Text 11203, 69 rader
Skriven 2019-06-26 14:44:44 av Alexey Vissarionov (2:5020/545)
  Kommentar till text 11202 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.73)
Ärende: FTSC's "job"
====================
Good ${greeting_time}, mark!

26 Jun 2019 05:43:00, you wrote to Alan Ianson:

 AI>> It would be best to report issues direcly with the author of the
 AI>> software causing issues (if known) or the project when possible.
 ml> it isn't software that is causing the main issue reported (characters
 ml> being stripped from message bodies)... it is the specifications in
 ml> use, how the wording they use is understood, and how multiple
 ml> specifications interact with other specifications due to the way they
 ml> are worded...
 ml> eg: does "blah is to be ignored" mean that blah is dropped from the
 ml> processing stream (one form of ignored) or does it mean that blah is
 ml> to not be acted on but must remain in the processing stream and
 ml> passed on to other systems (another form of ignored)...

The phrase "%s must be ignored" in technical documentation could mean only
"despite of all possible special meanings, any special processing of %s is
prohibited".

Examples:
1. The $shell_variable_name enclosed in 'single quotes' must be ignored.
2. The /* comments in a C/C++code */ must be ignored by compiler.
etc.

 ml> the secondary issue of software messing with the message bodies of
 ml> in-transit mail on intermediate systems in the path is well known...
 ml> the problem is 1) getting that software up/downgraded until a fix is
 ml> released and 2) getting the maintainer's attention so it can be
 ml> fixed... both are neigh on impossible to do these days when you have
 ml> operators that simply do not respond to echomail or netmail and may
 ml> take weeks to respond to messages written on their own boards which
 ml> requires that someone go set up an account there and write said
 ml> message...

"You should also on occasion send a message to every node in your network to
ensure that they are operational. If a node turns out to be "off the air" with
no prior warning, you can either mark the node down or remove it from the
nodelist."

That means two weeks with "Hold" status, two weeks with "Down" status and,
finally, kicking such system from the nodelist. Oh yes, there also should be
some reasonable time to wait for an answer before "Hold" - a week or so.

 ml> it was easier back in the day when the nodelist was required for a
 ml> FTN system to operate properly... *Cs could get an operators
 ml> attention by putting a node on HOLD status or even removing said node
 ml> from the nodelist... removal generally garnering the best response
 ml> since the node wouldn't run properly if its number didn't appear in
 ml> the nodelist...

Exactly same thing for now. Even if some node may explicitly put connection
parameters into the mailer configuration file, all these parameters must be
obtained only from nodelist.

 ml> it was at that time the problem could be explained and the operator
 ml> could downgrade to an approved version of their software or upgrade
 ml> to a fixed version if one was available...

Banning people with incompatible software from echoareas works just fine.


--
Alexey V. Vissarionov aka Gremlin from Kremlin
gremlin.ru!gremlin; +vii-cmiii-ccxxix-lxxix-xlii

... :wq!
--- /bin/vi
 * Origin: http://openwall.com/Owl (2:5020/545)