US military and confidentiality
Didier MORANDI
http://www.charonvax.com/images/CHARON%20VAX%20Newsletter%20Oct%202004.pdf
the following information:
"Every branch of the US military and all the major US defense
contractors are using CHARON VAX some at many of their sites"
Shouldn't this information be classified?
In France, there would be no way for anyone outside an Administration to
post any data on the equipments they use.
D.
--
Didier MORANDI - VMS Expert and SAP CRM Consultant
13 chemin du Gué - 1213 Petit-Lancy (GE) Switzerland
Phone: +336 7983 6418 - www.didiermorandi.com
toby
Didier MORANDI wrote:
> One can read in the last Salem Automation newsletter on Charon-VAX
> http://www.charonvax.com/images/CHARON%20VAX%20Newsletter%20Oct%202004.pdf
> the following information:
>
> "Every branch of the US military and all the major US defense
> contractors are using CHARON VAX some at many of their sites"
>
> Shouldn't this information be classified?
Who cares? Here's another little secret. They run Windoze too.
Bwahahaha.
VAXman-
>
>
>Didier MORANDI wrote:
>> One can read in the last Salem Automation newsletter on Charon-VAX
>> http://www.charonvax.com/images/CHARON%20VAX%20Newsletter%20Oct%202004.pdf
>> the following information:
>>
>> "Every branch of the US military and all the major US defense
>> contractors are using CHARON VAX some at many of their sites"
>>
>> Shouldn't this information be classified?
>
>Who cares? Here's another little secret. They run Windoze too.
That's not a secret, it's a shame. It's also a surprise. Weendoze runs?
--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
"Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"
Bill Gunshannon
Didier MORANDI <n...@spam.com> writes:
> One can read in the last Salem Automation newsletter on Charon-VAX
> http://www.charonvax.com/images/CHARON%20VAX%20Newsletter%20Oct%202004.pdf
> the following information:
>
> "Every branch of the US military and all the major US defense
> contractors are using CHARON VAX some at many of their sites"
>
> Shouldn't this information be classified?
Not if it's dis-information. :-)
>
> In France, there would be no way for anyone outside an Administration to
> post any data on the equipments they use.
>
Contracts for most of this stuff are public information (how else do you
think the bidders find out about them?)
But, as I said in another post recently I would love to see some
confirmation of this. As we all know, VMS takes a level of knowledge
somewhat beyond Windows/Linux. The military does not teach it nor
openly solicit people with VMS skills. That being the case, how
widespread can it really be beyond a few legacy applications? I
have just recently attended the most advanced computing school the
Army has to offer. Everyone here probably remembers the only mention
VMS got there.
Don't get me wrong, if its true, I have a vested interest in learning
it.
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
bi...@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Dave Froble
> But, as I said in another post recently I would love to see some
> confirmation of this. As we all know, VMS takes a level of knowledge
> somewhat beyond Windows/Linux. The military does not teach it nor
> openly solicit people with VMS skills. That being the case, how
> widespread can it really be beyond a few legacy applications?
The issus here is that you casually dismiss any such usage as "a few
legacy applications". The number could be quite large. Any system
based upon VAX since 1978 could be a candidate for Charon VAX.
As for new work, yeah, you made that real clear.
--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. Fax: 724-529-0596
DFE Ultralights, Inc. E-Mail: da...@tsoft-inc.com
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486
Bill Gunshannon
Dave Froble <da...@tsoft-inc.com> writes:
> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>
>> But, as I said in another post recently I would love to see some
>> confirmation of this. As we all know, VMS takes a level of knowledge
>> somewhat beyond Windows/Linux. The military does not teach it nor
>> openly solicit people with VMS skills. That being the case, how
>> widespread can it really be beyond a few legacy applications?
>
> The issus here is that you casually dismiss any such usage as "a few
> legacy applications".
I don't mean toi dismiss them at all. As a matter of fact, I would
very much like to know of places where my talents could be better
put to use. And like it or not, while I may not be of the caliber
of some of you, I do have several years of VMS experience to offer.
> The number could be quite large.
Could be, but the larger it was the harder it would be to
hide it and up til now they have been doing a prety good
job of hiding it from me. I've sat at dinner with the
two top Warrant Officers in the Signal Corps while snickers
were exchanged about the stuff I run in my basement and the
lab behind my office here at the University, including the
VMS systems. One would think that if VMS held such a high
place int he DOD they would not be laughing but writting my
name and number down in their rolodex.
> Any system
> based upon VAX since 1978 could be a candidate for Charon VAX.
I remember a whole bunch of VAXen in the basement of a funny shaped
building in VA. I often wonder if many of them are still there.
Probably never get the chance to go down there again and see. :-(
>
> As for new work, yeah, you made that real clear.
Don't shoot the messenger. I guarantee you if the opportunity
arises to propose VMS as the right solution for the job, you can
rest assured that political correctness has never been my strong
point and BillyBoy is not going to make the top of my list of
solutions.
Dan Notov
> In article <11c35il...@corp.supernews.com>,
> Dave Froble <da...@tsoft-inc.com> writes:
>
>>Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>
>>
>>>But, as I said in another post recently I would love to see some
>>>confirmation of this. As we all know, VMS takes a level of knowledge
>>>somewhat beyond Windows/Linux. The military does not teach it nor
>>>openly solicit people with VMS skills. That being the case, how
>>>widespread can it really be beyond a few legacy applications?
>>
>>The issus here is that you casually dismiss any such usage as "a few
>>legacy applications".
>
>
> I don't mean toi dismiss them at all. As a matter of fact, I would
> very much like to know of places where my talents could be better
> put to use. And like it or not, while I may not be of the caliber
> of some of you, I do have several years of VMS experience to offer.
For a number of years, Lockheed Martin was crying for VMS savvy people
to support a number of military programs.
>> The number could be quite large.
>
>
> Could be, but the larger it was the harder it would be to
> hide it and up til now they have been doing a prety good
> job of hiding it from me. I've sat at dinner with the
> two top Warrant Officers in the Signal Corps while snickers
> were exchanged about the stuff I run in my basement and the
> lab behind my office here at the University, including the
> VMS systems. One would think that if VMS held such a high
> place int he DOD they would not be laughing but writting my
> name and number down in their rolodex.
>
>
>> Any system
>>based upon VAX since 1978 could be a candidate for Charon VAX.
>
>
> I remember a whole bunch of VAXen in the basement of a funny shaped
> building in VA. I often wonder if many of them are still there.
> Probably never get the chance to go down there again and see. :-(
>
>
>>As for new work, yeah, you made that real clear.
>
>
> Don't shoot the messenger. I guarantee you if the opportunity
> arises to propose VMS as the right solution for the job, you can
> rest assured that political correctness has never been my strong
> point and BillyBoy is not going to make the top of my list of
> solutions.
>
> bill
>
Most of the VAX systems are embedded & running lights-out. If something
goes wrong, read the manual & fix it or replace it.
John Smith
<snip>
>
> Could be, but the larger it was the harder it would be to
> hide it and up til now they have been doing a prety good
> job of hiding it from me. I've sat at dinner with the
> two top Warrant Officers in the Signal Corps while snickers
> were exchanged about the stuff I run in my basement and the
> lab behind my office here at the University, including the
> VMS systems. One would think that if VMS held such a high
> place int he DOD they would not be laughing but writting my
> name and number down in their rolodex.
Whether it's gov't, military, commercial, or otherwise, most people at most
places hold the same attitudes - even many of the people who formerly used
VMS extensively.
The kid who is given a case of lemons usually makes lemonade with it and
sets up a stand in a high-traffic area, puts up a sign, calls out to
passers-by asking if they want to buy some tasty lemonade and sells it. Not
that VMS is a lemon by any means, but HP found a case of lemons in VMS but
they do nothing to sell it.
--
OpenVMS - The never-advertised operating system with the dwindling ISV
base.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Bill Gunshannon
Dan Notov <d9...@hp.com> writes:
> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> In article <11c35il...@corp.supernews.com>,
>> Dave Froble <da...@tsoft-inc.com> writes:
>>
>>>Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>But, as I said in another post recently I would love to see some
>>>>confirmation of this. As we all know, VMS takes a level of knowledge
>>>>somewhat beyond Windows/Linux. The military does not teach it nor
>>>>openly solicit people with VMS skills. That being the case, how
>>>>widespread can it really be beyond a few legacy applications?
>>>
>>>The issus here is that you casually dismiss any such usage as "a few
>>>legacy applications".
>>
>>
>> I don't mean toi dismiss them at all. As a matter of fact, I would
>> very much like to know of places where my talents could be better
>> put to use. And like it or not, while I may not be of the caliber
>> of some of you, I do have several years of VMS experience to offer.
>
> For a number of years, Lockheed Martin was crying for VMS savvy people
> to support a number of military programs.
A search right now for either VMS or OpenVMS returns nothing. :-(
Tom Linden
> A search right now for either VMS or OpenVMS returns nothing.
Did that include Ft Meade?
Larry Kilgallen
> In article <42c1b870$1...@usenet01.boi.hp.com>,
> Dan Notov <d9...@hp.com> writes:
>> For a number of years, Lockheed Martin was crying for VMS savvy people
>> to support a number of military programs.
>
> A search right now for either VMS or OpenVMS returns nothing. :-(
Looking at Dice.com for postings with both the words "lockheed" and "VMS"
today returns 18 hits. Four of those are explicitly at Air Force bases,
and two are in England. I would guess all those are military programs.
ns
"Bill Gunshannon" <bi...@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message
news:3id1gjF...@individual.net...
I've heared that after 9/11 some CHARON-VAX installations was delivered to
exactly that building with five corners.
Norbert Stadler
CHARON-VAX Reseller
Austria and Germany
Bill Gunshannon
I have dealt with Dice for about 5 years. I don't put any faith in
them. I find it hard to believe that Dice has jobs that LMCO's own
HR people don't have. Unless, of course, they are not LMCO jobs but
short-term sub-contract positions using their association with LMCO
to try and gain some credibility.
Bill Gunshannon
The original poster was talking about Lockheed-Martin. I searched their
careers page. (Which I have bookmarked as I often go there to look. I
used to work for them in the pre-Lockheed days and it was a great company
to work for!)
And by Ft. Meade I assume you mean No Such Agency. I saw the news footage
of the immense Alpha farm but experience would make me think it much more
likely that they are running Unix/Linux rather than VMS. I am willing to
be convinced otherwise, but it will take more than vague rumours about
the government loving VMS.
Bill Gunshannon
If that's the case, they may not still be there. The system I used to
work with in that computer room belonged to an agency that no longer
exists and I doubt anyone took over their old hardware/software systems.
Tom Linden
> In article <opss3vv0aazgicya@hyrrokkin>,
> "Tom Linden" <t...@kednos.com> writes:
>> On 29 Jun 2005 00:11:13 GMT, Bill Gunshannon <bi...@cs.uofs.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> A search right now for either VMS or OpenVMS returns nothing.
>>
>> Did that include Ft Meade?
>
> The original poster was talking about Lockheed-Martin. I searched their
> careers page. (Which I have bookmarked as I often go there to look. I
> used to work for them in the pre-Lockheed days and it was a great company
> to work for!)
