[Search for users]
[Overall Top Noters]
[List of all Conferences]
[Download this site]
| Title: | VAX MAILGATE for MEMO |
|
| Moderator: | STKHLM::OLSSON |
|
| Created: | Sat Feb 25 1989 |
| Last Modified: | Tue May 14 1996 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 216 |
| Total number of notes: | 933 |
210.0. "no-delivery notification lost in space?" by MLNORO::MALACRIDA () Thu Apr 06 1995 19:11
Can someone please explain if the following SNA gateway trace of
a message sent from MRGATE to a non-existent MEMO user, does or
doesn't contains a non-delivery notification?
The reason I'm asking is that nothing seems to come back from
MEMO side in terms of no-delivery notification ( nothing arrives to
the sender, nothing is posted in Message Router etc..)
We are running MRouter and MRGATE 3.2, Mrmemo gateway 2.1A and
the version of IBM MEMO gateway is 1.2.0.
At the end of the trace I've attached an output showing the
setup of the server.
Thanks for any help.
Giovanni
SNATRACE V2.1 Session Trace 3-APR-1995 16:52:48.52
Gateway node GSNA2 Physical Unit SNA-3 Session 75
(Protocol version = 2.0.0, Buffering level = 10, Data size = 4096)
T 16:53:56.18 TH=2C00014B0001 RH=0380C0 RU=433. bytes (005,00000001)
FID2,OS,DAF=01,OAF=4B,SNF=0001
RQ,FMD,BCI,ECI,DR1I,BBI,EBI
0005 C001 0000 7ACD 0101 001D C301 4106 : ..{...:\....C.\\
0100 0000 0F12 0237 3436 3134 3536 3133 : ........\\\\\\\\
3034 3035 394D 4D00 26C3 0201 0009 C201 : \\\\\((..C...\B.
4104 0100 0100 18C2 0241 0F01 C3D6 D4C9 : \\.....B.\..COMI
E34B E2C2 C1C7 D3C9 D604 0380 0000 2AC3 : T.SBAGLIO\.\..\C
0341 1A01 E5C1 E74B E2E8 E2E3 C5D4 4B4B : .\\.VAX.SYSTEM..
D4D9 C7C1 E3C5 4B4B E3C5 E2E3 0807 C000 : MRGATE..TEST\.{.
F400 0000 0308 C100 08C5 0541 0301 0101 : 4....\A.\E.\....
2DC9 0301 0033 CA03 4110 0197 9996 A581 : .I...\\.\..prova
4084 8593 89A5 8599 A813 0270 726F 7661 : delivery..\\?\/
2064 656C 6976 6572 7920 6B6F 0405 0050 : \\\%\\\\`\,?\..&
0406 0003 0307 0000 05CB 0101 4040 4040 : \\.......\..
4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 :
4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 :
4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 :
4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 :
4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 98A4 85A2 : ques
A396 4094 A287 4095 9695 4081 9999 89A5 : to msg non arriv
8140 8140 8485 A2A3 8995 81A9 8996 9585 : a a destinazione
4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 :
4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 :
4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 :
4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 :
4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 :
4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 :
4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 :
4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040 0005 CF01 : ..\.
00 : .
R 16:53:56.95 TH=2C004B010001 RH=838000 RU=0. bytes (005,00000001)
FID2,OS,DAF=4B,OAF=01,SNF=0001
+RSP,FMD,BCI,ECI,DR1I
R 16:53:57.47 TH=2C004B010001 RH=4B8100 RU=1. byte (005,00000001)
FID2,OS,DAF=4B,OAF=01,SNF=0001
RQ,DFC,FI,BCI,ECI,DR1I,PI
C8 : H
T 16:53:57.48 TH=2C00014B0000 RH=830100 RU=0. bytes (005,00000001)
FID2,OS,DAF=01,OAF=4B,SNF=0000
+RSP,FMD,BCI,ECI,PI
T 16:53:57.54 TH=2C00014B0001 RH=CB8000 RU=1. byte (005,00000001)
FID2,OS,DAF=01,OAF=4B,SNF=0001
+RSP,DFC,FI,BCI,ECI,DR1I
C8 : H
R 16:53:57.96 TH=2C004B010002 RH=0380C0 RU=48. bytes (005,00000001)
FID2,OS,DAF=4B,OAF=01,SNF=0002
RQ,FMD,BCI,ECI,DR1I,BBI,EBI
0005 C001 0000 26C1 0401 0021 C301 4106 : ..{....A\..\C.\\
0100 0000 0012 0237 3436 3134 3536 3133 : ........\\\\\\\\
3034 3035 394D 4D04 0300 0000 05CF 0100 : \\\\\((\.....\..
