Text 10101, 97 rader
Skriven 2013-08-29 14:51:35 av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
  Kommentar till text 10098 av Ulrich Schroeter (2:244/1120)
Ärende: Internet access - Fidonet Policy thoughts ....
======================================================
Ulrich Schroeter wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:

 US>>> p407, 8.1 isn't a blocker as all ZC's accepts the proposal to
 US>>> move forward with the voting mechanism

 MV>> The last time it was tried it already failed at the first step:
 MV>> getting a majority of the RC's to say "yes".

 US> at the first step ?

Pretty much.

 US> you're building your house from the roof tops ?-)

Some may have had a good plan in their approach, some not so good. I think
Michiel had a good grasp on what needed changing and the first step is to
lay the foundation that first.

 US> and then you probably didn't had a masterplan to move this project
 US> to success ... ?!?  ?-)

The problems arose as more and more RCs rejected the presence of the IC in
the proceedings. Without him it was a foregone conclusion that things may
have worked out, but when he entered the picture, that was the end of
that.

 MV>>  We are hovering near critical mass. Fidonet will
 MV>> not survive another radical change.

 US> So why did Fidonet survive so a long time ?

By ignoring the policy that wasn't supposed to be in the first place.

If Tom Jennings had his way while he was still in Fidonet, there wouldn't
have been a policy that ultimately takes away the powers of a sysop to run
his own system without interference from a *C structure. Had the *C
structure been given the only task of being nodelist clerks, there
wouldn't have been a need for policy.

 US> This is todays message, that realy makes Fidonet in Tom Jennings
 US> ideas to have a universial, decentralized communications network,
 US> where each one may connect another without having a dictatorship that
 US> allows one to cut down the whole net.

8^)

 US> Why do we block down possible alternate transport media with
 US> restrictions written into policy, why we aren't able, to correct
 US> these clauses, so Fidonet becomes future minded and open to systems
 US> that makes the heart of Fidonet - decentralized operations over well
 US> defined FTN standards that doesn't limit communication down to one
 US> transport media only

I don't see any provisions in policy that would get in the way of
transporting Fidonet. I see more in policy pertaining to antiquated rules
that no longer apply to Fidonet. ZMH: being the first to go under the
Fidonet policy surgeon's knife. It can't be written out at this point in
time, but it can surely be ignored by those who have chosen to stay in
Fido using the latest in internet technology to transport mail (echo or
net) via a protocol compatible with the internet and newly written Fido
software to use it.

 US> My vision:

 US> One potential candidate has been named in the meanwhile: "HAM" packet
 US> radio maybe such an addtl. transport layer Others may follow ...

Interesting thoughts.

 US> A subliminal anxiety of publishing content in the internet is not
 US> that is intended by this concept. Its an open looking forward by the
 US> question, what may happen tommorow, if one switches off the
 US> centralized internet routers, than probably from one day to another
 US> all internet and mostly all phone traffic (in the western world)
 US> will be shut down.

Also an interesting view.

 US> Today we're using POTS and by bending Policy also IP ...
 US> to add more physical layers we have to bend Policy again.
 US> Is this what we want? or do we want the Policy updated
 US> to make it possible to extend the Fidonet capabilities
 US> to switch easily the media to continue with communication ?

Why have a policy in the first place? Wouldn't it be much simpler to work
under a gentleman's agreement to transport Fidonet without the burden of
keeping in step with a policy that could possibly need changing again
tomorrow? Maybe an FTSC statement of the agreement to which a sysop agrees
to follow?


         R\%/itt


--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-31012
--- D'Bridge 3.92
 * Origin: Lone Star BBS San Antonio, Texas - USA - (1:387/22)