>
> And by Ft. Meade I assume you mean No Such Agency. I saw the news
> footage
> of the immense Alpha farm but experience would make me think it much more
> likely that they are running Unix/Linux rather than VMS. I am willing to
> be convinced otherwise, but it will take more than vague rumours about
> the government loving VMS.
>
Thet aye also a big PL/I shop. BTW, don't forget Northrup-Grumman.
> bill
>
Larry Kilgallen
> In article <LRNCPb...@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
> Kilg...@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:
>> In article <3ie791F...@individual.net>, bi...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>> In article <42c1b870$1...@usenet01.boi.hp.com>,
>>> Dan Notov <d9...@hp.com> writes:
>>
>>>> For a number of years, Lockheed Martin was crying for VMS savvy people
>>>> to support a number of military programs.
>>>
>>> A search right now for either VMS or OpenVMS returns nothing. :-(
>>
>> Looking at Dice.com for postings with both the words "lockheed" and "VMS"
>> today returns 18 hits. Four of those are explicitly at Air Force bases,
>> and two are in England. I would guess all those are military programs.
>
> I have dealt with Dice for about 5 years. I don't put any faith in
> them. I find it hard to believe that Dice has jobs that LMCO's own
> HR people don't have. Unless, of course, they are not LMCO jobs but
> short-term sub-contract positions using their association with LMCO
> to try and gain some credibility.
I thought the issue was not terms of employment but
>>>> For a number of years, Lockheed Martin was crying for VMS savvy people
>>>> to support a number of military programs.
If Lockheed wants to run their VMS machines with contractors it may be
they don't list the openings on their own site. Lots of companies will
only hire contractors through third parties.
Keith Cayemberg
I was quoted the exact number of "OpenVMS Systems" working "currently"
in the Pentagon by a "person who must know" earlier this year. Since I
don't remember now the exact number, I'll only say for certain it was
certainly more than 300, and possibly much more. I say "more than 300"
because I wish to be absolutely boolean truthful and not invent a number
from a potentially faulty memory. I should have wrote it down.
Please note the following links as well.
After 9/11 Pentagon looking for 70+ VAX 7800s - Google
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3ba238eb%241_3%40news.iglou.com
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.os.vms/msg/bf2d0febf2c417eb
There is one caveat concerning the Lockhead-Martin jobs at Dice which
may apply. Lockheed-Martin has also has projects concerning a Vehicle
Management System for Jet Fighters and a Vessel Management System for
Ships.
Lockheed Martin F-22 - Vehicle Management System -
TRW Communications/Navigation/Identification (CNI)
look under heading "Avionics Racks"
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-22-avionics.htm
Lockheed Martin announces support for U.S. National Marine Fisheries
Service Vessel Monitoring System (VMS)
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/wms/findPage.do?dsp=fec&ci=12179&rsbci=0&fti=0&ti=0&sc=400
That being said, there exists collateral showing Lockheed Martin, it's
subcontractors, and various military and industrial organisations make
use of OpenVMS in many (on-going) products and projects. Here's hoping
the following references will help you make your (OpenVMS) case when the
occasion arises.
Lockheed Space Systems Company - Strategic Missile Program -
Salem Automation CHARON-Vax Success Story - PDF
http://www.winvms.com/images/Lockheed%20Martin%20Cape%20Canaveral%20Success%20Story.pdf
Pratt & Whitney - F119 Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) for
the Lockheed Martin F/22A Raptor (formerly the Advanced Tactical Fighter)
http://www.adaic.org/atwork/pw.html
*OpenVMS in the U.S. Military Collateral*
Northrop Grumman Information Technology - J-STARS with OpenVMS -
The COTS Revolution (see caption on page 66)
http://www.armada.ch/02-5/complete_02-5.pdf
J-STARS - Customer Brief - U.S. Air Force surveillance equipment -
Wayback Machine
http://web.archive.org/web/20030424152602/http://h18003.www1.hp.com/hps/news/jstar.html
J-STARS - newspaper article in New Hampshire Telegraph
http://www.genetek.com/JSTARS.htm
OpenVMS Lives On In The Not-So-Friendly Skies (Compaq to supply OS on
machines for Air Force) - InformationWeek - HighBeam Research
http://www.highbeam.com/library/doc0.asp?DOCID=1G1:77138738&num=114&ctrlInfo=Round5a%3AMode5a%3ASR%3AResult&ao=
Raytheon - Hardened Computers -
E²COTS Products (Extended Environment Commercial- Off- The- Shelf)
http://www.raytheon-computers.com/
HP VMS Ambassador working at a customer site (Joint Forces Command) in
Suffolk, VA. - Google
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.os.vms/msg/db7871fbc3d2e157
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs - VistA Monograph
http://www1.va.gov/vista_monograph/
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs - (OpenVMS Clusters) - HP Awarded
$784 Million Services Contract
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=857e9e41.0403240626.4017bc3%40posting.google.com
InformationWeek > Business Services > VA Hospitals Sign HP To $784
Million IT-Support Deal > March 24, 2004
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=18401553
Big Federal Contract for HP - VA
http://www.line56.com/articles/default.asp?ArticleID=5489
U.S. Navy - Moving-Map Composer (MMC)
http://www7440.nrlssc.navy.mil/client-server.htm
U.S. Coast Guard - Marine Safety Center
http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/nmc/pubs/msm/v4/c2.htm
Super Hornet - AN/ALQ-165 (ASPJ) was programmed using VMS
http://www.sci.fi/~fta/aviat-5.htm
U.S. Army - BBS and CBS Battle Simulations - MS Word
http://www.strategypage.com/prowg/simulationshandbook/chp_7.doc
U.S. Army - UCCATS - MS Word
http://www.strategypage.com/prowg/simulationshandbook/chp_8.doc
U.S. Air Force - Air Mobility Command - Agencies worry about future of
DEC's OpenVMS - GCN February 9, 1998
http://www.gcn.com/archives/gcn/1998/February9/cov4.htm
U.S. Air Force - TACCSF (Theater Aerospace Command and Control
Simulation Facility) - VSTARS (Virtual Surveillance, Targeting and
Attack Radar System)
http://www.gcn.com/vol20_no4/dod/3679-1.html
Predator UAV use OpenVMS in Telemetry -
Could a PC do this - Don't think so - Google Groups COV
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.os.vms/msg/79acacc3663dd581
*OpenVMS in other Militaries Collateral*
Eurofighter - avionics written in Digital's ADA
http://www.tni-europe.com/tnie/casestudies/eurofighter.htm
Eurocontrol Euro-Airspace Air Traffic Management and
Eurofighter Typhoon, Nimrod & Hawk - CP HOOD Examples
http://www.tni-world.com/flashmx/cp_hood_examples.asp
Tigre Helicopter -
anti-tank and protection missions management software written on OpenVMS
http://www.tni-world.com/flashmx/tiger.asp
Although many of the links show implementations in projects started in
the 90's, the tendency to use existing code bases would be great for the
recent follow-on projects. It is also not to be expected that the
implementation details of currently forming projects to be made public
knowledge. So the question of recent implementations is sort of a
"Catch-22".
http://www.rajaniemi.com/data/diduknow.html
Cheers!
Keith Cayemberg
JF Mezei
When Microsoft makes a sale to the military, you can bet your ass that
Microsoft will be bragging about it. They may not give many details on
exactly what those systems will do, but they will brag about it big
time. Same with other operating systems.
But when the owner of VMS makes a sale to the military, the owner uses
the excuse "sorry, it is confidential, we can't talk about it" and VMS
never gets marketed.
They are EXCUSES to not market VMS.
When supercomputer vendors make sales to nuclear research labs who get
funding from the military, you can bet that they will advertise this
with nice press releases and make sure that those sites are ranked in
the most powerful computers listings.
Buit if there is a VMS sale, it doesn't get mentioned.
The military may not wish the vendor to release certain details of the
machines, but it most certaintly allows non-VBMS system sales to be
announced by the vendor. And there is no reason why VMS couldn't be
publisised in the same way.
The is the same as the HP apoligists who continue to state that HP is
not allowed to reveal product specific financial information, even in
the face of HP revealing product specific financial information for
products that are not VMS.
Main, Kerry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei...@teksavvy.com]
> Sent: June 29, 2005 1:14 PM
> To: Info...@Mvb.Saic.Com
> Subject: Re: US military and confidentiality
>
> I find it interesting that there would even be such a discussion.
>
> When Microsoft makes a sale to the military, you can bet your ass that
> Microsoft will be bragging about it. They may not give many details on
> exactly what those systems will do, but they will brag about it big
> time. Same with other operating systems.
>
> But when the owner of VMS makes a sale to the military, the owner uses
> the excuse "sorry, it is confidential, we can't talk about it" and VMS
> never gets marketed.
>
JF -
Think about what you just said.
If I am a Customer concerned about high security, there is no way in any
way shape or manner that I am going to publicly acknowledge what I am
running as the base for whatever application environment I have.
If the vendor publicly went against my secrecy directive, then they
would be out on their ear.
That is not specific to OpenVMS - that is just a security best practice.
And that goes for any Customer - not just DOD.
Regards
Kerry Main
Senior Consultant
HP Services Canada
Voice: 613-592-4660
Fax: 613-591-4477
kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom
(remove the DOT's and AT)
OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.
JF Mezei
> If I am a Customer concerned about high security, there is no way in any
> way shape or manner that I am going to publicly acknowledge what I am
> running as the base for whatever application environment I have.
This loses credibility when the same customer allows all other vendors
to announce a sale to them, but when it is for VMS, the vendor never
bothers asking permsission to the customer, assuming the response would
be "NO".
And consider that for those military departments who really rely on VMS,
it is now to their advantage to get HP to market those sales and market
VMS since not doing so jeoperdizes the long term viability of VMS, the
availability fo software and more importantly, experienced VMS people.
Bill Gunshannon
"Main, Kerry" <kerry...@hp.com> writes:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei...@teksavvy.com]=20
>> Sent: June 29, 2005 1:14 PM
>> To: Info...@Mvb.Saic.Com
>> Subject: Re: US military and confidentiality
>>=20
>> I find it interesting that there would even be such a discussion.
>>=20
>> When Microsoft makes a sale to the military, you can bet your ass that
>> Microsoft will be bragging about it. They may not give many details on
>> exactly what those systems will do, but they will brag about it big
>> time. Same with other operating systems.
>> But when the owner of VMS makes a sale to the military, the owner uses
>> the excuse "sorry, it is confidential, we can't talk about it" and VMS
>> never gets marketed.
>
> JF -=20
>
> Think about what you just said.=20
>
> If I am a Customer concerned about high security, there is no way in any
> way shape or manner that I am going to publicly acknowledge what I am
>
> If the vendor publicly went against my secrecy directive, then they
> would be out on their ear.
>
> That is not specific to OpenVMS - that is just a security best practice.
>
> And that goes for any Customer - not just DOD.
Kerry,
You missed the point.
We see things about WIndows being used my DOD all the time, even when
it's embarassing (like the ship dead int he water) but whenever it is
VMS all we hear is "I'ld tell you, but then I would have to kill you."
