| Author |
UCX checksum validation problem |
wisnios
Member
Posts: 4
Joined: 15.03.10 |
| Posted on March 15 2010 04:49 |
|
|
Hello.
Is there any way to figure out what is the reason of validation error (in addition to the bad checksum ;-) )?
$ LICENSE REGISTER UCX -
_$ /ISSUER=OPENVMS_HOBBYIST -
_$ /AUTHORIZATION=DECUS-DEC-... -
_$ /PRODUCER=HP -
_$ /UNITS=0 -
_$ /TERMINATION_DATE=3-MAR-2011 -
_$ /ACTIVITY=CONSTANT=100 -
_$ /CHECKSUM=...
%LICENSE-F-BADCHK, checksum does not validate for UCX
I have just installed a brand new VAX VMS 7.3 on SIMH.
The VAX-VMS license has been successfully registered.
So, I have requested the OpenVMS Layered Products license, and now I try to use the UCX one... with no result.
I had tried the different PRODUCER, OPTION, TERMINATION, TERMINATION_DATE, DATE, ISSUER combinations... and failed.
Thanx in advance.
Regards.
Marcin Wisnios |
 |
| Author |
RE: UCX checksum validation problem |
tesneddon
Member
Posts: 3
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Joined: 28.01.09 |
| Posted on March 15 2010 15:27 |
|
|
|
wisnios wrote:
Is there any way to figure out what is the reason of validation error (in addition to the bad checksum ;-) )?
A validation error is a result of poor data entry.
$ LICENSE REGISTER UCX -
_$ /ISSUER=OPENVMS_HOBBYIST -
_$ /AUTHORIZATION=DECUS-DEC-... -
_$ /PRODUCER=HP -
_$ /UNITS=0 -
_$ /TERMINATION_DATE=3-MAR-2011 -
_$ /ACTIVITY=CONSTANT=100 -
_$ /CHECKSUM=...
%LICENSE-F-BADCHK, checksum does not validate for UCX
I have just installed a brand new VAX VMS 7.3 on SIMH.
The VAX-VMS license has been successfully registered.
So, I have requested the OpenVMS Layered Products license, and now I try to use the UCX one... with no result.
I had tried the different PRODUCER, OPTION, TERMINATION, TERMINATION_DATE, DATE, ISSUER combinations... and failed.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by "different...combinations". You should enter the LICENSE command as is in the procedure. You mentioned that you are using SIMh. Can you not just cut-paste the LICENSE command into the emulator console?
Tim. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: UCX checksum validation problem |
wisnios
Member
Posts: 4
Joined: 15.03.10 |
| Posted on March 15 2010 21:34 |
|
|
|
tesneddon wrote:
A validation error is a result of poor data entry.
As poor as the copy-n-paste can be.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by "different...combinations". You should enter the LICENSE command as is in the procedure. You mentioned that you are using SIMh. Can you not just cut-paste the LICENSE command into the emulator console?
Tim.
The simple c-n-p results with:
$ LICENSE REGISTER UCX -
_$ /ISSUER=OPENVMS_HOBBYIST -
_$ /AUTHORIZATION=DECUS-DEC-... -
_$ /PRODUCER=HP -
_$ /UNITS=0 -
_$ /TERMINATION_DATE=3-MAR-2011 -
_$ /ACTIVITY=CONSTANT=100 -
_$ /OPTIONS=(IA64,PPL) -
%DCL-W-IVKEYW, unrecognized keyword - check validity and spelling
\IA64\
$ /CHECKSUM=2-...
'Combinations' means nothing more than ommiting optional fields and/or trying to use alternate option choices. For example TERMINATION instead of TERMINATION_DATE.... as I found it in the documentation examples... It is my first OpenVMS installation tryout, so nothing is obvious.
Marcin. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: UCX checksum validation problem |
tesneddon
Member
Posts: 3
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Joined: 28.01.09 |
| Posted on March 16 2010 01:05 |
|
|
|
The simple c-n-p results with:
$ LICENSE REGISTER UCX -
_$ /ISSUER=OPENVMS_HOBBYIST -
_$ /AUTHORIZATION=DECUS-DEC-... -
_$ /PRODUCER=HP -
_$ /UNITS=0 -
_$ /TERMINATION_DATE=3-MAR-2011 -
_$ /ACTIVITY=CONSTANT=100 -
_$ /OPTIONS=(IA64,PPL) -
%DCL-W-IVKEYW, unrecognized keyword - check validity and spelling
\IA64\
$ /CHECKSUM=2-...
