
------------------------------------------------------------------
NOV-WEB.DOC -- 19980326 -- Email thread on NetWare as a WWW Server
------------------------------------------------------------------

	Feel free to add or edit this document and then email
	it back to faq@jelyon.com




Novell has introduced their own Web Server that will run with NetWare 4.1.
The package includes WordPerfect Internet Publisher, Netscape Navigator and
BASIC and Perl script interpreters. They claim that you have it set up from
out of the box in 10 minutes with no knowledge of UNIX required. Price, not
cheap at $995. You can get more information at:
	http://www.novell.com

------------------------------

From: "Larry Havenstein" <lhavenst@ltlapple.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 16:38:34 +0600
Subject: Web Servers

Another good web server that ought to be on Web Servers for Novell page:
I have been involved with the test phase on this package and it is
much cleaner than the GLACI HTTPD.  The name of this other package is
LanWEB HTTPD and it sells for $395 list or $250 educational price.

This web server will do the page counting without doing CGI
(much more efficient), can track many things that Netware tracks, and
will do secure links (unlike the GLACI in its current form).

	http://www.wonloo.com/

------------------------------

From: Garry J Scobie Ext 3360 <GSCOBIE@ml0.ucs.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 08:30:37 +0000
Subject: Another FAQ entry?

Here are four NetWare Web server alternatives:

Edime
	http://www.edime.com.au/webware/webware.html

Novell
	http://corp.novell.com/announce/webserve/

Wonloo Technologies Inc
	http://www.wonloo.com/

Puzzle Systems
	info@puzzle.com

------------------------------

>Anyone who has any info on a Web server NLM please email me!

Hi Joe, check out SiteBuilder.  It runs under Netware 3.1x and 4.1.
(It's also used by Novell as the core technology for their Netware web
server.)  There's an eval copy available at www.american.com.

SiteBuilder is a solid and full-featured product, and is an excellent
choice for either an intra-net or Internet web server.  I will admit
to some bias in this matter, though, so here are the other companies
making Netware web servers of which I'm aware:

 Novell (www.novell.com)
 Wonloo (www.wonloo.com)
 GLACI (www.glaci.com)
 Edime (www.edime.com.au)

Michael Haag

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 13:21:47 GMT
From: Juergen Sauer <jojo@SERVER.SAE.EXTERN.FH-HANNOVER.DE>
Subject: Re: A Novell Web Server

>We plan to put our college on the Internet using our Novell 3.12 100
>user server.  What do we need and what steps should we follow to transform
>our server into a Web server?

According to my experience a Novell Server is a _VERY_ GOOD server for
Files, Printers in a DOS/Windows network.

... but:

For serving www it's not the best choice. :-(
I general we use a UNIX based System for WWW-Serving. It's really
better. We solved the problem for our own college by using an
external system.

First we had an IBM RS/6000, AIX 3.2.5, using the CERN httpd Package.
Friends of mine found  that a SUN based System is the best, but this
solution was to expensive. :-((

So we are using a fast High-End PC with Linux as OS.

The most important Points for this decision were:
	+ Free WWW Servers availble, in Source too
	+ Many different WWW Servers with more Features, including JAVA
	+ System is not only for WWW it can do:
	+ Mail Server
	+ News Server
	+ FTP Server
	+ Remote Access to our NET
	+ Modem-Server (Dial-In and Dial Out)
	+ UUCP Server (Connecting Prof's & Student's computers to the Net
	  for News & Mail)
	+ Fax - Server
	+ PPP and SLIP Server
	+ TCP/IP Routing via Modem on demand
	+ WAIS Server
	+ Gopher Server
	+ Telnet Server
	+ Domain Name Server (DNS)
	+ Gatway / Router
	+ NFS File Server
	+ WfW/NT File Server
	+ (Novell) Fileserver & Client Services (New in 1996!)
	+ Free OS with no USER licence limits
	+ Student's learning system for UNIX
	+ Development system for software (Full Develop Kit included)
	+ Grafical User Interface: X-Windows X11 R6
	+ UPS support
	+ VERY WIDE SUPPORT within thew USENET (comp.os.linux.*, etc)
	+ every piece of software is avaible by ftp.
	+ All Source Code avaible
	+ ALL SOFTWARE FREE without costs
	+ Hardware as cheap or expensive as the Hardware for Novell
	+ Not only for Intel-Based Systems(DEC Alpha, PowerPC, M68K too)
	+ Using OS/2 Warp Connect is a good & cheap Network Client for
	  lokal WWW-Reading, NEws Reading, MAil & telnet ....)

The most important points against:
	- Much Knowlege nedded to Setup the  upper described system and
	  for keep it up and running
	  (But if you have time to learn any smart computer guy will get it
	   running within 1-2 Months, the first week full time, then keeping
	   an eye on the server and fix common problems)
	- The supported Hardware is smaller than in novell world,
	  you should have closer look to the FAQs.
	- NO professional support
	- In unix lives another user-machine philosophy. Thinking unix there
	  is to imagine there are mor than 1 user at the same time and there
	  is a very wide range of accessing hardware to a unix: this means
	  you have to imagine that any user could have an other Terminal.

	- NFS File & Printing Clients for DOS expensive
	- X11 Servers (for Client Programms running on the Main Server
	  CPU, using DOS-PC as Display) are expensive

---

We decided to take Linux to solve our problem. We use this hardware:
	1. Novell Server V4.1 + TCP/IP Package + NFS Services
	2. Linux:
	   Pentium 90  (Intel Zappa) Most fast Pentium boards or 486
			Boards are ok.)
	   64 MB Ram (started with 32)
	   SCSI Controller: NCR53c810 & Adaptec 1542cf
	   SCSI-Harddisks: required:    300-400 Base System (All Soft & Source)
					1 - 10 MB for each user
					<1 GB News (you decide to get & serve)
					<500 MB WWW-Proxy (Thought big)
					+ Space for WWW Pages
					+ Space for FTP Files
	Networkcard(s): 3Com 509 (many more possible)
	Any Modem Card or Modems connected to Multiport Cards
	Terminal Servers
	Any cheap video Card and Monitor. (A Server System should
	not be used as X11 Workstation, do this from a Client)

This is the Software:
	OS:     Linux Kernel 1.3.xx
	www:            apache
	ftp:            wu-ftp 2.4
	News:           inn-1.4 unoff 2
	MAil:           smail or sendmail
	Modem, fax:     mgetty (includes fax receive, fax print, dial-in login)

---

The upper described Linux Server is Running in many palces. Most people
are completely satisfied, not all: Our Computing Center Admininstation
has to pay for the increaseing Internet Trafic ... :-) caused by the
many happy users.

At my colleague we have uptimes about 60 to 120 days, not more because we
do software maintainace time to time.
you may check out: http://linux.rz.fh-hannover.de, ftp the same.
Attention for performance junkies: our colleague has only 64kBit/s to the
net, :-(

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 11:12:03 -0600
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: CGI-able Web software for NW4.1 servers

>I need to acquire a Web NLM for my NW 4.1 servers that:
>1. is stable.
>2. supports, among other "advanced" HTML features, CGI scripting.
>I need users to be able to produce page-hit-counters for their web pages.
>
>The GLACI httpd seems to be too "simple" and unable to handle these
>advanced features, although it seems to perform well for plain HTML
>work.  I have heard Edime is way too expensive for what you get.
>
>Does anyone know about the Novell web packages and its capabilites
>along these lines ?
------------
	Novell's Web server for NW 4.1 is running at my place. It's setup
on a test 4.1 server with only the default home page at the moment (pressures
of time and to-do list). It seems to be a rather complete package, with
Perl and Visual Basic support right now, counters, nifty screens and logs,
and so on. Novell thinks web serving is hot stuff and is planning to
offer among the best in the business, according to Drew Major who is in a
position to back these words with action. Novell has acquired rights to
the full Java suite from Sun, as an indication, and wants to spread it
network wide (moving the decision making "logic" to the place sorting the
information, client/network approach, etc).
	Installation is a snap. Resource consumption is under 1MB or so.
Management is via a Windows program. Lotsa developers tools. Performance is
reported to be better than on an NT server, and about to climb out of sight
(Drew's comments again).
	To touch this server contact 129.123.1.74 (no name, test device).
I'm not a web guru at all, so I can't give you a deep reading of features
versus common wishes. If a special test setup is needed to check features
please contact me directly and I'll see what can be done. Check Provo's
Web pages for descriptive information.
	Joe D.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 19:00:14 +-100
From: Eric Hall <ehall@NWC.COM>
Subject: Re: CGI-able Web software for NW4.1 servers

>Does anyone know about the Novell web packages and its capabilites
>along these lines ?

Novell's web server has three ways to do CGI:

  1) via the bundled BASIC interpreter
  2) via the bundled PERL interpreter
  3) via custom-compiled CGI NLMs

The BASIC interpreter is weak, but functional for small scripts. You can
write a 200-300 line program, but much more than that and the basic script
server starts having internal memory problems. Also, it won't read more
than 256 characters from the data sent to STDIN via POST. Finally, the port
is of Dartmouth BASIC, so you have to use line numbers (yech!).

