Monday, 20 December 2004
[Monday] [Tuesday] [Wednesday]
[Friday] [Saturday] [Sunday]
- It got even colder than forecast last night. Down to
-11.2°C (12°F), according to our electronic recording
thermometer, which is cold for Winston-Salem. And the sensor is just
outside the kitchen window, warmed by air leaks, so the true low
temperature was probably closer to 10°F. The Weather Channel was
reporting 11°F this morning when our thermometer was reading
13°F, so there's probably a couple degrees of warming by the
There was also a 25 MPH (40 KPH) wind, which must have taken the wind
chill down to below zero Fahrenheit. It's actually chilly in my office,
which isn't usually the case with all these computers running.
Roadrunner connectivity was nearly dead when I tried to check
my email Saturday morning. I spent the better part of an hour on the
phone with their tech support people. They quickly escalated me to
second-tier tech support, where I spoke to a nice woman named Sandy,
who did her best to help but was hampered by Roadrunner's
anti-Linux policies. She probably violated their rules by accepting the
output of a Linux traceroute command I gave her, when according to
policy she's supposed to accept only the output from a Windows tracert
command or whatever Apple uses. Come to think of it, I should probably
have told her I was running OS/X
She asked me to connect a Windows box directly to the cable modem to
remove Linux and the D-Link DI-624 wireless router from consideration.
I said, "You want me to connect a naked Windows box to the cable modem?
How long is that going to last before a worm nails it? Two minutes?" I
told her I'd do it, but that meant I'd have to format the drive and
reinstall Windows later. She sympathized, but said she had to ask me to
do that per company policy. She said I might be surprised by how many
of their subscribers have Windows boxes connected directly to their
cable modems. I told her I wouldn't be.
So I connected a Windows box, by which time the cable modem had died
anyway. She said they did have some reports of dead cable modems in
Greensboro and were working on the problem. She gave me a trouble
ticket number and asked me to call back if the problem wasn't fixed in
the next few hours.
I called around the neighborhood and found we weren't alone in being
down. That's good, because Roadrunner has an obnoxious policy. If I
call them to say I'm down, they do essentially nothing about it until
they have multiple outage reports, I believe five. In the evening,
that's not a problem, because enough people are using their systems
that many call in problem reports soon after the outage occurs. But
during the day if the problem is localized to the neighborhood there
may not be five people aware that something's wrong.
They did eventually get the cable modem back up Saturday, but then
this morning about 7:30 a.m. it died again. I called Roadrunner tech
support to tell them my cable modem light was alternating between out,
slow flashing, and fast flashing, and they said they'd have someone out
between 7:30 a.m. and noon tomorrow. Wonderful. Down for another 24
hours. One thing is for sure. We can't depend on Roadrunner IP
connectivity to replace our phone service. Before I dispense with
standard telephone service, I'll need to have a second broadband
connection of some sort.
I sure am looking forward to broadband over power line. Every power
company in the US wants to deploy it, because it'll allow them to read
meters remotely and, more important, institute charges that differ
according to the load on their system. During the summer when
everyone's air conditioners are running flat out, electricity will cost
a lot more per kilowatt-hour than at times when the load is light.
Delivering broadband Internet service over power lines is only a
secondary purpose of this deployment, but one that will allow power
companies to recoup their costs. I expect that service to be priced
very competitively, because the power companies will have the
infrastructure in place to support their own needs, so every dollar
they can get for broadband subscriptions is icing on the cake.
Barbara and I spent Sunday afternoon over at Paul's and Mary's home,
building a new PC for them. Mary built it while Paul and I offered
helpful(?) suggestions, and Barbara shot images. Here's what we used:
I dithered about the CPU cooler. My main desktop system is similar to
this configuration, except that it uses a 3.2 GHz Northwood with the
stock retail-box Intel cooler. The Dynatron DC1206MB-Y is a skived pure
copper cooler with a 60mm fan. It should be a bit quieter than the
stock Intel cooler and a bit more efficient as well.
- Antec Aria case
- Intel D865GLC motherboard
- Intel Pentium 4/2.8 processor (Northwood core)
- Dynatron DC1206BM-Y CPU cooler
- KingMax PC3200 DDR-SDRAM (256 MB X 2)
- Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 160 GB S-ATA hard drive
- Plextor PX-708A DVD writer
Friday night, Barbara walked by my
office and commented that my system was making a loud whine. No wonder.