Why can Microsoft tell when the government uses their products and VSM
can't? The answer (at least as I am sure most people here see it) is
that they could, but they choose not to. there is no pressure from the
government. As I said in another message. Except for a few black projects
all government procurements in this country are public. So how come
we never hear about VMS being the winner? Unless, they never are.
Bob Koehler
> Raytheon - Hardened Computers -
> E涎OTS Products (Extended Environment Commercial- Off- The- Shelf)
> http://www.raytheon-computers.com/
"Tru64 UNIX"
Jack Peacock
news:FD827B33AB0D9C4E92E...@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net...
>
> If I am a Customer concerned about high security, there is no way in any
> way shape or manner that I am going to publicly acknowledge what I am
> running as the base for whatever application environment I have.
>
secret ones. How can you hire anyone if you can't list the skills needed?
The location can be left out, but if there really were a significant VMS
military presence then there would be contractors advertising for VMS
admins/programmers.
There are recruiters that specialize in this kind of customer (hmmm, Top
Echelon? something like that, usually requires an active clearance to apply
for a job). If there are VMS ads they are well-concealed.
Jack Peacock
John Smith
>
> If Lockheed wants to run their VMS machines with contractors it may be
> they don't list the openings on their own site. Lots of companies
> will
> only hire contractors through third parties.
This is quite true for many companies and governments. There is a 'vendor of
record' such as EDS or Andersen or Cap Gemini or others and then there are
the people with special skills like those of us with VMS backgrounds who are
hired by the vendor of record on contract.
Sometimes you just don't get in the door at these places unless you ride on
the coattails of the vendor of record.
And then you have to watch out for the gambit of "The customer is cutting
their daily rate and you'll have to take less" from the vendor of record.
Then you check with the customer's point person who liases with the vendor
of record only to find out that the vendor of record is either not receiving
less from the customer or is in fact raising their rates to the customer for
your services. I have found this to be *very* common practice among vendors
of record.
--
OpenVMS - 411,000 installed systems and holding since 1993.
Bill Gunshannon
Keith Cayemberg <keith.c...@arcor.de> writes:
>
> in the Pentagon by a "person who must know" earlier this year. Since I
> don't remember now the exact number, I'll only say for certain it was
> certainly more than 300, and possibly much more. I say "more than 300"
> because I wish to be absolutely boolean truthful and not invent a number
> from a potentially faulty memory. I should have wrote it down.
>
> Please note the following links as well.
>
> After 9/11 Pentagon looking for 70+ VAX 7800s - Google
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3ba238eb%241_3%40news.iglou.com
September 2001
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.os.vms/msg/bf2d0febf2c417eb
September 2001
> There is one caveat concerning the Lockhead-Martin jobs at Dice which
> may apply. Lockheed-Martin has also has projects concerning a Vehicle
> Management System for Jet Fighters and a Vessel Management System for
> Ships.
>
> Lockheed Martin F-22 - Vehicle Management System -
> TRW Communications/Navigation/Identification (CNI)
> look under heading "Avionics Racks"
> http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-22-avionics.htm
>
> Lockheed Martin announces support for U.S. National Marine Fisheries
> Service Vessel Monitoring System (VMS)
> http://www.lockheedmartin.com/wms/findPage.do?dsp=fec&ci=12179&rsbci=0&fti=0&ti=0&sc=400
>
We'll just ignore these as well as a certain system for serviceing cows. :-)
>
> That being said, there exists collateral showing Lockheed Martin, it's
> subcontractors, and various military and industrial organisations make
> use of OpenVMS in many (on-going) products and projects. Here's hoping
> the following references will help you make your (OpenVMS) case when the
> occasion arises.
>
> Lockheed Space Systems Company - Strategic Missile Program -
> Salem Automation CHARON-Vax Success Story - PDF
> http://www.winvms.com/images/Lockheed%20Martin%20Cape%20Canaveral%20Success%20Story.pdf
October 2003
>
> Pratt & Whitney - F119 Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) for
> the Lockheed Martin F/22A Raptor (formerly the Advanced Tactical Fighter)
> http://www.adaic.org/atwork/pw.html
No date for this one, however it should be noted it's about Ada and
the stresses the fact that Pratt & Whitney are staying with Ada. HP
already announced that they are not continuing their Ada product, so
where does that leave this account?
>
>
> *OpenVMS in the U.S. Military Collateral*
>
> Northrop Grumman Information Technology - J-STARS with OpenVMS -
> The COTS Revolution (see caption on page 66)
> http://www.armada.ch/02-5/complete_02-5.pdf
May 2002
>
> J-STARS - Customer Brief - U.S. Air Force surveillance equipment -
> Wayback Machine
> http://web.archive.org/web/20030424152602/http://h18003.www1.hp.com/hps/news/jstar.html
I couldn't get this one, but based onthe URL I place it at April 2003.
>
> J-STARS - newspaper article in New Hampshire Telegraph
> http://www.genetek.com/JSTARS.htm
August 2001
>
> OpenVMS Lives On In The Not-So-Friendly Skies (Compaq to supply OS on
> machines for Air Force) - InformationWeek - HighBeam Research
> http://www.highbeam.com/library/doc0.asp?DOCID=1G1:77138738&num=114&ctrlInfo=Round5a%3AMode5a%3ASR%3AResult&ao=
August 2001
>
> Raytheon - Hardened Computers -
> E²COTS Products (Extended Environment Commercial- Off- The- Shelf)
> http://www.raytheon-computers.com/
This is an ad for custom hardware from Raytheon some of which uses Alpha
but says nothing about VMS.
>
> HP VMS Ambassador working at a customer site (Joint Forces Command) in
> Suffolk, VA. - Google
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.os.vms/msg/db7871fbc3d2e157
Dec 2003. Not sure those machines belong to the government as they
are not usually allowed to "sell" old equipment in order to buy newer
equipment. I suspect they belong to the contractor and there is no
guarantee that they are being used to develop VMS software for JFC.
>
> U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs - VistA Monograph
> http://www1.va.gov/vista_monograph/
No mention of VMS in this at all and if there was it would probably
be refering to VISTA Monograph System.
>
> U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs - (OpenVMS Clusters) - HP Awarded
> $784 Million Services Contract
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=857e9e41.0403240626.4017bc3%40posting.google.com
March 2004
OK, we found on just over a year old. But we were talking DOD I
thought and the it would take a real stretch of the imagination to
equate the VA with DOD. :-)
>
> InformationWeek > Business Services > VA Hospitals Sign HP To $784
> Million IT-Support Deal > March 24, 2004
> http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=18401553
Same event and story as above. No points.
>
> Big Federal Contract for HP - VA
> http://www.line56.com/articles/default.asp?ArticleID=5489
Same event and story as above. No points.
>
> U.S. Navy - Moving-Map Composer (MMC)
> http://www7440.nrlssc.navy.mil/client-server.htm
October 2000
>
> U.S. Coast Guard - Marine Safety Center
> http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/nmc/pubs/msm/v4/c2.htm
This is some ancient Coast Guard document that talks about something
done in 1986.
"transfered to the MicroVax system which uses the Fortran language
and the Vax/VMS"
Even if it still existed, this is what you call legacy!!!
I mean (VAX/FORTRAN/PLOT 10). Can we get real?
>
> Super Hornet - AN/ALQ-165 (ASPJ) was programmed using VMS
> http://www.sci.fi/~fta/aviat-5.htm
May&June 2001
>
> U.S. Army - BBS and CBS Battle Simulations - MS Word
> http://www.strategypage.com/prowg/simulationshandbook/chp_7.doc
December 1998
This one is about VS3100 and VMS 6.1.
>
> U.S. Army - UCCATS - MS Word
> http://www.strategypage.com/prowg/simulationshandbook/chp_8.doc
THis is the a different chapter from the same book as above.
>
> U.S. Air Force - Air Mobility Command - Agencies worry about future of
> DEC's OpenVMS - GCN February 9, 1998
> http://www.gcn.com/archives/gcn/1998/February9/cov4.htm
February 1998.
Somehow, I doubt they are still worrying.
>
> U.S. Air Force - TACCSF (Theater Aerospace Command and Control
> Simulation Facility) - VSTARS (Virtual Surveillance, Targeting and
> Attack Radar System)
> http://www.gcn.com/vol20_no4/dod/3679-1.html
February 2001
>
> Predator UAV use OpenVMS in Telemetry -
> Could a PC do this - Don't think so - Google Groups COV
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.os.vms/msg/79acacc3663dd581
Seems current, but I fail to see the connection to DOD. In any
event it looks more like a migration away from VMS in favor of
a PC and the comments of someone who has already made such a
migration telling him what to look out for. I can assure you
there are no Alphas runing VMS mounted in HUMVEES to handle the
telemetry from the UAV's in actual use. :-)
>
>
>
> *OpenVMS in other Militaries Collateral*
Not sure this is worth it as I seem to get the idea from posts in
c.o.v that Europe is still much more enamored with VMS then anyone
in the US, but here's a few comments anyway.
>
> Eurofighter - avionics written in Digital's ADA
> http://www.tni-europe.com/tnie/casestudies/eurofighter.htm
Nice project. No date given but theolane went into service in 2001.
Again, however, this is an Ada project and specifically mentions VAX.
Probably not current. No evidence it's still on VMS.
>
> Eurocontrol Euro-Airspace Air Traffic Management and
> Eurofighter Typhoon, Nimrod & Hawk - CP HOOD Examples
> http://www.tni-world.com/flashmx/cp_hood_examples.asp
This is the same article, just a different page.
>
> Tigre Helicopter -
> anti-tank and protection missions management software written on OpenVMS
> http://www.tni-world.com/flashmx/tiger.asp
Same place. Different song. While one line says:
"Platforms: VAX/VMS and UNIX (HP and SUN)"
The article actually says:
"The development tool used in the project was Rational APEX on SUN"
It looks like another Ada project. Same comments as above, I guess.
>
>
> Although many of the links show implementations in projects started in
> the 90's, the tendency to use existing code bases would be great for the
> recent follow-on projects.
What would possibly make you draw that conclusion? Everyday we watch
companies change the systems they choose to support. Why woudl you
think any of these (beyond the VA) are still running those VS3100 and
VMS 6.1?
> It is also not to be expected that the
> implementation details of currently forming projects to be made public
> knowledge. So the question of recent implementations is sort of a
> "Catch-22".
No, actually it is as I expected. There is no evidence that HP hasn't
let yet another opportunity wither on the vine. You want to show that
DOD is still big on VMS? Show me the announced RFP's in the CBD. Unlike
what Didier said about France, our procurements are, by law, public. (well,
except for a few black projects.)
>
>
> http://www.rajaniemi.com/data/diduknow.html
"This holiday season, if you received a catalogue in the U.S.
mail, it got to your door through the powers of OpenVMS. That's
because the route of every mail carrier in the United States is
managed/generated by an OpenVMS system."
Even this is doubtful. I once interviewed with the contractor who
does the computing for the USPS (I used to do this periodically just
to garner information to pass on to our students about current trends
int he industry). That was over 10 years ago. They were looking for
VMS and Unix experience. Current ads I have seen no longer list VMS
skills as needed or even desired.
