From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V8 #114 Reply-To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Sender: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Errors-To: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Precedence: bulk skunk-works-digest Wednesday, November 24 1999 Volume 08 : Number 114 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** Re: Big Brother/Sister Watching You Re: Big Brother/Sister Watching You Re: Big Brother/Sister Watching You RE: Big Brother/Sister Watching You Re: Big Brother/Sister Watching You Re: Big Brother/Sister Watching You RE: Big Brother/Sister Watching You RE: Big Brother/Sister Watching You RE: Big Brother/Sister Watching You RE: Big Brother/Sister Watching You (fwd) Sorry for the form of this X-44A "Manta" Re: X-44A "Manta" Re: X-44A "Manta" Re: X-44A "Manta" Re: X-44A "Manta" *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 00:11:57 -0700 From: JAZ Subject: Re: Big Brother/Sister Watching You >>From Defense Systems Daily: >> >>Ya gotta wonder if they pick up on some of our discussions don't >>ya think? >> >>Andy Morris >> > >They certianly do, both officially and non-officially. It doesn't >require much of anything to subscribe to the list, it's archived on >the web & through ftp, and we do tend to discuss things that would >interest AFOSI, etc. They don't need a system like Echelon to keep >tabs on us skunkers :) > >As a side note, I find the recent interest in the "Echelon" >capability interesting, as Bamford's "Puzzle Palace", the definitve >work on the NSA, chronicled what we now know as "Echelon" more than >10 years ago. The only really new information I've seen in the recent >press articles and investigations has been Internet related, and even >that is mostly irrelevant. So they can tap the many terabytes going >through MAE-East and -West every day- even with a pipelined >supercomputer it would take them years to analyze it! I don't think so, a specially designed machine that only listens to key words could pick out messages to look at in more detail. High speed networks have to be able to know they are sending accurate data and there is no reason you can't analyze it on the fly. James Z. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 03:14:17 -0500 (EST) From: Sam Kaltsidis Subject: Re: Big Brother/Sister Watching You > >>From Defense Systems Daily: > >> > >>Ya gotta wonder if they pick up on some of our discussions don't > >>ya think? > >> > >>Andy Morris > >> > > > >They certianly do, both officially and non-officially. It doesn't > >require much of anything to subscribe to the list, it's archived on > >the web & through ftp, and we do tend to discuss things that would > >interest AFOSI, etc. They don't need a system like Echelon to keep > >tabs on us skunkers :) > > > >As a side note, I find the recent interest in the "Echelon" > >capability interesting, as Bamford's "Puzzle Palace", the definitve > >work on the NSA, chronicled what we now know as "Echelon" more than > >10 years ago. The only really new information I've seen in the recent > >press articles and investigations has been Internet related, and even > >that is mostly irrelevant. So they can tap the many terabytes going > >through MAE-East and -West every day- even with a pipelined > >supercomputer it would take them years to analyze it! > > I don't think so, a specially designed machine that only listens to key > words could pick out messages to look at in more detail. High speed > networks have to be able to know they are sending accurate data and there > is no reason you can't analyze it on the fly. > > James Z. > > Smart terrorists use encryption with 768bit keys if not larger. Good luck decrypting them... We should all be very greatful most terrorists seem to be quite dumb. Sam ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 07:43:16 -0600 From: "Allen Thomson" Subject: Re: Big Brother/Sister Watching You > As a side note, I find the recent interest in the "Echelon" > capability interesting, as Bamford's "Puzzle Palace", the definitve > work on the NSA, Bamford had a piece on the current Echelon buzz in the Washington Post a few days ago -- it mentioned that he's working on a successor to "Puzzle Palace." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 09:17:47 +1030 From: Dennis Lapcewich Subject: RE: Big Brother/Sister Watching You Folks, The Channel Nine TV network in Oz did an extensive piece on ECHELON on their Sunday program ( see http://sunday.ninemsn.com.au/ ) back on 23 May 1999, and even then, it was based on an earlier story (that I can't locate). For cover story info, go to http://sunday.ninemsn.com.au/sun_cover2.asp?id=818 For the cover story backgrounder, go to http://sunday.ninemsn.com.au/sun_bg2.asp?id=817 If neither of the above seem to work properly, go to the main link and search under ECHELON. This subject is quite timely as Wired posted a news email today: "ACLU to Spy on Echelon (Politics 3:00 a.m.) http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,32586,00.html?tw=wn19991117 "Does the surveillance system code-named Echelon exist? A major citizen's watchdog group thinks it does, and plans to monitor its activities. By Chris Oakes." However, if you visit the Oz Sunday program links you will find no speculation whether ECHELON exists according to the opening words, "In this Sunday investigation, Australia's spy-chiefs acknowledge for the first time this country's role in an international spying alliance that is monitoring the overseas phone, fax and email messages of every Australian - indeed, everyone on the planet." I remember this story quite well. It even included maps, videos, etc., of every "known" ECHELON base in Australia and New Zealand, and supports my personal long-time theory about Oz that the best way to hide something here is out in the open. People here tend to look under rocks but ignore the 50-foot golf ball domes in the next valley -- something about reverse psychology ... FYI - The Channel Nine network here broadcasts the Australian version of the USA's 60 Minutes on Sunday evenings, even down to the stopwatch and program format (as well as lifting complete stories from the USA program). IMHO, it used to be quite good at investigative journalism but in recent years seems to center more on puff pieces. In the mean time, the Nine Network's Sunday program (broadcast 9a-11a) centers on weekly news analysis with a bit of quality arts news. The gem of the program is that they devote at least 30 air minutes (broken into two segements) on one investigative story and/or indepth interview and they pull no punches. Such as this example, "Our personal [Sunday Program] favorite was about how Marconi Avionics failed to deliver on the Foxhunter radar for the frontline NATO Tornado air defence fighter. As a result Tornado fighters had to take off with lumps of concrete ballast in their nose to balance the aircraft for the missing radar for about half a decade until the problem was fixed!!! Or maybe it was the story of the Marconi Tigerfish wire-guided torpedo for the British Navy. It turned out that Tigerfish was so unreliable that during the Falklands/Malvinas War when the Commander of HMS Conqueror was ordered to sink the Belgrano, he used torpedos made in the Second World War in preference to Tigerfish!" Ok, Ok, it must be Spring here with my prolific two postings the past two days. I'll return to the shadows ... Dennis ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 18:56:11 -0800 From: Dan Zinngrabe Subject: Re: Big Brother/Sister Watching You >>>From Defense Systems Daily: >>> >>>Ya gotta wonder if they pick up on some of our discussions don't >>>ya think? >>> >>>Andy Morris >>> >> >>They certianly do, both officially and non-officially. It doesn't >>require much of anything to subscribe to the list, it's archived on >>the web & through ftp, and we do tend to discuss things that would >>interest AFOSI, etc. They don't need a system like Echelon to keep >>tabs on us skunkers :) >> >>As a side note, I find the recent interest in the "Echelon" >>capability interesting, as Bamford's "Puzzle Palace", the definitve >>work on the NSA, chronicled what we now know as "Echelon" more than >>10 years ago. The only really new information I've seen in the recent >>press articles and investigations has been Internet related, and even >>that is mostly irrelevant. So they can tap the many terabytes going >>through MAE-East and -West every day- even with a pipelined >>supercomputer it would take them years to analyze it! > >I don't think so, a specially designed machine that only listens to key >words could pick out messages to look at in more detail. High speed >networks have to be able to know they are sending accurate data and there >is no reason you can't analyze it on the fly. > >James Z. Sure there is. You'd have to take every packet, assemble it, etc. etc. before you could even start looking for a key word- and even then, how do you know what packets to look at? All of them? The problems at work here are not all that dissimilar from those faced by the Lacrosse and Rhyolite/Aquacade/etc. programs. They generate far too much data to analyze offline, much less in real time. The bandwidth for MAE-West alone is several orders of magnitude greater than Lacrosse, and would require more computing power to analyze in real time than NSA, NRO, and CIA could possibly have comibined. And networks don't really know that they're sending "accurate data"- they just send the data, and make sure it gets where it's supposed to go. That's both an advantage