RAM issues

[Nigel Stapley]

Me again with another question of the blindingly obvious...

I've just bought some extra SDRAM. I had 128, but bought an extra 256 (I
wanted 128, but they were out of stock).

I had some problems...well, a lot of problems in fact, with a host of blue
screens and ipf's in just about every program you could imagine (and one or
two you couldn't!), but I think I sorted that one out - I cleaned the old
stick and both slots properly.

All the ipf's showed the same first section of the address - 016f.

(The system is showing the correct amount of RAM - 384MB - both in system
info and the BIOS).

After I did that, the machine ran fine for about 3 hours or so. Then, with
eMule already open, I opened Front Page 2000, but when I tried opening a
page to edit it, it gpf'd me in Kernel386.exe. A host of other fun ipf's,
gpf's and (for all I can remember) wtf's followed. Again, the ipf's all
showed the address beginning with 016f.

I've also had registry errors. I backed up a known working one, but the
problem returned later. I let Windows repair it this time. When it came back
up after my next step, it said that it had repaired some system files
(didn't say which) and asked me to register my copy of Office 2000, which
I've had for nearly 3 years!

So now, I did what I thought I saw recommended on a site I found (can't
remember which one now), which is to put the newer, bigger, (presumably)
faster stick in DIMM Slot 1, and the older one in Slot 2. So far (about 30
minutes), this seems to be working OK.

(I've just checked again, and the article in fact says exactly the opposite.
But I started out with the smaller stick in Slot 1 and, as you can see, it
didn't work very well. By a process of elimination, therefore, back-to-front
may be the way ahead!)

Do you think this is likely to cure it? If the problem recurs, is there
anything else I could take a look at?

I couldn't help notice when checking the BIOS settings earlier on that DRAM
Frequency is set to '100' (this is a 133 machine) and that SDRAM CAS#
Latency is set to '3'. On the same site I got the other advice from, it
suggested changing this to '2'.

I'd be grateful for any advice, hints, pointers or consoling thought.

TIA


--
Regards

Nigel Stapley (aged 42 years minus 9 hours and counting down.... ;-))

www.judgemental.plus.com

<reply e-mail address will bounce>

[Gary S. Terhune]

While others may want to help you tweak to your heart's content, I suggest
that these two sticks of RAM are simply incompatible and that you should
just try using the new stick alone. Use conservative settings (IOW, leave it
at 100 MHz) for the moment, get DocMemory from www.sysinternals.com and run
a burn-in test. If it fails, get your money back if possible.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP for Win9x

"Nigel Stapley" > wrote in message
...
> Me again with another question of the blindingly obvious...
>
> I've just bought some extra SDRAM. I had 128, but bought an extra 256 (I
> wanted 128, but they were out of stock).
>
> I had some problems...well, a lot of problems in fact, with a host of blue
> screens and ipf's in just about every program you could imagine (and one
or
> two you couldn't!), but I think I sorted that one out - I cleaned the old
> stick and both slots properly.
>
> All the ipf's showed the same first section of the address - 016f.
>
> (The system is showing the correct amount of RAM - 384MB - both in system
> info and the BIOS).
>
> After I did that, the machine ran fine for about 3 hours or so. Then, with
> eMule already open, I opened Front Page 2000, but when I tried opening a
> page to edit it, it gpf'd me in Kernel386.exe. A host of other fun ipf's,
> gpf's and (for all I can remember) wtf's followed. Again, the ipf's all
> showed the address beginning with 016f.
>
> I've also had registry errors. I backed up a known working one, but the
> problem returned later. I let Windows repair it this time. When it came
back
> up after my next step, it said that it had repaired some system files
> (didn't say which) and asked me to register my copy of Office 2000, which
> I've had for nearly 3 years!
>
> So now, I did what I thought I saw recommended on a site I found (can't
> remember which one now), which is to put the newer, bigger, (presumably)
> faster stick in DIMM Slot 1, and the older one in Slot 2. So far (about 30
> minutes), this seems to be working OK.
>
> (I've just checked again, and the article in fact says exactly the
opposite.
> But I started out with the smaller stick in Slot 1 and, as you can see, it
> didn't work very well. By a process of elimination, therefore,
back-to-front
> may be the way ahead!)
>
> Do you think this is likely to cure it? If the problem recurs, is there
> anything else I could take a look at?
>
> I couldn't help notice when checking the BIOS settings earlier on that
DRAM
> Frequency is set to '100' (this is a 133 machine) and that SDRAM CAS#
> Latency is set to '3'. On the same site I got the other advice from, it
> suggested changing this to '2'.
>
> I'd be grateful for any advice, hints, pointers or consoling thought.
>
> TIA
>
>
> --
> Regards
>
> Nigel Stapley (aged 42 years minus 9 hours and counting down.... ;-))
>
> www.judgemental.plus.com
>
> <reply e-mail address will bounce>
>
>

