it.
 
I  apologize for  the problems  you have  been having  with LISTSERV  recently.
That's what you get when you are forced off the network for a hardware
"upgrade" at the  wrong moment... By the  way, our new machine  reached a state
of utter  saturation recently with  a paging rate of  58/sec, a STORAGE  use of
148% (not kidding! :-) )  reported by CP IND with EXPAN- 013,  12 people in Q2,
3 in  Q1 and  50% of  STEAL. 58  pages per  second corresponds  exactly to  the
transfer rate  of a  3375 device  (we have only  one page  DASD), that  is, the
system could not  have paged more than  that... Valdis, did CLVM  beat that, or
should I feel  entitled to consider that  FRECP11 holds the record  so far? ;-)
The only  reason for  that drastic  change is 8M  instead of  16M and  more CAD
users...
 
  Eric