Text 1465, 79 rader
Skriven 2008-03-24 20:12:17 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
   Kommentar till text 1393 av Werner Dworak (2:2487/0)
Ärende: Proper nodelist format for Internet-only nodes?
=======================================================
 AV>> All necessary information for contacting a node MUST be published
 AV>> in the nodelist,

 ml> if that's the case, then why are there so many who do not? most all of
 ml> them are binkp nodes, too...

 WD> One explaination might be that some *C were too careless and sloppy
 WD> and didn't complain and reject faulty nodelist entries.

more supposition and speculation :?

 AV>> FSP-1026 and fidonet.net domain provide an additional service
 AV>> (sometimes it is useful, but always is unnecessary).

 ml> FWIW: i find that this depends on what mailer is being used on the
 ml> originating system...

 WD> Can you explain that closer? A decent mailer in the first place
 WD> should run on the information provided by the nodelist proper. The
 WD> fidonet.org systen should be an additional feature only.

we're talking about the conversion of FTN addresses to internet compliant
domain names, werner... if a system has no clue about the internet then it
cannot do anything with that type of information... not all systems require
their mailer to do the work of other services...

 ml> however, even with my hybrid system running two mailers, side by
 ml> side,

 WD> What kind of mailer do you use?

what do you mean by "what kind"? i use two FTN mailers, of course... one has
the ability to use the information in field 6 to contact IP nodes via telnet...
the other doesn't even make use of the nodelist (!) quite contrary to all the
arguments i keep getting hit with :?

 ml> i can't make use of any of the nodelist internet domain stuff
 ml> (outside of field 6), at all... both require some sort of behind
 ml> the scenes assistance :(

 WD> What do you mean by "some sort of behind the scenes assistance"?

something else, outside the mailer, must be done to enable the mailers to
contact nodes...

 WD> What information or assistance do you need which are not inside the
 WD> nodelist or otherwise openly available?

preferrably, the contact "number" to reside in field 6... it would also be real
nice if the other mailer would use the nodelist as it was intended to be used
without all the other crap of having to look to other fields or flags for the
necessary information...

 LK>>>> There are about 15 entries with similiar problems in Zone 1.

 ml>>> you need to spend more time in the FTSC documents and figuring
 ml>>> out how everything meshes together ;) :P

 AV>> Follow your own advise - start with FTS-5001 and look for "INA"
 AV>> flag there.

 ml> uh... i _know_ how it all fits together... i've been here and doing
 ml> this for much too long to not know... hell, i've been around fidonet
 ml> since before P4 was even put out as a proposal... i even cast a vote
 ml> in the process that made P4 our current policy document ;)

 WD> I see only big words but no real answer to Alexeys remark. Don't
 WD> you have any? So my explicit question: How do these 15 entries
 WD> conform to FTSC regulations? 

there's no big words up there in my comment... surely you know the meanings and
spellings of all of them :?

how's about you and Alexey show how they do not conform since you are asking
the questions and pointing them out...

)\/(ark

 * Origin:  (1:3634/12)