So - what's your view on working from home?For me it is always very hard to concentrate while working from home.
So - what's your view on working from home?
Quoting Joacim Melin to All <=-
So - what's your view on working from home?
On 10-05-18 14:54, Joacim Melin wrote to All <=-
So - what's your view on working from home?
So - what's your view on working from home?
Joacim wrote:
So - what's your view on working from home?
I have been doing it for several years. Generally it's fine, but you
need to
keep a routine. Get up, shower, have breakfast, go to work, etc. If
you
don't then you'll end up spending days without getting showered or
going out
anywhere. :)
The social aspect is difficult too. You'll talk to people on the
phone but
the only daily human interaction you'll get is with those around you
and
that can get very old after a few years. Find and maintain some
outside
activity that gets you away from the house and other people once a
week or
so, otherwise you're going to go stir crazy.
On 10-06-18 01:01, Nigel Reed wrote to Joacim Melin <=-
@TZ: 412c
Joacim wrote:
So - what's your view on working from home?
I have been doing it for several years. Generally it's fine, but you
need to keep a routine. Get up, shower, have breakfast, go to work,
etc. If you don't then you'll end up spending days without getting showered or going out anywhere. :)
The social aspect is difficult too. You'll talk to people on the phone
but the only daily human interaction you'll get is with those around
you and that can get very old after a few years. Find and maintain some outside activity that gets you away from the house and other people
once a week or so, otherwise you're going to go stir crazy.
On 10-06-18 09:28, Joacim Melin wrote to Nigel Reed <=-
I find virtually every observation you just pointed out to be 100
percent true.
I used to run my own business and for three years I would work from
home every
day. I enjoyed the freedom but man, I was socially starved after just
a few weeks and now adays I work at home maybe 1-2 days per month but
not more than that. Part of me wish I was OK to work home more but at
the same time I'm glad I'm not, if that makes any sense.
I find virtually every observation you just pointed out to be 100 percenttrue.
I used to run my own business and for three years I would work from homeevery
day. I enjoyed the freedom but man, I was socially starved after just a few weeks and now adays I work at home maybe 1-2 days per month but not morethan
that. Part of me wish I was OK to work home more but at the same time I'mglad
I'm not, if that makes any sense.
Joacim wrote:
true.
I find virtually every observation you just pointed out to be 100 percent
I used to run my own business and for three years I would work from homeevery
day. I enjoyed the freedom but man, I was socially starved after just a few
weeks and now adays I work at home maybe 1-2 days per month but not morethan
that. Part of me wish I was OK to work home more but at the same time I'mglad
I'm not, if that makes any sense.
Yup, I understand. It's nice to go into the office occasionally,
however
those days are few and far between. That said, the amount I save in
tolls
and gas and wear on my car is worth it. I barely go anywhere so I
fill up
like twice a month. Plus the 40 minute commute each way gives me more
time
to do my own stuff.
So - what's your view on working from home?For me it is always very hard to concentrate while working from home.
I guess it is a lack of personal discipline but whatever...
Roman
So - what's your view on working from home?
I've done it. It can work very well. In the big cities, working from home can save hours in commuting, which means more time to do things you want to do. It depends on your workplace, your job and your self discipline and personal circumstances as to whether it works. One potential downside is you can miss out on the social side of the workplace. My latter days of working from home were the ultimate in the distributed workplace. There were 4 of us doing the bulk of the company work, spread across 3 sites (none of which were used for operations) in 2 countries (Australia and New Zealand). And it worked pretty well.
On 10-07-18 11:24, Carol Shenkenberger wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Came to a new job (no longer contractor) and while they liked that I
knew how to do a distributed work environment, they don't really 'get
it' and are missing out on the very differences in how you interact to solve them. They are used to 'face to face' and do not understand the concepts of other operations.
Quoting Joacim Melin to All <=-
So - what's your view on working from home?
I'd starve to death.
Great advice. I found the same as well, having a disciplined routine and outside social contact are vital for successful working from home. Butiron
out those kinks, and working from home can be very rewarding andproductive.
Outings like Linux users groups, radio clubs, running groups and orienteering/rogaining really helped with the social side for me duringthose
years. :)
On 10-08-18 02:40, Nigel Reed wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Another option is to go to a coffee shop and work. Pack up the laptop
and a cell phone and go sit in an internet cafe (do they have those any more?) or at least a place with coffee or a favorite beverage. You can spend the day there, have your breakfast, and lunch, drinks and
whatever. Sure, it'll probably cost the same as a commute would, but it gets you out the house and maybe once a month isn't going to hurt much.