and disadvantage to packet-based communication. Dan _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ The software you were born with helps you follow thousands of different threads on the Internet, whip up gourmet feasts using only ingredients from the 24-hour store, and use words like "paradigm" and "orthogonal" in casual conversation. It deserves the operating system designed to work with it: the MacOS. _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 20:06:56 -0800 From: Dan Zinngrabe Subject: Re: Big Brother/Sister Watching You >> >>From Defense Systems Daily: >> >> >> >>Ya gotta wonder if they pick up on some of our discussions don't >> >>ya think? >> >> >> >>Andy Morris >> >> >> > >> >They certianly do, both officially and non-officially. It doesn't >> >require much of anything to subscribe to the list, it's archived on >> >the web & through ftp, and we do tend to discuss things that would >> >interest AFOSI, etc. They don't need a system like Echelon to keep >> >tabs on us skunkers :) >> > >> >As a side note, I find the recent interest in the "Echelon" >> >capability interesting, as Bamford's "Puzzle Palace", the definitve >> >work on the NSA, chronicled what we now know as "Echelon" more than >> >10 years ago. The only really new information I've seen in the recent >> >press articles and investigations has been Internet related, and even >> >that is mostly irrelevant. So they can tap the many terabytes going >> >through MAE-East and -West every day- even with a pipelined >> >supercomputer it would take them years to analyze it! >> >> I don't think so, a specially designed machine that only listens to key >> words could pick out messages to look at in more detail. High speed >> networks have to be able to know they are sending accurate data and there >> is no reason you can't analyze it on the fly. >> >> James Z. >> >> > >Smart terrorists use encryption with 768bit keys if not larger. >Good luck decrypting them... > >We should all be very greatful most terrorists seem to be quite dumb. > >Sam hehe... one of my hats at my day job is Mr. Crypto :) Fortunately for us, those "smart terrorists" largely use commercial crypto software rather than develop their own. Commercial crypto has a number of disadvantages for the discerning terrorist: 1. Commercial crypto programs use known algorithms that are well documented, and many of which are very much behind the times. DES and RSA are shining examples- recently researchers in Israel cracked 512 bit RSA in *microseconds*, using more or less conventional attacks- NSA has more resources, both in funds and talent to develop pipelined hardware for breaking common crypto systems. While I doubt that NSA is cracking 512 RSA in microseconds, they certainly do it within hours, and have industrialized the process. I'm sure John Pike can tell you when NSA has a new cracking tactic under test, and when they have put a new attack into opertion- by the installation osf new ventillation on their buildings in Maryland and Virginia. 2. Many commercial cryptosystems are "crippled" by the governments in which they were developed. The security of most major internet transaction software is widely know to have been compromised at the request of the National Security Agency, and other countries do the same thing. Any terrorist who trusts commercial crypto is a fool. 3. With any cryptosystem, the biggest flaw is always the user. The more humans involved in the process, the more easily it can be cracked by means other than brute force computation- people still use birthdays as passwords, re-send identical messages, etc. Commercial softwre tends to amke crypto "point and click", which can very easily lull the user into bad habits, and allow the user to put mispalced trust in the crypto system. So me, I'm not all that worried about terrorists with crypto, and I'm sure not worried about NSA reading my mail :) Dan _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ The software you were born with helps you write code into the wee small hours, find the bugs in your competitors' products, and create fake demos for the first six months of a project. It deserves the operating system designed to work with it: the MacOS. _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 20:18:09 -0800 From: Dan Zinngrabe Subject: RE: Big Brother/Sister Watching You The ACLU interest seems pretty silly to me. Echelon (or whatever this week's codename is) is an intelligence system, and the charters of NSA and CIA prohibit them from directly spying on Americans. Sure, it's a bit more complicated than that, but that's the bottom line. Any system as large and expensive as Echelon requires extensive congressional oversight- and that makes sure that NSA plays by the rules. I'd think that the ACLU would only be