'Combinations' means nothing more than ommiting optional fields and/or trying to use alternate option choices. For example TERMINATION instead of TERMINATION_DATE.... as I found it in the documentation examples... It is my first OpenVMS installation tryout, so nothing is obvious.
Ahh, I see the problem :-) When picking your layered products licenses, there are two options:
o. OpenVMS Layered Products (104 PAK's!)
o. OpenVMS Integrity Layered Products (104 PAK's!)
Did you pick the "Integrity" layered products? You need the first one.
I also get what you mean by combinations. It's quite reasonable to abbreviate commands and qualifiers, as long as it isn't ambiguous. "SH" instead of "SHOW" is a common one, i.e.
$ SHOW DEVICE
or
$ SH DEV
There is plenty of info around the place. A couple site that might be useful, aside from this one are;
http://www.kednos.com/kednos/Hobbyist
http://labs.hoffmanlabs.org
Tim. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: UCX checksum validation problem |
wisnios
Member
Posts: 4
Joined: 15.03.10 |
| Posted on March 16 2010 03:17 |
|
|
|
tesneddon wrote:
Ahh, I see the problem :-) When picking your layered products licenses, there are two options:
o. OpenVMS Layered Products (104 PAK's!)
o. OpenVMS Integrity Layered Products (104 PAK's!)
Did you pick the "Integrity" layered products? You need the first one.
I had started with the 'Layered Product' license, but when I failed I have selected the 'Integrity Layered Products' license... with the same result - %LICENSE-F-BADCHK, checksum does not validate for UCX.
It seems to be a problem with \OPTION value.
The exact line from 'Layered Products' looks like that:
/OPTIONS=(IA64,PPL) -
and corresponding error message:
%DCL-W-IVKEYW, unrecognized keyword - check validity and spelling
\IA64\
And the line from 'Integrity Layered Products' looks exactly like (including dots):
/OPTIONS=(IA6...
and its error message:
%DCL-W-IVKEYW, unrecognized keyword - check validity and spelling
\IA6...\
Ommiting the /OPTION line result always with the validation error message:
%LICENSE-F-BADCHK, checksum does not validate for UCX
Any ideas?
Regards,
Marcin |
|
|
| Author |
RE: UCX checksum validation problem |
tesneddon
Member
Posts: 3
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Joined: 28.01.09 |
| Posted on March 16 2010 04:15 |
|
|
|
wisnios wrote:
I had started with the 'Layered Product' license, but when I failed I have selected the 'Integrity Layered Products' license... with the same result - %LICENSE-F-BADCHK, checksum does not validate for UCX.
It seems to be a problem with \OPTION value.
The exact line from 'Layered Products' looks like that:
/OPTIONS=(IA64,PPL) -
I just got a copy of the non-Integrity layered product licenses emailed to me and it had no trace of the /OPTIONS qualifier on any of the commands.
and corresponding error message:
%DCL-W-IVKEYW, unrecognized keyword - check validity and spelling
\IA64\
And the line from 'Integrity Layered Products' looks exactly like (including dots):
/OPTIONS=(IA6...
There is definitely something very wrong here. The "..." dots are not a valid part of any LICENSE command that I am aware of.
and its error message:
%DCL-W-IVKEYW, unrecognized keyword - check validity and spelling
\IA6...\
Ommiting the /OPTION line result always with the validation error message:
%LICENSE-F-BADCHK, checksum does not validate for UCX
This is correct. The license was generated with the /OPTIONS=(IA64,PPL) qualifier, which is factored into the checksum. However, those keywords are not valid for the /OPTIONS qualifier on OpenVMS VAX. The Integrity licenses will not work on Alpha or VAX as the licensing scheme is very different.
Tim. |
|
|
| Author |
RE: UCX checksum validation problem |
wisnios
Member
Posts: 4
Joined: 15.03.10 |
| Posted on March 16 2010 08:53 |
|
|
|
tesneddon wrote:
I just got a copy of the non-Integrity layered product licenses emailed to me and it had no trace of the /OPTIONS qualifier on any of the commands.
Thank you for your feedback. I have just requested the 'OpenVMS Layered Products' licenses for the second time... and there is no sign of /OPTION qualifier at all. And of course the UCX license has been registered successfully!
Spooky... ;)
Kind regards.
Marcin |
|
|