The PERL interpreter seems to be much more robust. But of couse, your users
will need to learn/know PERL to get much out of it. The roll-yer-own NLM
stuff I can't really comment on yet.

For small scripts, the basic interpreter will probably work well enough.
Novell has also announced that they will be working with the NMX/ManageWare
guys on a plug-in, and enabling users to develop basic scripts in VB that
are run-able on the server, in a future release.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 16:33:37 EST
From: Jayson Agagnier <jaysona@PILS.COM>
Subject: Re: Internet server

If you are concerned about security, look at spending a lot of money
($50,000+) and some good solid hardware.

We had a Linux box along with a MorningStar router for a while, but
quickly found out how weak it was.

We have since purchased a Black Hole firewall from MilkyWay Systems,
and use a Sun SparcSation 20 as our Web, News, and ProxyServer.

Things are running very smoothly, and we are able to control exactly
what goes in and out, and are able to log everything very nicely.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 10:41:09 +0100
From: "Mr. R. Coates" <roysan@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Internet server

>Hi, I want to buy an Internet server for our network: 7 servers 4.1.
>I don't know if better is to buy Novell's Web Server (or other NLM) and
>connect to tree, or buy any Unix machine (SCO, Linux ...) or any other.
>
>Security is the most important thing for me.

If security is the *most* important thing - use novell's web server.

Un*x out of the box has more holes in it than a tea-bag.

I now run 6 un*x boxes at my ISP site and as much time has been spent
making them 'secure' as has been spent installing the mail, irc, web,
ftp, gopher, usenet software - or maybe it just seems that way ;)

Incidentally - that's why I've been so quiet on this list for the last
few months. With the Universities demise seeming imminent, and redundancy
looking ever more likely, I've broken out into the ISP game as a
fall back - just in case.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 09:26:40 -0400
From: "Eliot T. Ware" <etware@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject: Re: Internet server

>Hi, I want to buy an Internet server for our network: 7 servers 4.1.
>I don't know if better is to buy Novell's Web Server (or other NLM) and
>connect to tree, or buy any Unix machine (SCO, Linux ...) or any other.
>
>Security is the most important thing for me.

If security is the "most important thing" than strongly suggest you look
into the Novell Web Server or American Internet's Sitebuilder.  You get
NetWare level security and the added benefit of outstanding (well beyond
Unix or NT based web server) performance.  The downside is third-party
application support.  In general, third-party apps do not support these
solutions.  However, generic applications which do not directly "speak" to
the operating system will work.  In addition, Sitebuilder will be bundled
with FrontPage in the next release and will support the FrontPage server
extensions.  Bottom line:  it's your call depending on what's most
important to you.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 19:12:39 +0100
From: Eric Hall <ehall@NWC.COM>
Subject: Re: Query re Internet services on NetWare

>1. DNS service

Novell's NetWare/IP offers an easy-to-use-but-not-too-robust DNS server.
Unoverica (http://www.unoverica.com) has a very robust-but-not-too-easy
-to-use DNS server.

>2. SMTP service
>3. POP service

Mercury is written by the author of Pegasus (which is the e-mail client
you use at UCD). Unoverica also has a full-blown version of SENDMAIL for
NetWare, offering more power than Mercury.

>4. WWW service

Novell has one. American Internet (http://www.american.com) has one that
they licensed to Novell. Edime (http://www.edime.au, I think), GLACI
(http://www.glaci.com), and Process Software (http://www.process.com)
are other options.

>5. News service

No NNTP news server yet. Several are being worked on.

>6. FTP service

One comes with Novell. There's also MurkWorks (http://www.murkworks.com) and the
Hellsoft (no URL available).

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 20:52:04 -0500
From: Darwin Collins <dcollins@fastlane.net>
To: netw4-l@bgu.edu
Subject: Re: Web servers

>How about Microsoft Internet Information Server on an NT machine.
>Works as smooth as silk.  And that Front Page of theirs is awesome!!!

Couldn't tie it into the network.

Basically, needed something that I could get:
. good performance.
. integration with the network.
. integration with NDS.

So... we went to the Novell Web Server.
Basically, the users don't need to learn FTP and I don't have to
maintain yet another user database.
They can simply 'save' their files to the web subdirectories.
Same for the Macs.  The perl/basic stuff is going to keep them busy for
along time.

Moves/Adds/Changes are normal.  This way, I need only one place to make
the changes.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 15:38:07 AST4ADT
From: Paul Steele <paul.steele@ACADIAU.CA>
Subject: Re: Warning: Netware Web Server is *very* buggy

On 10 Oct 96 at 11:55, Joe Doupnik wrote:
>>We have been using the Netware Web Server for a little over a month and
>>so far have not been impressed. Feature-wise, the product seems to be
>>pretty good for an NLM-based web server. However, the product is
>>extremely unreliable. It can cause a variety of server abends, it can
>>make some documents unavailable for editing after the page has been
>>accessed, the server can get into a state where it can no longer respond
>>to requests, and unloading the web server can often lock the server
>>console. It is ultimately a pretty pitiful example of a commercial
>>product.
>
>	Let's put some substance on the above bare bones. Which version
>of Novell's web server, and which version of NetWare? And, if it is not
>too much trouble, how could the problems be reproduced?
>	I'm saying this not as a challenge to you but rather as a way
>of creating an environment demonstrating gotcha's on a system that can be
>made available to Novell for inspection, and that system can be mine. It's
>easier for Novell to reach my place than yours.
>	I have NW 4.10 (I presume that's what you are using) and 4.11/beta.
>I have their web server v2.0 on the NW 4.11 machine, and I am expecting
>web server v2.5 any day now.
>	So, what can we do to enlighten Novell on particulars and then
>maybe get them (particulars) fixed?

I am using Netware 4.1, with all the numerous patches, and Novell HTTP
Server 2.5. The only NLM the server is running besides the web server is
Lantegrity, and that was already removed to elliminate it as a possible
cause. The most common problem are page fault abends in "Http timer
process" and "Http worker process". On our busier Netware server the
abends were occuring so much we were forced to switch back to Glaci's
web server. I prefer the features of the Novell server but the
instability was too high. I've left the software on our student servers
for the momentand since students aren't using it as much the problems
have been less frequent. But we have had abends, and today I had to
reboot two servers because the web server had stopped responding and my
attempt to unload the HTTP nlm locked the console. The unload did not
take place and there were no errors.

As for reproducing the errors in a controlled environment, I suspect it
would be difficult. Its hard  to know what users are doing at any given
time that might induce the various crashes. I've seen half a dozen
abends in an hour, and then none for several days. I don't think my users
are doing anything special. Just typical web pages with typical amounts
of text and graphics. The really annoying problem is when the web server
locks a file. Most users will edit an html file, then load the page in
the web server, then go through a seriers of editing then reloading to
view the latest changes. At some point during this process for some
users, the web server does not close the file preventing any further
updates.

I have not been impressed with the help I've gotten from Novell's tech
support, but that doesn't really surprise me. It usually depends on who
answers the phone. The thing that really got me was that they don't
really seem to be all that concerned about the problem...

---------

Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 13:56:55 -0600
From: Jason Green <srpbfs01.jgreen@STATE.UT.US>
Subject: Re: Warning: Netware Web Server is *very* buggy -Reply

>I am using NetWare 4.1, with all the numerous patches, and Novell HTTP
>Server 2.5. The only NLM the server is running besides the web server
>is Lantegrity and that was already removed to elliminate it as a possible
>cause. The most common problem are page fault abends in "Http timer
>process" and "Http worker process". On our busier NetWare server the
>abends were occuring so much we were forced to switch back to
>Glaci's web server. I prefer the features of the Novell server but the
>instability was too high. I've left the software on our student servers
>for the momentand since students aren't using it as much the problems
>have been less frequent. But we have had abends, and today I had to
>reboot two servers because the web server had stopped responding
>and my attempt to unload the HTTP nlm locked the console. The unload did
>not take place and there were no errors.

I too am running WebServer 2.5 on NW 4.1 fully patched.  The problems I
have had have been minimal, but the one reproducible abend is that
when I use server side includes to do a page count, I get an abend from
HTTP Worker process.  This is reproducible on my server.  Obviously, I
don't do that anymore.

I have never had the server stop responding to requests.  Does this
happen after an abend or is it just happening randomly to you?

>The really annoying problem is when the web server
>locks a file. Most users will edit an html file, then load the page in
>the web server, then go through a seriers of editing then reloading to
>view the latest changes. At some point during this process for some
>users, the web server does not close the file preventing any further
>updates.

I also have the problem of the file being read only, but I exit out of the
editor and reload the file and it is R/W again.  I have never had it not let
me edit the file if I loading it a second time.  It is annoying, but workable.