interested if NSA started passing along info on the Mafia or whatever to FBI, and FBI acted on it- which NSA would not allow FBI to do, since the use of Echelon material in a court would expose the sources and methods used to collect that data, and thus put the rather large investment in Echelon at risk. At any rate, I doubt much of interest to FBI would ever pass through Echelon, since Echelon is pretty much monitoring of- Undersea cables (AT&T, GTE, ITT, etc) Satellites (commercial and military) Microwave, but only outisde of CONUS (ie- cellular towers) Very limited Internet monitoring (MAE-West, MAE-East, etc. - from what I understand this is primarily an investigative tool for post-attack anaylsis -- say, to see what Sierra Grande did when they attacked US. DoD systems) So very little of interest to the FBI would actually move through that network. And since NSA *is* a military intelligence agency, all of those wonderful rules about how little the military can work with law enforcement apply here. All of those rules drawn up just for situations like this :) Dan _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ The software you were born with helps you follow thousands of different threads on the Internet, whip up gourmet feasts using only ingredients from the 24-hour store, and use words like "paradigm" and "orthogonal" in casual conversation. It deserves the operating system designed to work with it: the MacOS. _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 10:39:06 -0500 (EST) From: Sam Kaltsidis Subject: RE: Big Brother/Sister Watching You > > The ACLU interest seems pretty silly to me. Echelon (or whatever this > week's codename is) is an intelligence system, and the charters of > NSA and CIA prohibit them from directly spying on Americans. Sure, > it's a bit more complicated than that, but that's the bottom line. > Any system as large and expensive as Echelon requires extensive > congressional oversight- and that makes sure that NSA plays by the > rules. I'd think that the ACLU would only be interested if NSA > started passing along info on the Mafia or whatever to FBI, and FBI > acted on it- which NSA would not allow FBI to do, since the use of > Echelon material in a court would expose the sources and methods > used to collect that data, and thus put the rather large investment > in Echelon at risk. > > At any rate, I doubt much of interest to FBI would ever pass through > Echelon, since Echelon is pretty much monitoring of- > Undersea cables (AT&T, GTE, ITT, etc) > Satellites (commercial and military) > Microwave, but only outisde of CONUS (ie- cellular towers) > Very limited Internet monitoring (MAE-West, MAE-East, etc. - from > what I understand this is primarily an investigative tool for > post-attack anaylsis -- say, to see what Sierra Grande did when they > attacked US. DoD systems) > > So very little of interest to the FBI would actually move through > that network. And since NSA *is* a military intelligence agency, all > of those wonderful rules about how little the military can work with > law enforcement apply here. All of those rules drawn up just for > situations like this :) > Dan > > > _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ > The software you were born with helps > you follow thousands of different > threads on the Internet, whip up gourmet > feasts using only ingredients from > the 24-hour store, and use words > like "paradigm" and "orthogonal" > in casual conversation. It deserves > the operating system designed to work > with it: the MacOS. > _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ > Many government and private computer systems have legal statements similar to the one below: <\/etc/motd> This system is for the use of authorized users only. Individuals using this computer system without authority, or in excess of their authority, are subject to having all of their activities on this system monitored and recorded by system personnel. In the course of monitoring individuals improperly using this system, or in the course of system maintenance, the activities of authorized users may also be monitored. Anyone using this system expressly consents to such monitoring and is advised that if such monitoring reveals possible evidence of criminal activity, system personnel may provide the evidence of such monitoring to law enforcement officials. I am not a legal expert, however a statement such as the one above pretty much allows the system operators to do whatever they want. This particular statement applies to computer systems but with minor modifications could be used to apply to networks as well -- actually it may already apply to networks, though that may be stretching it. Network connectivity providers may have the right to monitor network traffic in order to