"If you're the pilot of an F-22 Stealth Fighter, an astronaut
flying the Space Shuttle, or a pilot of the new proto Eurofighter,
you're flying with OpenVMS."
This is just plain mis-leading. There is no VMS on any of them. Just
because some phase somewhere along the line used it (maybe) doesn't mean
your flying with it.
"If you ship material through the port of New York or container
cargo through the port of Rotterdam, you're a user of OpenVMS."
This is possible, but really pretty meaningless as the same task was
handled just fine with pencils and paper for several centuries. :-)
I am sure there are considerably more Windoze boxes in both these places.
"If you're using the underground in London, the electric lights
lighting your way are controlled by an OpenVMS system."
Now that's impressive. The worlds most complicated and expensive
light switch. :-)
"If you ride a train in Germany, France, Italy, or Poland you are
a user of OpenVMS."
Also interesting, but a claim by COMPAQ is not likely to convince me.
COMPAQ doesn't even exist making this just another old web page.
"If you explore the mysteries of the universe from pictures generated
by the Hubble Space Telescope - one of the most popular pastimes on
the Web - you are a user of OpenVMS."
I would love to see the justification for this claim. I know JPL used VMS
in the past, but is there any evidence that it is still the case today?
There is much better graphics handling hardware than anything that is
supported under VMS today.
"Visste du?
Om du använder verktyg för bearbetning av metall köpt
från världens ledande tillverkare av hårdmetallverktyg,
AB Sandvik Coromant, så är du en OpenVMS användare."
We have Sandvik facilities locally. I have never seen them advertise
for anyone with VMS skills. Windows and Unix, but never VMS.
Of course, the fact that this is a COMPAQ web page says something about
it's age. Come on people. Stop living int he past. We need something
current to show that VMS is alive and well. No one is going to buy that
because somebody used it 10 years ago we can assume they still do today.
In this industry, quite the contrary would be the norm.
I am still waiting for somethign concrete and believable that points
to DOD's interest in VMS.
Larry Kilgallen
> Except employees have to be recruited to maintain any facility, even the
> secret ones. How can you hire anyone if you can't list the skills needed?
> The location can be left out, but if there really were a significant VMS
> military presence then there would be contractors advertising for VMS
> admins/programmers.
And there are, all the time.
> for a job). If there are VMS ads they are well-concealed.
Not if you look at Dice.com. Sometimes it seems that 1/3 of the VMS
postings are military and 1/3 are banking.
Main, Kerry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfm...@teksavvy.com]
> Sent: June 29, 2005 4:32 PM
> To: Info...@Mvb.Saic.Com
> Subject: Re: US military and confidentiality
>
> > If I am a Customer concerned about high security, there is
> no way in any
> > way shape or manner that I am going to publicly acknowledge
> what I am
> > running as the base for whatever application environment I have.
>
> to announce a sale to them, but when it is for VMS, the vendor never
> bothers asking permsission to the customer, assuming the
> response would
> be "NO".
>
JF - you are simply making things up to suit your own agenda.
Advertising wins for secure environments like DOD is simply not done by
any vendor. Sure, Microsoft can state general things like "DOD will be
using Windows for an application to store information and make things
more efficient..". They may even be allowed to state an environment
within DOD, but you can bet it is not one which has any elevated level
of security. It likely also would take them 6 months to a year to get
all the approvals - even to get a mention of an insecure environment.
Heck, I work a lot with the Federal Govt here in Canada and since 9-11
and a few high profile internal audits, they are extremely nervous about
any perceived vendor bias and/or public attention. Its gotten to the
point that some managers do not let their staff receive any vendor mugs,
pens, free pizza lunches (when talking about business) etc.
I find it really hard to believe that this is not also the same thing
that is happening in the US.
> And consider that for those military departments who really
> rely on VMS,
> it is now to their advantage to get HP to market those sales
> and market
> VMS since not doing so jeoperdizes the long term viability of VMS, the
> availability fo software and more importantly, experienced VMS people.
>
Do you think the govt does not have strict rules about vendor bias when
speaking or being quoted publicly in any type of an official capacity?
Bill Gunshannon
How are they military? I wasn't aware that Dice.com was part of
USAREC. Seriously though, I have been resgistered with dice.com and
monster.com for several years. I haven't found anything of value
about either of them. LMCO (one of my favorite example companies)
has hundreds of jobs in the IT business available, none of which
appear on either place,
John Smith
This is quite true. I've been on the receiving end of this with one app we
built - at the time and for a long while it was the one and only solution in
the marketplace that a specific government dept./agency thought was great
and liked it to be widely used among capital markets participants, they
could not and would not open their mouths to recommend us to anyone. Their
words to us were, "We cannot be seen favoring or promoting one vendor".
--
OpenVMS - The never-advertised operating system with the dwindling ISV
base.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
Bill Gunshannon
"John Smith" <a...@nonymous.com> writes:
> Main, Kerry wrote:
>>
>> I find it really hard to believe that this is not also the same thing
>> that is happening in the US.
Once again, with the exception of certain black projects all DOD
(and I am sure other gov't procurements, but I only have first-hand
experience with DOD) procurements are public knowledge and the RFP's
are required to be published in the CBD. Explain to me why HP can't
announce it is bidding on and later that it won some of these RFP's?
>> Do you think the govt does not have strict rules about vendor bias
>> when speaking or being quoted publicly in any type of an official
>> capacity?
>
>
> This is quite true. I've been on the receiving end of this with one app we
> built - at the time and for a long while it was the one and only solution in
> the marketplace that a specific government dept./agency thought was great
> and liked it to be widely used among capital markets participants, they
> could not and would not open their mouths to recommend us to anyone. Their
> words to us were, "We cannot be seen favoring or promoting one vendor".
>
NUtt hat only means the gov't can't say "Company A is better
than sliced bread". There is no bias in saying "Company A
bid on RFP 5X389275B and was selected and awarded Contract
Q5693D786 for which they will provide 10 HP XP1000's running
OpenVMS Version 8.3." No bias, just a statement of fact.
And then HP can say "We won Contract Q5693D786 and here is the
reason why we were chosen #1 for this proposal."
Unless, HP never bids on any of these, not even as the equipment
provider to someone like LMCO.
Main, Kerry
-----Original Message-----
> From: bi...@triangle.cs.uofs.edu
> [mailto:bi...@triangle.cs.uofs.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Gunshannon
> Sent: June 30, 2005 9:18 AM
> To: Info...@Mvb.Saic.Com
> Subject: Re: US military and confidentiality
>
> "John Smith" <a...@nonymous.com> writes:
> > Main, Kerry wrote:
> >>
> >> I find it really hard to believe that this is not also the
> same thing
> >> that is happening in the US.
>
> Once again, with the exception of certain black projects all DOD
> (and I am sure other gov't procurements, but I only have first-hand
> experience with DOD) procurements are public knowledge and the RFP's
> are required to be published in the CBD. Explain to me why HP can't
> announce it is bidding on and later that it won some of these RFP's?
>
Bill, you do not seem to understand how the RFP stuff actually works.
Vendors do not announce "we are bidding on XYZ RFP". It is always a game
where you try to figure out who the competition is and what their
strategy will be. Some of the games include submitting clarification
questions (these are allowed and the crown responds to all bidders
without any indication who asked the question) which will put one of
your perceived competitors in a tougher position to respond
successfully.
RFP responding is always a big cat-n-mouse game and if not successful,
no vendor will admit it lost or even participated in the bid.
> >> Do you think the govt does not have strict rules about vendor bias
> >> when speaking or being quoted publicly in any type of an official
> >> capacity?
> >
> >
> > This is quite true. I've been on the receiving end of this
> with one app we
> > built - at the time and for a long while it was the one and
> only solution in
> > the marketplace that a specific government dept./agency
> thought was great
> > and liked it to be widely used among capital markets
> participants, they
> > could not and would not open their mouths to recommend us
> to anyone. Their
> > words to us were, "We cannot be seen favoring or promoting
> one vendor".
> >
>
> NUtt hat only means the gov't can't say "Company A is better
> than sliced bread". There is no bias in saying "Company A
> bid on RFP 5X389275B and was selected and awarded Contract
> Q5693D786 for which they will provide 10 HP XP1000's running
> OpenVMS Version 8.3." No bias, just a statement of fact.
> And then HP can say "We won Contract Q5693D786 and here is the
> reason why we were chosen #1 for this proposal."
>
> Unless, HP never bids on any of these, not even as the equipment
> provider to someone like LMCO.
>
Just because you do not read about it in the press, assuming HP and its
partners does not bid OpenVMS (and win occasionally) on specific DOD
contracts is ridiculous. DOD is likely one of the biggest single
Customers that any vendor could potentially have.
And contrary to some of the allegations here, many DOD folks do
understand the issues of security when dealing with commodity off the
shelf server platforms and their vendor recommended monthly security
patches.
Regards
Bill Gunshannon
"Main, Kerry" <kerry...@hp.com> writes:
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> [mailto:bi...@triangle.cs.uofs.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Gunshannon
>> Sent: June 30, 2005 9:18 AM
>> To: Info...@Mvb.Saic.Com
>> Subject: Re: US military and confidentiality
>>=20
>> In article <42c3ec6d$1...@spool9-west.superfeed.net>,
>> "John Smith" <a...@nonymous.com> writes:
>> > Main, Kerry wrote:
>> >>
>> same thing
>> >> that is happening in the US.
>> Once again, with the exception of certain black projects all DOD
>> (and I am sure other gov't procurements, but I only have first-hand
>> experience with DOD) procurements are public knowledge and the RFP's
>> are required to be published in the CBD. Explain to me why HP can't
>> announce it is bidding on and later that it won some of these RFP's?
>
> Bill, you do not seem to understand how the RFP stuff actually works.
Kerry, actually, I do. I have done it from both sides. I have written
RFP's and I have helped put together bids on them. I haven't always
been in this academic ivory tower! :-)
>
> Vendors do not announce "we are bidding on XYZ RFP". It is always a game
> where you try to figure out who the competition is and what their
> strategy will be. Some of the games include submitting clarification
> questions (these are allowed and the crown responds to all bidders
Sorry, we don't have any crowns down here and the original topic
was regarding the US DOD.
> without any indication who asked the question) which will put one of
> your perceived competitors in a tougher position to respond
> successfully.
That part is pretty much the same down here.
>
> RFP responding is always a big cat-n-mouse game and if not successful,
> no vendor will admit it lost or even participated in the bid.=20
We don't care about the ones HP looses. We want to hear about the
ones they win. Down here, the RFP and in most cases the final
contract are public information. If you want, I can probably go
out ont he web and find ancient reports of some of the ones that
the companies I worked for did during my tenure with them. None
of it was secret and after winning we tended to plaster them all
over every headline we could grab. It was free advertising for the
company and it tended to rub the competitors' noses in it as well.
Try google on "ulana2".
>
>> >> Do you think the govt does not have strict rules about vendor bias
>> >> when speaking or being quoted publicly in any type of an official
>> >> capacity?
