Text 30823, 69 rader
Skriven 2012-07-06 12:39:36 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
  Kommentar till text 30815 av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
Ärende: binkd (was: Link requ... blah blah)
===========================================
 RW>> One would be listed with an ;A or ;S...

 ml> nope... already discussed and tested years ago... besides:

 RW> What I used here was just an example of what can be done. I didn't
 RW> make any claim that it was done that way. But the following seems
 RW> to be in vogue:

[TRIM]

i've already talked about that... you'll notice that it is using multicharacter
;Ex style lines... bj and i were both experimenting with this stuff starting at
the same time... both of our networks segments in the main nodelists had
similar lines... the content of those lines not withstanding... the goal of the
testing was which comment lines were allowed to traverse the entire network
thru all the processing by all the different software and remain intact when
viewed from any other point in the network...

 RW> Apparently that discussion is being ignored by some FTSC members! 

i'm afraid you've lost me with this comment :/


 RW>> ,12,Waldo's_Place_USA,Central_NC_USA,mark_lewis,1-919-774-5930,9600
 RW>> ,XA,ICM
 RW>> ;S,12,Waldo's_Place_USA,Central_NC_USA,mark_lewis,000-0-00-0,IBN,U,
 RW>> NEC

 ml> the problem with this is having mailers to understand that they can
 ml> process this ;S line instead of ignoring it as a sysop interest
 ml> item... ;E lines were, i think, found to be the only ones to make it
 ml> completely thru the network with all the processing done in the
 ml> path...

 RW> As above.

it will get stripped as i've already pointed out... it does not make it all the
way from the bottom up to the top and back down again... the ;E lines are the
only ones that do...

 ml> this is one of the reasons why some of us started looking at
 ml> things like using ;Ex where 'x' was one or more characters... it
 ml> seemed to work as my netseg carried a ;ENote line and a couple of
 ml> others for quite some time... however, it seems that something has
 ml> broken now because my resent ;ENote line has not propogated and
 ml> neither has the change to a node's entry even though i was notified
 ml> that the processing was done without error... i have to follow up on
 ml> that (again)...

 RW> You mean like Janis' nodelist software problems?

this is before janis' level AFAIK... i've not had any word back to my
inquiry... besides, it worked before because my test lines were seen in
nodelists in other zones until i removed them after a year or more of
testing...

 RW>> If someone can insert a notice in this way that the segment is
 RW>> 'copyright' material, it must be just as legitimate to list
 RW>> multi-nodes that way.

 ml> but you are forgetting the main thing is that mailers should also be
 ml> able to handle it in a clear fashion if/when mailers actually get
 ml> developed and maintained again :/

 RW> LOL! That'll be the day.

)\/(ark

 * Origin:  (1:3634/12)