[Search for users]
[Overall Top Noters]
[List of all Conferences]
[Download this site]
| Title: | *OLD* ALL-IN-1 (tm) Support Conference |
| Notice: | Closed - See Note 4331.l to move to IOSG::ALL-IN-1 |
| Moderator: | IOSG::PYE |
|
| Created: | Thu Jan 30 1992 |
| Last Modified: | Tue Jan 23 1996 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 4343 |
| Total number of notes: | 18308 |
1221.0. "MAIL FORWARD address causes MAIL INIT ACCVIO ?!" by SHALOT::LANPHEAR (Take the tide one wave at a time) Tue Aug 11 1992 18:14
The janitor run at our customer site failed over the weekend, and it
happened to fail on an account set up for a digit. The account has
been around for a long time, so it _was_ working fine up to about two
weeks ago (he has been on vacation for the past two weeks, and he will
be gone through the end of this week). I can NEWDIR to the account,
and use the WP SEL command to see every document in his filecab, but if
I try to use the WP Index, or enter EM, it invokes MAIL INIT, and gives
me a tour of the registers.
A hacked up trace for EM shows:
em{CR}
...
113 ! %OA-I-LOGFUN, Function: MAIL INITIALIZE
113 ! OA$FLO_OPEN_FORM: Opening form - NIENTR
114 ! in USERDISK3:[ALLIN1.LIB_ENGLISH]OAFORM.FLB;
114 ! DSAB Name: NIENTR Requests : OPEN
116 ! OA$FLO_OPEN_FORM: Opening form - NETWORK
116 ! in USERDISK3:[ALLIN1.LIB_ENGLISH]MEMRES.FLB;
116 ! DSAB Name: NETWORK Requests : OPEN
117 ! DSAB Name: PROFIL Requests :GET_BY_KEY
120 ! %OA-I-LOGERROR, %SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO, access violation, reason mask=01, vi8
121 ! %OA-I-LOGERROR, %SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO, access violation, reason mask=01, vi8
121 ! %OA-I-LOGERROR, %SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO, access violation, reason mask=01, vi8
121 ! %OA-I-LOGERROR, %SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO, access violation, reason mask=01, vi8
121 ! %OA-I-LOGERROR, %SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO, access violation, reason mask=01, vi8
123 ! OA$FLO_ALL_NDISP: Undisplay all workspaces
I just checked his profile record, and MAIL_FORWARD contains
JON JOHNSON@1=US@2=MCI@3=DIGITAL@TELEMAIL
I blanked it, and that was the problem - his account works fine!
Now, can somebody explain this? They're running V2.4 patched through K604.
And by the way, did his mail autoforward to that address, or did it
just go away - I'm not sure if it's a valid address(?)
Any ideas? Cheers, Dan'l
| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1221.1 | A MAIL INIT known restriction | AIMTEC::WICKS_A | DEC Mail Works for ME sometimes | Tue Aug 11 1992 18:39 | 19 |
| Dan'l,
Shouldn't the mail forward address contain
Vid Desai (desai@a1@iosG)
or in the X.400 case
Remote Address (desai@1=us@2=nc,@3=....)
BTW: The Mail will never have got to the address you forwarded it to.
The code is very sensitive to the position of the ( so if you get the
address wrong in some form then it will call the mail error handler
which displays the DCL overlay form (i.e it ACCVIOs)
It does this in v3.0 also.
Regards,
Andrew.D.Wicks
|
| 1221.2 | I'll have to ask JJ what he did | SHALOT::LANPHEAR | Take the tide one wave at a time | Tue Aug 11 1992 18:56 | 10 |
| Thanks for the fast response, Andy! And when you say the mail never
got to the destination, does that mean it went into the extended
address space of the bit bucket, or is it hanging around some queue
some where, that's not immediately obvious? MRMAN shows they have
source and destination journaling - is there any chance we can recover
some of the mail?
Bad user... bad user!
Cheers, Dan'l
|
| 1221.3 | 99.9% perfect | AIMTEC::WICKS_A | DEC Mail Works for ME sometimes | Wed Aug 12 1992 01:58 | 38 |
| Dan'l
The original sender(S) should have got non-deliveries.
in fact it's one of the better non-deliveries as shown here:
I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M
Date: 12-Aug-1992 05:55am EST
From: Mail Postmaster
POSTMASTER@A1@DIMUND
Dept:
Tel No:
TO: WICKS_A@A1@SUTHRN
Subject: Delivery Failure Report
ALL-IN-1 was unable to deliver your message dated 11-Aug-1992 10:48am to
wicks
- Auto Forward set to non-existent ALL-IN-1 account;
on node DIMUND
The subject of the message was :
vid owes me money
- not perfect i'll grant you since it says ALL-IN-1 account rather
than invalid address, I guess in the really old days you could only
set AF to ALL-IN-1 account before all these gateways were even dreamt
of.
Regards,
Andrew.D.wicks
|