[Hugh Candlin]

Nigel Stapley > wrote in message ...
>
> After I did that, the machine ran fine for about 3 hours or so. Then, with
> eMule already open, I opened Front Page 2000, but when I tried opening a
> page to edit it, it gpf'd me in Kernel386.exe.

Did it? There is no legitimate Windows file by that name.

There is a similarly-named file - KRNL386.EXE - which IS legitimate,
but virus writers thrive because people overlook such bogus files
because of such name similarities.

[Ron Martell]

"Nigel Stapley" > wrote:

>Me again with another question of the blindingly obvious...
>
>I've just bought some extra SDRAM. I had 128, but bought an extra 256 (I
>wanted 128, but they were out of stock).
>
>I had some problems...well, a lot of problems in fact, with a host of blue
>screens and ipf's in just about every program you could imagine (and one or
>two you couldn't!), but I think I sorted that one out - I cleaned the old
>stick and both slots properly.
>
>All the ipf's showed the same first section of the address - 016f.
>
>(The system is showing the correct amount of RAM - 384MB - both in system
>info and the BIOS).
>
>After I did that, the machine ran fine for about 3 hours or so. Then, with
>eMule already open, I opened Front Page 2000, but when I tried opening a
>page to edit it, it gpf'd me in Kernel386.exe. A host of other fun ipf's,
>gpf's and (for all I can remember) wtf's followed. Again, the ipf's all
>showed the address beginning with 016f.
>
>I've also had registry errors. I backed up a known working one, but the
>problem returned later. I let Windows repair it this time. When it came back
>up after my next step, it said that it had repaired some system files
>(didn't say which) and asked me to register my copy of Office 2000, which
>I've had for nearly 3 years!
>
>So now, I did what I thought I saw recommended on a site I found (can't
>remember which one now), which is to put the newer, bigger, (presumably)
>faster stick in DIMM Slot 1, and the older one in Slot 2. So far (about 30
>minutes), this seems to be working OK.
>
>(I've just checked again, and the article in fact says exactly the opposite.
>But I started out with the smaller stick in Slot 1 and, as you can see, it
>didn't work very well. By a process of elimination, therefore, back-to-front
>may be the way ahead!)
>
>Do you think this is likely to cure it? If the problem recurs, is there
>anything else I could take a look at?
>
>I couldn't help notice when checking the BIOS settings earlier on that DRAM
>Frequency is set to '100' (this is a 133 machine) and that SDRAM CAS#
>Latency is set to '3'. On the same site I got the other advice from, it
>suggested changing this to '2'.
>
>I'd be grateful for any advice, hints, pointers or consoling thought.
>

If the problem recurs try pulling the *old* 128 mb and running for
several days with just the new 256 mb by itself.

Good luck


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."

[Nigel Stapley]

Thanks, Gary. It started playing up again shortly after my last post (same
issues, same memory area), so I'll try this. I only wanted 256MB anyway - I
was just seeing if the two sticks would run together.

I've tried DocMemory on it as it is, and it comes up with failures on the
Quick Test. I'll take out the old stick and see how it goes.