I checked the BIOS hardware monitoring and found the CPU was running at
57° C, with the CPU fan at 5561 RPM and the power supply fan at
1798 RPM. I shut the system down, and closed the heating vent behind
it. Duh. When I restarted, the system came back up with a CPU
temperature of 45° C, with the CPU fan at 2880 RPM and the power
supply fan at 1107 RPM. After running more than a day, it had
stabilized at a CPU
temperature of 48° C, with the CPU fan at 4195 RPM and the power
supply fan at 1518 RPM. That's several degrees higher than when I first
built and tested the system, so perhaps I should open the case and look
I'd like to install a really good CPU cooler like the Thermalright
XP-120, but there's simply not room for it in the SFF case. What I may
do instead is run the Pentium 4/3.2 at 2.8 GHz. (I can do that on my
own system, because Intel sends me unlocked Engineering Sample
processors.) At 2.8 GHz, which is the same speed as Paul's and Mary's
processor, my Northwood core Pentium 4 dissipates 69.7W. That's 12.3W
less than the same core stepping
running at 3.2 GHz. That may not sound like much, but reducing the
thermal load in that SFF case by 12.3W should lower the CPU temperature
noticeably. The performance difference between 2.8 GHz and 3.2 GHz is
pretty minor, not enough to notice in routine use. And 2.8 GHz is the
sweet spot. Dropping from 3.2 to 3.0 saves 0.1W. Dropping from 3.0 to
2.8 saves 12.2W. Dropping from 2.8 to 2.6 saves only another 3.5W.
At any rate, I chose a Northwood-core Pentium 4/2.8 GHz for Paul and
Mary. It's inexpensive and more than fast enough. In fact, you probably
wouldn't notice a difference between a 2.8 GHz Pentium 4 and a 3.2 GHz
Pentium 4 unless you had the systems side by side. The 2.8 is
noticeably slower than the fastest Pentium 4s and Athlon 64s, but then
those are $900 processors. And, at 69.7W full throttle, the 2.8 GHz
Northwood dissipates just over half the wattage of the fastest Pentium
4s. That made it much easier to cool the SFF case without an annoyingly
loud CPU fan.
I thought for a while about using only the heatsink part of the
Dynatron CPU cooler, replacing its 60mm fan with a separate 80mm fan.
The Aria includes a bracket that allows you to mount a standard case
fan to the side of the power supply. I decided not to do that, because
the heatsink part of the Dynatron CPU cooler is pretty much encased in
a metal shroud. The sides are open, but the top has only a relatively
small open space, which the stock 60mm fan sits on top of. I was afraid
that using the 80mm fan several inches away from the heatsink wouldn't
cool it adequate, so I decided to go with the stock Dynatron fan. With
a 2.8 GHz processor, it should spend most of its time running
relatively slowly anyway, so the noise shouldn't be intrusive.
As far as the other components, you're probably wondering about the
KingMax memory. I'd ordinarily use Crucial, but hey, someone made me an
offer I couldn't refuse. KingMax is good stuff, although I don't
ordinarily advise paying more for "performance" memory. The Plextor
burner is plenty fast enough for what Paul and Mary plan to do with it,
and the Plextor PX-708A is available now very inexpensively. I
considered an NEC ND-3500A, which supports 16X DVD+R burns and
dual-layer recording, for about the same price, but DL discs are still
outrageously expensive, and the difference between 8X burns and 16X
burns doesn't really matter to Paul and Mary. On balance, I'd rather
have the Plextor 8X burner than the NEC 16X burner for the same price.
We got over to their house about 12:30 and Mary started building the
new system around 13:00. Within a couple of hours, we had the system
built, and I attempted to install Xandros 2. The initial parts of setup
proceeded normally, but then it stuck on the
"preparing the disk" part of setup. I let it run for half an hour or
so, and it finally popped up an "unable to mount" error message. I
think the hard drive is borked. By that time, it was about 16:30, and
we'd run out of time. Paul and Mary had plans for dinner and the
evening, so we just left things as they were and headed home. I'll see
about replacing the hard drive later this week.
Chervenak contemplates building her first PC.
