Noel Demos wrote:
> Sletten Kenneth W KPWA wrote:
> > > Why not the PHOENIX Network Server?
> > .... because it never actually turned into ashes;  so it can't
> > really "rise" from them....

Perhaps not in the general case, but as you may recall in Richard's
and my prior postings, our 3000 was "supposed" to be retired in favor
of a big nasty Oracle/Unix package that eats dollars and expectations.
When the project stumbled on the timetable, and our aging 950 and 960
were dropping peripheral support right and left, we managed to justify
a replacement, and consolidated onto a 969/120.  And as Richard noted,
we are now staying with the 3000 for our core requirements since the
big nasty package couldn't make the cut.  So for the past two years
we have proudly hosted "phoenix.utc.edu".

So I have to support the "phoenix" idea :-)

Jeff Kell <[log in to unmask]>