On 17 Jun 2004 16:36:00 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@d-and-d.com (DoN. Nichols) vaguely proposed a theory ......and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email
There was one other Oz guy who posted. I will see what they can get.
As I said in that other branch , they actually have had a fax, not an email. I can't even email them.
Perhaps they should be asking what's happening. Is it only Oz?
hmmm... I wanted to go to the horse's mouth about whether they had chain to suit, not secondhand statements. Until I know, I am not going to bother the local guy with questions. I am 80-90% sure his prices will piss me off.
On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 07:21:11 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@esper.com (Dave Mundt) vaguely proposed a theory ......and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email
Yes....errr no. I can see that!
Don has been "talking" me through this. It seems it's not the site, but something blocking either Oz or overseas stuff at a level up their line. Another Oz guy also failed to get through.
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 21:20:06 +1000, "David Chambers" vaguely proposed a theory ......and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email
Dave,
Don Nichols has been talking me through trying to work this out.
There is a programme called traceroute (tracert.exe). In win 98 it runs under a DOS window. Not sure about OSs. I have to actually open a DOS window and run it on the command line, in the windows directory. It takes a few seconds to start showing results.
It shows connections as they are made along the chain.
Could you give it a go, and see where you get stopped (you will see "*
* * Operation timed out" repeatedly). What IP address is the last one you see?
If you could do that I would be grateful. Mostly OOI, but also maybe Rapco needs a heads-up.
Sometimes a bounce is a temporary one -- a "we can't deliver your mail so far, but we'll keep trying" type of thing.
O.K.
Not a word, by which I assume that they are pretty clueless about the workings of their web page. IIRC, some other firm took the credit for the page's design and implementation. And it may be that still a third party is responsible for the blocks.
:-)
O.K. Are the chain pitches sometimes in metric units, and sometimes in inches, depending on country of origin?
Let us know what happens.
Good luck, DoN.
P.S. Is it time to straighten out the spelling of "carbide" in the "Subject: " header? My spelling checker keeps stumbling over that one. :-)
On 17 Jun 2004 21:44:44 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@d-and-d.com (DoN. Nichols) vaguely proposed a theory ......and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email
I quote from the bounce
"Sorry, I couldn't find any host by that name. (#4.1.2) I'm not going to try again; this message has been in the queue too long."
Sounds pretty final to me
Anyway we sorted what really happened.
No. I am happy to deal in Imperial...sorry...inches. The only thing is sometimes it's 3/8" and sometimes .375. Then there is .370...go figure. 1/200th of an inch! Thsi guy tells me the saw only takes .325" and .370. But everybody else says 3/8".....then there is low profile, etc.
Will do.
Ok. It will lose the thread, but I take your point. Do you show all header fields? Or does your SC check the title as well?
Yes -- and this clears up that the problem *here* was access to the DNS (Domain Name Server) records to look up the IP address of the system. Apparently, the ISP isn't doing that good a job of propagating the DNS records for that address.
[ ... ]
What I meant was not the actual units of measurement, but whether there was an actual physical difference in the pitch of the sprockets on the saws.
AS for the .375 vs .370 -- I think that may be a side-effect of people accustomed to mm (where 0.01mm is already pretty small) just rounding the decimal inches to two significant figures too -- but continuing to display that third zero. :-)
The .325 may be a matter of just not typing in the right figure somewhere in there, as it makes no real sense either in fractional inch or in mm (8.25mm doesn't sound like a normal metric size to me.) .3125" (5/8") is pretty close to 8mm, but this isn't that, either.
It sounds as though the saw chain will work with no problems other than the human ones. :-)
Depends on the newsreader. For those which honor the "References: " header, it will continue to be part of the same thread. For those which depend on the "Subject: " header entirely, it will break the thread. (This is why when someone changes the subject to try to start a new thread while replying to an existing thread, it only works for some. To truly divorce the thread, you have to edit out the "References: " header to no content to eliminate the connection to other articles.