---------

Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 22:59:45 +0100
From: Hakan_Andersson <hakana@VD.VOLVO.SE>
Subject: Re: Warning: Netware Web Server is *very* buggy

Maybe you should check out what patches you are running on your
servers. We have been running version 2.50 and 2.51 without any
problems for a long time now.

---------

Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 16:10:39 -0600
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Warning: Netware Web Server is *very* buggy

<snip>
----------
	As Mr. Andersson of Volvo remarked, there is a Web server v2.51.
As I looked at my CD-ROM collection I found it and just installed it on
a NW 4.11 server. Now this is part of NW4.11/beta etc rather than the
regular distribution channel, but the thought is there may be fixes in
their for your situation (though the docs do not mention anything like
that). How you might get v2.51 out of Novell is beyond my understanding.
	Server abends from wild pointers are nasty things. I wonder, if
by chance, if you have read & write fault emulation turned on (I have them
turned off, but notification turned on). That's SET 2 (memory) at the
console. Also, "allow invalid pointers=off" on my machinery, same SET
area. There is one other parameter of interest in this group, "alloc
memory check flag=on/off", which is off here but you may wish to turn
on for safety's sake.
	I would not be surprized to learn wild pointers come from the Perl
NLM, given the things Perl does with memory.
	Lastly, one needs to pick and choose the version of the underlying
tcpip.nlm, and there are a number in the archives. I'm at version 3.00
because the latest stuff blocks RDATE.
	Joe D.

---------

Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 17:07:45 -0600
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Warning: Netware Web Server is *very* buggy

	A tiny and quick update on trying Web Server v2.51/beta on
NW 4.11/beta. It crashes the machine when saying EXIT. Apparently
the web server stuff is not shutting down properly when the server
does. If I shutdown the web server first, by unistop, then a server
shutdown is clean.
	Joe D.

---------

Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 18:39:15 -0600
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Novell's web server, cont'd

	For those interested in Novell's lastest web server software
I have netlab3.usu.edu 129.123.1.74 up and running it in demonstration
form. This is version 2.51, mentioned a couple of times today. It has
a 45 day free trial scheme too, if you are clever and click on the
proper decoration. There's a features list and play things.
	Please note that the site name is netlab3.usu.edu, not
www.something.blah. I've done no real configuration or tweaking to make
things better than out-of-the-box form.
	Joe D.

---------

Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 20:15:22 -0600
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Novell's web server, cont'd

>>	 For those interested in Novell's lastest web server software
>>I have netlab3.usu.edu 129.123.1.74 up and running it in demonstration
>>form. This is version 2.51, mentioned a couple of times today. It has
>>a 45 day free trial scheme too, if you are clever and click on the
>>proper decoration. There's a features list and play things.
>>	 Please note that the site name is netlab3.usu.edu, not
>>www.something.blah. I've done no real configuration or tweaking to make
>>things better than out-of-the-box form.
>>	 Joe D.
>
>Hmmm, it seems that your server is experiencing similar problems as mine.
>
>I have had Novell HTTP Server 2.51 running on NetWare Prototype 4.11 Beta
>6.0 for several months now, and have yet to be able to access my server
>outside of my own domain with regular success.
>
>It works great on the local ethernet here at home, but as soon as I try
>to access it from the Internet I get server unaccesable about 90% of the
>time.
>Jayson Agagnier
-----------
	Ah so, right you are. But five minutes later I fixed the problem.
It was simple. That server wasn't intended to be seen outside my local
region by TCP/IP so I paid little attention to a few details. Adding an IP
default route pointing to my Cisco solved the problem, and the server is now
visible and usable from far away. I checked it from my New York City account.
	Joe D.

---------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 13:10:09 +1000
From: Adrian Moore <C-Moore@MAIL.DEC.COM>
Subject: Re: Warning: Netware Web Server is *very* buggy ?
	 Perhaps there is a reason...

I haven't seen the behaviour you have described since installing v2.5.
NETDB.NLM from the 2.0 server caused me some problems.

To expand on Joe D's comments, TCPN02.EXE from novell's
http://support.novell.com/ illustrates that there can be revision
issues when multiple products are installed. Novell have told me that
they are working on a TCPIP.NLM v3.12 which will integrate all the
other versions and provide a common, stable TCPIP.NLM for all
products.

So I am inclined to think that the product is not inherently unstable,
and that you either may need a higher level of support, or you should
post more information for the list community to assist you in
troubleshooting the problem further.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:40:52 +1000
From: Adrian Moore <C-Moore@MAIL.DEC.COM>
Subject: Little bit out of topic, Web servers

>My firm is planning to buy Web server, may be not a NetWare and I
>want to know if there are any benchmarks of other platforms. I would
>prefer NetWare...

http://webcompare.iworld.com/ is actually a great site for getting
information on most flavours of web servers. Check it out. The reason
I wrote "...servers available for NetWare" was to make reference to
the original question about info the different "NetWare" servers.

Look at the list of servers in the
http://webcompare.iworld.com/bench.html chart first, then try
AltaVista, or Yahoo, for a list of Web servers.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 6 Nov 1996 13:47:11 -0600
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Netscape 3.0 LAN install

>I have a serious problem that is preventing full implementation of the
>program. The problem is that Netscape.exe and the rest of the program
>resides on a shared network drive, where everyone has read/scan rights.
>There are 2 files that need to be personal and fully accessable:
>bookmark.htm and netscape.hst. In the past, from Netscape 1.1, these files
>were located on the users' home drive, where they have full rights. So far
>so good...I have no problem with the bookmark.htm file, it is working fine
>on the individual's home directory.
>
>The problem is that the Netscape program insists to use the Netscape.hst
>file located in the program directory, if I delete it, it creates a new one.
>We can't have that because this needs to be a personal file and needs to be
>written to/read by the individual user.
>
>In the 32-bit program--Win95's registry points to the user's home drive for
>the file location of Netscape.hst..
>In the 16-bit program, Netscape.ini references the file at the same
>location, but the program still tries to read/write to the program
>directory!

	Move netscape.ini to the user's directory, together with win.ini.
Have a very careful look with MONITOR to ensure Windows does not beat up
on your network while trying to open a non-existant or read-only file.
	Joe D.

---------

Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 10:01:00 -0800
From: "Clarkson, Mark" <mclarkso@SSBPOST.ENV.GOV.BC.CA>
Subject: Re: Netscape 3.0 LAN install

	Set your 'Install Directory' Parameter under the '[Main]' section to
the place that you want your Netscape.hst file to be.  This will allow
you to have a personal Netscape.hst file  (ie:  Install
Directory=c:\netscape  ).  I am not to sure about the Win95 registry but
there might be a similar setting.

---------

Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 12:11:22 +0000
From: Jon Hall <jmah@ISVR.SOTON.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Netscape 3.0 LAN install

<snip>

Make sure that the "Install Directory" key in the [Main] section of
NETSCAPE.INI points to a directory on the local hard disk and does NOT
end in a backslash. NETSCAPE.HST etc. will then be referenced in this
directory. Be warned that if this directory is inaccessible for any
reason Netscape will default back to the program directory and rewrite
the INI file to suit!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 09:11:42 -0600
From: Tim Rushforth <trushfor@CITY.WINNIPEG.MB.CA>
Subject: All Roads lead to Microsoft

>>Here's a good one; trying to access the Web site for Novells
>>recent program CNENet, I tried the link
>>http://cnenet.novell.com , using my MS IE Browser.
>>
>>Imagine my surprise when I wound up at the Microsoft Home Page.
>>What is the URL for the CNE Net Site? I wonder how I get to the
>>MS Site??? TIA Sam

I experienced this running Novell Client 32 for Windows 95 and IE 3.0.
Applying the patch in C32NWR.EXE fixed this for me.  This file is on
Novell's Web site (but is not officially tested)

The readme states:
"NWRRNSP.DLL was modified to change the Name Space Resolution
Priority from 2000 to 2143 to avoid conflicts with DNS.  This works
around the bug in Microsoft's WINSOCK DLL with parallel name
resolution."

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 16:43:58 -6
From: nw dl_list <DL_LIST@TDOA.CAPNET.STATE.TX.US>
Subject: Webservers on netware or whatever

To those contemplating setting up a webserver under Netware or whatever:

We had finally settled on using FreeBSD (Unix) / Apache for a webserver.
Then came a suggestion to try a product by Quarterdeck called Totalweb.

This may not be the best solution for everyone (or us either), but we
decided to spring for the $100 it cost. Runs in a PC under Win 3.xx (also
includes vers for Win 95 and NT and web doc processor). Requires a
connection to the internet, obviously.

Don't have to worry about security problems in our NW server.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 17:51:42 EST
From: Jayson Agagnier <jaysona@PILS.COM>
Subject: Re: IntranetWare Web server audit trail (fwd)

>Does the Web server keep a log of http usage ?
>
>A customer intend to setup a IntranetWare Web server.  He wants to:
>
>1. keep a record of events such as, how long has someone been surfing,
>how long has the browser been idle, etc.  Purpose is to terminate any
>idle connection & release the locked resources for other users.
>
>2. produce a periodic statistics of the web access usage.

