Text 24380, 47 rader
Skriven 2015-05-09 21:59:44 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
  Kommentar till text 24375 av Robert Wolfe (1:116/18)
Ärende: The totally incompetent R19C
====================================
 On Sat, 09 May 2015, Robert Wolfe wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:

> It may be OK by your interpretation of policy, but over here, it was 
> never acceptable. A coordinator that can't find the time or the 
> motivation to check on his FTN stuff more often than once every few 
> weeks should step down and making room for someone who can. Period.

 RW> This is similar to what it appears my NC is doing.  I tried to 
 RW> send a routed netmail routed through my NC and only got a 
 RW> bounceback saying that the node I tried to send the netmail to was 
 RW> not in the nodelist when in fact it is.

what software generated that bounceback? what node generated it?? in many many
cases, there is no such bounceback... in some cases where there is such, it
comes down to the nodelist that bouncing node's software is using is not up to
date... in some cases, it may be more up to date than that you are running...
it may be that the message came bouncing back to you from another node further
up the line of the path you routed your netmail down...

 RW> This happens frequently when I try to send routed netmail.

ok, so have you discussed this problem with the bouncing node or no???

 RW> At least when I used to route all my outbound netmail through 
 RW> 261/38 it got where it was supposed to be.

so why did you change your routing???

 RW> Now I am seeing myself possibly having to do that same thing again 
 RW> unless we get net 116 cleaned up (read "up to date") and fully 
 RW> functional again.

FWIW: remember that your NC doesn't have to route any outbound netmails... they
only have to route those they have agreed to route in your *private* agreement
with them... your NC is only required to route/make available inbound
netmail...

 RW> (AAMOF one of my downlinks switched to me for his Fido feed 
 RW> because our NC wasn't responding to his netmails nor was he 
 RW> getting any traffic from him).

perhaps someone else needs to step up to the plate and bare their arse for all
to take a kick at?? ;) :) 8) 

)\/(ark

 * Origin:  (1:3634/12)