TFYH


--
Regards

Nigel Stapley

www.judgemental.plus.com

<reply e-mail address will bounce>
"Gary S. Terhune" > wrote in message
...
> While others may want to help you tweak to your heart's content, I suggest
> that these two sticks of RAM are simply incompatible and that you should
> just try using the new stick alone. Use conservative settings (IOW, leave
it
> at 100 MHz) for the moment, get DocMemory from www.sysinternals.com and
run
> a burn-in test. If it fails, get your money back if possible.
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS MVP for Win9x
>
> "Nigel Stapley" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Me again with another question of the blindingly obvious...
> >
> > I've just bought some extra SDRAM. I had 128, but bought an extra 256 (I
> > wanted 128, but they were out of stock).
> >
> > I had some problems...well, a lot of problems in fact, with a host of
blue
> > screens and ipf's in just about every program you could imagine (and one
> or
> > two you couldn't!), but I think I sorted that one out - I cleaned the
old
> > stick and both slots properly.
> >
> > All the ipf's showed the same first section of the address - 016f.
> >
> > (The system is showing the correct amount of RAM - 384MB - both in
system
> > info and the BIOS).
> >
> > After I did that, the machine ran fine for about 3 hours or so. Then,
with
> > eMule already open, I opened Front Page 2000, but when I tried opening a
> > page to edit it, it gpf'd me in Kernel386.exe. A host of other fun
ipf's,
> > gpf's and (for all I can remember) wtf's followed. Again, the ipf's all
> > showed the address beginning with 016f.
> >
> > I've also had registry errors. I backed up a known working one, but the
> > problem returned later. I let Windows repair it this time. When it came
> back
> > up after my next step, it said that it had repaired some system files
> > (didn't say which) and asked me to register my copy of Office 2000,
which
> > I've had for nearly 3 years!
> >
> > So now, I did what I thought I saw recommended on a site I found (can't
> > remember which one now), which is to put the newer, bigger, (presumably)
> > faster stick in DIMM Slot 1, and the older one in Slot 2. So far (about
30
> > minutes), this seems to be working OK.
> >
> > (I've just checked again, and the article in fact says exactly the
> opposite.
> > But I started out with the smaller stick in Slot 1 and, as you can see,
it
> > didn't work very well. By a process of elimination, therefore,
> back-to-front
> > may be the way ahead!)
> >
> > Do you think this is likely to cure it? If the problem recurs, is there
> > anything else I could take a look at?
> >
> > I couldn't help notice when checking the BIOS settings earlier on that
> DRAM
> > Frequency is set to '100' (this is a 133 machine) and that SDRAM CAS#
> > Latency is set to '3'. On the same site I got the other advice from, it
> > suggested changing this to '2'.
> >
> > I'd be grateful for any advice, hints, pointers or consoling thought.
> >
> > TIA
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards
> >
> > Nigel Stapley (aged 42 years minus 9 hours and counting down.... ;-))
> >
> > www.judgemental.plus.com
> >
> > <reply e-mail address will bounce>
> >
> >
>

[Nigel Stapley]

"Hugh Candlin" > wrote in message
...
>
> Nigel Stapley > wrote in message
...
> >
> > After I did that, the machine ran fine for about 3 hours or so. Then,
with
> > eMule already open, I opened Front Page 2000, but when I tried opening a
> > page to edit it, it gpf'd me in Kernel386.exe.
>
> Did it? There is no legitimate Windows file by that name.
>
> There is a similarly-named file - KRNL386.EXE - which IS legitimate,
> but virus writers thrive because people overlook such bogus files
> because of such name similarities.
>

Sorry Hugh, that's the one I meant. I cen't road my oun writting..... ;-)


--
Regards

Nigel Stapley

www.judgemental.plus.com

<reply e-mail address will bounce>

[Nigel Stapley]

"Ron Martell" > wrote in message
...
>
> If the problem recurs try pulling the *old* 128 mb and running for
> several days with just the new 256 mb by itself.
>
> Good luck
>
>
> Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada

Thanks, Ron. I'll try this.


--
Regards

Nigel Stapley

www.judgemental.plus.com

<reply e-mail address will bounce>

[Nigel Stapley]

Update on this : I ran DocMemory with just the 256MB stick in. It
consistently failed the MATS+ tests in the same two places (134M & 175M)
each time. When it tried to read back the data string, the fifth character
was always wrong.

I then ran it with just the old 128MB stick. No problems.

I think we're looking at a faulty stick here, Houston. Back to the shop with
it this afternoon, if I can.

