We just received our BITEARN NODES update for the current month, and now LISTSERV doesn't accept commands, mail bounces from hosts that didn't bounce before, etc.

This question is only relevant with VM servers running in NJE mode. It is therefore technically obsolete, but there may be z/VM LISTSERV nodes running on internal networks that still use NJE.

Did you add a ':newnode' tag to your BITEARN NODES entry for the current update? The ':newnode' tag internally removes your server from BITNET, and if you are running LISTSERV-NJE, this will cause problems with mail coming in to the server from outside and with commands (e.g., via TELL) coming from local userids. To fix the problem you must edit your copy of BITEARN NODES and remove the ':newnode' tag from your site's entry. The following appendix from LEAVING BITNET (originally at ftp://ftp.cren.net/bitnet/doc/leaving.bitnet, page no longer available) applies:


       Use of the :newnode tag for nodes running LISTSERV-NJE

   The following is excerpted from e-mail on the LSTSRV-L@UGA.BITNET

list, on 94/11/29-94/12/05 and 96/03/14-96/03/18.

   The problems that have been reported to result from setting a

:newnode tag for a node running LISTSERV-NJE include:

a. bounces of regular mailings from external sources that worked fine


b. bounces by local Listserv<->Netnews gateway;

c. Listserv error messages for X-DEL jobs;

d. refusal by LISTSERV to accept mail or TELL commands from

  owner/maintainer VM accounts.

e. Users subscribed with FULLHDR lose that option and revert to SHORTHDR

  when Listserv 'newnode' processing takes place.

Note that these problems do NOT arise for nodes running LISTSERV-TCP

when the :newnode tag is used for those nodes.

   Part of the reason for those problems is that LISTSERV-NJE doesn't

support running from a non-NJE host-name.  It is therefore necessary to

edit the node's local copy of BITEARN NODES to remove the :newnode tag,

erase BITEARN LINKSUM2, and restart.  This must be done each month the

node remains in BITNET after the :newnode tag is entered.

   Another cause for the problems is that the processing of the

:newnode tag does not affect the 'owner' tag in Listserv header, so the

'owner' tag has to be edited by hand for each LISTSERV list whose owner

is affected by the :newnode tag in order for the owner to be recognized

by LISTSERV.  LISTSERV will respond to owner comande by mail as it does

for all Internet commands, since all commands will be translated to the

owner's Internet address.