Both -- my newsreader copies everything, including the headers, into the editor so I can create my response. This means that the spelling checker sees all kinds of things which it doesn't like, including the "Message-IDs: " and "References: ", as well as all kinds of fractions of e-mail addresses and such. It does not limit itself to checking just my own new text -- it checks everything. I have to resist correcting other's spelling in the quoted text. :-)
3/8"
3/8" Low Profile .325" pitch (I've not got any idea where they came up with this size but it is standard).
1/4" pitch.
There are larger sizes as well but those are reserved for the large saws. Most saws that home owners have either take a 3/8" low profile or a .325 pitch.
Next there's the gauge measurement. This is the thickness of the drive links. Most smaller saws use a 0.050" gauge. Some saws are set up for 0.058" gauge (Stihl comes to mind here). There is another gauge but I don't remember it off the top of my head since I've never seen it in this part of the country.
Isn't there also a pitch that alternates drive links of one length (I think .375) with sideplates of another (either .325 or .25), that's also used on smaller saws?
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 15:18:04 GMT, Glenn Lyford vaguely proposed a theory ......and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email
Ooooohhhhhh! Noooooooo! Arrgh!
Actually all saw chain has irregular drive link pin spacing. You actually measure the pitch by measuring the ditance across _3_ pins C/C, the dividing by 2. See? Easy and sensible!
On 17 Jun 2004 23:46:58 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@d-and-d.com (DoN. Nichols) vaguely proposed a theory ......and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email
Didi you ever see that Simpson's episode when the dog (Santa's littel Helper) could not understand what people were saying, and all he could hear was funny noise?...... Which is to say, sorry you lost me. I can see what you mean, but have no idea of how it would happen or why it should do what it's doing.
Rapco seema weird mob. They get mentioned _everywhere_ as the _THE_ carbide chain maker in the US. But getting people to sell it is amazing, and they use some penny-ante dealer in Oz, who has no website, and ...BAH!.
Yes.
I see what you mean.
But .370 means nothing in mm. It is a definite pitch all its own. The saw tech I am trying to get sense out of at Baileys says .370 is actually 3/8" low profile (which may or may not be true), and Rapco don't make it. Another Rapco dealer lists 3/8" low profile but won't sell to me.
Nope! It's a pitch alrighty. Quite well known. I agree it makes no sense, even up to some fraction of 128!
5/16" ?
hmmmm.
Yeah, that just happened to me. Funny, I have seen threads lost _because_ there was a "re:" in front of the header. Oh well, it's still there.
WRT saw chain, I am getting to a point where I can't!
Yeah, something like that. I was looking into this some when I bought a chain for my dad, so now I've forgotten all the particulars, but it's not unusual for the nominal pitch to not match any particular single link in the chain. Though I want to say that in the larger pitches, they actually do match. I'd have to dig back into the Oregon site to figure all this out again, but it sounds like you're on top of it.
Nope! I'm one of those who don't watch the Simpsons. But the principle is clear.
O.K. Let's see ...
1) All systems on the internet are reachable by their IP address. (one of my systems happens to have the IP address of 204.91.85.10).
2) These numbers mean nothing to *people* -- just to computers, so each is assigned a name, a combination of the computer's name (ceilidh is one of mine), and the domain name (.d-and-d.com), which is registered from one of the registrars.
3) When you want to contact a system, you type in the system's full name (e.g. ceilidh.d-and-d.com), and your computer asks its DNS server (Domain Name Server). That server likely doesn't know anything except very nearby systems, but it looks at it and says ".com" -- O.K. I ask this upstream server. It looks at it, and if it knows d-and-d.com, it knows where to ask for the final detail -- the address of ceilidh. If not, it passes the request on upstream, and eventually finds some name server which knows "d-and-d.com", and asks it about ceilidh.d-and-d.com.
4) That system finally says -- "Oh yes -- ceilidh.d-and-d.com is really "204.91.85.10".
5) Finally, armed with this information, the actual connection to the system can be performed.
Note that the same IP address can have a large number of names, aliases. This is the case when an ISP offers web services for a large number of customers with their own domain names and system names. This sometimes results in failures for DNS lookups, as some systems (I think) have a limit to how many names will be handled for a single IP address.