>> >=20
>> >=20
>> > This is quite true. I've been on the receiving end of this=20
>> with one app we
>> > built - at the time and for a long while it was the one and=20
>> only solution in
>> > the marketplace that a specific government dept./agency=20
>> thought was great
>> > and liked it to be widely used among capital markets=20
>> participants, they
>> > could not and would not open their mouths to recommend us=20
>> to anyone. Their
>> > words to us were, "We cannot be seen favoring or promoting=20
>> one vendor".
>> >=20
>>=20
>> NUtt hat only means the gov't can't say "Company A is better
>> than sliced bread". There is no bias in saying "Company A
>> bid on RFP 5X389275B and was selected and awarded Contract
>> Q5693D786 for which they will provide 10 HP XP1000's running
>> OpenVMS Version 8.3." No bias, just a statement of fact.
>> And then HP can say "We won Contract Q5693D786 and here is the
>> reason why we were chosen #1 for this proposal."
>>=20
>> Unless, HP never bids on any of these, not even as the equipment
>> provider to someone like LMCO.
>>=20
>
> Just because you do not read about it in the press, assuming HP and its
> partners does not bid OpenVMS (and win occasionally) on specific DOD
> contracts is ridiculous. DOD is likely one of the biggest single
> Customers that any vendor could potentially have.
Then why doesn't HP come right out and show it!!! That's the point
people are trying to make here. The information isn't secret, it's
public "BY LAW" (at least down here). If this is valuable advertising
opportunity and HP doesn't use it, what conclusion should be derived?
Either they don't win any or they really don't care.
>
> And contrary to some of the allegations here, many DOD folks do
> understand the issues of security when dealing with commodity off the
> shelf server platforms and their vendor recommended monthly security
> patches.
As well we should. But that is still side-stepping the issue.
Why doesn't HP take advantage of the tremendous free advertising
availability they would get from publishing powerful news releases
about these (supposed) major DOD contract wins?
JF Mezei
> and liked it to be widely used among capital markets participants, they
> could not and would not open their mouths to recommend us to anyone. Their
> words to us were, "We cannot be seen favoring or promoting one vendor".
This si quite different from the vendor getting permission to mention a
sale to company XXX without revealing any specific details.
When HP brags about Tandem machines at NASDAQ, do they give details
about what they really do ? No. "They just process millions of
transactions".
When Microsoft brags about selling to the US military, do you think
Microsoft reveales any details the military don't want revealed ? No. It
isn't the military bragging about microsoft, it is microsoft bragging.
There are instances howvere where outfits will brag about choosing
microsoft. I still remember the vancouver airport authority bragging in
its annual report about having standardized all purchasing of IT on
Microsoft software only, thus saving the organisation much money. (how
can removing the RFP process and competitive bidding save an
organisation money ?).
This was undoubdedly some statement with a goal of telling wall street
analysts that YVR Inc had gone "mainstream" and followed all the other
sheep. But I saw it as a terrible management decision and certaintly
gave the airport an image of having far less safety. I don't trust
windows to handle the systems that help a 747 land at that airport.
(while the policy may have been intended only for office systems, the
wording had not restricted it to office systems).
Chris Scheers
When looking at "VMS" jobs at Lockheed, some care must be taken.
The suite of computers on the F22 is called the Vehicle Management
System, aka, VMS. I suspect that most of the Lockheed references to VMS
refer to this.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Scheers, Applied Synergy, Inc.
Voice: 817-237-3360 Internet: ch...@applied-synergy.com
Fax: 817-237-3074
Larry Kilgallen
> And contrary to some of the allegations here, many DOD folks do
> understand the issues of security when dealing with commodity off the
> shelf server platforms and their vendor recommended monthly security
> patches.
There was a participant at the boot camp who wanted to take some of
the trinkets back to the big boss. The individual said the big boss
was a long-time VMS fan, but it was just a joke because the military
would not accept vendor specific trinkets displayed in the obvious
place in the workplace. There was a chance they might get one such
trinket displayed in the test environment after a personnel shift.
The fact that they cannot be out front boosting VMS does not mean
they don't love VMS and depend on its most unique features.
Larry Kilgallen
> Larry Kilgallen wrote:
>> In article <3ie791F...@individual.net>, bi...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>
>>>In article <42c1b870$1...@usenet01.boi.hp.com>,
>>> Dan Notov <d9...@hp.com> writes:
>>
>>
>>>>For a number of years, Lockheed Martin was crying for VMS savvy people
>>>>to support a number of military programs.
>>>
>>>A search right now for either VMS or OpenVMS returns nothing. :-(
>>
>>
>> Looking at Dice.com for postings with both the words "lockheed" and "VMS"
>> today returns 18 hits. Four of those are explicitly at Air Force bases,
>> and two are in England. I would guess all those are military programs.
>
> When looking at "VMS" jobs at Lockheed, some care must be taken.
>
> The suite of computers on the F22 is called the Vehicle Management
> System, aka, VMS. I suspect that most of the Lockheed references to VMS
> refer to this.
That could be, but five of them also say VAX and at least two that do
not say VAX do say "Open VMS" (two words).
Dan Notov
F16 and F22 made and continues to make exensive use of VMS on these
programs. Most aircraft programs get locked into a certain computing
envinronment due to certificatation of the HW and SW involved. Rehosting
the solution(s) is very difficult because the cost of recertifying is so
high.
CHARON-VAX helps out a lot.
/danno
Dan Notov
The announcement will be some dry disclosure in some public document or
trade rag.
Publishing a reference as you describe still requires buy-in from the
sponsor. You just cannot unilaterally announce something without
permission. Also, some contractual documents preclude public
announcements without permission.
JF Mezei
> F16 and F22 made and continues to make exensive use of VMS on these
> programs. Most aircraft programs get locked into a certain computing
> envinronment due to certificatation of the HW and SW involved. Rehosting
> the solution(s) is very difficult because the cost of recertifying is so
> high.
>
> CHARON-VAX helps out a lot.
And that, my friends, says a hell of a lot about HP's claims that
customers will easily migrate to that IA64 thing.
If staying with VAX for so many years is necessary for some customers,
then so will staying with Alpha for other customers.
In the end, Alpha customers will be buying lenovo or Dell machines 64
bit machines and run Charon-Alpha on it to continue their operations. (I
assume Charon-Alpha will come out not long after HP stops selling alpga
machines soon.
JF Mezei
> Publishing a reference as you describe still requires buy-in from the
> sponsor. You just cannot unilaterally announce something without
> permission. Also, some contractual documents preclude public
> announcements without permission.
Yep. and you won't get permission if you don't even ask for it. Those HP
employtees who reluctantly agree to sell a VMS stystem know full well
that VMS isn't marketed and won't bother asking for the right to brag
about that sale.
But Those HP employees who sell Microsoft systems to the same
organisation will take the effort to ask for permission and generally
get it (with some restrictions, of course) and they will use this big
time not only to bolster's HP's image, but for the kickbacks they get
from Microsoft and Intel.
Where there is a will, there is a way. As long as there is no will to
market VMS, a way won't event be sought.
Bill Gunshannon
When TRW won the first ULANA Contract it was plastered across the front
pages of every major trade journal. When TRW won NADN (a sale so big
that the salesman who closed the deal was not allowed, by law, to be
paid his usual percentage!!) It was no only on the trade journals but
even made papers like the Washington Post. The same was true when MMDS
won the USMA network and academic computer system.
>
> Publishing a reference as you describe still requires buy-in from the
> sponsor. You just cannot unilaterally announce something without
> permission. Also, some contractual documents preclude public
> announcements without permission.
Read my lips. While the bids, during the procurement process, are
classified and treated as "trade secrets" once the contract is awarded
it is public information. That's the law. It would have to be a
direct threat to national security to be classified in any way and
who has or where a computer system is located just doesn't meet that
requirement in the majority of cases. It is the data stored on the
computer that makes it classified. not who bought it or where.
Stop beating around the bush. If everybody else can tell about their
government wins, why can't VMS? Unless, HP has stopped bidding in
the first place.
As an interesting side note, while looking for the stuff on ULANA-2,
I found a site that listed a number of Open Ended contracts to provide
all kinds of computer equipment to the government. All of these
contracts, although specific to certain agencies like NASA and USAF,
can be piggy-backed onto by any government agency. There were
contracts going back to the 90's, some marked closed (like ULANA)
but many going until 2007-2008. It is interesting that HP actually
shows up in at least three of them by name. Providing Unix and
Windows, no mention of VMS systems at all. I guess it is VMS that
is classified rather than the contract.
Dan Notov
that they will not be there on Integrity. Framemaker 4, for example.
What do we do with all that documentation created in the late 80's and
90's if they cannot rehost to another product without a major
recertification of the software stack.
Dan Notov
customer say no.
/danno
Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing
>Dan Notov wrote:
>> F16 and F22 made and continues to make exensive use of VMS on these
>> programs. Most aircraft programs get locked into a certain computing
>> envinronment due to certificatation of the HW and SW involved. Rehosting
>> the solution(s) is very difficult because the cost of recertifying is so
>> high.
>>
>> CHARON-VAX helps out a lot.
>
>
>And that, my friends, says a hell of a lot about HP's claims that
>customers will easily migrate to that IA64 thing.
>
>If staying with VAX for so many years is necessary for some customers,
>then so will staying with Alpha for other customers.
>
>In the end, Alpha customers will be buying lenovo or Dell machines 64
>bit machines and run Charon-Alpha on it to continue their operations.
Not if HP will only support and license the notional Charon-Alpha on I64. (Not
that I have any idea about their plans.)
-- Alan
Rob Young
>
> When HP brags about Tandem machines at NASDAQ, do they give details
> about what they really do ? No. "They just process millions of
> transactions".
>
Non-Stop is for the first tier (at least it was 2 years ago)...
the other two tiers (mid-tier and backend) are Windows based
http://www.onwindows.com/article.asp?id=25
The first tier receives
quotation information from SuperMontage's Hewlett-Packard Non-Stop
Computing mainframe platform. The second tier processes and
maintains the data, while the third tier disseminates the information
to SuperMontage's subscribers.
[snip]
The second tier, running on Windows 2000 Server and SQL Server
implemented on two Dell 8450 four-processor servers, manages all
business logic using stored procedures. Each quotation, or message,
causes a SQL Server stored procedure to execute four or five database
calls to process the message and load it into the database. SQL
Server business logic reviews all the reference information associated
with the message, such as the state of quoting participants. It
prepares relevant information to be included with the eventual
transmission of the quotation data to subscribers. It analyses whether,
and where, the new quotation fits among the top five bid and ask
prices.
The third tier pulls data from the SQL Server database and multicasts
it to all SuperMontage subscribers. This layer is implemented on three
dual-processor Dell 2250 servers running Windows 2000 Server. Each
processor supports a single channel of output, and each server has a
backup machine for failover.
[snip]
"Quite candidly, when we started the project, I had my doubts whether
Microsoft could deliver on enterprise-class applications," he
concludes. "But I think the results speak for themselves. Microsoft can
deliver."
---
Rob
Men with walkie-talkies I'm home again to you babe
Men with flashlights waving You know it makes me wonder
Up upon the tower Sittin' in the quiet slipstream
The clock reads daylight savin' Rollin' in the thunder
-- Neil Young
Larry Kilgallen
> Read my lips. While the bids, during the procurement process, are
> classified and treated as "trade secrets" once the contract is awarded
> it is public information.