provide security and better services to their customers, and I would dare speculate that contracts between users and providers may have a monitoring clause built right in***. In addition to this some traffic moves over government networks or is routed through government systems which would give them the right to monitor that traffic. Since users expressly consent to such monitoring, I do not see any legal problems. *** I'll do some research and see if I can come up with an example. Personally, I am more worried about unscrupulous sys-admins and companies that have very low, or non-existent, ethical standards than I am about the government. I myself am a sys-admin and as a result of this discussion have decided to strength the legal language on my systems. Sam ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Nov 99 05:53:58 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: RE: Big Brother/Sister Watching You On 11/18/99 7:39AM, in message <199911181539.KAA03165@aegis.mcs.kent.edu>, Sam Kaltsidis wrote: > > > > The ACLU interest seems pretty silly to me. Echelon (or whatever this > > week's codename is) is an intelligence system, and the charters of > > NSA and CIA prohibit them from directly spying on Americans. Sure, > > it's a bit more complicated than that, but that's the bottom line. > Without blabbing too much on this fascinating discussion, there's a key point to remember. One of the tenets attributed to its alleged operation is that we don't use it to spy on our citizens. We use it to spy on our allies' citizens that they aren't allowed to. We then share the information we got with them. They in turn, use the system to spy on our citizens and share the information with us. No one is spying on their own citizens, or so the story goes. Art ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 22:14:33 -0800 (PST) From: Wei-Jen Su Subject: RE: Big Brother/Sister Watching You (fwd) - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:45:07 -0800 (PST) From: Wei-Jen Su To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Subject: RE: Big Brother/Sister Watching You On Wed, 17 Nov 1999, Dan Zinngrabe wrote: > The ACLU interest seems pretty silly to me. Echelon (or whatever this > week's codename is) is an intelligence system, and the charters of > NSA and CIA prohibit them from directly spying on Americans. Sure, Oh well, they say Vulcans never lie but sometimes Spock does... He call it improvising... ;P May the Force be with you Wei-Jen Su E-mail: wsu@cco.caltech.edu - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I am the culmination of one man's dream, this is not ego or vanity, but when Dr. Soong created me, he added to the substance of the universe. If by your experiment I am destroyed, something unique, something wonderful will be lost. I can not permit that. I must protect his dream." Mr. Data (ST:TNG) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:42:55 -0600 From: "George R. Kasica" Subject: Sorry for the form of this Hello: Just a quick note that I may be very quiet on various lists and that server/list issues may take a bit longer to resolve for the next few days. Reason behind this is I just found out that my best friends daughter Lisa passed away this morning at Froedert hospital she was due to be listed on the National Liver Transplant list in a day or so, but it was not to be I guess. George George, MR. Tibbs & The Beast Kasica Waukesha, WI USA georgek@netwrx1.com http://www.netwrx1.com ICQ #12862186 Zz zZ |\ z _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'_' '---''(_/--' `-'\_) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 21:46:15 -0500 From: Gunman and Jacks Subject: X-44A "Manta" I just read a brief snippet about a new proposed X plane, that resembles the F-22, anounced at the H. Silver and Associats Fighter conference last month. Anyone have more info on it? I tried H. Silver's website, and a couple X-plane sites, but didn't find anything. Thanks - ------------------------------------------------ Gunman and Jacks PGP Key Available (see headers) - ------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 23:13:58 -0500 From: Jeff Clark Subject: Re: X-44A "Manta" On Tue, 23 Nov 1999 21:46:15 -0500 Gunman and Jacks writes: >I just read a brief snippet about a new proposed X plane, that >resembles >the F-22, anounced at the H. Silver and Associats Fighter conference >last >month. > >Anyone have more info on it? I tried H. Silver's website, and a >couple >X-plane sites, but didn't find anything. > >Thanks > >------------------------------------------------ >Gunman and Jacks >PGP Key Available (see headers) >------------------------------------------------ I have seen a picture titled 'manta.jpg', at my work, that is an obviously doctored in-flight picture of one of the