There are three basic logs kept in VOL:WEB\LOGS

They are: Access.log
	  Debug.log
	  Error.log

The contents of the log files can be viewed using the NetWare Web Server
Manager program located in SYS:System\Public and is called WebMgr.Exe.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 13:59:50 -0600
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Novell 4.1 and Novell Webserver 2.0

>I'm running Novell 4.1 with Novell Web Server. I can "see" the webserver
>internally, via IP address or host name. When I try to connect from the
>"outside", via compuserve or america online, etc., I get a Timed out
>message...like it can't find the server. What's happening?? We currently
>run a Windows NT WebServer, a MAC Webserver, and a Front Page
>Webserver without any problems...but the Novell WebServer, it just
>doesn't want to be seen by the outside world.
--------------
	Which version of Novell's Web Server?
	My quick guess: you lost the IP "default route." Some late versions
of Novell's TCPIP.NLM clobber that item and I have had to insert the default
route by hand (via Load TCPCON) after each boot.
	Joe D.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:45:20 -0600
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Netscape and ftp

>Thanks to all who responded to my frustration at
>getting into the netlab2 directories using Netscape.  Now I
>understand that I must either type out the url so that netlab2's pre
>directory-name space does not appear, I must use another ftp client,
>or I should try netlab1 instead.
------------
	Just to make sure the real problem is understood generally, let
me summarise the situation.
	The FTP protocol has two commands to show directory listings:
NLST to provide a list of bare filenames, one per line, and LIST to
provide a list of filenames and characteristics, one per line. NLST is
used heavily by the mget user-level command to first acquire a list
of candidate filenames to the client side and then request each file
in turn. Both commands are normally hidden behind the user interface,
but are available at command line level via the QUOTE ftp-command method.
QUOTE means send the following text verbatium to the other side, a bypass
of the user interface.
	LIST provides text designed to be read by humans, and its form
and syntax is competely arbitrary. To demonstate this try several different
sites, and on some machines issue the SITE DOS or SITE UNIX commands to
change the manner of presentation.
	RFC959.TXT has the ftp specs.
	Web browsers try to be "helpful" by letting a user click on a
filename or group of names shown on the screen from a LIST command, and
move contents across the net. That is basically "screen scraping." But the
authors of some browsers failed to attend CS 201 where one discusses
removal of bracketing whitespace before using names. If you recall several
years ago when GUI interfaces to ftp first came out there was about a full
year of disasters while authors discovered this fundamental design critera
of ftp. It is still true to a degree today, particularly discovering
directories amongst filenames.
	Thus the problem is in the hands of the browser author, not the ftp
server author. Yes, there are movements afoot to try standardising the
presentation format, but results remain to be seen.
	Joe D.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 09:37:33 +0100
From: Hans Nellissen <dbphilos@UNI-DUESSELDORF.DE>
Subject: Netscape on the network

[Shared "Internet" directory on the server containing:]
- TRUMPET Tcpman
- TRUMPET Winsock
- Winsock.ini
- Netscape
and in each users directory, their own Netscape.ini & Bookmark.htm.

Launch Netscape with:

Netscape -i %directory%\netscape.ini

To ensure that all users use the same netscape you can update the
netscape.ini within LOGIN with a program called UPDATE.

	ftp://ftp.soe.purdue.edu/pub/update

In Netscape.ini we point to the install-directory, news-directory,
mail-directory, Netscape\cache (all on the server) and update Mail-Info,
Proxy-Info.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 18:24:08 +0000
From: "Robert S. Sfeir" <robert@BUYSIDE.COM>
Subject: Web server SPEEDY!

I just finished transferring data from our Macintosh Web server to the
Netware Webserver 3.0b6... WOW!  It took about 10 minutes to setup, 20
minutes to figure out the little intricacies of working with it, and 10
minutes to setup the IP addresses and routing tables.  People can now see
it from the outside.  if you guys want to see sheer speed from a server,
visit:

	http://www.streetnet.com/

I would love to hear comments (to my direct address) on performance.  I
think Novell has something here that they can be absolutely proud of.  I
think we're running at about what any Netscape Fast Track is running at,
maybe even faster!

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 18:15:02 -0600
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: You're invited

>If anyone is interested, we just finished deploying our Netware Web Server
>3.0 site.  http://www.streetnet.com/
>
>I would love to hear comments on performance. Since this is a Web Server
>made by Novell, I hope no one minds this posting. (Please e-mail back
>directly, and please use Netscape 3.0)
>
>If you're curious, the server runs on a Dell PowerEdge 2100/200 with 128MB
>of RAM and (2) 4 gig duplexed ultra fast wide Barracuda 15150 drives
>connected to 2 Adaptec 2940UW cards.  The server is connected to a 10MB
>Switched port to a Full T1.
>
>Any questions on setup please feel free to ask.  I'd say this server will
>outperform *any* NT server out there, and get pretty close to a UNIX box.
>I'm told it was clocked at 600 connections per second.
>
>Robert S. Sfeir
-------------
	Fine, do it. And cross check the comms speed item by touching
netlab3.usu.edu with a web browser. It is also a INW web server 3.0 beta item,
but running on a small 486-33 machine with a slow SCSI hard disk (old), but
also with a 44Mbps Internet connection (throttled to a mere 10Mbps at the
server). While experimenting touch netlab1.usu.edu. It's on the same wire as
netlab3 but it is a UnixWare machine with the Apache 1.2b7 web server; lotsa
horses in that box, and lotsa traffic to it.
	That should give a little variety to compare with. Use any old
web browser to my gear.
	Joe D.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Mar 1997 12:07:58 -0800
From: Floyd Maxwell <floyd@DIRECT.CA>
Subject: Re: Client32 and Winsock

Someone originally wrote:
>>My problem is that, I want to use Winsock(.dll) that came with
>>Client32 for WFW3.11. I tried PING, and it seems to work, but not
>>sure about that one

And then various others replied with NET.CFG change suggestions and
things like...
>I put WINSOCK.DLL & WLIBSOCK.DLL in my WINDOWS dir.

and...
>Make sure that the WINSOCK.DLL for Client32 is the only one on the system,
>or at least the only one with a search path to it.  The TCP/IP stack is
>very particular about using its own Winsock, and not someone elses.

What I do:

Put the relevant Winsock.dll files in the relative directory and skip
putting them on a directory in the path unless it happens that way.

\C32\WINSOCK.DLL -- Novell's, in the C32 directory (the default) so that
C32 apps will naturally load it as they look in the current dir first.
Happens to be on the path.

\WINDOWS\_ISP_\WINSOCK.DLL -- my ISP's subdir, containing Trumpet's
WINSOCK, so that the apps that came with it, like Netscape will
naturally load this (correct) WINSOCK because they load what is in
the current dir if found.  Not, definitely not, on the path -- no
need to have it on the path either.

\WINDOWS\NS3\WINSOCK.DLL -- a "null sock" (available from all the FAQ
mirror sites) that allows me to launch Netscape without any TCP/IP
services available and still get useful (designing web pages) work
done (home config), access the Internet via a dedicated ISDN line
(work config).  And if I wish to use NS3 via modem, I _first_ launch
Trumpet TCPMAN.EXE, and _then_ launch NS3...note that even though the
null sock is in the NS3 directory, it doesn't conflict (doesn't load)
because one is already loaded (via TCPMAN).  Also do not want this on
the path, but there is no reason to have NS on the path anyway.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 19:05:22 -0700
From: "Steven W. Smith" <SYSSWS@GC.MARICOPA.EDU>
Subject: Webserver 3.0, longfilenames

  We recently installed Novell's Webserver 3.0 on one of our INW 4.11
servers and have found what may be an "undocumented feature".  It seems
that support for long filenames (greater than the DOS 8.3) only works on
the server that is running the HTTP software.  Access to other servers
is limited to 8.3 names.

  Specifically, we've two 4.11 servers: Guts and Glory.  Each has a USER
volume supporting DOS, MAC and LONG namespaces.  Glory runs HTTP, Guts
doesn't.  If USER_A's home directory is on Glory, you could access

http://staff.gc.maricopa.edu/~user_a/heresmystuff.html

If that user's home directory is on Guts, the same URL would return:

403 Forbidden
Your client does not have permission to access the URL this server
/~user_a/heresmystuff.html

  This only happens with files exceeding 8.3.  Shooting Mac and Win95 users
is not currently an option for us; moving the user's home directory to
server Glory solves the problem.

  Can someone confirm that this isn't misconfiguration on my part?  TIA

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 10:40:14 -0800
From: "Robert S. Sfeir" <robert@BUYSIDE.COM>
Subject: NEW MAILING LIST

I've created a discussion list for all who are using or have an interest
in using the IntraNetware Web server.  If you're interested do the
following to subscribe:

Email to:  Listserver@buyside.com
Subject:   Blank
Text body: subscribe netwareweb <firstname> <lastname>

This list has a moderated join, so it may take a little while before
you're subscription is accepted. (usually once a day)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 08:59:43 -0800
From: "Robert S. Sfeir" <robert@BUYSIDE.COM>
Subject: Re: Web Server memory requirements

>Does anyone have any experience with Web server 3.0 from Novell?  How
>much processing power and memory is required for a web server?