From a current US government contract:
"Except as may be otherwise provided herein, the Contractor shall not
refer to the XXX or to any of its XXXs, organizations, or facilities
in any manner or through any medium, whether written, oral or visual,
for any prupose whatsoever, including but not limited to, advertising
marketing, promotion, publicity, or solicitation, without the prior
written approval of the Contracting Officer."
Granted, that is for consulting service rather than for sale of hardware.
Didier Morandi
The new CHARON-VAX 66x0 emulates all VAX CPUs, and it seems that SRI is working
on the same kind of result for CHARON-AXP.
See http://www.softresint.com/charon-axp/index.htm
D.
--
Didier MORANDI - Expert informaticien - VMS / SAP
13 chemin du Gué, 1213 Petit-Lancy (GE) Suisse
Tél. : +33(0)6 7983 6418 ~ www.didiermorandi.com
Bill Gunshannon
One, that appears to be for a specific contract. I would need the rest
of the contract to try to determine why they might have included that.
My guess is the contract is at least an inch thick and not a fun read.
Two, that statement not withstanding, unless the contract is classified
anyone can file an FOIA request with the contract number and get a copy
of it which they can then publish in the local newspaper if they wish
thus making the statement rather toothless.
It also says you merely have to ask, not that you can not say anything.
>
> Granted, that is for consulting service rather than for sale of hardware.
Pretty much the same rules, but much less to brag about anyway.
Larry Kilgallen
> In article <hUUYr3...@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
> Kilg...@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:
>> In article <3ijcl7F...@individual.net>, bi...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>
>>> Read my lips. While the bids, during the procurement process, are
>>> classified and treated as "trade secrets" once the contract is awarded
>>> it is public information.
>>
>> From a current US government contract:
>>
>> "Except as may be otherwise provided herein, the Contractor shall not
>> refer to the XXX or to any of its XXXs, organizations, or facilities
>> in any manner or through any medium, whether written, oral or visual,
>> for any prupose whatsoever, including but not limited to, advertising
>> marketing, promotion, publicity, or solicitation, without the prior
>> written approval of the Contracting Officer."
>
> One, that appears to be for a specific contract. I would need the rest
> of the contract to try to determine why they might have included that.
> My guess is the contract is at least an inch thick and not a fun read.
>
> Two, that statement not withstanding, unless the contract is classified
> anyone can file an FOIA request with the contract number and get a copy
> of it which they can then publish in the local newspaper if they wish
> thus making the statement rather toothless.
Not at all. FOIA does not restrict _you_ from doing that, but it does
restrict the contract _signatory_ from doing that, which is what we
were discussing - HP publicizing government contracts.
Presumably any signatory who colluded to have _you_ go the FOIA route
would find the contract quite toothful.
JF Mezei
> > marketing, promotion, publicity, or solicitation, without the prior
> > written approval of the Contracting Officer."
>
> One, that appears to be for a specific contract. I would need the rest
> of the contract to try to determine why they might have included that.
It would be pretty standard to have that in. You don't want the vendor to
start bragging about aspects which are private to the customer. And you don't
have to be within the military.
Back when Montreal was big enough to have a stock exchange, and back when DEC
was smart enough to win that account, when the time came for Toronto to look
at replacement for their old systems, the toronto DEC salespersons tried very
hard to get the montreal sales rep to divulge tons of information about the
montreal exchange (even internally within DEC) and he was under strict
instructions not to reveal any details which may reveal some of the
competitive advantages montreal had over toronto due to the use of VMS and the
software to run a stock exchange.
However, dec was able to brag about having won that exchange. They just
weren't allowed to divulge specific aspects of it.
And just because there is a clause requiring specific written approval doesn't
mean that approval is dificult to get.
You just need a wroitten approval to divulge only certain aspects and keep
confidentiality about others. So you can bragh about the win, but can't
release any of the details the customer doesn't want released.
Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing
>Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing wrote:
>on the same kind of result for CHARON-AXP.
>
>See http://www.softresint.com/charon-axp/index.htm
At the risk that my spending any more time on what was basically a wisecrack
will give the false impression that I have a position to defend:
JF was saying that Alpha customers, rather than buy I64, would end up
running CHARON-AXP on generic X86-64 machines from other sources than HP,
based on what seems to be the fact that quite a few VAX customers have
ended up running CHARON-VAX. I was suggesting that HP is in a position to
lower the likelihood of that happening by only allowing license transfers
to, and only offering support for, VMS on CHARON-AXP if it's running on an
HP I64 box, in which case they'd still get hardware revenue from those
Alpha replacements.
(That is, this is all a speculative marketing/licensing interchange, not
a technical interchange.)
Your remark seems like a non sequitur to that.
-- Alan
Tom Linden
Of course, VMS mangement might get really smart and realize that they
would
a lot more money as a software company, and get out of the box business!
Bob Koehler
>
> JF was saying that Alpha customers, rather than buy I64, would end up
> running CHARON-AXP on generic X86-64 machines from other sources than HP,
> based on what seems to be the fact that quite a few VAX customers have
> ended up running CHARON-VAX. I was suggesting that HP is in a position to
> lower the likelihood of that happening by only allowing license transfers
> to, and only offering support for, VMS on CHARON-AXP if it's running on an
> HP I64 box, in which case they'd still get hardware revenue from those
> Alpha replacements.
I was under the impression that HP willonly officially support
Charon-VAX on PCs with HP and Compaq logos, but would license VMS for
it for other PC makes.
John Smith
So Ken Farmer could 'hear' 2nd-hand about these via the grapevine, request
under FOIA, and then freely post and even make up ads that could go into the
Wall Street Journal?
Sorry to drag you in Ken.
John Smith
> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>> marketing, promotion, publicity, or solicitation, without the prior
>>> written approval of the Contracting Officer."
>>
>> One, that appears to be for a specific contract. I would need the
>> rest of the contract to try to determine why they might have
>> included that.
>
>
> It would be pretty standard to have that in. You don't want the
> vendor to start bragging about aspects which are private to the
> customer. And you don't have to be within the military.
>
> Back when Montreal was big enough to have a stock exchange, and back
> when DEC was smart enough to win that account, when the time came for
> Toronto to look at replacement for their old systems, the toronto DEC
> salespersons tried very hard to get the montreal sales rep to divulge
> tons of information about the montreal exchange (even internally
> within DEC) and he was under strict instructions not to reveal any
> details which may reveal some of the competitive advantages montreal
> had over toronto due to the use of VMS and the software to run a
> stock exchange.
The ME had a decent VMS environment and better application software than the
TSE.
They ran some Mira's initially as I recall, and maybe FT's later.
JF Mezei
> The ME had a decent VMS environment and better application software than the
> TSE.
>
> They ran some Mira's initially as I recall, and maybe FT's later.
They didn't stay long with VMS. Migrated to SUN within a couple of years until
the montreal exchange ceased to exist as a stock exchange.
Stanley F. Quayle
> I was under the impression that HP willonly officially support
> Charon-VAX on PCs with HP and Compaq logos, but would license VMS
> for it for other PC makes.
My understanding is that HP will only sell VMS software support for
CHARON-VAX systems that run on HP (or Compaq) hardware.
As for license transfers, no one at HP has ever asked about the
server that's running CHARON-VAX.
But, what would I know? I'm only a CHARON-VAX reseller [Shameless
Plug (tm) Alert].
--Stan Quayle
Quayle Consulting Inc.
----------
Stanley F. Quayle, P.E. N8SQ +1 614-868-1363
8572 North Spring Ct., Pickerington, OH 43147 USA
stan-at-stanq-dot-com http://www.stanq.com
"OpenVMS, when downtime is not an option"
Tom Linden
<squ...@insight.rr.com> wrote:
> On 1 Jul 2005 at 16:00, Bob Koehler wrote:
>> I was under the impression that HP willonly officially support
>> Charon-VAX on PCs with HP and Compaq logos, but would license VMS
>> for it for other PC makes.
>
> My understanding is that HP will only sell VMS software support for
> CHARON-VAX systems that run on HP (or Compaq) hardware.
>
> As for license transfers, no one at HP has ever asked about the
> server that's running CHARON-VAX.
Can you license VMS to run on CHARON-VAX or does it have to be a transfer
of an existing license? If so, can you do it, or does one have to go to
HP for the license?
JF Mezei
> My understanding is that HP will only sell VMS software support for
> CHARON-VAX systems that run on HP (or Compaq) hardware.
Since Charon-VAX is the actual hardware from VMS' point of view, is there any
technical reason for this ?
Also, how does HP know on what PC Charon is running on ? You could get an old
HP piece of junk and give that serial number to HP, while your real charon
systems run on Lenovo or Dell :-)
Stanley F. Quayle
> Can you license VMS to run on CHARON-VAX or does it have to be a
> transfer of an existing license? If so, can you do it, or does one
> have to go to HP for the license?
I have customers who buy licenses from HP for their "new" VAX. Most
use a HP-authorized license reseller since getting the licenses
directly HP appears to be impossible.
Stanley F. Quayle
> "Stanley F. Quayle" wrote:
> > My understanding is that HP will only sell VMS software support for
> > CHARON-VAX systems that run on HP (or Compaq) hardware.
> Since Charon-VAX is the actual hardware from VMS' point of view, is
> there any technical reason for this ?
VMS doesn't see CHARON-VAX. It sees a VAX 4000, or a MicroVAX II, or
a VAX 6630, whatever's being emulated.
> Also, how does HP know on what PC Charon is running on ?
The customer buys VMS support directly from HP. I don't know what
customers say to buy it.
Most of the "big" systems (6000's, 7000's, multi-node clusters) are
on support, both hardware and software. The MicroVAX 3100's in broom
closets typically aren't. That's a cost/benefit decision that the
customer makes.
Larry Kilgallen
> On 2 Jul 2005 at 9:40, Tom Linden wrote:
>> Can you license VMS to run on CHARON-VAX or does it have to be a
>> transfer of an existing license? If so, can you do it, or does one
>> have to go to HP for the license?
>
> I have customers who buy licenses from HP for their "new" VAX. Most
> use a HP-authorized license reseller since getting the licenses
> directly HP appears to be impossible.
Tom might have a better time of it than your other customers
since Tom's company is an ISV and a member of DSPP.
Or not.
Beach Runner
Sharon VAX is STILL a PC. I typically see VAXes and Alphas up for
months or years. How about PCs? PCs are still subject to cyber
attacks. VMS protects our nation. Run on real VMS platforms.
I see Charon VAX a useful place for an engineer who can reboot, and
doesn't need reliability.
Stanley F. Quayle
> [...] since getting the licenses directly HP appears to be impossible.
>
> Tom might have a better time of it than your other customers
> since Tom's company is an ISV and a member of DSPP.
Okay, that's an exception. "Ordinary" customers can't buy
licenses...
Stanley F. Quayle
> Sharon VAX is STILL a PC. I typically see VAXes and Alphas up for
> months or years. How about PCs? PCs are still subject to cyber
> attacks. VMS protects our nation. Run on real VMS platforms.
