Text 3813, 168 rader
Skriven 2012-09-11 07:43:34 av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
   Kommentar till text 3301 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Pvt nodes vs points
===========================
mark lewis wrote to Robert Bashe on Monday September 10 2012 at 13:56:

RB>> You can poll my system with binkd by adding my node number and using
RB>> the domain. No password required.

ml> i don't want to add everyone to my binkd setup... do you? why not just

ml> include binkd.txt

ml> in your binkd.cfg after the nodes you specifically define and let it
ml> figure out the math? ;)  we did talk about this a few weeks back :)

Yes, but the problem was that the domain is listed differently in various
systems. Many if not most here add it just after the node number, like in my
case:

,44,abel.dnsalias.net,Datteln,Robert_Bashe,49-2363-56073,9600,CM,XA,MO,V34,V42B
,V110H,X75,IBN,U,ENC

and others use other systms:

,290,Wueppel-BBS,Merzenich,Doris_Schmitz,49-2421-981180,9600,MO,CM,XA,V32B,V34,
X75,IBN:24555,INA:wueppel.doene.de

Without even looking hard, I immediately spotted a PVT node in R24 such as I
mentioned earlier, with domain:

Pvt,434,rr1.dnsart.com,Hagen,Ralf_Remus,-Unpublished-,300,CM,XX,IBN,IEM:ghostri
der@ralf-remus.de

I have my doubts that any program making an "include" file will catch
_everything_ like this, and anyway, I don't correspond with huge numbers of
people. My whole list of nodes I contact directly (with password) may be around
10-15 entries long. I use an "include" list, too, but often have to add a node
that hasn't been caught or is new to my own configuration. I don't consider
that a great handicap.

The only problem comes when I get someone like Bob S., who writes with a PVT
address with _no_ domain and expects people to guess that return mail is
supposed to be host routed. That's confusing here, as we don't have such node
systems (or at least no more than maybe 10 in the entire region, and even they
can be reached by addressing a reply to a reachable node number). If you
already know the situation (as you and others in Z1 obviously do), that's no
problem, but if you're unfamiliar with it, you can make the kind of mistakes I
did with Bob S.

RB>> As to the f.n.z. conversion, there's been so much shut down in fido
RB>> over the years that I have no idea if that would even work nowadays,
RB>> and here in R24, at least, people include their domain in their
RB>> listing if they're IP-capable.

ml> f.n.z conversion is default in binkd... specifying a domain is an
ml> override, technically... all you have to do is to contact the person
ml> that manages the Z2 DNS zone and ask them to place a CNAME for your
ml> static domain name and your f.n.z will work...

_More_ hassle, and here I am without any real problems to begin with ;-)

ml>... some of the binkp.net zone managers have set up something so that
ml>RCs can manage the entries in their region... there might even be a
ml>regional DNS zone manager...

[...]

Marc, I don't want to insult anyone, but all that seems a great effort for very
little benefit to me. It would be enough if we could all agree on how and where
in the nodelist entry a domain _must_ be listed and stick to that. The only
problem we have now is that the domain is included at various positions and
using various flags.

ml>> what do you do when you see a domain listed?

RB>> I add it to my binkd.cfg and poll it. If it responds, and it
RB>> generally does, I know the system is active. That naturally says
RB>> nothing about whether it's on autopilot or not, but at least it
RB>> exists.

ml> that's too much work adding and removing...

For a total of around 15 nodes (the number that were listed in N2448 before I
cleared out the deadwood)? Aside from which many of them had no IP connection
and I had to poll them using a modem or ISDN.

ml> this has already been done for you with the binkd.txt file ;) granted,
ml> a new one hasn't been published in the last few weeks but...

OK, if I contactedd loads of people on a regular basis, I could see the point.
But I run a small system with only 8 active nodes in the net and a few people I
write otherwise. This is not a large system like those of the people doing the
main mail moving.

ml>> for the f.n.z dns domain format, the binkd guys have set up binkp.net
ml>> since fidonet.net got lost some time back...

RB>> Aha! This is exactly the thing I meant above.

ml> i don't understand "exactly the thing [...] meant above"...

Look at my comment above:

RB>> As to the f.n.z. conversion, there's been so much shut down in fido
RB>> over the years that I have no idea if that would even work
RB>> nowadays...

You confirmed the problem with your remark. You know about this binkp.net. I
didn't until now, and how many others (outside R50) are familiar with it?

RB>> Now, you know this, and it may be common knowledge in Z1, but it's
RB>> the first time I've heard of it and I certainly wouldn't use it
RB>> unless there were really no other way.

ml> one of the binkd guys got fidonet.net years and years ago when their
ml> started working on all of this... the f.n.z conversion stuff was
ml> already being used for years and years before that...

This is another thing that may well be normal in Z1, but as far as I know isn't
in R24. I keep mentioning R24 and not Z2 because I don't know what is done
outside our region and stuff like this f.n.z. conversion was never very
widespread here, and was mainly - in the late 1990's - used to spread
advertising spam into fido. Thankfully, whoever was doing this finally stopped.

RB>> Please remember, I was doing a count of active nodes. I wrote several
RB>> times in our node echo, polled every node (there weren't that many
RB>> entries anyway) and repeated that with all modes (analog, ISDN and
RB>> IP) I could manage. Practically nobody uses PVT nodes here, and those
RB>> that do mostly include their domain so that the node can be reached.
RB>> There were none in my segment anyway, so the question never arose.

ml> that's fine... i am just saying that you don't need to manually add
ml> them to your binkd connections list if you use the binkd.txt file or
ml> generate your own from the distributed nodelist...

Which is basically what I do now. But the "include" lists are never complete.
Not a big deal.

RB>> The point was, if their system reacts properly to a poll, it exists.

ml> and what happens if they are on a dynamic connection that was down at
ml> that time you tested?

I didn't test just once, or only on one day. This went on over a period of 7-10
days and at least in R24, no dynamic connection is down that long.

ml> were you doing this all at the same specified time?

No. I just repeated, on various days and times until I was sure that either the
system wasn't online or was working. Remember, these are guys in my local area,
up to around Bochum, not sysops in some other state or even country. It's not
that difficult to tell if their system is working or not.

ml> i'm only pointing out possible problems... heck, my POTS side was down
ml> for a week while i waited on more modems to arrive... at one point i
ml> had it busied out but other times it wasn't...

Which wouldn't have bothered me, if anything else was working. Really, it isn't
that difficult to tell if a system is online here. Last week, our main mail
mover had a problem with his power supply burning out and apparently a couple
of other things, so he was unreachable (I also tried modem and ISDN
connections, all "not online"). That occasionally happens for a day or so, but
after the second day, I mailed a couple of other people here in the region and
asked them to check, too. That's how I found out about the problem. It was
solved in 2-3 days, and was not a really big deal - most of the netmail and
echos affected were R24-internal, anyway.

Cheers, Bob

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-0613
 * Origin: Jabberwocky System - 02363-56073 ISDN/V34 (2:2448/44)