It depends on the hits you're getting or planning on getting.  Generally
web servers have 3 areas of performance concern:

1- I/O -- For over 100K/day get an Ultra Fast Wide drive with an
Ultra Fast Wide Card.  Put enough memory in there to support the
drive sizes, the software, and the number of threads you'll need
to support the increasing number of connections, and to allow for
more files to run from CACHE.

2- Connection speed -- Not Netware Dependant.

3- Processor Speed -- A Faster processor is not always going to give you
faster serving.  Serving Web Pages is not Processor intensive, but HD and
RAM (for caching files) intensive.  Depending on the number of "hits" you
get, you may need a faster processor, to faster process the higher number
of threads required to handle the increasing number of client requests.

I found that with a 2gig HD and 32 MB of RAM things run surprisingly well
on a 486/66.  If you're looking to smoke on the net, you can do what I did
(which is a little too much right now), Get a 200MHZ Pentium pro machine
with 128MB of Ram and use an Adaptect 2940UW card with an Ultra Fast Wide
drive of your choice (I'm using a Seagate Barracuda 15150's).  We get
roughly 30K hits per day, but are waiting for some links from major sites
which we expect will jump us to roughly 400K hits/Day.  With that setup we
rarely use more than 4 threads to serve the 30K hits/day.  Over kill, since
the maximum default threads assigned to the Web Server is 16.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 Apr 1997 17:49:35 MET+1
From: Radovan Smerda <Radovan.Smerda@OUDEC.OSU.CZ>
Subject: Re: Novell Webserver 3.0 Netbasic IDE

>I had written a few scripts in Basic when I was using Webserver 2.5.  Now
>that I have downloaded and installed 3.0 they do not work.  I started the
>tutorial on Netbasic, and got to the part where you install the IDE
>(Integrated Development Environment) on your Win machine...  No IDE.
>No mention of it on the Novell Web Site, no sign of it on the CD Roms with
>4.11 either....

You may download Demo version IDE from http://www.hitecsoft.com

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 14:24:44 -0600
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: SLOW browser startup on web server

>>>I finally got everything setup and sort of working with 4.11 and the web
>>>server version 3. When I fire up my browser (exploder or netscraper) and
>>>type in the web server (www.soderstrom.com) it takes ~60 seconds for a
>>>response. The fact that it does respond fills me with joy but I would
>>>like better response time.
>>>
>>>Anyone have some hints as to where my setup might be wrong or why it
>>>takes so long to bring up the webpage?
>>>
>>>I am working on a NT client (novell ver 4.1).
>>
>>	As a networking professional I'd have thought you would look into
>>the situation more deeply, such as snooping on the wire. If you were to do
>>so I think you might discover Novell's web server provides very fast
>>responses, fast enough to overload your lan adapter and related software.
>>That leaves open how you have the web server material setup and whether
>>a web login is required to reach your page, and so on.
>>	Joe D.
>
>My problem also is identical.  The server is extremely slow in response
>to initial contact. After the contact is made, any subsequent links
>followed just really snap into place. I've even cleared the browser cache
>to make sure
>it wasn't loading the pages from cache.
>
>I'm using Novell's latest client s/w on the lan, but the same response is
>observed using a dialup connection also.
>
>I too would appreciate any setup insite to the Webserver 3.0 performance
>issues.
---------
	Ok, suggestion number two to probe. The Web server normally resolves
IP numbers into IP names via DNS machinery. Mal-adjusted/missing/etc DNS
equipment can send queries to the top level DNS servers (very busy, far
away) and so on. A minute can easily elapse before queries are given up
as hopeless. See all this with Lanalyzer attached to the wire the server
uses to get to your DNS machines and/or off-site.
	Inference and hint. Put every local machine into your DNS server so
there is full information available. That includes MX records too. Lack of
DNS entries will slow down many many connections. Then go to the hosts
tables on machines and gut them to two lines: localhost and the name of that
machine (if not getting them from Bootp/DHCP); use of hosts is strongly
depreciated.
	My site has excellent DNS service. Web server 3 often fails to
display the opening page correctly the first time. The reason is packets
flow very very quickly and can overwhelm a client. All that cache memory
in the server is put to work blasting out information in microseconds
rather than in tens of milliseconds.
	Joe D.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 15:26:55 +0200
From: Svetlin Petrov <admin@ECS.RU.ACAD.BG>
Subject: Re: Web Server, netware 4.1 and 4.11

>We are presently running a netware 4.1 with SFTIII fileserver and the
>Novell Web server 2.5. We would like to set up a new machine mainly
>dedicated as a web server (internet) but including FTP and possible
>IRC server. We do not want to risc that the webserver down our main
>netware server (as it has done). We see three choices. A dedicated
>Unix server. A dedicated NT server. Or a netware 4.11 WEB server 3.0.
>Is it possible to set up a 4.11 server with web Server 3.0 that can
>access files on our main netware server but that do not risc downing
>it.
>
>What is the experience of Web Server 3.0 in respect to the more common
>internet servers in Unix and NT environments?

NWS3.0 has multihoming support - so you can use data from any NetWare
server in the same tree.

NWS3.0 is really perfect ! Very very fast, SSL, PERL5, NetBasic, SSI,
Search Engine.

I've used it since the beta testing period and I've had no problems !

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 10:43:22 -0700
From: Camaszotisz Gyorgy <webmaster@KERORG.HU>
Subject: Re: Perl Script Abends NetWare Server

Try fweb259.exe, it contains the Perl5 module.
We had several problems using earlier Perl versions, and Novell
Technical Support said there is a field test version of Perl5 for
use with Web Server 2.5x wich solves many problems.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 11:06:33 -0500
From: GB <alpinista@BIGFOOT.COM>
Subject: Re: Network Install of Netscape or Internet Explorer?

>I want to setup Netscape or IE to run on windows '95 and have each user be
>able to have  their own set of  bookmarks and settings that will move with
>them as they log into different  workstations.  Has anyone had any success
>with this?

I have a very functional shared Netscape installation with user's files
residing in their home directory.

Logged in as SUPERVISOR equivalent, I installed Netscape on a network APPS
directory and granted RF rights to user group NETSCAPE. To the login script,
I added MAP ROOT U:=VOL1:USERS\%LOGIN_NAME. Then I created an administrative
distribution point VOL1:USERS\TEMPLATE  giving RF rights to EVERYONE and
added subdirectories and files:
	\NETSCAPE\
	\NETSCAPE\netscape.ini (see attachment)
	\NETSCAPE\bookmarks.htm
	\NETSCAPE\CACHE\  (empty)
	\NETSCAPE\MAIL\  (empty)
	\NETSCAPE\NEWS\  (empty)

In Win95, the desktop shortcut command line must include the option:
	 -i U:\NETSCAPE\netscape.ini
The MAP ROOT U:= was necessary as WIN95 will not parse DOS environment
variables. So "DOS SET USERNAME=%LOGIN_NAME" and using
-i f:\users\%username%\netscape\netscape.ini will not work (Feel free to
correct me if I'm wrong, I'm fairly new to WIN95).

Of course, you could modify the above file structure to suit your site.
In addition, if the number of users made it time/cost effective, you
could .INF the entire installation.  I've only got 30 users and
10 stations, so it was easy enough to do it manually.

I don't think it's possible with IE as you can't specify the iexplore.ini
location other than the .exe directory.

If you have any problems, feel free to email me directly.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 16:01:27 -0700
From: "Robert S. Sfeir" <robert@BUYSIDE.COM>
Subject: Netware Web Server... Let the truth be known.

For those of us going round and round on Novell's support of Perl scripts,
here's the truth! (Read the reply from Novell at the end of this message)
and I guess we were not barking up the wrong tree.  What I am upset about
is that Novell claims that they fully support HTTP 1.0 standards, and yet
now we're finding that they don't support all of it!

>From: Joe Merrill <JOE_MERRILL@novell.com>
>
>I am sorry I haven't sent you an earlier update.  The problem is that the
>Novell Web Server does not currently support parsed headers.  It is possible
>to get the Location: line in the header, but because there is no 300 code in
>the header, the client won't redirect.  To get the 300 code in the header
>requires that the server "parse" the header that the CGI sends back, that
>the server recognize the Location: line, and that the server instruct the
>client to redirect by placing the 300 code in the header it sends out.
>
>In some respects, that is not a bug but rather a missing feature (one thing
>that the Novell Web Server doesn't do).  Still, I think I can push it
>through as a bug.  There may be evidence that the functionality was in an
>earlier version of the product (perhaps an R&D version).  I am not sure why
>it didn't make it into the shipping version (security, performance or other
>reason).
>
>Still researching.
>
>Joseph Merrill
>NTS WWS, Novell Inc.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 20:50:45 +0200
From: Stefan Luscher <ateneuit@READYSOFT.ES>
Subject: Re: Network Install of Netscape or Internet Explorer?