Thanks for all your advice.

HAND
--
Regards

Nigel Stapley

www.judgemental.plus.com

<reply e-mail address will bounce>

"Nigel Stapley" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks, Gary. It started playing up again shortly after my last post (same
> issues, same memory area), so I'll try this. I only wanted 256MB anyway -
I
> was just seeing if the two sticks would run together.
>
> I've tried DocMemory on it as it is, and it comes up with failures on the
> Quick Test. I'll take out the old stick and see how it goes.
>
> TFYH
>
>
> --
> Regards
>
> Nigel Stapley
>
> www.judgemental.plus.com
>
> <reply e-mail address will bounce>
> "Gary S. Terhune" > wrote in message
> ...
> > While others may want to help you tweak to your heart's content, I
suggest
> > that these two sticks of RAM are simply incompatible and that you should
> > just try using the new stick alone. Use conservative settings (IOW,
leave
> it
> > at 100 MHz) for the moment, get DocMemory from www.sysinternals.com and
> run
> > a burn-in test. If it fails, get your money back if possible.
> >
> > --
> > Gary S. Terhune
> > MS MVP for Win9x
> >
> > "Nigel Stapley" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Me again with another question of the blindingly obvious...
> > >
> > > I've just bought some extra SDRAM. I had 128, but bought an extra 256
(I
> > > wanted 128, but they were out of stock).
> > >
> > > I had some problems...well, a lot of problems in fact, with a host of
> blue
> > > screens and ipf's in just about every program you could imagine (and
one
> > or
> > > two you couldn't!), but I think I sorted that one out - I cleaned the
> old
> > > stick and both slots properly.
> > >
> > > All the ipf's showed the same first section of the address - 016f.
> > >
> > > (The system is showing the correct amount of RAM - 384MB - both in
> system
> > > info and the BIOS).
> > >
> > > After I did that, the machine ran fine for about 3 hours or so. Then,
> with
> > > eMule already open, I opened Front Page 2000, but when I tried opening
a
> > > page to edit it, it gpf'd me in Kernel386.exe. A host of other fun
> ipf's,
> > > gpf's and (for all I can remember) wtf's followed. Again, the ipf's
all
> > > showed the address beginning with 016f.
> > >
> > > I've also had registry errors. I backed up a known working one, but
the
> > > problem returned later. I let Windows repair it this time. When it
came
> > back
> > > up after my next step, it said that it had repaired some system files
> > > (didn't say which) and asked me to register my copy of Office 2000,
> which
> > > I've had for nearly 3 years!
> > >
> > > So now, I did what I thought I saw recommended on a site I found
(can't
> > > remember which one now), which is to put the newer, bigger,
(presumably)
> > > faster stick in DIMM Slot 1, and the older one in Slot 2. So far
(about
> 30
> > > minutes), this seems to be working OK.
> > >
> > > (I've just checked again, and the article in fact says exactly the
> > opposite.
> > > But I started out with the smaller stick in Slot 1 and, as you can
see,
> it
> > > didn't work very well. By a process of elimination, therefore,
> > back-to-front
> > > may be the way ahead!)
> > >
> > > Do you think this is likely to cure it? If the problem recurs, is
there
> > > anything else I could take a look at?
> > >
> > > I couldn't help notice when checking the BIOS settings earlier on that
> > DRAM
> > > Frequency is set to '100' (this is a 133 machine) and that SDRAM CAS#
> > > Latency is set to '3'. On the same site I got the other advice from,
it
> > > suggested changing this to '2'.
> > >
> > > I'd be grateful for any advice, hints, pointers or consoling thought.
> > >
> > > TIA
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Nigel Stapley (aged 42 years minus 9 hours and counting down.... ;-))
> > >
> > > www.judgemental.plus.com
> > >
> > > <reply e-mail address will bounce>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>

[Gary S. Terhune]

Can't say "I told you so", since I didn't, but this is why I always
recommend Crucial.com for RAM. For service, price, support and response to
warranty, they can't be beat.