We'd talked about making their new system dual-boot Windows 2000 or XP,
but there seemed little point to
doing that. Paul and Mary are rightly concerned about security,
malware, and so on, and they're not gamers, so they don't really have
any need to run Gaming OS. If Paul wants to run Cartes du Ciel, he can
do it easily enough on his notebook. They can run MS Office under
CrossOver Office if they want to. They shouldn't need to, because
StarOffice Writer and Calc should handle everything they need to do in
While I'm over there next time, I'll also set up their new D-Link
DI-624 wireless router and get their
notebooks set up to access it.
Tuesday, 21 December 2004
[Monday] [Tuesday] [Wednesday]
[Thursday] [Friday] [Saturday]
[Sunday] [Next Week]
- If you're using WEP to secure your wireless network, it's time
to upgrade. A SecurityFocus
article discusses a new WEP cracking method that allows a WEP
network to be compromised in minutes or even seconds. Cracking WEP is
trivial in a mathematical sense but until now it has been
time-consuming, at least if WEP was using strong keys. Accordingly, WEP
had been considered good enough to secure a wireless network against
casual intruders. That is no longer true.
If your wireless network uses old 802.11b access points and adapters
that support only WEP, you need to replace them with modern components
that support WPA. Otherwise, anyone can discover your passwords and use
your connection. Most people will be more concerned about the
possibility of compromised passwords and identity theft. Those are
important concerns, certainly, but allowing your Internet connection to
be used by intruders is not trivial, either, as some have already found
to their dismay.
For example, if someone wants to download child porn, he's not going to
do it using his own broadband connection, leaving his fingerprints all
over the download. Instead, he'll surreptitiously connect to your
network, and, if they investigate, the Feds will see that your
broadband IP and MAC addresses are listed as the destination for what
he downloaded. Heck, he may even pay for the stuff with your credit
card and store the porn in a hidden directory
on your computer. Why not? He can get to it any time he wants to.
If the Feds come knocking on your door because they think you've been
downloading child porn, you are in deep shit even if you are innocent.
Child porn prosecutions are witch hunts. The Bill of Rights doesn't
apply. As the accused, you are presumed guilty unless you can prove
yourself innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. The presence of child porn
on your computer or ISP logs that indicate child porn was downloaded by
your computer is prima facie evidence that you are guilty. Although
there have been a few cases in which the accused proved that he was not
responsible for the child porn downloaded by or stored on his computer,
one has to wonder how many innocent people are now in jail because they
couldn't prove their innocence. Quite a few, I suspect.
That'll probably never happen to you, of course, even if you don't
secure your wireless network. But it could happen, and even if it
doesn't there are a lot of other serious compromises that could occur.
Most people have all sorts of private information on their systems.
Their social security numbers, credit card numbers, bank account
information, and so on. Also, most people tend to use at most one or
two passwords for everything, so once an intruder has logged your
password for one thing, he probably has the password he needs for
The best way to protect yourself against such intrusions is not to use
wireless networking at all. If you need wireless networking, do as I
do. Enable it only when needed, and keep it turned off otherwise. If
you use wireless networking, use only access points and adapters that
support WPA. WEP simply isn't good enough nowadays.
11:33 - Oooh, a challenge.
Date: Tue, 21
Dec 2004 08:06:12 -0800
I'd like to
issue a minor challenge for you, in your new role as linux advocate.
you, by yourself and without Brian's (or Rolands, or any other *nix
gurus) help, set up and configure a file server running multiple raided
hard drives in a raid 5 configuration! You've got to do it by
yourself....grin. How about we build a terabyte server?
Ideally it should work in a multi-os environment and serve files for
windows, linux, and mac os. I'd prefer that you use
software raid, natch.
You can use
how-to's, user forums, books, etc but you can't call anyone and ask
them to do it for you. You also can't call Brian and ask
him which distribution to use or how to do it. In other words,
I'd like you to do it like someone without excellent industry
We could add
to the complexity of all of this by asking you to set up a public mail
server and a Web Server and secure them from the web, but let us just
stick to setting up a file server. This is a task that any
reasonably sophisticated end user should be able to do in a minimal
period of time...a day or two. This is just the sort of the kind
of thing that a small business user or advanced home user would
Alas, I've already done it, some years ago, in fact, with, IIRC, Red
Hat 7.X and a Promise ATA RAID controller. That included setting up
shared access for Linux clients via NFS and for Windows clients with
Samba. I didn't set up access for Macs, but that's because I don't have
a Mac. I've also installed and configured sendmail, although I wouldn't
look forward to doing it again, and there are easier alternatives. I
didn't install Apache or another web server, but I suspect it wouldn't
have been that difficult. I don't doubt that doing all of this would be
considerably easier now.