F-22s with its vertical and horizontal tails missing. Maybe that's what it is? Jeff Clark ___________________________________________________________________ Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 07:21:52 EST From: JNiessen@aol.com Subject: Re: X-44A "Manta" Hi group, The X-44A is exactly as described...an F-22 fuselage without vertical tail surfaces. Additionally, it has a truncated delta wing. Most importantly, there are no control surfaces. All maneuvering is handled via thrust vectoring. Right now, the project still is proprietary (though not classified). I suspect that, if it becomes public domain, a lot of information will quickly become available. Nothing yet is settled on the design, however, so it may be a while before we see much. All the best, Jay Miller ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 12:48:52 -0000 From: "David" Subject: Re: X-44A "Manta" - ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeff Clark To: Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 1999 4:13 AM Subject: Re: X-44A "Manta" > On Tue, 23 Nov 1999 21:46:15 -0500 Gunman and Jacks > writes: > >I just read a brief snippet about a new proposed X plane, that > >resembles > >the F-22, anounced at the H. Silver and Associats Fighter conference > >last > >month. > > > >Anyone have more info on it? I tried H. Silver's website, and a couple > >X-plane sites, but didn't find anything. > I have seen a picture titled 'manta.jpg', at my work, that is an > obviously doctored in-flight picture of one of the F-22s with > its vertical and horizontal tails missing. Maybe that's what it > is? The X-44a Manta( Multi Axis NoTail Aircraft) is the most exciting X-plane for years. The decision to fund the programme hasn't been made yet, but fingers crossed. Agencies involved: NASA(DFRC) , AFRL - contractors LockMart - not the S-W and P&W. The notional baseline study uses an F-22 fuselage and engines, but with 3-D TV and NO conventional control surfaces. Aerodynamic control will be achieved using a combination of TV and sophisticated flight software. The F-15 ACTIVE programme ( very underrated and quite extraordinary programme) has flown without using its moveable control surfaces using its Intelligent Flight Control Programme and this will help with the X-44a . In going that step further and designing a no-tail- no control surface a/c from scratch, they'll be able to explore the application of other advanced ideas such as inflatable control surfaces as a safety back-up should the TV system encounter problems. Currently, they're evaluating concepts and deciding which could be implement in the short term and which might take longer to mature. The claimed benefits of dispensing with moveable control surfaces will make a/c lighter, less complex to build or maintain, and therefore cheaper. They would be stealthier and more agile. If funding is made available, the X-44a could be flying by 2007. D ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 09:03:31 -0500 From: "Philip R. Moyer" Subject: Re: X-44A "Manta" >The X-44A is exactly as described...an F-22 fuselage without vertical tail >surfaces. Additionally, it has a truncated delta wing. Most importantly, >there are no control surfaces. All maneuvering is handled via thrust >vectoring. Right now, the project still is proprietary (though not >classified). I suspect that, if it becomes public domain, a lot of >information will quickly become available. Nothing yet is settled on the >design, however, so it may be a while before we see much. Jay, What's the difference between the X-44A project and the F/A-18 HARV project out at DFRC? The HARV was essentially the same idea. Is this a research project to determine flight dynamics of the F-22 shape? Thanks for the note - if the answer is RTFM (or web site, or whatever) I'll understand. I'll go back to lurking now. Cheers, Phil PS - Hey, Mary, drop me a note; I seem to have misplaced your current e-mail address.... ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V8 #114 ********************************* To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe in the body of a message to "majordomo@netwrx1.com". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-skunk-works": subscribe local-skunk-works@your.domain.net To unsubscribe, send mail to the same address, with the command: unsubscribe in the body. Administrative requests, problems, and other non-list mail can be sent to georgek@netwrx1.com. A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "skunk-works-digest" in the commands above with "skunk-works". Back issues are available for viewing by a www interface located at: http://www.netwrx1.com/skunk-works/ If you have any questions or problems please contact me at: georgek@netwrx1.com Thanks, George R. Kasica Listowner