Came to a new job (no longer contractor) and while they liked that I
knew how to do a distributed work environment, they don't really
'get it' and are missing out on the very differences in how you
interact to solve them. They are used to 'face to face' and do not
understand the concepts of other operations.
It is a different way of working. Sometimes, knowing what medium to use (email, instant message/chat - e.g. Slack, phone, video conference/desktop sharing) to use for each situation is important. I would often be using email and phone at the same time - the phone for rapid discussion, with email to convey details that would be slower and more error prone over the phone, for example.
personal circumstances as to whether it works. One potential downside is you can miss out on the social side of the workplace. My latter days of
Another option is to go to a coffee shop and work. Pack up the laptop
and a cell phone and go sit in an internet cafe (do they have those any more?) or at least a place with coffee or a favorite beverage. You can spend the day there, have your breakfast, and lunch, drinks and
whatever. Sure, it'll probably cost the same as a commute would, but it gets you out the house and maybe once a month isn't going to hurt much.
On 10-08-18 18:19, Carol Shenkenberger wrote to Vk3jed <=-
It is a different way of working. Sometimes, knowing what medium to use (email, instant message/chat - e.g. Slack, phone, video conference/desktop sharing) to use for each situation is important. I would often be using email and phone at the same time - the phone for rapid discussion, with email to convey details that would be slower and more error prone over the phone, for example.
Yes or a Point-to-point screenshare with voice.
On 10-08-18 18:20, Blue White wrote to vk3jed <=-
personal circumstances as to whether it works. One potential downside is you can miss out on the social side of the workplace. My latter days of
Honestly, after a day of "the social side of the workplace, supermarket after work, etc.," I am beat. OTOH, the times I have been able to work from home I feel a lot more energetic and productive... sometimes I
even forget to quit at quittin' time!
They only let us work from home now if it is an emergency or we are on call. Too many folks abused the system and were not really working at
all on their WFH days. Punishing the whole rather than firing the few
is apparently the way to go.
Today, it's all academic. My work requires hands on - it's hard to dig holes or pull weeds over the Internet (without a lot of capital
investment in robotics! :D ).
On 10-10-18 16:49, Blue White wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Today, it's all academic. My work requires hands on - it's hard to dig holes or pull weeds over the Internet (without a lot of capital
investment in robotics! :D ).
LOL, and probably for some insurance for when the robots go rogue and
do some real damage. :)
Came to a new job (no longer contractor) and while they liked that I
knew how to do a distributed work environment, they don't really
'get it' and are missing out on the very differences in how you
interact to solve them. They are used to 'face to face' and do not
understand the concepts of other operations.
It is a different way of working. Sometimes, knowing what medium to use (email, instant message/chat - e.g. Slack, phone, video conference/desktop sharing) to use for each situation is important. I would often be using email and phone at the same time - the phone for rapid discussion, with email to convey details that would be slower and more error prone over the phone, for example.
Hi Carol
I can see you tried to send me routed netmail via 1/100 but in this case Mystic would not handle the packet.
The logs show
[snip]
! Oct 08 20:08:21 8C71E93D.PKT does not match an AKA (21:1/101)
! Oct 08 20:08:21 537D2F99.PKT does not match an AKA (21:2/116)
Tiny wrote:
Quoting Joacim Melin to All <=-
So - what's your view on working from home?
I'd starve to death.
That's what wives are for.
On 10-13-18 20:19, Carol Shenkenberger wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Exactly. It's funny but the younger guys are the ones struggling with that concept. The older ones are used to it and use it natively.
On 10-13-18 20:34, Carol Shenkenberger wrote to Nigel Reed <=-
Actualy husbands are for that. Get with the program.
The logs show
[snip]
! Oct 08 20:08:21 8C71E93D.PKT does not match an AKA (21:1/101)
! Oct 08 20:08:21 537D2F99.PKT does not match an AKA (21:2/116)
Humm. Might I have made a typo of 101 vs 100?
Exactly. It's funny but the younger guys are the ones struggling
with that concept. The older ones are used to it and use it
natively.