As to doing it without help, why would I hamper myself? Certainly,
Brian, Greg, Roland, and others are Linux experts, but there is no
shortage of competent, willing people who know a lot about Linux and
are more than happy to help out. I have no monopoly on access to help.
But even if I didn't have willing helpers available, there is certainly
sufficient information in print and on the web to do all that you
describe. It might take a bit longer, but that's all.
As to competent end users setting up a file server, we perhaps differ
in our expectations. I don't expect an end user to understand security
issues, access permissions, and so on. Nor would I ever consider
setting up a file server that also faced the public Internet and
provided web and mail server functions. That's a horribly bad idea.
If you want to set up a simple file and print server and are willing to
forego RAID, you can do it with Xandros more easily than with Windows.
You could do the same with another Xandros box on the public side of
the DMZ running web and mail servers. And, of course, the Xandros box
is inherently more secure than a Windows box would be. My opinion,
which is shared by many, is that anyone who sets up a Windows box with
IIS and connects it to the Internet has just created an accident
waiting to happen.
Wednesday, 22 December 2004
[Wednesday] [Thursday] [Friday]
[Sunday] [Next Week]
Years Ago Today]
- Barbara was leaving straight from work yesterday to meet her
sister and head for the mall, so I went over to Mary's & Paul's
house yesterday afternoon to get their new PC running and hook up their
new wireless router.
The system had been acting hinky, and I first suspected the Seagate
Barracuda S-ATA hard drive was defective. I replaced the original with
one of my spares, but as I was working on the system I noticed that one
of the grounding tabs on the I/O shield was sticking into the Ethernet
port, shorting it out. I pried the tab out, and sure enough the
hinkiness went away. I thought I'd checked for errant grounding tabs--I
almost always do--but apparently I'd forgotten to do so.
Xandros installed normally. After I installed the D-Link DI-624 router,
I ran Xandros Networks to get the OS updated, got accounts set up for
Paul and Mary, configured the system, installed AdBlock and FlashBlock,
and did the myriad other things necessary to have the system set up
properly. Everything appears to work properly. We don't have speakers
connected, so I couldn't verify sound, but otherwise they're good to go.
We then got wireless networking set up and WPA activated. Paul walked
around their yard with his notebook to check signal strength. He ended
up walking down the street and reported that he had a signal all the
way to the end of the block. We discussed cutting the transmitter power
to reduce the range, but the downside to that obviously is that we
might end up with dead spots within their home. We eventually decided
that WPA was sufficient to secure their wireless network even if their
signal covered most of their neighborhood.
I wanted to disable SSID broadcast, but of course I couldn't do that
because Windows won't connect to a wireless network unless it's
broadcasting its SSID. Geez. I also didn't bother to enable MAC
filtering, although I may do that once the wireless card for Mary's
notebook arrives. It's easy enough to spoof MAC addresses, so MAC
filtering adds very little security, but I suppose every little bit
Around 5:15 I took a break and drove back home to feed and walk our
dogs. We're also taking care of a dog that belongs to some friends
while they're out of town, so I stopped over at their house to feed and
walk her. Then I headed back to Mary's and Paul's house for dinner.
Mary made a wonderful home-made pizza. We had that, salad, and some
venison that Paul grilled. Very nice.
After dinner, we headed back up to their office and installed some
software on their new PC. Tux Racer was a big hit. Mary played a couple
games, and then handed the keyboard to Paul. I think he was still
playing when I left.
I still have some stuff to do, but they're pretty much functional for
- Oh, yeah. I forgot to mention that I'm doing another radio
interview for John Iasiuolo's Computer Outlook show. I'm on tonight
from 8:00 to 9:00 EST. If you want to listen in, visit the Computer Outlook home page
and click the "Listen Live" icon in the upper left corner of the home
23 December 2004
[Wednesday] [Thursday] [Friday]
[Sunday] [Next Week]
- I had a good time on the radio interview last night. I'm not
sure how many books it sells, but it's fun to do.
