Text 3320, 69 rader
Skriven 2012-09-13 22:12:06 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
     Kommentar till en text av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
Ärende: Pvt nodes vs points
===========================
ml>> binkd has it built in and uses it even if you don't... to be more
ml>> specific, it uses it each and every time there's a connection and the
ml>> AKAs are presented... you cannot prevent that... it /is/ used,
ml>> period!

RB>> May be, but you still can't contact anyone with binkd without
RB>> specifying a domain in the configuration or an "include" file. If you
RB>> can, it'd be new to me.

ml> so have you actually tried it yet?

 RB> Hell, YES! How do you think this whole discussion started? 

was it really by trying to contact those in your own net that do not specify
the domain in the nodelist? as indicated previously, they and the NC apparently
don't understand all the ways of listing nodes and the methods they can be
contacted... sorry that you have fallen into this situation... it is why,
afterall, i am trying to educate and provide the explanations and pointing to
the methods and reasonings behind them...

 RB> Already forgotten it was because I tried to crash a reply to Bob 
 RB> S.'s "pvt" nodenumber, from which he wrote me (for reasons that 
 RB> were never explained). And that I got a connection, but his system 
 RB> refused my reply because it was addressed to his "pvt" node number 
 RB> and he didn't have that listed as an AKA? Explain that who can. 

that's a completely different matter than the f.n.z capabilities of your chosen
internet capable mailer...

ml>> i keep telling you this but you refuse to accept it :sigh:

RB>> As you refuse to accept that PVT nodes are essentially identical to
RB>> sysop points unless the PVT node (as here) includes a domain to allow
RB>> it to be crashmailed ;-) We all have our problems.

ml> that's political and/or opinion...

 RB> I don't design or govern fido, Mark. All I try to do it use it. 

bingo! and without the knowledge of the way things really work, you and others
will fall into this trap... i'm trying to explain all the mechanisms, how they
work and why there are in place...

 RB> And that's not an "opinion" or "political". It's fact, and the 
 RB> reasons for which some people feel they absolutely _must_ have a 
 RB> "pvt" node are still totally unfathonable to me. 

that's opinion... sad to say... there are reasons for such and it is allowed...
by policy and technology... especially the technology... and even moreso the
technology which politicos have tried to get around and to block in more ways
than those we have seen...

 RB> I personally consider them unnecessary garbage, but if they make 
 RB> some people happy, I have no objections. But it would never occur 
 RB> to me to write netmail using such an address IF I wanted an 
 RB> answer.

routing works if everyone plays the same game as is intended... that some
refuse to is what breaks the system...

 RB> Writing echomail is another matter, since anyone can reply in an 
 RB> echo. But netmail is a different kettle of fish. 

agreed... but echomail is not private mail no matter if delivered routed or
direct...

)\/(ark

 * Origin:  (1:3634/12)