I think it depends on _which_ older people. People around my age (50) who were early adopters of technology have had the advantage of starting out without it, and adapting to the changes over time. That probably makes us versatile, when it comes to things like working away from home.
Actualy husbands are for that. Get with the program.
The question for me is _which_ husband? :D
[snip]
! Oct 08 20:08:21 8C71E93D.PKT does not match an AKA (21:1/101)
! Oct 08 20:08:21 537D2F99.PKT does not match an AKA (21:2/116)
Humm. Might I have made a typo of 101 vs 100?
I don't know but I suspect not, the netmail to 101 should be sent via 100 and route to it just fine, and does for others who send me netmail vai the 100 HUB. Hmm
On 10-14-18 19:25, Carol Shenkenberger wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I think it depends on _which_ older people. People around my age (50) who were early adopters of technology have had the advantage of starting out without it, and adapting to the changes over time. That probably makes us versatile, when it comes to things like working away from home.
Could well be! Folks like to say 'dont hire older employees as they
don't adapt well'. Fact is in my experience, it's the younger ones who seem to have a set 'this is how it has to be done' attitude. Odd that.
On 10-14-18 19:27, Carol Shenkenberger wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Actualy husbands are for that. Get with the program.
The question for me is _which_ husband? :D
.. looks over shoulder and picks one... This one do?
We'll have to make some more tests then ut it's late Sunday with work early tomorrow.
I can tell you Rob Swindell had an alert on a SBBSECHO update. It potentially is related but the main problem I get is Mystic sites with
the crash bit set then 'routing' it via me.
We'll have to make some more tests then ut it's late Sunday with
work early tomorrow.
I can tell you Rob Swindell had an alert on a SBBSECHO update. It
potentially is related but the main problem I get is Mystic sites
with the crash bit set then 'routing' it via me.
OK :) Lets just keep playing as when we can :)
Can someone on fido send a netmail to joe@1:220/70. I'm not sure my hub is routing things correctly.
Can someone on fido send a netmail to joe@1:220/70. I'm not sure my hub is routing things correctly.
Can someone on fido send a netmail to joe@1:220/70. I'm not sure my hub is routing things correctly.
On 10-22-19 17:59, Joe wrote to All <=-
Can someone on fido send a netmail to joe@1:220/70. I'm not sure my
hub is routing things correctly.
Can someone on fido send a netmail to joe@1:220/70. I'm not sure my hub is routing things correctly.
Thanks to everyone who sent the netmails, Unfortunatly none of them made it here. I get netmails from FSXNet, and from areafix/filefix from the hub, but nothing else seems to make it here. Dont know if RJ's System is jacked up or further up stream.
Thanks to everyone who sent the netmails, Unfortunatly none of them
made it here. I get netmails from FSXNet, and from areafix/filefix
from the hub, but nothing else seems to make it here. Dont know if
RJ's System is jacked up or further up stream.
On 10-23-19 05:58, Joe wrote to ALL <=-
Can someone on fido send a netmail to joe@1:220/70. I'm not sure my hub is routing things correctly.
Thanks to everyone who sent the netmails, Unfortunatly none of them
made it here. I get netmails from FSXNet, and from areafix/filefix
from the hub, but nothing else seems to make it here. Dont know if
RJ's System is jacked up or further up stream.
I just sent you a netmail so I'm hoping all is good between 1/100 and 4/100 as far a netmail (thinking encryption password) goes and you will get it OK.
so it's lands at 1/100 OK and then I need to run pack - correct? for
it to export out... so I do this
and in my echomail out I see a file with a .IUT extension.... is that going to send when I fire up BinkD? or should HPT be packing it with
an Arcmail attachment or ???
It's probably a config thing at my end.
Also does HPT use the netmail base as a temp scratch pad? Looks like
the nemail was imported then deleted...as it was routed onwards to
1/101 ??
and in my echomail out I see a file with a .IUT extension.... is that going to send when I fire up BinkD? or should HPT be packing it with
an Arcmail attachment or ???
I forgot to mention, there is the keyword "ArcNetmail" that you can use
in a link section if you want netmail to be packed in an arcmail bundle along with echomail for a node. Normally netmail is not packed into arcmail bundles, it is saved as raw netmail in .HUT, .DUT, .OUT, .CUT,
or .IUT files in the outbound. They will be sent as .PKT files and given
a random filename.
Interesting its still sitting here... I'll give it a prod..