In any case, whenever the addition of a new hardware component coincides
with you-know-what hitting the fan, that component simply being FUBAR is the
first thing to assume. If it proves to be OK on its own, then compatibility
is next on the list.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP for Win9x

"Nigel Stapley" > wrote in message
...
> Update on this : I ran DocMemory with just the 256MB stick in. It
> consistently failed the MATS+ tests in the same two places (134M & 175M)
> each time. When it tried to read back the data string, the fifth character
> was always wrong.
>
> I then ran it with just the old 128MB stick. No problems.
>
> I think we're looking at a faulty stick here, Houston. Back to the shop
with
> it this afternoon, if I can.
>
> Thanks for all your advice.
>
> HAND
> --
> Regards
>
> Nigel Stapley
>
> www.judgemental.plus.com
>
> <reply e-mail address will bounce>
>
> "Nigel Stapley" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Thanks, Gary. It started playing up again shortly after my last post
(same
> > issues, same memory area), so I'll try this. I only wanted 256MB
anyway -
> I
> > was just seeing if the two sticks would run together.
> >
> > I've tried DocMemory on it as it is, and it comes up with failures on
the
> > Quick Test. I'll take out the old stick and see how it goes.
> >
> > TFYH
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards
> >
> > Nigel Stapley
> >
> > www.judgemental.plus.com
> >
> > <reply e-mail address will bounce>
> > "Gary S. Terhune" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > While others may want to help you tweak to your heart's content, I
> suggest
> > > that these two sticks of RAM are simply incompatible and that you
should
> > > just try using the new stick alone. Use conservative settings (IOW,
> leave
> > it
> > > at 100 MHz) for the moment, get DocMemory from www.sysinternals.com
and
> > run
> > > a burn-in test. If it fails, get your money back if possible.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Gary S. Terhune
> > > MS MVP for Win9x
> > >
> > > "Nigel Stapley" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > Me again with another question of the blindingly obvious...
> > > >
> > > > I've just bought some extra SDRAM. I had 128, but bought an extra
256
> (I
> > > > wanted 128, but they were out of stock).
> > > >
> > > > I had some problems...well, a lot of problems in fact, with a host
of
> > blue
> > > > screens and ipf's in just about every program you could imagine (and
> one
> > > or
> > > > two you couldn't!), but I think I sorted that one out - I cleaned
the
> > old
> > > > stick and both slots properly.
> > > >
> > > > All the ipf's showed the same first section of the address - 016f.
> > > >
> > > > (The system is showing the correct amount of RAM - 384MB - both in
> > system
> > > > info and the BIOS).
> > > >
> > > > After I did that, the machine ran fine for about 3 hours or so.
Then,
> > with
> > > > eMule already open, I opened Front Page 2000, but when I tried
opening
> a
> > > > page to edit it, it gpf'd me in Kernel386.exe. A host of other fun
> > ipf's,
> > > > gpf's and (for all I can remember) wtf's followed. Again, the ipf's
> all
> > > > showed the address beginning with 016f.
> > > >
> > > > I've also had registry errors. I backed up a known working one, but
> the
> > > > problem returned later. I let Windows repair it this time. When it
> came
> > > back
> > > > up after my next step, it said that it had repaired some system
files
> > > > (didn't say which) and asked me to register my copy of Office 2000,
> > which
> > > > I've had for nearly 3 years!
> > > >
> > > > So now, I did what I thought I saw recommended on a site I found
> (can't
> > > > remember which one now), which is to put the newer, bigger,
> (presumably)
> > > > faster stick in DIMM Slot 1, and the older one in Slot 2. So far
> (about
> > 30
> > > > minutes), this seems to be working OK.
> > > >
> > > > (I've just checked again, and the article in fact says exactly the
> > > opposite.
> > > > But I started out with the smaller stick in Slot 1 and, as you can
> see,
> > it
> > > > didn't work very well. By a process of elimination, therefore,
> > > back-to-front
> > > > may be the way ahead!)
> > > >
> > > > Do you think this is likely to cure it? If the problem recurs, is
> there
> > > > anything else I could take a look at?
> > > >
> > > > I couldn't help notice when checking the BIOS settings earlier on
that
> > > DRAM
> > > > Frequency is set to '100' (this is a 133 machine) and that SDRAM
CAS#
> > > > Latency is set to '3'. On the same site I got the other advice from,
> it
> > > > suggested changing this to '2'.
> > > >
> > > > I'd be grateful for any advice, hints, pointers or consoling
thought.
> > > >
> > > > TIA
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > Nigel Stapley (aged 42 years minus 9 hours and counting down....
;-))
> > > >
> > > > www.judgemental.plus.com
> > > >
> > > > <reply e-mail address will bounce>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

