• Re: Usenet(ish) Distro?

    From Avon@21:1/101 to Vk3jed on Thu Dec 20 17:59:25 2018
    On 12/19/18, Vk3jed pondered and said...

    Downside with this (like Usenet) is that it can end up with lots of groups with little traffic (think fido) where really want you want (i my view) is some overarching management of group creation - much like the early days of Usenet (Big 8) - so you don't get runaway groups being created.

    It might take a bit of thought. Certainly Usenet style distribution
    could work, but there might need to be some control protocols to allow management of group(echo) creation. Unless it breaks something, I would still like to see some look of FTN addressing, even if the underlying transport is something totally different to what we know as FTH echomail.

    I'm not wedded personally to using established FTN addressing. I can't see
    any benefit if we're thinking in a broader bolder fashion to create something new. I do like the underlying methodology of Usenet and how information is shared between peered systems etc. I think there's something in that idea for
    a future BBS interconnected message network(s) :)

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A40 2018/12/16 (Windows/32)
    * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)
  • From Vk3jed@21:1/109 to Avon on Thu Dec 20 17:32:00 2018
    On 12-20-18 12:59, Avon wrote to Vk3jed <=-

    I'm not wedded personally to using established FTN addressing. I can't
    see any benefit if we're thinking in a broader bolder fashion to create something new. I do like the underlying methodology of Usenet and how information is shared between peered systems etc. I think there's something in that idea for a future BBS interconnected message
    network(s) :)

    While we are talking echomail, what if someone wants to netmail someone who's on the new technology privately from a legacy system, how do we ensure that happens in a transparent matter? Sure we can do the Fidonet - email style gateway thing, but that is ugly, especially for the non Fidonet side. :)


    ... The master has failed more times than the beginner has even tried.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (21:1/109)
  • From Avon@21:1/101 to g00r00 on Thu Dec 20 21:57:03 2018
    On 12/19/18, g00r00 pondered and said...

    Imagine something more along the lines of torrent tech that allowed B to just announce they were available to the wider network to share/se messages to others.

    Many many years ago I did have the start of "MysticNet" which was
    similar to what you're speaking about. But I am hesitant to push for
    it. I think some of the Synchronet people did something like that
    too... At the end of the day the BBS scene is too small to segregate too much based on proprietary protocols, and so we end up getting stuck with FTN.

    I think it's timely to discuss new ways of doing things and how interested parties might collaborate on turning those ideas into reality.

    Contemporary BBS use may well grow if a proprietary protocol or similar was developed and embraced by those who can such applications using
    2019 tools and best practice.

    I'm not necessarily gunning to make BBS "great again" (and I'm very sorry for dragging out that overused/overhyped turn of phrase) but I feel there's an opportunity, call it almost a need by some, to have a online
    messaging community that is not indexed and algorithmically monitored up the wazoo by large corporates.

    A place where people can meet and discuss ideas in, well, simple text vs flashy web based GUIs.

    A place that offers network resilience and redundancy between nodes,

    Something that can translate to radio network interconnectivity (aka LoRa approach used for IoT) for people who want to set up extensions of the
    message network not totally dependent on the Internet.

    So in short, while what falls out of this broader discussion may not be MysticNet I hope that the concepts you had in mind can be discussed here and perhaps adopted in part/whole by devs who are creating BBS specific offerings of their own.

    It would be interesting to see where we all end up. :)

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A40 2018/12/16 (Windows/32)
    * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)
  • From Avon@21:1/101 to Vk3jed on Thu Dec 20 21:59:08 2018
    On 12/20/18, Vk3jed pondered and said...

    I'm not wedded personally to using established FTN addressing. I can' see any benefit if we're thinking in a broader bolder fashion to crea something new. I do like the underlying methodology of Usenet and how information is shared between peered systems etc. I think there's something in that idea for a future BBS interconnected message network(s) :)

    While we are talking echomail, what if someone wants to netmail someone who's on the new technology privately from a legacy system, how do we ensure that happens in a transparent matter? Sure we can do the Fidonet
    - email style gateway thing, but that is ugly, especially for the non Fidonet side. :)

    I don't know and I think that kind of question may be premature at this
    point. Important to hash out over time, but still premature in my mind. At
    this stage we're still just kicking ideas around for alternative ways to transport public/private messages. But I do take your point.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A40 2018/12/16 (Windows/32)
    * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)
  • From g00r00@21:1/112 to Avon on Thu Dec 20 17:09:27 2018
    I think it's timely to discuss new ways of doing things and how
    interested parties might collaborate on turning those ideas into reality.

    Absolutely, there is no reason not to discuss it!

    There are a lot of factors though, design, implementation, testing, adoption... all of those things take time and effort so who knows how many people would be capable or willing to bother with it. Its probably not something that would happen overnight and it could be difficult to get everyone to agree on one way of doing things.

    A place that offers network resilience and redundancy between nodes,

    I would like to see this increased. We can bandaid FTN as I am already
    doing, but a much better system could be created.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A39 2018/04/21 (Windows/32)
    * Origin: Black Flag <ACiD Telnet HQ> blackflagbbs.com (21:1/112)
  • From NuSkooler@21:1/121 to g00r00 on Fri Dec 21 17:45:41 2018

    On Thursday, December 20th g00r00 was heard saying...
    I would like to see this increased. We can bandaid FTN as I am already doing, but a much better system could be created.

    Exactly.


    --- ENiGMA 1/2 v0.0.9-alpha (linux; x64; 10.13.0)
    * Origin: Xibalba -+- xibalba.l33t.codes:44510 (21:1/121)