There's an interesting
article on C|NET. As most people know, connecting an unpatched
Windows system to the Internet is foolish. The average time a Windows
PC will remain uninfected is shorter than the time needed to download
updates and patches. Even a Windows XP/SP2 system is vulnerable to
quite a few exploits. I found it interesting, although not surprising,
that connecting an unpatched Linux system to the Internet is reasonably
safe. The article reported that unpatched Linux systems remained
uninfected even after being connected for months on end.
More from Dr. Huth.
Date: Wed, 22
Dec 2004 11:04:02 -0800
Bilbrey, Jerry Pournelle
A bit of
snarling at you...Duncan like.....
yesterdays conversations....a couple of other
things....respectfully...my memory of what you reported you did and
your memory are a bit different. Natch, it is your memory and you know
what you did, but you told us in January of 2004 that you hadn't been
able to get samba working with fedora core. In 2001, you set up a
samba page in which you were going to document your efforts replace
theodore your file server with a purpose built linux server running
samba. As a loyal reader, I just presumed that the linux server
effort disappeared because you have reported on a number of occasions
(as recently as last week) that you are still running windows 2000 as
your file server.
In any event
setting up Samba is fairly easy although perhaps not on Fedora
core...the trick is in dancing through the steps necessary to get the
server to recognize the raid 5!
As to your
monopoly in getting help...well you've more of a monopoly than you
think. Access to people like Brian, Greg, and Roland is really, really,
really expensive out here in the real world. None of them is in
the $50/hour range and mostly they have other things to do with their
lives. Frankly, if you had to pay them what they are worth...well
the Thompson coffers might feel the impact. I've spend about 3.5
hours on the phone with Brian while he used ssh to log into my debian
mail server...and I'd suggest that his worth for that was between
$400-600. Understand that he was wonderfully gracious about it, but it
was still an imposition. That was to help set up a mail
server...understand I had it 98% set up, I just couldn't figure out why
it wasn't working....he made a minor change in a configuration file (he
changed the server name to localhost in the file...despite the fact
that the damned how-to specifically said to specify the server name)...
and I was alive...
As to setting
up sendmail...well it is fairly easy to set up Sendmail on a server,
just follow the instructions in the distribution. However, lets
get spamchecking working, run antivirus software, and virtualize the
users so that they all don't have to have accounts on the
box....suddenly we are deep in guru-land. We're not talking just
any guru either, we've got to find us a guru who speaks sendmail or
qmail or postfix and spamassassin and clamav and knows debian or fedora
core or Xandros....there aren't lots of them just waiting around to be
Apache running...as you suggest it was fairly easy once you understand
that there are a couple of versions of Apache (1.3 and 2.x) and a
couple of versions of Apache support files, but I'm sure finding it
more difficult to get Apache configured so that it can do anything.
Again, I've got several books, I've read the how-to's and I'm a daily
visitor to the Apache mailing lists...but I'm still deep in guru-land.
I know how to do what I need to do (I'd like to have ip addresses
inside our domains go to one page and ip addresses outside our domain
go to another!), Brian suggested one way...what he called a crude hack,
I know there is another way, but the number of people in the world who
know how to configure mod_rewrite in Apache 1.3 must reach at least
three and I've not happened on any of them yet. I'll get it
figured out, but 'tis non-trivial. We've got it configured on our
windows server....one types the ipaddresses for one page into one
configuration file and the ipaddresses for the other page into
another. I had it working on my cobalt qube, but that was an
earlier version of apache and things don't seem to work the same way....
easy once you know how...it is the knowing how that is the
challenge. I figure that I'm brighter than the average guy and I
once earned a living pushing database bits for Burroughs so that I'm
not afraid to jump into things and try to make them work. Getting
systems that work under linux is hard work.
said.....please, don't be glib and wave your hands in the air and say
it's easy. It isn't and that is why Microsoft keeps selling
software. That's why Roland, and Greg, and Brian have jobs!
Full employment for Gurus!
Actually, it's Malcolm who snarls...
The problems I reported with Samba were specific to Fedora Core. I'd
had Samba up and running on several earlier distributions I'd tried,
including a couple of Red Hat releases and at least one Mandrake
release. I'm sorry I let the Samba Project page lapse, but I often have
little time available to document in detail things I've done. I could
have migrated to a Linux server some years ago, but elected to remain
with Windows for my file/print server out of inertia more than anything
The Windows 2000 Professional box is still functioning as a file
server. I'd planned to take it down by year-end, but I may wait a while
longer. A certain Linux company whose name I can't mention plans to
release a easy-to-use Linux server version that I suspect is aimed
squarely at Microsoft's Small Business Server. I may wait for that, or
I may just bring up a fileserver using Xandros Desktop.