>
> I see Charon VAX a useful place for an engineer who can reboot, and
> doesn't need reliability.
CHARON-VAX is not subject to "cyber attacks". Check out app note 29
from the CHARON-VAX web site (http://www.charon-vax.com).
CHARON-VAX is a "real" VMS platform -- it passes all the VAX
verification tests.
My experience is that Windows (*gulp*) can be stable if it's only
running one application with all unnecessary services disabled.
There's an app note on that, too. I full expect multi-year uptimes
if using server-class hardware.
[Yes, I am a CHARON-VAX reseller, and proud of it.]
Beach Runner
How many Charon VAXes have been up for rears at a time?
Incidently, thanks for proving VMS can run on a simple platform.
Tom Linden
<squ...@insight.rr.com> wrote:
> On 2 Jul 2005 at 9:40, Tom Linden wrote:
>> Can you license VMS to run on CHARON-VAX or does it have to be a
>> transfer of an existing license? If so, can you do it, or does one
>> have to go to HP for the license?
>
> I have customers who buy licenses from HP for their "new" VAX. Most
> use a HP-authorized license reseller since getting the licenses
> directly HP appears to be impossible.
How much does it cost them? It seems if you can get an old VAX the
transfer
fee is $1500.
Tom Linden
> Sharon VAX is STILL a PC. I typically see VAXes and Alphas up for
> months or years. How about PCs? PCs are still subject to cyber
> attacks. VMS protects our nation. Run on real VMS platforms.
> I see Charon VAX a useful place for an engineer who can reboot, and
> doesn't need reliability.
I think you are somewhat mistaken. Reliability is significantly improved,
I use a W2k Dell server as my pop client and for all my business needs, and
it never needs rebooting, aside from power outages, it has been up as long
as my VMS cluster. As for hacking, this issue has come up before and is
a non-issue. I have an emulator running under Linux on a PC with two nic
cards,
one for Linux and one for VMS . So you could put the Linux behind a
firewall
and the other not, for example. Which is kind of cute, you could ssh or
telnet
from one to the other. I ran a collection of PL/I benchmarks on the
650MHz P3
and it ran about the same as 4000/90
Main, Kerry
Tom,
It does not matter if you eliminate unnecessary services etc - when
dealing with Windows and/or Linux as a base OS that is to be installed
on the main network, you still need to apply the vendor recommended
monthly security patches.
And the big issue is not in applying the patches and/or potential reboot
time (which if you have hundereds of servers is significant), but rather
the time to QA/Test these monthly security patches before they are
released into production.
As an example, Red Hat released 28 Linux *security* patches in June this
year alone. Approx 140+ since Jan of this year.
Reference:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/enterprise-watch-list/ (Red Hat Security
patches)
https://www.redhat.com/archives/enterprise-watch-list/2005-June/thread.h
tml (June 28 patches)
Windows has the same issue.
Regards
Kerry Main
Senior Consultant
HP Services Canada
Voice: 613-592-4660
Fax: 613-591-4477
kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom
(remove the DOT's and AT)
OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.
Tom Linden
Maybe, but recognize that you need only a very minmal version of either OS
to boot
VMS, i.e., you can turn off almost all services, most of which are
responsible for
the various exploits that are reported on. Think of such a reduced OS as
a (large)
bootstrap loader.
Main, Kerry
Yep .. Course, even with this approach, you still have to review the
monthly security patches to determine if one of the monthly security
patches applies to the kernel or ISV software (virus, backup etc) or
device level drivers specific to that system that are not services.
Tom Linden
True, but this is no different than reviewing announced VMS patches to
determine their applicability to your situation. I haven't tried it but
very likely I could boot my emulator from Linux booted to single user
(don't remember if this requires mounting /usr or not). I can certainly
boot without a nic connected to the internet. I can't see why such a
system
would be less secure than a real VAX.
Main, Kerry
Mmm.. OpenVMS does not have 10+ *security* related patches per month
like Windows or Linux (28 this past June alone). In addition, most VAX
systems today likely have connections to the local intranet.
Using your Linux analogy, I would assume that you have already gone
through all of these Red Hat published security patches to determine
which ones are applicable to your environment.
I am not saying there is no place for emulator type technologies. There
certainly is e.g. no source code, vendor gone away etc. However, my
preference wrt to best practices will always be from highest priority to
lowest):
1. Recompile using native code.
2. Emulate on similar platform (e.g. VAX emulator on OpenVMS Alpha) if
option 1 is not feasible.
3. Emulate on dissimilar platform (e.g. Linux/Windows) if options 1 and
2 are not feasible.
John Smith
I seem to recall that a VAXstation 4000/60 was about the same speed range as
a 33Mhz 386
John Smith
Verry cool Kerry.
HP Services has got to have a pretty good idea for all its customers who use
Window or Linux just what the 'administrative' burden is per 100 PC's or
servers in dealing with the patch-of-ther day/hour club is and what that
cost is in dollars and manpower wasted.
Q. When is HP going to advertise VMS's robustness in this regard?
A. There aren't enough COTS applications left on VMS for the average
prospect to consider using VMS in the first place. Don't you find it ironic
that HP keeps saying it's the applications that sell VMS yet they do no
advertising to help convince ISV's that building apps for the VMS market is
a good use of the ISV's money? So the answer is why bother - for both the
ISV and HP.
David Froble
>
> Sharon VAX is STILL a PC. I typically see VAXes and Alphas up for
> months or years. How about PCs? PCs are still subject to cyber
> attacks. VMS protects our nation. Run on real VMS platforms.
I'm sure the customers would, if they could. If it's a VAX that's needed, no
Alpha or itanic, then what's their choice? Their original vendor dropped the
platform they need. That created the vacuum that the SRI people filled.
If you're going to say "upgrade to Alpha or itanic" (well, you wouldn't say
'itanic'), what part of "it's a VAX that's needed" isn't understood?
> I see Charon VAX a useful place for an engineer who can reboot, and
> doesn't need reliability.
Something is better than nothing, which is where DEC left some folks.
David Froble
> Tom Linden wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 19:25:20 GMT, Beach Runner <b...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Sharon VAX is STILL a PC. I typically see VAXes and Alphas up for
>>>months or years. How about PCs? PCs are still subject to cyber
>>>attacks. VMS protects our nation. Run on real VMS platforms.
>>> I see Charon VAX a useful place for an engineer who can reboot, and
>>>doesn't need reliability.
>>
>>I think you are somewhat mistaken. Reliability is significantly
>>improved, I use a W2k Dell server as my pop client and for all my
>>business needs, and it never needs rebooting, aside from power
>>outages, it has been up as long as my VMS cluster. As for hacking,
>>this issue has come up before and is
>>a non-issue. I have an emulator running under Linux on a PC with two
>>nic cards,
>>one for Linux and one for VMS . So you could put the Linux behind a
>>firewall
>>and the other not, for example. Which is kind of cute, you could ssh
>>or telnet
>> from one to the other. I ran a collection of PL/I benchmarks on the
>>650MHz P3
>>and it ran about the same as 4000/90
>
>
>
> I seem to recall that a VAXstation 4000/60 was about the same speed range as
> a 33Mhz 386
Depends what you're running. If it's VMS, the VAXstation is much faster.
David Froble
> It does not matter if you eliminate unnecessary services etc - when
> dealing with Windows and/or Linux as a base OS that is to be installed
> on the main network, you still need to apply the vendor recommended
> monthly security patches.
Why?
How are windoz systems attacked? Usually via the network interface? What if
you're running the system without a network interface for the windoz OS?
Note, it's my very limited understanding that the emulator runs a seperate
network interface, which windoz doesn't see. Could be wrong.
Main, Kerry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Smith [mailto:a...@nonymous.com]
> Sent: July 3, 2005 5:55 PM
> To: Info...@Mvb.Saic.Com
> Subject: Re: US military and confidentiality
>
> Main, Kerry wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Tom Linden [mailto:t...@kednos.com]
> >> Sent: July 3, 2005 9:32 AM
> >> To: Info...@Mvb.Saic.Com
> >> Subject: Re: US military and confidentiality
> >>
> >
> > It does not matter if you eliminate unnecessary services etc - when
> > dealing with Windows and/or Linux as a base OS that is to
> be installed
> > on the main network, you still need to apply the vendor recommended
> > monthly security patches.
> >
John,
Again, I am not saying external marketing for OpenVMS (or HP-UX, NSK)
could not be improved. However, with regards to getting ISV's moving to
OpenVMS Itanium, behind the scenes folks at HP have doing very well
considering the official Itanium release for OpenVMS was only just
officially released in Jan and many ISV's like to wait for the official
release before starting their porting/testing.
While marketing is certainly one way of getting ISV's on board, another
approach is to actually talk and work with ISV's and HP has certainly
been doing that. The attendees can attest to how well the ISV partner
night was at the recent boot camp.
As an example, check out the ISV list at:
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/solutions/matrix/i64partner_A.html
Certainly one advantage of Itanium for ISV's is that with a single
Integrity server / small SAN, they can support their software on HP-UX,
Linux and Windows as well as OpenVMS. They only need to change the
console boot pointer to boot a different OS. And with the DSPP ISV
program (free to join) and workshops they can get a nice Itanium server
for all 4 OS's for $2k (not including sw of course).
Main, Kerry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Smith [mailto:a...@nonymous.com]
> Sent: July 3, 2005 5:55 PM
> To: Info...@Mvb.Saic.Com
> Subject: Re: US military and confidentiality
>
[Snip ...]
>
> Q. When is HP going to advertise VMS's robustness in this regard?
>
> A. There aren't enough COTS applications left on VMS for the average
> prospect to consider using VMS in the first place. Don't you
> find it ironic
> that HP keeps saying it's the applications that sell VMS yet
> they do no
> advertising to help convince ISV's that building apps for the
> VMS market is
> a good use of the ISV's money? So the answer is why bother -
> for both the
> ISV and HP.
>
>
John,
Re: HP working with ISV's and Customers on moving to OpenVMS Itanium -
not sure if this was previously reported on the newsgroup, but just in
case: (I believe Wayne posts occasionally here on c.o.v.)
Just happened to be on the DSPP pages and noticed this url:
http://h21007.www2.hp.com/dspp/bus/bus_BusDetailPage_IDX/1,1252,7721,00.
html
"Winning with DSPP: First OpenVMS VAX to OpenVMS on Integrity Server
Port Completed at a Workshop Event"
"The HP & Intel(r) Developer Workshop, held April 26-28 in Tampa
Florida, was the site of the first OpenVMS VAX to OpenVMS I64 on
Intel(r) Itanium(r) port to be completed at a Developer Workshop event.
Wayne Seifert, System Developer for Lieberman Technologies of Evansville
Indiana, completed the port within two days during the event. The event
was available to companies in the HP DSPP program as a member-only
benefit.
Mr. Seifert attended the workshop with the goal of porting and testing
two of the company's applications as well as testing an array of general
utilities and subroutines. "The workshop was superb. I was very pleased
with how smooth the porting process was and with the level of support
provided at the workshop". After completing the ports, Mr. Seifert
tested the HP Integrity server by running several standard reports. Two
reports, each of which had typically taken 45 minutes to an hour to
complete, ran in less than one minute on the HP Integrity server.
