Text 2468, 46 rader
Skriven 2008-03-29 13:15:33 av Nick Andre (1:229/426)
     Kommentar till en text av Björn Felten
Ärende: Re: Two related questions plus one to the candidates
============================================================
> After having spent several hours trying to catch up in here, I think I
> now have a fairly good grip of where all you candidates stand. But to get
> some clarification before I cast my vote, I would very much want to hear
> more precisely what you think about the infamous field #6 in the
> nodelist. Feel free to be as elaborate as you like.
 
> 1. Do you think that an IP number should be allowed there?
> 2. Do you think that an FQDN should be allowed there?
 
Good questions.
 
Trick questions.
 
No matter how one answers, one may be flamed. :-)
 
This whole field 6 situation is a moot point. It doesn't solve anything.
 
Re-tooling D'Bridge, as an example, to increase the memory-storage space
required to store FQDN's (lets say, increasing from 30 to 40 characters in
field 6) - is next to impossible. And why should a developer spend all sorts of
time with workarounds for whats in the fields. Its a no-win scenario.
 
So it seems to me, that if IP-capable products are looking for IP addresses and
FQDN's in the nodelist, and putting in that in field 6 (or ANY field for that
matter) is a problem politically or technically... then lets keep it out of ALL
fields and put it somewhere else... such as in a comment-line before the node
entry. When properly parsed by IP-oriented mailers, problem is solved.
 
The complaints stop (for the most part), MAKENL doesn't choke on it, PSTN
software doesn't get affected, and IP software can finally have their FQDN's
listed along with hours of operation, specific capabilities, etc etc. AND -
we're not re-inventing the wheel here by putting things where they don't belong
or expecting people who've ran the same setup for years to change.
 
Now what I think is a good idea for Fidonet and what can be realistically
implemented with co-operation from all is another question altogether.
 
> 3. Are you confident that you will be able to fully cooperate with all
> the other members of the FTSC (assuming all the candidates get elected)?
 
Yes.
 
*Nick*

--- D'Bridge 2.99
 * Origin: His juggling is almost hypnotic. Like a lava lamp. (1:229/426.1)