Sat, 30 Mar 1996 03:16:43 +0100
|
On Tue, 26 Mar 1996 13:40:25 EST Raymond Ayers
<[log in to unmask]> said:
Sorry for the delay, we had a hard deadline on a time limited offer for
our T1 -> 10Mbps upgrade. The technology used to deliver 10Mbps
connectivity is relatively new and much more complex than a T1 setup
(there are multiple options, etc). These offerings are new to most ISPs,
the salesmen are confused and often contradict themselves, there's more
FUD than hard facts, and you end up simply not knowing for a fact that if
you sign here where the big friendly arrow is pointing, it will actually
work out as expected. The salesmen are confident, but usually won't
guarantee anything in writing, beyond that if you buy this big rack of
hardware you don't want to buy because you've already got everything you
need, it's going to work. The technical people give you random answers
because they don't understand what the salesmen are babbling about and
you can't talk to them directly. Anyway, I've spent most of the last 3
days sorting out this mess and didn't have much time to read my mail.
>My first point of confusion is LISTSERV 1.8b vs. LISTSERV-TCP/IP:
>Can I continue with what I have or will I have to procure the
>TCP/IP version?
The NJE version requires RSCS, so you will need to upgrade to the TCP/IP
version.
>Based on the following extract from announcement of LISTSERV
>1.8b May 1995 can I now safely use the NEWNODE tag to begin
>address conversion?
The problem CREN refers to is that the ':newnode.' tag causes LISTSERV to
internally convert all NJE addresses for the node in question to the
specified Internet form. When making this change for the node LISTSERV
runs on, you will have a problem if you are using the NJE version,
because it is not designed to handle a situation where the local node is
not a NJE nodeid (with LISTSERV-TCP/IP this will work fine).
The simplest solution is to just edit your local copy of BITEARN NODES to
remove the ':newnode' tag. Alternatively, if you install LISTSERV-TCP/IP
before you introduce the ':newnode.' tag, you will not have this problem
to start with.
Eric
|
|
|