[Nigel Stapley]

"Gary S. Terhune" > wrote in message
...
> Can't say "I told you so", since I didn't,

Shouldn't let that stop you! ;-)

>but this is why I always
> recommend Crucial.com for RAM. For service, price, support and response to
> warranty, they can't be beat.

I always prefer to deal with a local company if I can. Not only am I
supporting the local economy by doing so, but I know where they live... :-).
I can actually go to see them, rather than being on hold for an hour by a
Customer Disservice Dept. somewhere in Azerbaijan or wherever.

>
> In any case, whenever the addition of a new hardware component coincides
> with you-know-what hitting the fan, that component simply being FUBAR is
the
> first thing to assume. If it proves to be OK on its own, then
compatibility
> is next on the list.

The guy was cool about it - gave me a new one (different model) straight
away.

I ran DocMemory on it on its own for about half an hour, and then did a
one-and-a-half-hour burn-in on both sticks together (128MB in DIMM 1, 256MB
in DIMM 2). No problems either way.

I'm reluctant to say "problem over" until I've had the live system running a
few hours, but I hope it is - it's a pain trying to type with your fingers
crossed.

Thing is, I've now had to reduce the response speed of the keyboard because
if I leave my finger on the backspace button for as long as I've been used
to, a whole line has disappeared before I can stop it!

Again, thanks for the help.


--
Regards

Nigel Stapley

www.judgemental.plus.com

<reply e-mail address will bounce>

You know when you've been a sysadmin for too long when the phone rings at
home, and you pick it up and say, "Hello, IT Support!"

[Gary S. Terhune]

LOL! Glad to be of service. Yes, if I had a physical location to deal with,
I would. Not an option where I live. 2 hours one-way to get to anything
decent, which means I've yet to even look for such. I do *everything* online
these days. When it comes to customer service, and I've had plenty of
experience across the board, I suspect Crucial.com would rank absolutely #1
in the computer world. I've only had to deal with anything other than
purchasing once, and it was as fast a response as you can get. I get the
same story from everyone I've ever heard on the subject.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP for Win9x

"Nigel Stapley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Can't say "I told you so", since I didn't,
>
> Shouldn't let that stop you! ;-)
>
> >but this is why I always
> > recommend Crucial.com for RAM. For service, price, support and response
to
> > warranty, they can't be beat.
>
> I always prefer to deal with a local company if I can. Not only am I
> supporting the local economy by doing so, but I know where they live...
:-).
> I can actually go to see them, rather than being on hold for an hour by a
> Customer Disservice Dept. somewhere in Azerbaijan or wherever.
>
> >
> > In any case, whenever the addition of a new hardware component coincides
> > with you-know-what hitting the fan, that component simply being FUBAR is
> the
> > first thing to assume. If it proves to be OK on its own, then
> compatibility
> > is next on the list.
>
> The guy was cool about it - gave me a new one (different model) straight
> away.
>
> I ran DocMemory on it on its own for about half an hour, and then did a
> one-and-a-half-hour burn-in on both sticks together (128MB in DIMM 1,
256MB
> in DIMM 2). No problems either way.
>
> I'm reluctant to say "problem over" until I've had the live system running
a
> few hours, but I hope it is - it's a pain trying to type with your fingers
> crossed.
>
> Thing is, I've now had to reduce the response speed of the keyboard
because
> if I leave my finger on the backspace button for as long as I've been used
> to, a whole line has disappeared before I can stop it!
>
> Again, thanks for the help.
>
>
> --
> Regards
>
> Nigel Stapley
>
> www.judgemental.plus.com
>
> <reply e-mail address will bounce>
>
> You know when you've been a sysadmin for too long when the phone rings at
> home, and you pick it up and say, "Hello, IT Support!"
>
>