Lieberman Technologies provides consulting, design and development
services to small and medium businesses. In addition to custom software
development, the company offers turnkey applications for health center
billing systems, scheduling packages and retail applications. Lieberman
Technologies recently migrated all of their internal applications to
Itanium, and is in the process of transitioning all of their clients to
HP Itanium Integrity servers. More information about Lieberman
Technologies at http://LTnow.com"
[snip ..]
Btw, they have nice web page for moving from VAX/Alpha to Integrity -
click on link on their home page.
JF Mezei
> could not be improved. However, with regards to getting ISV's moving to
> OpenVMS Itanium, behind the scenes folks at HP have doing very well
> considering the official Itanium release for OpenVMS was only just
> officially released in Jan and many ISV's like to wait for the official
> release before starting their porting/testing.
There is a huge difference between convicing existing VMS ISVs to spend the
money to port to that IA64 thing, and attracting NEW applications and new ISVs
to VMS.
If you start off with 0 applications on VMS-IA64, you can easily generate
fantrastic growth statistics because you're dealing only with IA64 things.
Howver, since the installed base is Alpha and VAX, it is also important to
attract ISVs to Alpha and VAX. More so than some tiny IA64 marketplace.
Now, if Motif/X11 were on the roadmap, perhaps you could get Corel to port
wordperfect to VMS. Perhaps you could get Open Office fully ported and
supported. But none of the GUI applications will risk any porting effort
since VMS management steadfastedly omit Motif/X11 from the roadmaps.
> While marketing is certainly one way of getting ISV's on board, another
> approach is to actually talk and work with ISV's and HP has certainly
> been doing that.
Have they gone to SWIFT and begged SWIFT to reconsider VMS as a target
platform for their fund transfer software ? Have they apoligised for the deeds
of Palmer and Curly ?
Has HP gone to HP and asked them to reconsider VMS as a platform ? Or are they
happy that HP-UX runs SAP ?
> Certainly one advantage of Itanium for ISV's is that with a single
> Integrity server / small SAN, they can support their software on HP-UX,
> Linux and Windows as well as OpenVMS.
Not when HP-UX customers are still on PaRisc and when Linux customers are on
8086s and most VMS customers on Alpha/VAX.
Tom Linden
Don't know how you can compare them. What I did was to run a collection
of benchmarks, which we have for PL/I which excercise a number of things
including ISAM and the like. And remember these are run under a software
running under Linux, so ther is a fair amount of overhead.
John Smith
I ttruly appreciate each an every item you post, including the post below.
One might say that progress is measured in steps, one ISV at a time. Yet HP
has known that VMS was to be launched on Itanic for how many *years* and
this is all we have to show for it ISV-wise?
There should have been a flood of ISV's announce who have committed to, who
are actively, or who have completed their ports by now, not the 50-100 that
we have.
The DSPP $2k program is just as much Intel/HP-UX/Linux as it is VMS, so
viewed a bit differently, out of each dollar in promoting this program only
about $0.25 goes towards VMS. How about a program that is 100 cents on the
dollar VMS-centric? I'd be happy with DSPP as it is right now + 75 cents per
dollar towards VMS-dedicated advertising by HP.
--
S
> The DSPP $2k program is just as much Intel/HP-UX/Linux as it is VMS, so
> viewed a bit differently, out of each dollar in promoting this program only
> about $0.25 goes towards VMS. How about a program that is 100 cents on the
> dollar VMS-centric? I'd be happy with DSPP as it is right now + 75 cents per
> dollar towards VMS-dedicated advertising by HP.
A major surprise for me was to see the latest DSPP newsletter starting
with a VMS story.
On the other hand, VMS doesn't have its own section in the newsletter, so...
S
Stanley F. Quayle
> How are windoz systems attacked? Usually via the network interface?
> What if you're running the system without a network interface for the
> windoz OS?
>
> Note, it's my very limited understanding that the emulator runs a
> seperate network interface, which windoz doesn't see. Could be wrong.
Most SIMH installations use pcap to set the port into promiscuous
mode. Incoming packets are sorted by the host OS before going to
either the host stack(s) or the emulator. This allows the host to be
attacked.
In CHARON-VAX, a separate network interface is required. A NDIS
driver is used to send all incoming packets to the emulated VAX.
This requires that no other protocols are running on the card.
Some customers elect to connect the "Windows-side" interface to their
network for remote management. Some don't.
As for the frequent Windows patches, they're not required unless you
expose the host to a network.
Main, Kerry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: S [mailto:soterroaty...@ccerelrim02.cce.hp.com]
> Sent: July 4, 2005 9:40 AM
> To: Info...@Mvb.Saic.Com
> Subject: Re: US military and confidentiality
>
Actually, it does further down in the newsletter.
:-)
Tom Linden
<squ...@insight.rr.com> wrote:
> On 3 Jul 2005 at 18:38, David Froble wrote:
>> How are windoz systems attacked? Usually via the network interface?
>> What if you're running the system without a network interface for the
>> windoz OS?
>>
>> Note, it's my very limited understanding that the emulator runs a
>> seperate network interface, which windoz doesn't see. Could be wrong.
>
> Most SIMH installations use pcap to set the port into promiscuous
> mode. Incoming packets are sorted by the host OS before going to
> either the host stack(s) or the emulator. This allows the host to be
> attacked.
That should clearly be avoided.
Doc.
<snip>
>> Most SIMH installations use pcap to set the port into promiscuous
>> mode. Incoming packets are sorted by the host OS before going to
>> either the host stack(s) or the emulator. This allows the host to be
>> attacked.
>
> That should clearly be avoided.
I suppose it depends on what you're doing. If you're a Hobbyist who is
just getting started with VMS, you're going to want to do that as you'll
also want to use the underlying OS. At Deathrow we've seen quite a few
people get curious from non-privved access, move on to SIM-H to play with
elevated privileges, then buy second hand hardware to experience the real
thing.
Obviously, as Charon is a solution for use in a commercial setting,
you've a little more budget to do things properly.
Doc.
--
OpenVMS: Eight out of ten hackers prefer *other* operating systems.
http://www.openvms-rocks.com Deathrow Public-Access OpenVMS Cluster.
Tom Linden
> %NEWS-I-NEWMSG, Tom Linden wrote in news:opstecbnvzzgicya@hyrrokkin
>
> <snip>
>
>>> Most SIMH installations use pcap to set the port into promiscuous
>>> mode. Incoming packets are sorted by the host OS before going to
>>> either the host stack(s) or the emulator. This allows the host to be
>>> attacked.
>>
>> That should clearly be avoided.
>
> I suppose it depends on what you're doing. If you're a Hobbyist who is
> just getting started with VMS, you're going to want to do that as you'll
> also want to use the underlying OS. At Deathrow we've seen quite a few
> people get curious from non-privved access, move on to SIM-H to play with
> elevated privileges, then buy second hand hardware to experience the real
> thing.
Hobbyists are one thing, but of course, they don't directly generate any
revenue. I haven't used SIMH, but i got the impression from the way Stan
worded his response that you didn't have to run the nic in promiscuous
mode.
The emulator I am using under Linux provides me with an environment no less
secure than a real VAX.
>
Doc.
> On 04 Jul 2005 16:51:47 GMT, Doc. <d...@openvms-rocks.com> wrote:
>
>> %NEWS-I-NEWMSG, Tom Linden wrote in news:opstecbnvzzgicya@hyrrokkin
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> Most SIMH installations use pcap to set the port into promiscuous
>>>> mode. Incoming packets are sorted by the host OS before going to
>>>> either the host stack(s) or the emulator. This allows the host to
>>>> be attacked.
>>>
>>> That should clearly be avoided.
>>
>> I suppose it depends on what you're doing. If you're a Hobbyist who
>> is just getting started with VMS, you're going to want to do that as
>> you'll also want to use the underlying OS. At Deathrow we've seen
>> quite a few people get curious from non-privved access, move on to
>> SIM-H to play with elevated privileges, then buy second hand hardware
>> to experience the real thing.
>
> Hobbyists are one thing, but of course, they don't directly generate
> any revenue. I haven't used SIMH, but i got the impression from the
> way Stan worded his response that you didn't have to run the nic in
> promiscuous mode.
I read Stan's response similarly, I'm sure he's looked closely at sim-h
as it is what the open source community can offer in terms of
"competition".
Otherwise, I'm not in a position to encourage my employer to make more
sales where the OS is OpenVMS, but I do what I can encouraging people to
play with the OS and see that it has some value. I very much doubt that
Deathrow, and the people there who like VMS, have managed to gain a
hundred converts, but even if it is only 20 or 30, it's likely to be 20
to 30 more shops where at least one person knows VMS is still being
actively developed.
That situation probably generates a bit of revenue here and there for
Dave Turner - who seems to think our efforts are worthwhile enough to
donate a DS10L - but I can't see us getting any multi-million dollar
contracts for HP because some random person with a bit of curiosity and
spare time finds our site and discovers OpenVMS.
So, yes, Hobbyists don't generate revenue (for HP), but we need more
people who think VMS is good stuff - even if they don't run it as
securely as possible.
Stanley F. Quayle
> However, my preference wrt to best practices will always be from
> highest priority to lowest):
>
> option 1 is not feasible.
Now that the VAX 6660 emulator on Alpha has been announced, you now
have a wider range of possibilities.
I do have customers who won't accept a Windows solution. For some,
it's a technical reason. For others, it's an emotional reason.
Either way, SRI and its resellers strive to please. :-)
Stanley F. Quayle
> It's still sitting on top of a dangerous os.
Most of my customers want a Windows solution. It's the old saying,
"better the devil you know that the devil you don't". For them, it's
an emotional decision, not a technical one.
> How many Charon VAXes have been up for rears at a time?
Since CHARON-VAX has only been around for a few years, we're going to
have to wait for that one.
> Incidently, thanks for proving VMS can run on a simple platform.
Thanks. I run it on my 1 GHz Pentium III laptop frequently. I've
done software development on a plane en-route to a customer site.
And I do demos this way all the time. I have one customer who bought
a copy specifically to have a travelling VMS system to take on field
service calls around the world.
Beach Runner
Stanley F. Quayle wrote:
> On 3 Jul 2005 at 7:09, Beach Runner wrote:
>
>>It's still sitting on top of a dangerous os.
>
>
> Most of my customers want a Windows solution. It's the old saying,
> "better the devil you know that the devil you don't". For them, it's
> an emotional decision, not a technical one.
>
>
>>How many Charon VAXes have been up for rears at a time?
>
>
> Since CHARON-VAX has only been around for a few years, we're going to
> have to wait for that one.
>
>
>>Incidently, thanks for proving VMS can run on a simple platform.
>
>
> Thanks. I run it on my 1 GHz Pentium III laptop frequently. I've
> done software development on a plane en-route to a customer site.
> And I do demos this way all the time. I have one customer who bought
> a copy specifically to have a travelling VMS system to take on field
> service calls around the world.
> --Stan Quayle
> Quayle Consulting Inc.
>
It proved it could have been done all along.