Text 10042, 141 rader
Skriven 2013-08-26 21:00:34 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
  Kommentar till text 10033 av Ulrich Schroeter (2:244/1120)
Ärende: Internet access - Fidonet Policy thoughts ....
======================================================
 On Mon, 26 Aug 2013, Ulrich Schroeter wrote to Joe Delahaye:

 JD>   Re: Internet access
 JD>   By: mark lewis to Joe Delahaye on Sun Aug 25 2013 14:29:33
 JD> ...
 >> some months later to carry message area traffic and became known as
 >> echomail... echomail has always revolved around user's traffic...
 JD> Of course, but to this day, nowhere does it state that  you have to
 JD> run a BBS. A mailer will suffice.  No BBS, no users.  No users, means
 JD> no echomail eminating from your system, other then what you the
 JD> operator write.

 US> p4.07 intro

 US> This document establishes the policy for sysops who are members of
 US> the FidoNet organization of electronic bulletin board systems.

 US> conclusion: every node listed in nodelist is a sysop with a running
 US> bulletin board system ... aka BBS   =:D

it may say that but even back in the 80s there were MO (Mail Only) systems and
they did not run any BBS software... they were either HUBs of some sort or they
were private systems with no BBS or users... in some cases, they actually did
run a BBS and they did have users but this was not acvertised in the nodelist
and contacting them via the advertised nodelist method(s) resulted in no access
to the BBS...

 US> The first step in obtaining a current nodelist is to locate a
 US> FidoNet bulletin board.

no... just a fidonet related system that carries the necessary software, policy
document and nodelist files...

 US> A coordinator is encouraged to operate a public bulletin board
 US> system which is freely available for the purpose of distributing
 US> Policy, FidoNews, and Nodelists to potential new sysops. 

"encouraged" is the operative word here...

 US> Dissemination of this information to persons who are potential
 US> FidoNet sysops is important to the growth of FidoNet, and
 US> coordinators should encourage development of new systems. 

yes... however, the information and files can still be gathered without a
BBS...

 US> Policy, FidoNews, and the nodelist are the glue that holds us
 US> together. Without them, we would cease to be a community, and
 US> become just another random collection of bulletin boards.

true... without the strict definition of "BBS"...

 US> All above sections speaks about "Bulletin Board Systems", not in
 US> Systems (Nodes), running a mailer

hey, you can't really blame the "armchair lawyers" who put P4 together, can
you? then again, many don't take current policy in its entirity, either... just
like EP1, they pick and choose the parts that fit them at the moment...

 US> In Ward's mail writing, that running a BBS on a POTS line makes no
 US> sense nowadays ... but there is an increase of running Telnet BBS
 US> systems servicing Fido-over-IP, so which makes sense ..

yes... pretty much...

 US> What I'll try to focus on is, that P4.07 now is a 24 years old
 US> policy The "ideas" to group "Bulletin Board Systems" together to be
 US> listed as Fidonet members was based by 1989's technique. Now the
 US> world moved forward, Fidonet still exist ... but the requirements
 US> still did change 

true...

 US> We have to switch between POTS, ISDN, IP, maybe more comes in the
 US> future?!?

more is already here and has been for ages... i've yet to see a totally radio
operated system properly listed in the nodelist only by their radio
capabilities... they were forced to have POTS and/or internet connectivity...

this is one reason why africa ended up falling apart in the nodelist... there
were other problems as well but fidonet used to travel via packet radio until
some pright bulb figured out how to use TCP/IP over packet radio and lessen the
transfer rates (at 9600) even more... but at least they did have "live"
bidirectional comms...

 US> We have to deal with probably no POTS BBS system remaining,

wrong... i'm still POTS capable as are many others... specifically because of
what happens when storms and other natural events take out the connection
capability...

 US> but we have a couple of Telnet BBS systems. How a POTS user can 
 US> connect into a Telnet BBS system ?!?  (the question still makes no 
 US> sense ... we probably have lesser POTS systems running than the 
 US> nodelist tells. My assumption is, that 90% of all fidonet traffic 
 US> is handled via FoIP

true to an extent... as for POTS users connecting to a telnet only system,
that's easily handled via an intermediary system that offers a bridge between
the two systems...

 US> An update of Policy 4.07 still hasn't picked up by anyone so its 
 US> an undone task. The open question, if its still necessary or can 
 US> we live with this 24 years, imperfect policy these days ? 

policy simply needs some updating... the problem is conforming to the existing
methodology...

 US> A rethinking about CMH is necessary, as it doesn't apply to the
 US> majority of all systems (times of multilines, FoIP with
 US> multitasking, splitting services BinkP / Telnet) indicates that
 US> this paragraph requires an update. 

CMH? crash mail hour? continuous mail hour?

 US> To implement a mechanism, that allows several different physical
 US> layers to communicate via an elevator concept

in a manner of speaking, yes... as i note above...

 US> But these are not the only topics ...

true...

 US> The days are counted, until my POTS line dies by ISP restictions
 US> same for ISDN ... so I'm no longer policy conform running a POTS
 US> line ?!? ?-) 

i refuse to give up my copper connection specifically because it is all too
possible (and has happened in recent times) that the internet will not be
accessible or operational for any specific entity... in almost all cases in the
last 20+ years that my internet has been inaccessible, i've still had POTS to
fall back on... there has only been a very few times that my copper didn't work
for direct and dedicated connections... those are getting harder and harder to
maintain, though, as more and more systems fall victim to the hype and
propeganda :(

)\/(ark

 * Origin:  (1:3634/12)