I know that access to people like Brian, Greg, and Roland is expensive
in the real world, if by real world you mean consulting for businesses.
The same is true of access to skilled Windows folk. But I also know
that people like Brian, Greg, and Roland are happy to help out
individuals who are attempting to learn Linux. The fact that Brian
helped you is proof of that. Not to minimize Brian's skills or
generosity, which I also deeply appreciate, but you'll find that Linux
folks are generally very helpful, at least as much as Windows folks.
Once again, bringing up public-facing mail and web servers is not
something an inexperienced user should be doing, whether under Linux or
Windows. It's really no easier to do it properly under Windows than
under Linux. If you don't believe that, talk to Paul Robichaux about
bringing up an Exchange Server, not to mention trying to manage it
properly. Doing these things properly requires a high level of skill,
which costs money in a commercial setting, no matter which OS you use.
24 December 2004
[Saturday] [Sunday] [Next
- I was just reading a C|NET
article about Firefox. It mentioned that Firefox renders
IE-specific pages in "Quirks mode", so I decided to check this page,
expecting that it'd render in "Standards compliance mode". Alas, it
renders in Quirks mode, and I don't know why.
N|vu has a menu option to check the page being edited against the W3C
HMTL validator. I ran that, and this page validates as HTML 4.01
Transitional, with two exceptions. Both of those are related to the
embedded code needed to implement the Search box at the top of the
page, and there's nothing I can change there without breaking Search.
I'm not sure why that would have anything to do with rendering the
page, or why Firefox/Mozilla considers this page IE-specific, but there
- Barbara and I visited Tractor Supply this morning. Believe it
or not, the one idea she gave me for a Christmas gift was a hand truck.
So we bought her a small hand truck, which she has an image of posted
on her page.
While we were there, I picked up some fasteners. I needed a couple
1/4"X20 bolts, nuts, and washers to repair the handle of her lawn
vacuum. I had one of those drawer organizers with assorted fasteners
that we'd picked up years ago, but the fasteners in it are something
like SAE Grade -12. You can snap the head off one of the 1/4" bolts in
that assortment without trying hard.
I was hoping to find a similar fastener assortment with good grade
fasteners, but they didn't carry one. Instead, I just picked up stuff a
la carte. Tractor Supply carries SAE Grades 2, 5, and 8 fasteners. They
sell them by the pound, mix and match. SAE Grade 2 is $1.37/lb. SAE
Grade 5 is $2.17/lb. SAE Grade 8 is $3.62/lb. I picked up a couple
pounds of assorted 1/4", 5/16", and 3/8" SAE 5 bolts in different
with nuts and lock washers to match.
I also need to get a bunch of #6, #8, and #10 fasteners, but, as far as
I know, SAE Grade applies only to 1/4" and larger fasteners. There must
be some kind of rating system for smaller fasteners, but I don't know
what it is. I do know I want something better than the pot-metal
fasteners included in the kit that's still sitting down in the basement.
25 December 2004
[Saturday] [Sunday] [Next
26 December 2004
[Saturday] [Sunday] [Next
- Subscriber Chris Madsen posted the following over on the
You got me
curious, so I did an experiment. The reason your page renders in
Quirks mode is the DOCTYPE declaration. You have:
html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
change, it renders in Standards Compliance mode. It looks mostly
the same. There are some minor spacing differences. (It's
interesting to load the two versions in tabs and click back and forth
to see differences. Check out the daily links under Tuesday's
And that does indeed work. Thanks!
What's really interesting is that I didn't put that DOCTYPE declaration
in there; Mozilla Composer or N|vu did it. And when I called up the
page in N|vu and attempted to edit the DOCTYPE declation, N|vu wouldn't
let me touch it. I had to call up the file in a text editor and change
it there. Once I did that, saved the changes, and published, the page
now renders in Standards Compliance Mode.
In my browser, though, I didn't see any rendering differences at all.
Perhaps that's because I have Mozilla set to limit the smallest font
© 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 by Robert Bruce
Thompson. All Rights Reserved.