Spec
Interesting its still sitting here... I'll give it aprod..
ok
Hey Netsurge,
Did you get my netmail?
Did you get my netmail?
Did you get my netmail?
I have not. Did you send it via fsxNet?
Yep to 21:4/154
Looks like you won't be in the fsxNet nodelist until tomorrows release
so my tracking system rejects your message (You should have gotten a bounce back saying so).
Looks like you won't be in the fsxNet nodelist until tomorrows release
so my tracking system rejects your message (You should have gotten a bounce back saying so).
Looks like you won't be in the fsxNet nodelist until tomorrows releas so my tracking system rejects your message (You should have gotten a bounce back saying so).
Also, I was in last weeks fsx node list :P
No bounceback, at least nothing I saw in the logs or otherwise.
Also, I was in last weeks fsx node list :P
would you like to send another test netmail. I can check the HUB logs
for you both later and post confirmation it was routed onwards to Frank
if you guys would like?
My system will process the new nodelists tomorrow so you can wait till then or you can email it to me at frank@diskshop.ca and I will get you setup.
would you like to send another test netmail. I can check the HUB logsIt was routed to me fine, but seeing as he isn't listed in the 038 nodelist from Friday, RNTrack rejected his message due to him not being
in the nodelist.
Do you run a weekly process for nodelists? I ask only because if I hatch
a new nodelist out sooner than that I wonder if that's why you may not have seen him sooner?
When processing nodelists, if it sees the same day number as an extension then it won't reprocess it as a new diff.
Paul, have you given any thought to doing DNS distribution
for nodelist data, a la http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5004.001 ?}
I'd kind of like to play around with that.
On 02-15-20 04:36, tenser wrote to Netsurge <=-
On 14 Feb 2020 at 10:14a, Netsurge pondered and said...
When processing nodelists, if it sees the same day number as an extension then it won't reprocess it as a new diff.
Paul, have you given any thought to doing DNS distribution
for nodelist data, a la http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5004.001 ?}
I'd kind of like to play around with that.
On 02-14-20 10:47, Netsurge wrote to tenser <=-
Paul, have you given any thought to doing DNS distribution
for nodelist data, a la http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5004.001 ?}
I'd kind of like to play around with that.
I do it for SciNet. Take a look at the scinet-ftn.org domain. It works well.
For example. If you send out a new nodelist on Tuesday, it will have
last Fridays date and day number.
When processing nodelists, if it sees the same day number as an extension then it won't reprocess it as a new diff.
Paul, have you given any thought to doing DNS distribution
for nodelist data, a la http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5004.001 ?}
I'd kind of like to play around with that.
On 15 Feb 2020 at 04:36a, tenser pondered and said...
Paul, have you given any thought to doing DNS distribution
for nodelist data, a la http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5004.001 ?}
I'd kind of like to play around with that.
Yes I have something in place already linked to fsxnet.nz
With the help of Vorlon we have x 2 DNS servers for this domain and for nodes with static IP I can assign vanity domain names such as yourbbsname.fsxnet.nz
There's a also a script I need to automate that will create a record
based off the nodelist such that
f100.n1.z21.fsxnet.nz resolves to agency.bbs.nz using
f100.n1.z21 IN CNAME agency.bbs.nz.
f101.n1.z21 IN CNAME ipv4.agency.bbs.nz.
When processing nodelists, if it sees the same day number as an exten then it won't reprocess it as a new diff.
Mystic seems to handle them fine and pick up the changes but I take your point and thanks for the explanation. I wonder if I should be releasing diff files but then ideally I would want Mystic to handle them also and
I am not sure if right now it would?
Mystic seems to handle them fine and pick up the changes but I take your point and thanks for the explanation. I wonder if I should be releasing diff files but then ideally I would want Mystic to handle them also and
I am not sure if right now it would?
On 02-15-20 16:32, Avon wrote to tenser <=-
On 15 Feb 2020 at 04:36a, tenser pondered and said...
Paul, have you given any thought to doing DNS distribution
for nodelist data, a la http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5004.001 ?}
I'd kind of like to play around with that.