For e-mail, what the system should do is ask for the MX record (mail exchanger) -- the IP address of the system which accepts e-mail for that name. This is usually a mail server run by the ISP.
What happens sometimes is that the communication between the various DNS servers is flakey, or the local mail server just asks for the IP of the system, not the MX record, and can't find an address to which to deliver the e-mail. This is what happened in your case. If I still had the e-mail address, I would try a lookup locally.
Ouch!
[ ... ]
Agreed -- but it might result from someone accustomed to working in mm deciding that there was no need for that third figure after the decimal place. After all, in metric work, that third figure is for really serious precision, while in decimal inches, it is common precision.
Ouch! Why won't he sell it to you? Does he insist that it will not fit your saw?
Agreed. But the confirmation from Wayne Cook assures me that it is not a typo.
Yes -- sorry about that. I really should not type these things this late at night. :_)
[ ... ]
Those would be with rather stupid newsreaders which base it all on the "Subject: " header. Those which monitor the "References: "header will be fine -- except when one of the more stupid newsreaders forgets to update it, or leaves it off entirely. :-)
I hope that it works out for you. I presume that you've tried asking for "A chain to fit a Quisling brand model 3325XZ" or whatever as appropriate?
On 19 Jun 2004 00:40:25 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@d-and-d.com (DoN. Nichols) vaguely proposed a theory ......and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email
snip
And all the dog had to do was "Sit!" Thanks for that.
No. That's the irony. The ones who say they _have_ chain won't sell overseas. The one who won;t agreeehtere _is_ such a chain _would_ sell it to me if he agreed it existed!
It feels more like the Danish "Ugly Duckling" at the moment!
But yes I started _out_ this way. Since then I have learnt a lot, and now quote chapter and verse every time I post an email.
Hah! I just had a guy come back from a chainsaw shop "What's TCT?" eeerrrrrrrgh!
On 17 Jun 2004 16:36:00 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@d-and-d.com (DoN. Nichols) vaguely proposed a theory ......and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email
I have had no response from the other Auzzie on this thread. I will get my wife to try on her logon. May even gether to try at work. That would really be interesting.
They even semm to have trouble "knowing" whether they replied to my "email" (in fact a fax) sucessfully.
Don't trust the local guy to know what he is talking about, based on past experience with similar setups. I have faxed Rapco again, with fax no, email, you name it. We shall see.
When I get what I want from them, I am going to ......._politely_..... let them know that if they want to "go worldwide" they need to wake up. I mean politely. But often even the most gentle "negative" advice can cause a very sour response.
.......sez he, from his 150 acres of Auzzie bush (actually the Auzzie bush is now called john howard! ) where he hides from dealing with people as much as possible, because he gave up the cirporate world where every bastard made everyone else's business his own.........hrrrmpph! Sorry.
O.K. This makes it look as though their spamblocking has gone wild, and they are considering everything in OZ as potential spam or a potential system cracker.
I just took your current IP --203.59.191.63 (taken from the "NNTP-Posting-Host: " header), and ran my script to see whether it is in any blocklists. It is currently in one -- blackholes.five-ten-sg.com, which lists more entries than many of the others. They are more stable than spamcop, where entries appear and vanish in the blink of an eye.
The comment which they have associated with the entry is:
"Miscellaneous address blocks which have sent spam here."
Dolores just checked it, and it is also in block.blars.org, and that one blocks by class-B or class-C IP blocks, not just individual IPs. (That is, 256 at a time, or 65,536 at a time.)
So -- someone has sent a lot of spam from somewhere in the same class-C or class-B block (likely several addresses within that range), and this could block e-mail *to* the company, if the company's ISP uses one of those blocklists.
However, it should *not* block access to their web page, unless they have a seriously draconian firewall set up somewhere in there. This could be the ISP, or the company -- or conceivably the router. Note that all of Australia (along with China, Korea, Japan, and many other countries) are in APNIC, and it is possible that the blocking is against all of APNIC's address space.
I'm afraid that the only way to be *sure* of reaching them (for you) is a phone call -- or perhaps snail-mail.
Or *perhaps* you could get a free hotmail account which you could access from OZ, and mail as though from in the USA.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.