Text 116, 35 rader
Skriven 2006-01-05 22:01:16 av Bob Jones (1:343/41.0)
     Kommentar till en text av Marty Blankenship
Ärende: Re: Squish Archiving
============================
BJ> The two "Send Direct" lines should come before the 
 MB> "Send Normal" line.  If
BJ> 92:602/100 and 510:507/0 are the nodes seeing the 
BJ> problem, then this is
BJ> probably the cause of the issue.

 MB> Originally I had the send normal line after the send direct lines. I just 
 MB> changed then before I posted the messages and it didn't 
 MB> make a difference. I 
 MB> have many send direct lines in my route.cfg file and 
 MB> those 2 nodes aren't the 
 MB> only ones seeing my fidonet address on the archived 
 MB> packets. I can load up 
 MB> frontdoor and look at the archived bundles and they all have my fidonet
 MB> address on them instead of my networks aka.

I suspect that with Squish being 4D and not 5D aware, along with trying to run
a single copy of squish is the problem.  The only time I was involved with a
non-Fidonet address, I only talked to nodes in Fidonet, so my Fidonet node
number wouldn't have caused problems.....

Interesting....  Results from using Inspecta (mentioned in other recent
messages) would be able to confirm the problem.  One solution is to make
seperate squish runs for each different network, using it's own control file. 
The only potential glitch with that is that you will need to do some special
zone definitions for all but the main FTN configuration if you are using
Binkley Style Outbound areas.....  Now, if you aren't using that, then the
problem may be one with the interactions between squish and your front end. 
Since I run Binkley, and I know there is an option for an alternate style, that
may be where the problem is....

Bob Jones, 1:343/41

--- Maximus/2 3.01
 * Origin: Top Hat 2 BBS (1:343/41)