Yes I have something in place already linked to fsxnet.nz
With the help of Vorlon we have x 2 DNS servers for this domain and for nodes with static IP I can assign vanity domain names such as yourbbsname.fsxnet.nz
There's a also a script I need to automate that will create a record
based off the nodelist such that
On 02-14-20 23:19, g00r00 wrote to Avon <=-
Mystic doesn't merge DIFF files just full nodelists, and honestly I've
had no real plans to support them. Its the same effort to just send
the entire thing.
point and thanks for the explanation. I wonder if I should be releasi diff files but then ideally I would want Mystic to handle them also a I am not sure if right now it would?
Mystic doesn't merge DIFF files just full nodelists, and honestly I've
had no real plans to support them. Its the same effort to just send the entire thing.
a 2k DIFF and complicate the process to produce and merge it, when you
can just send a 10k fsxnode.z74 file in the same amount of time with
less effort?
Of course if there is a more functional reason I missed (I don't always read this base) let me know!
would you like to send another test netmail. I can check the HUB logs
for you both later and post confirmation it was routed onwards to Frank
if you guys would like?
Yes, Fridays, but if you hatch a nodelist out before your scheduled nodelist release date (the one you set in your processor like makenl)
and it will always set the header and extension to the previous date.
For example. If you send out a new nodelist on Tuesday, it will have
last Fridays date and day number.
I don't think that is necessary, I have been able to netmail you, Dan, and StackFault without any issues. I think probably they all accept netmail from unknown nodes.
I don't think that is necessary, I have been able to netmail you, Dan, and StackFault without any issues. I think probably they all accept netmail from unknown nodes.
that explains it, Avon hatched it on feb 7/8 but it said the date was feb 14th. I commented on it, and there was a typo in the name. My BBS had picked up a couple nodelist updates since last week.
It's all good now. Although Mystic will alway reprocess nodelists when
you tell it to, most of the older software tends to stick to the FTSC specs. This offers maximum compatibility. In this hobby, it is real easy to break something as you really don't know what software people are using. Following the FTSC specs is usually the safest bet.
Mystic doesn't do any processing of nodelists, it uses raw nodelists for lookups. Its literally impossible for it to not be following FTSC specs.
Either way, I think this is all resolved as it looks like Avon will be releasing the nodelist using a daily standard and not a weekly one.
I'd sent you a reply to your netmail the other day, just checking you got both of them?
I did, but it seems that the wrapping screwed up the layout of your
makenl .ctl file. I have responded asking that you email it to me so I
can help you get a daily going.
On 14 Feb 2020 at 10:14a, Netsurge pondered and said...
When processing nodelists, if it sees the same day number as an extension
then it won't reprocess it as a new diff.
Paul, have you given any thought to doing DNS distribution
for nodelist data, a la http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5004.001 ?}
I'd kind of like to play around with that.
On 15 Feb 2020 at 04:36a, tenser pondered and said...nodes
Paul, have you given any thought to doing DNS distribution
for nodelist data, a la http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5004.001 ?}
I'd kind of like to play around with that.
Yes I have something in place already linked to fsxnet.nz
With the help of Vorlon we have x 2 DNS servers for this domain and for
with static IP I can assign vanity domain names such asyourbbsname.fsxnet.nz
There's a also a script I need to automate that will create a record based off the nodelist such that
f100.n1.z21.fsxnet.nz resolves to agency.bbs.nz using
f100.n1.z21 IN CNAME agency.bbs.nz.
Did I send you the Perl script that I use? It creates the following froma
standard nodelist:literal
CNAME records for hosts with a domain name.
A records for hosts with IPv4 addresses in the nodelist (no support for
IPv6 addresses yet)non
SRV records for hosts with port information, so that hosts listening on
standard ports can be found.
Paul, have you given any thought to doing DNS distribution
for nodelist data, a la http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5004.001 ?}
I'd kind of like to play around with that.
IMHO that specification and most implementations are broken by design.
The problem are SRV
records, non-standard ports and different hostnames for different protocols.
On 02-18-20 18:25, Oli wrote to Vk3jed <=-
What about hosts that already use a SRV record?
On 02-18-20 20:08, Oli wrote to Avon <=-
But binkp for 21:1/100 is on port 24556, so it doesn't work in this
case.
I don't think that would be relevant, because there would be a SRV
record for the nodelist DNS domain name with the correct port info
(taken from the nodelist) added anyway.
On 02-18-20 20:30, Netsurge wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I don't think that would be relevant, because there would be a SRV
record for the nodelist DNS domain name with the correct port info
(taken from the nodelist) added anyway.