T 16:53:57.98 TH=2C00014B0002 RH=838000 RU=0. bytes (005,00000001)
FID2,OS,DAF=01,OAF=4B,SNF=0002
+RSP,FMD,BCI,ECI,DR1I
Total of 8 trace records processed.
------- MRMEMO server characteristic ----------
VAX MAILGATE for MEMO Manager version V2.1
MRMEMO1 summary as of 1995-04-04 14:55:32
Server Identification:
Node name: TEST
Mailbox name: MEMO
Message Router Password: ****
SNA Session Identification:
Gateway node: GSNA2
Access name: MEMOTEL3
Circuit name:
Session address: 0
Application name:
Logon mode entry:
Related files:
Translation table: SYS$LIBRARY:MRMEMOTRA.TBL
Log file: MRMEMO$DIR:MRMEMO1.LOG
Accounting file: MRMEMO$DIR:MRMEMOACC1.DAT
Options:
Accounting: Enabled
Timestamp: Disabled
Header in text: Disabled
Request Notifications: Enabled
Send Notifications: Enabled
Cluster alias address: Enabled
Address translation: Disabled
MEMO address: SN_ATTRIBUTES
DDS validation:
MR to MEMO sender: Disabled
MEMO to MR sender: Disabled
MEMO to MR recipient: Enabled
MR to MEMO recipient: Disabled
Distribution list: None
Prefix: VAX.
Replace Strings: ..=@
Console logging: None
Clock tick interval: 0 00:00:30.00
MEMO line length: 80
Wrap/truncation string:
Wrapping of long lines: Enabled
Word wrap margin: Disabled
Hyphenation string:
Hours to GMT: 0
| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 210.1 | Lost in MEMO space! | STKHLM::OLSSON | Anders Olsson, DC Sweden | Fri Apr 07 1995 20:39 | 25 |
| .0> Can someone please explain if the following SNA gateway trace of
.0> a message sent from MRGATE to a non-existent MEMO user, does or
.0> doesn't contains a non-delivery notification?
.0>
.0> The reason I'm asking is that nothing seems to come back from
.0> MEMO side in terms of no-delivery notification ( nothing arrives to
.0> the sender, nothing is posted in Message Router etc..)
The message sent to MEMO looks quite normal. The response that comes
back is just a "Commit" message which tells us that MEMO has taken over
responsibility for the message delivery. There should be a non-delivery
coming back eventually. If there isn't, the problem must be somewhere
in the MEMO system.
In what way is COMIT.SBAGLIO non-existent? Does COMIT exist but not
SBAGLIO or vice versa (or both)?
Is there a single MEMO machine or is there a MEMO network involved and
what is the route to COMIT?
Is a non-delivery returned in the most simple case?: Send a message to
the MEMO system which is directly connected to MRMEMO and specify a
correct DGN (the string before the dot) but a non-existent DEN. (Maybe
that's what you did?)
Anders
|
| 210.2 | some more infos | MLNORO::MALACRIDA | | Mon Apr 10 1995 11:05 | 37 |
| Anders,
> In what way is COMIT.SBAGLIO non-existent? Does COMIT exist but not
> SBAGLIO or vice versa (or both)?
COMIT does exist, SBAGLIO does NOT.
> Is there a single MEMO machine or is there a MEMO network involved and
> what is the route to COMIT?
Our gateway is directly connected to the MEMO machine: they eventually
route to other MEMO system. Anyway, the DGN COMIT is just one hop
from us.
> Is a non-delivery returned in the most simple case?: Send a message to
> the MEMO system which is directly connected to MRMEMO and specify a
> correct DGN (the string before the dot) but a non-existent DEN. (Maybe
> that's what you did?)
It's exactly what we did.
People from Programatic, after looking for sometimes at the problem,
have decided to send back the ball at DEC middle field: that's why
I asked if the trace showed a non-delivery or not.
From .0 I understand that the non-delivery notification is something
which cames back at a second time, as a different message.
Could the version of MEMO gateway at IBM side be the problem?
Have you ever heard of problem like this due to some mismatch in
the version of MEMO/IBM-MEMOgateway/DEC-MR-MEMO-gateway?
Thanks,
Giovanni
|
| 210.3 | | MLNORO::MALACRIDA | | Fri Apr 14 1995 10:26 | 4 |
| Programatic has installed a "new" version (1.2.1) of their Memo gateway
and now non-delivery are happily coming back.
Tnanks.
|
| 210.4 | Good | STKHLM::OLSSON | Anders Olsson, DC Sweden | Mon Apr 24 1995 00:08 | 11 |
| Glad to hear that it was resolved (and that it wasn't "our" problem!).
Anders
PS
.2> From .0 I understand that the non-delivery notification is something
.2> which cames back at a second time, as a different message.
Nowadays it is, yes. In older versions of MEMO (or MEMO/Gateway?) there
is a combined message (commit with status) containing both the
acknowledge *and* the (non-)delivery.
|