>I want to setup Netscape or IE to run on windows '95 and have each user be
>able to have their own set of bookmarks and settings that will move with
>them as they log into different workstations.  Has anyone had any success
>with this?

Have a look at the little program "NETSCINI" which should cover
your needs. I haven't tried it yet, but seems to be small and ok.
As I don't remember were I got it from, I send it to you in
a message directly to you.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 09:33:35 -0500
From: Avner Izhar <avner@NEGEV180.K12.IL>
Subject: Re: Novell's Web Server support

Your problem is not in the perl area, what you are trying to do
is called 'server side include' (SSI).

In novell's web server v2.5, SSI is enabled, in 1 exception, the
'exec' command (which you are trying to use) was disabled
do to security reasons.

Quoted from novell's document 2906043:
" ...In simple situations, SSI can be used in place of CGI scripts.
 Although the NetWare Web Server supports the basic
 NCSA SSI commands, for security reasons the "exec" command has
 been disabled."                             ^^^^^^

Found nothing on nws 3.x .

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 18:21:36 +0100
From: Richard Letts <R.J.Letts@SALFORD.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Novell Web server & Internet compliance

>I am in the early stages of brining up the latest Novell Web server,
>and in my initial discussions with a developer who is doing some
>custom programming for us, I am hearing from him that the Novell web
>server will not support his application.
>
>Here is what he is saying:
>
>"Unless Novell has changed drastically they still do not support full
>internet standards. The Schedule set does require both TCP/IP and Unix
>equiv. sockets. As far as I know only Unix and NT support these. There
>is no package that I know of that allows the same under Novell."
>
>I realize that I am not giving much information here.  I do know that
>the application requires a HTTP 1.0 and CGI 1.1 compliant web server.

what he probably means is that he's using BSD sockets interface in the
UNIX and TCP transport layers. basically you've no chance of it working
under NetWare because of this.  Although there is a TCP implementation of
sockets I find it rather buggy.  the one TCP NW application we do run had
to have a re-write to use the AT&T streams interface.

Note: BSD sockets has nothing whatsoever to do with 'internet standards'.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 16:19:36 +0100
From: Richard Letts <R.J.Letts@SALFORD.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Network Browsers

>I've been having some lively exchanges with a few WEB site admins,
>pertaining to cookies.  It seems that more and more of them are
>wanting to write these little parasites onto users' machines.
>
>In the case of "diskless" workstations, I certainly don't want these
>cookies being written to any server directory.  Overall, I don't want
>any site invading the hard drive (private property) of our
>institution.  Currently, students are allowed to download to floppy
>only.
>
>If these sites feel a need to track site hits, can't they just log
>MACs or IPs?

No:
 - MAC addreses are not transmitted over the Internet.
 - How do you know who is using a particular IP address?

I personally use cookies in some applications there I need to hold an
authentication across multiple forms/applications and across sessions.

If I want a short-lived cookie then I use a hidden field in the form which
is not displayed; however if you give the user a non-form with links on it
which point off-site then the short-lived cookie like this is no use since
you loose it when the user returns to your site.

If the client has no scratch-space then that's the remote sites problem;
long-lived cookies are not universally implemented on clients and
short-lived cookies have the problems I've mentioned.

For explanations on cookies, and how to use them I'd suggest the CGI
programming on the World-Wide-Web from O'reilly and Associates.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 17:12:45 -0600
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Webserver slow response

>I have an Intranetware 4.11 web server and when I first try to connect to
>the home page, It takes like 30 seconds for the server to respond.
>I have DNS running on the same machine, the entries are present for the
>server and all seems to work ok, except for the lag time.  There is NO
>traffic between the time the client requests the page and the server
>responds with the page.  I don't have lanalyzer to look at the packets, but
>it seems to do it at the FIRST attempt of the client request after having
>launched the browser.  Subsequent requests seem to have immediate response.
-----------
	I see shorter lags. But I believe they are involved with reverse
IP lookups to find who you are by IP name rather than just IP number. Thus
if your client's IP info were also on the server in the DNS material it
ought to find the scoop rather quickly indeed. There can be, with some
web servers, an identd probe sent to discover who lies behind an IP number,
and obviously regular DOS/Windows machines don't know about that and don't
respond (meaning, time goes by). LZFW should show that, as well as any
remote DNS lookup by the server (assuming LZFW and server are on the same
wire).
	Once identified information is cached so that subsequent requests
go along quickly.
	What I see beyond what you have reported is lots of fragmented
pages. The pictures are often missing. I interpret this as the NW web
server pushing out information faster than the web client is prepared
to accept and packets are dropped. In my case client and server are on
the same wire.
	Joe D.

---------

Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 09:21:41 -0600
From: Jason Green <srpbfs01.jgreen@STATE.UT.US>
Subject: Webserver slow response -Reply

FWIW, I had the exact same symptom running the Novell Webserver 3.0 and 3.1.  It
would take approximately 30 seconds to make the initial connection from a
browser (in my case I was even on the same sub net).  Once the connection was
made, everything worked just fine.  I was running it on a low power server so I
just figured it was because of that, but then I moved it to a real server (HP
Netserver LC with 140 MB RAM) and had the same problem.   I was to the point of
shelving NWS for a different web server.

After doing some testing and not loading everything, I was able to fix the
problem by not loading Novell's ftp server.  I went back to the other server and
unloading the ftp server fixed the speed problem on it also.   I don't know why
it slowed down, but it is running just fine now.  I moved ftp services to a unix
machine which is where they should have been anyway.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 16:31:40 +0200
From: Patrick Medhurst <pmedhurs@CTCC.GOV.ZA>
Subject: Re: Webserver Netbasic file locations

What you have tried works with Web Server 2.5x.
With 3.1, you have to use http:\\server\netbasic/test\a.bas
i.e. a "/" and not a "\" after "netbasic"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 Nov 1997 19:13:02 -0600
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: LOCKING UP IN NETSCAPE 3.0

>   I am having problems with lockup of the computers in our new
>computer lab. When you run Netscape they will freeze up completely.
>You can't even do a Ctrl-alt-del to reset them. I am running SMC
>9432 Either power II cards. I have tried different video drivers,
>changes in my NET.CFG I am running Trumpet 2.1f It never locks up in
>any other applications. It seam to make a difference when I changed
>the FIle handles in the net.cfg. I am running VLM version 1.2 and
>have tried the new drivers from SMC. I am using Tcpip shims ODIPKT 13
>and winpkt. All other computer labs running SMC EitherEZ cards
>running Netx are working fine. Any help will be greatly welcomed.
-------
	Read the Netscape docs, discover that you can turn down the number
of simultaneous open connections. Do so. Then read the SMC docs and see
if they have tunables to turn off either of Interrupt on Early Reception
or Send Early (often txthreshold or similar word, off meaning a large
value). Both parameters often default to terrible, and are there to make
pretty numbers in ZDPubs benchmarks.
	Joe D.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 11:24:54 +0100
From: Fred Melssen <fmelssen@TULIP.COM>
Subject: Re: SSI commands not working

>I am not sure if my previous message about this got posted. I would
>like to use SSI commands in a few HTML documents. I enabled SSI for
>the particular directory, and disabled executables (I tried also with
>the executables enabled, but it didn't make a difference). Still the
>commands are not executed.

First of all, the SSI parsing must be enabled by specifying the SSI
extension in the MIME.TYP file. Therefore the following entry must
be present in the server's MIME.TYP:

 text/x-server-parsed-html   ssi

Secondly, the directory containing the Web docs with SSI commands, must
be enabled for SSI. To do this, you must set the 'includes' option in
the ACCESS.CFG file. See for example the following sample where 'Options'
is set to Includes.

 <Directory docs/ssi>
 Options Indexes Includes
 IndexOptions FancyIndexing IconsAreLinks ScanHTMLTitles
 AllowOverride All
 <Limit GET>
 order allow,deny
 allow from all
 </Limit>
 </Directory>

The HTML documents containing the SSI commands must use the .SSI extension
(as specified in the MIME type). The server will not parse SSI in files
with the .HTML extension (unless you specified to do so).

If you did all of this, look if the SSI commands are displayed as HTML
comments in the document's source. If this is the case, did you use the
proper HTML syntax and the supported SSI commands?

---------

Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 08:21:13 +0530
From: "Information Systems Mgr." <Ism@KIS.ERNET.IN>
Subject: Re: SSI commands not working

>You also have to tell WebServer what file extensions to process as
>SSI.  By default, this is set only to "SSI", but you can add HTM and
>HTML.  Remember though, that there is a performance penalty for
>this:  now *all* your HTML documents will be scanned for SSI
>commands.  Better to create pages with SSI commands and give them
>names ending in SSI.  For your INDEX page, WebServer will use
>INDEX.SSI if INDEX.HTM isn't available.

