Text 4076, 130 rader
Skriven 2012-09-18 14:06:43 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
     Kommentar till en text av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
Ärende: Pvt nodes vs points
===========================
 ml>  telnet was a common method before they left...

 RW> A complete waste of time, unless one would continue to operate an
 RW> IP BBS. 

telnet was the first ip protocol that fidonet used...

 ml>  secure link? why does fidonet traffic need to travel over an
 ml> encrypted link? would hackers really be looking at our fidonet
 ml> traffic? yeah, ok... so maybe they would... at which point,
 ml> those developers would have come up with an encryption method or they
 ml> would have embraced encrypted telnet or ssh or any of several other
 ml> encrypted comms linking methods...

 RW> How do you block DNS from interupting your traffic? That's Denial
 RW> of Service and not the DNS protocol, of course.

yo are speaking of (D)DOS instead of DNS, right? (D)DOS is a while different
animal... simply put, it is the result of too much inbound traffic for the link
to handle... you cannot block (D)DOS at all... you /must/ get your provider
involved so they can nulroute it in the routers... the extra "D" i've put in
parenthesis stands for "Distributed"... plain DOS comes from one location
where's DDOS comes from more than one... both serve the same purpose of filling
the inbound pipe with more traffic than it can handle...

 ml>  but we can thank many others for their leaving and not carrying on
 ml> with the visions they had for fidonet :( :? :/

 RW> Souvestre, Bodger, Kohl, Frezburg...yeah, I agree with their exits.
 RW> Too bad they didn't make it sooner than later.

they were not developers... they were politicians... souvestre might have
written something but he didn't do much of that for very long as he
"contracted" later work out... nobogus being the direct result of that...

[trim]

 ml>> do you expect the maintainer of dbridge to also support binkd or
 ml>> no??

 RW>> Whatever he does, support or not, if the software works as he
 RW>> designed it,

 ml> *he* didn't design binkd... *he* only hybridized it

 RW> Same difference. I'm sure the code is a lot different now than it
 RW> was when he first got his hands on it.

the binkd code isn't...

[trim]

 ml> much like the bbs flaws that many have touted, *he* has the sources
 ml> whereas *i* do not...

 RW> With the expert knowledge that you have, and a code of your own
 RW> with a compiler to match, yours could be the ultimate Fidonet
 RW> package around. Unless you insist on supporting and using ancient
 RW> technology to continue developing it...

i will take that as the compliment it appears to be intended as... thank you...
if i do undertake such, it will most definitely continue to support the old
protocols...

 RW>> then he gets my vote for being the most competent with his
 RW>> package. Any other input is merely making unnecessary noise and
 RW>> complicates the issues.

 ml> not when the contributions are taken at facevalue and understood to
 ml> be what they are...

 RW> The problem with that is you're trying to tell him what to do, not
 RW> suggesting what features to fix and what to toss out.

there again, that's not the voice in my head when i write those messages...
when i write a post that provides a method of getting around a bug or problem,
i give the details of such... when the response appears to be a blowoff doe to
a misunderstanding, then yes, i will attempt to state it again slower so
there's no mistakes... that others take that as me telling them what to do is
definitely a mistake on their part because that's not what i have done...

 RW>>> As you know, I don't cater to text file configurations in a day
 RW>>> when GUI works much better.

 ml>> GUI don't "work so much better"... it may be prettier and it may be
 ml>> only a click away but...

 RW>> That's true, but I don't have to sit here and have a dozen open
 RW>> books to get the friggin thing configed with a fucking antique
 RW>> typewriter mentality.

 ml> are you willing to pay for a GUI to provide such simplicity for those
 ml> textfile only programs you use?

 RW> I hadn't planned on it when I encountered DB, but I've considered a
 RW> donation to the author for his cont'd work. Does that answer your
 RW> question?

if a GUI to handle binkd's config file is all you really want, well...

 ml> that's where the main question comes into play... many want "free" as
 ml> in "free beer" but when it comes down to brass tacks, their "free" is
 ml> much different that the "free" originally offered :/

 RW> I've been known to support GUI software before. I paid to register
 RW> IREX and didn't get what I paid for...that in itself makes 'free
 RW> shit' insoluable in my book.

i suspect that you thought you were paying for more than was stated in the
registration documentation... many folk have done this and many still do
today... sorry that you felt you got ripped...

 RW>>> But that makes a software author work that much harder and we're
 RW>>> shit out of software programmers these days.

 ml>> oh goo grief... do you really want me to write you a GUI editor for
 ml>> the binkd conf file??

 RW>> If it worked, that would be the only way I'd use Binkd.

 ml> right... but you're already using binkd! ;)

 RW> Not that I'm as aware of as I was with IREX... 8^)

IREX doesn't use binkd (the binary)... IREX implements an old version of the
binkP protocol... there is a difference...

)\/(ark

 * Origin:  (1:3634/12)