Thanks a lot for your advice. I didn't find this in any of the online
docs. However, since I have SSI commands only in the INDEX page, I
thought it will be nice to just change the extension of this file. So
I did, but calling the web page without indicating the filename
index.ssi presented me with a directory of all the files that are
existing in the root of WEB. Any suggestion about this?

I found out what the reason is: if I use the page address without /
at the end, it will show the directory. If I use the page address
with a / at the end, it will show the index page. What do I do in
order to avoid getting the directory only?

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 Nov 1997 13:01:56 MST/MDT
From: "Benjamin E. Fore" <benf@BADGER.SNOW.EDU>
Subject: Re: Perl scripts on Web Server 3.1

I am not extremely experienced in this area.  The information below
(taken from "Programming in CGI" by Shishir Gundavaran  p.9) may help:

"On the NCSA server . . . .The following directives when placed in
 the srm.conf configuration file, allow the server to execute
 files containing .pl, .sh, or .cgi extensions.

 AddType application/x-httpd-cgi           .pl    .sh    .cgi

 "However, this could be very dangerous!  By globally enabling all
  files ending in certain extensions, there is a risk that novice
  programmers might write programs that violate system security
  (e.g., printing the contents of important system files to standard
  output)."

Also noted is:

 "...The 'ScriptAlias' directive in the server resource map files
  (srm.conf) indicates the directory where the CGI scripts are placed.

 ScriptAlais     /cgi-bin/      /usr/local/etc/httpd/cgi-bin/

...

  You can have multiple directories to hold CGI scripts:

  ScriptAlias      /cgi-bin/              /usr/local/etc/httpd/cgi-bin/
  ScriptAlias      /my-cgi-bin/           /usr/local/etc/httpd/my-cgi-bin/

 "You might wonder why all CGI programs must be placed in distinct
  directories.  The most imporatnt reason for this is system security.
  By having all programs in one place, a server administrator can
  control and monitor all the programs being run on the system."

On our system, we use a system like the first example.  However, we limit
access to the server mostly to faculty and staff members.  So far, we haven't
had any problems, but CGI programming knowledge is not extremely common here.

From my study of the second example (and since we aren't using this config,
I have no personal knowledge), it appears that the server will attempt to
execute ANYTHING placed in the directory specified by the
ScriptAlias--regardless of extension.

>I am trying to get some perl scripts running on my web server.  The
>problem is they have the extension .CGI no t .PL.  I don't want to have
>to rewrite all of the scripts. Does anyone know how to setup the web
>server to run perl scripts with the extension .CGI.  Please be specific in
>instructions.  I've already read all the HTML documentation that came
>with the web server and have looked in the knowledge base at Novell
>and have been unable to get the setup correct.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Dec 1997 10:51:54 +0200
From: Patrick Medhurst <pmedhurs@CTCC.GOV.ZA>
Subject: Novonyx Products - Open Beta

The first of the Novonyx products have entered open beta.

Register at http://www.novonyx.com/products/beta

The Netscape Enterprise Server is a 33MB download.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 06:10:23 -0800
From: Michael Hoelscher <mhoelsch@CTC.CTC.EDU>
Subject: Re: web manager password

>Any way around a forgotten web manage password short of reinstalling
>the web server.

Go to SYS:etc, open the web.cfg file with a text editor.
You'll see an entry for "Admin Password" with the hashed
version.   Simply whack this line from the file, and you're
back to no password.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Dec 1997 08:32:14 +0100
From: Camaszotisz Gyorgy <cama@FREEMAIL.C3.HU>
Subject: Re: Novell WEBserver 3.1 and PERL5

>I plan to teach my student how to create dynamic WEBpages by using SSI,
>Perl5, Java etc.  How can I do that, if it isn't possible to set up
>Novell Webserver so all users can write Perl5 script?

Just to be clear: everyone can write Perl5 scripts, but only one system
directory can hold them to function as expected. And in a production
environment, only sysadmin may have rights to this directory.
One solution can be requesting students to submit their Perl5 scripts to
you. And You, as a security supervisor, must examine each script to see
no dangerous actions will be taken if placed online.
I think if one of your students goes to you saying "hey, I wrote this
fancy little NLM, please load it on your main server", you won't do it
without any question, right?

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 19:12:29 +0200
From: Mike Glassman - Admin <admin@IAA.GOV.IL>
Subject: InnerWeb Demo

The Novell Intranet

Building a useful intranet is a lot of work. It's even more difficult
when all the good examples are behind firewalls. That's why we asked
Novell's intranet team to package the best of their site (named
InnerWeb) for all to see.

For an explanation of the Novell technologies used to build InnerWeb and
some ideas that are driving its future direction, be sure to read about
InnerWeb.

You'll notice some of the InnerWeb links are active but some have been
disabled.

This demo is best viewed with Netscape Navigator 3.0 or greater and a
screen resolution of 800 x 600 (Super VGA).

	http://www.novell.com/demos/intranet/intro.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 8 Feb 1998 11:50:15 -0700
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: FTP daemon recommendations

>>>The very last product in the known universe that I would
>>>recommend is Novell's FTP "NLM"..."dousing a candle with a
>>>fire hose" comes to mind..."garbage" also does.
>>
>>What's SO BAD about Novell's ftp daemon?  I've installed it a few
>>places and it seems to work.  I'm not doing anything terribly serious
>>with it so it hasn't been pushed very hard.  If there are serious
>>problems with it, I'd like to know what they are.
>
>Well, aside from the bugs and security problems, it requires
>a ton of stuff to be installed.  NWIP is a monster, RAM-wise
>and module-wise.  With the worst DNS product I have ever seen.
>
>Murkworks FTPD.NLM takes some tiny fraction of an MB of RAM.
>One NLM (maybe two, it's been a while) -- load it and go.
>Next to no "interface" complexity, reinitializes in a few
>milliseconds.
>
>The point is that we installed on a separate 200 MB hard drive
>NW server, and then had to bump the RAM to 32MB just to be able
>to run NWIP...some of the "core" modules wouldn't even load!
>Ridiculous.  Like installing all of MS Office to use the clip art.
>
>Floyd Maxwell
-------
	Golly, I wish you hadn't mentioned MS Office 97 ClipArt. It's my
current systems worry...
	For what it's worth and in the interest of tracking the discussion
I brought up DNS service on a INW 4.11 server, via a beta of NFS 2.3 for
INW 4.11. It was easy to do and the memory consumption was very modest,
under 100KB by quick count for managing itself and no other zones. This
is not NW/IP. I am not counting memory consumed by other items such as
NIS (ugh) and NFS etc on my system.
	In regard to existence of PTR records, the Unixcon utility (via
rconsole) created them on the fly, and said as much (creating in-addr.arpa
entries). Displaying the results showed the A records and NS records, etc,
and one can (and should) edit the details while still in Unixcon.
	The problem here seems to be confusion in the program about "domain",
"host" and "zone". These terms are special for DNS work. To set the record
straight, "domain" is a branch of the DNS tree, such as all of novell.com.
A zone, on the other hand, is a subset of a domain and means the region
managed by a DNS server; it is the part of the domain for which the server
is an authority. If a slice of novell.com is delegated to another on-site DNS
server then the zones are smaller than the domain, but taken together equal
the domain. A host is the name of a particular machine and it is one word
(the first, leftmost) in a dotted string Fully Qualified Domain Name; the
domain is all the rest of that string.
	If one compares the process of using Unicon to setup a DNS server
with that of building and installing Bind v4 or v8 plus wading through the
"DNS and BIND" insect book (O'Reilly & Assoc) for a Unix machine then the
Novell version is vastly easier. I have been doing all three over the past
ten days. The Novell version shields one from many gory details, yet I would
be happier dealing with the details (just my opinion, yours may differ).

	On ftpd.nlm's. I've run three flavors here: Novell's for NW 3, for
NW 4, and Brad's (Murkworks Inc). Brad's is slick and recommended. Novell's
have had a long history of difficulties, and as I have remarked the NW 4
rendition is being redesigned and rewritten for Moab. I would not expose
the present NW 4 ftpd.nlm to the world, but I have run the NW 3 flavor
to the world for many many years (netlab2.usu.edu uses it).

	On running a DNS server at all. If one runs a web server on NW
then running a caching-only DNS server on it is recommended. The reason
is web serving is a large sequence of individual connections, one per
piece of a web page, and each connection can result in a DNS lookup of the
IP name to number, and also the reverse (two lookups). Those may have to
travel across the Internet. A caching-only DNS server on the web server has
memory and thus a lookup pair occurs only once and not for every tiny thing.
There is a big improvement in performance, and reduction in Internet traffic,
by creating a local cache of DNS information.
	A caching-only DNS server is one which is responsible for next to
nothing. Make it authorative for only localhost (127.0.0.1), which is in
fact a strictly local item anyway. It will then remember info gathered
from other name servers in the course of resolving IP numbers of callers.
	Joe D.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 10:58:44 -0500
From: Darwin Collins <nov-list@DART.ORG>
Subject: Re: Netscape Fasttrack server ^ Novell web server 3.1

Frontpage 97/98 can work with most Webservers.  But, you will 'still'
need to stay away from the webbots.  Sorry, but, its just easier to
say "Don't go there".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:29:09 -0800
From: Randy Richardson <randy@INTER-CORPORATE.COM>
Subject: Re: Web Server 3.1 and servlets

>Simple question, I think:  Does anyone know if Novell Web Server 3.1 is
>compatible with servlets?  I have a Java programmer in house that states
>it is not and has a need to install an additional web server on his own
>machine... would rather that not be done if not needed.

Web Server sure does support Java applets, and NetWare 4.11 can also
become a Java Virtual Machine (I downloaded the files once, but I'm
not sure where to get them now).

To verify this, just search for "Java" in the Novell KnowledgeBase,
and you'll find a TID about Web Server 2.<something> not supporting
Java, and the solution being to upgrade to Web Server 2.5.

Another option is to use RCGI to talk to the machine running Java
servlets, this way you can keep the Web Server on your server.

You may also want to take a look at Novonyx, the Netscape Web Server
for Novell NetWare.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 1998 21:34:14 -0500
From: Derrick E Barbour <dbarbour01@SPRYNET.COM>
Subject: Novell Webserver 3.1

>The new one is Netscape FastTrack server for netware.
>goto the support.novell and search for fast track.
>I can't remember where exactly it is.
>
>>I am looking for the latest version of Webserver (3.1?). Is Novell
>>giving it away? If so...where? I can't seem to find it on their
>>homepage.

Check at:
	http://sedwww.provo.novell.com

The Systems Engineering people are the ones providing support for Novell
WebServer product.

The "Official" product... ie: the one slated to ship with NetWare 5 will
be Netscape Fast Track. That raises a concern for those of us using NWS
3.1 in conjunction with GroupWise WebAccess! The kicker is that
currently, WebAccess does not work with FastTrack!!@#$%^&*

I downloaded 3.1 and the 3.1d patch from sedwww two nites ago. Let me
know if you have problems with it, I can arrange to ship a copy to you.
<Smile>> Forward Prepaid Envelope.......

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 10:48:26 -0800
From: Randy Richardson <randy@INTER-CORPORATE.COM>
Subject: Where to get Novell Web Server 3.1

Recently a few people asked about downloading the Novell Web Server
3.1 specifically.  It can be downloaded from the following URL:

	http://support.novell.com/cgi-bin/search/tidfinder.cgi?2935496

Novell Web Server 3.1 was replaced with the Novonyx web server, but
is still available for those who want to use GroupWise Web Access.

---------

Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 09:35:25 -0800
From: Randy Richardson <randy@INTER-CORPORATE.COM>
Subject: Re: Where is WebServer 3.X?

>>Novell's WebServer 3.1 is no longer being distributed, and has
>>been replaced by the Novonyx FastTrack server.  It is free and
>>avaialable on Novell's site.
>
>That is unfortunate since at present the FastTrack server lacks some
>features found in the old NWS. Namely the ability to use ~username
>in URL's and the ability to move the document root to another volume.
>I also don't like being forced to add long name space support to the
>SYS volume...

Novell's Web Server 3.1 is still available for download to everyone,
just in case someone needs to use GroupWise WebAccess.  See the
following URL:

	http://support.novell.com/cgi-bin/search/tidfinder.cgi?2935496

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 10:24:56 -0700
From: Joe Doupnik <JRD@CC.USU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Intranetware Web servers - Which are the best?

>>>When it comes to the crunch which is the better Web Server for Netware 4.11 -
>>>Novell's WebServer 3.1 or the Novonyx FastTrack server.
>>
>>	What crunch? Both are available for free, so a wise manager would
>>try both. Recall, what is best is dependent on local circumstances.
>>	Joe D.
>
>Is there a comparison between Web Server 3.1, Novonyx's FastTrack
>Server, and Novonyx's Enterprise or E Pro servers?
>
>Novonyx's web page compares Webserver 3.0, fastrack and
>Enterprise, II 3.  So it is doing a bit of an old compare...
--------
	Novell is currently offering Netscape's servers, sigh. There are
detailed comparisons of Netscape's servers on Novell's and Netscape's sites.
What one wants in a server depends on the local situation, so we read the
specs carefully and grab a trial copy for inspection. Seemingly tiny details
reach out to cause grief later on when we want to do something clever, and
those details appear only when we run the material locally. Hence, do the
trial runs with your web guru close at hand.
	Joe D.

---------

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 19:02:41 -0500
From: Nathan Durland <ndurland@CAPITAL.NET>
Subject: Re: IntraNetWare Web servers - Which are the best?

>When it comes to the crunch which is the better Web Server for NW 4.11 -
>Novell's WebServer 3.1 or the Novonyx FastTrack server.

Both are free, and have different feature sets.  For example, with
WebServer 3.1 it's easy to allow users to create their own homepage
(www.mycorp.com/~johndoe).  On the other hand, FastTrack has web
management, and I'm told it's a bit faster (although I'm just repeating
what I was told).  I'd say try them both out and see which you like
best.

>We use Mercury as our mail server, and in the past people using Pegasus
>could easily look up each other's local email address.

Lots of people like Mercury because of the price.  Depending on the size
of your network, you might want to give Novonyx messagin Server a look.
Very fast, very low overhead, doesn't require an external SMTP or POP3
server, user managment is done in NWAdmin, users can have automatic
forwarding and replys, LDAP, etc.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 11:44:05 -0800
From: Randy Richardson <randy@INTER-CORPORATE.COM>
Subject: Re: file downloads with Fasttrack and Perl

>>I wouldn't worry about IE because more people are using the Lynx
>>text-based browser than IE.
>
>I can certainly understand how this SHOULD be the case <G>.  Unfortunately
>this if for an intranet application where the entire organisation ONLY uses
>IE.

Security is a VERY BIG concern when it comes to the internet.  You
better review the following web page to find out what some of the
possible security risks are:

	http://www.lanman.com/sploits_micros.html

This page includes quite a few Internet Explorer 4 security holes,
and explains how they are used.  This should be helpful in securing
your system against these things (at least you'll know what to look
for).

>>If you really need it work though, you could try changing the
>>"Content-Type" from WordPerfect to Binary or some other format.  It's
>>possible that IE doesn't know how to handle WordPerfect files.
>
>Tried that with no success.  As far as I can tell (and have read) IE often
>(if not always <g>) ignores  the Content Type and infers the MIME type via
>the file itself.
>
>Since this script works fine with FastTrack and Perl on NT I can only think
>that the novonyx FastTrack or the Perl.NLM are not providing some sort of
>(hidden) header that FastTrack/Perl on NT does provide.  Following on this
>theory, then Netscape (which works with both novonyx and NT FastTrack) must
>infer the information.

Have you called 1-800-321-4CRC to report this bug?  I'm sure Novonyx
would be very interested in this problem.

>Any ideas what this secret header could be??

You can TelNet to port 80 and type the GET command yourself, to find out.

---------

Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 12:17:57 -0800
From: Randy Richardson <randy@INTER-CORPORATE.COM>
Subject: Re: file downloads with Fasttrack and Perl

>>You can TelNet to port 80 and type the GET command yourself, to find out.
>
>Can you explain in a bit more detail exactly what you type.
>
>I'm okay with the telnet part but once I'm connected, the syntax to get
>headers has me a bit lost.

I'm sorry, I should've included this information.  It can get pretty
confusing since the browsers hide it all.

You'll need to type exactly what the web browsers 'type' (followed
by the [Enter] key).  Here's an example (watch those spaces - 2 in
total):

	GET / HTTP/1.1

You can replace the "/" with the full URI you are looking for, but
don't include the "www.domainname.com" stuff, that's already been
determined by the web site's IP address.  For example, to get to the
following URI:

	http://www.inter-corporate.com/kb/

The browser determines the IP address of "www.inter-corporate.com"
then sends the following command:

	GET /kb/ HTTP/1.1

The "HTTP/1.1" portion (or the third parameter) tells the web server
what version of HTTP responses the browser can handle.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 12:04:20 -0800
From: Randy Richardson <randy@INTER-CORPORATE.COM>
Subject: Re: Basic Scripts

>I ugraded my web server from 2.5 to 3.1.  Everything seemed ok.
>But I have problem for a basic scripts.
>
>"The server encountered an internal error and was unable to complete your
>request
>The specific error message is:
>Remote script 'sys:/web/scripts/rehber.bas' failed with status: 500 Command
>failed (file name too long).
>
>You may contact the server administrator at [no address given], to inform
>about this error "
>can u help me ?

Make sure you've applied WS310d.Exe (a patch for Web Server 3.1).

	http://support.novell.com/products/nwebs30/patches.htm

This patch fixes many problem, including the following (which may
also be related to NetBASIC):

  14-Passing a long URL to Perl would cause the Web Server to abend

------------------------------