You are correct. As per the spec SRV records will be created for the following flags:
IBN
IFC
IFT
ITN
IVM
But binkp for 21:1/100 is on port 24556, so it doesn't work in this case.
On VKRadio, there would be a SRV record for such a system.
f100.n1.z21.fsxnet.nz resolves to agency.bbs.nz using
f100.n1.z21 IN CNAME agency.bbs.nz.
But binkp for 21:1/100 is on port 24556, so it doesn't work in this case.
I'd like to add other protocols, but need to work out what mailers to
use. My hub runs Mystic on a Pi :)
Can you guide me please as to what I should add?
On 18 Feb 2020 at 08:08p, Oli pondered and said...
f100.n1.z21.fsxnet.nz resolves to agency.bbs.nz using
f100.n1.z21 IN CNAME agency.bbs.nz.
But binkp for 21:1/100 is on port 24556, so it doesn't work in this c
Thanks for the heads up. I'm open to guidance as to how to add records to make things work.
The upshot is that, if you provide CNAME aliases in
a nodelist domain, then it's up to the target to
properly use and maintain SRV information.
19 Feb 20 16:16, you wrote to Avon:
The upshot is that, if you provide CNAME aliases in
a nodelist domain, then it's up to the target to
properly use and maintain SRV information.
I don't understand what you mean with that (I know what a CNAME and SRV is, but still don't
get it).
On 02-19-20 15:07, Avon wrote to Vk3jed <=-
On 19 Feb 2020 at 09:23a, Vk3jed pondered and said...
But binkp for 21:1/100 is on port 24556, so it doesn't work in this case.
On VKRadio, there would be a SRV record for such a system.
Can you guide me please as to what I should add?
On 02-18-20 21:47, Netsurge wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I'd like to add other protocols, but need to work out what mailers to
use. My hub runs Mystic on a Pi :)
You can always just setup an ftp server dedicated to mail and that will cover IFT, you can also do vmodem, emsi over telnet using ifcico which should compile on the Pi.
On 02-18-20 21:54, Netsurge wrote to Avon <=-
Can you guide me please as to what I should add?
Do you want me to send you the perl script I use for SciNet? It does everything for you and creates a bind9 compatible hosts conf file.
If you want to do it manually, here are the specs http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5004.001
If you want an example, use https://mxtoolbox.com/SRVLookup.aspx and lookup your node in SciNet's SRV record for binkp as you use 24555. It
is _binkp._tcp.f102.n3.z77.scinet-ftn.org
I can also publish the DNS for you if you wish. I have a cluster of DNS servers and have the infrastructure all setup here and already get a
copy of the fsxnet nodelist since I am a member of fsxnet. It would be just one more script I run and no big deal. You would just have to
point the domain you want to use to my dns servers.
On 02-19-20 16:16, tenser wrote to Avon <=-
The issue in this case is that you shouldn't add SRV
RR's for a hostname that is an alias (e.g., a CNAME).
So if `f100.n1.z21.fsxnet.org` is a CNAME for
`agency.bbs.nz` then you shouldn't add an SRV record
for it with your binkp port (similarly for telnet,
SSH, etc).
It's a bit unfortunate, perhaps, but that's just how
DNS works.
The usual work around is not to have CNAME RR's for
such aliases, but rather to have real A and AAAA RRs.
However, that leads to a problem of updating those
(duplicate) RRs if and when the target IP addresses
change. With CNAMEs, this is transparent; with
dup As and AAAAs it's obviously not.
Another workaround might be to have a dedicated
"nodelist" domain; suppose one ponies up the 20
euros a year for a Dutch domain like `fsxnet.nl`;
then that domain might consist only of SRV
records pointing to actual host names (not CNAMEs).
People who want port information do SRV queries
against that domain; if you just want to connect,
you do a query against the domain in fsxnet.org.
Sounds like some projects to take on. I'll have to check out ifcico at some stage, and FTP should be straight forward, at least in theory.
Wonder if it's the same one I use for VKRadio, which Paul has a copy of (well, I did send it to him). :)
BTW, I must join SciNet sometime. Thought I started down that road, but must have got distracted (pretty easy for me ;) ).
On 02-19-20 23:02, Netsurge wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Sounds like some projects to take on. I'll have to check out ifcico at some stage, and FTP should be straight forward, at least in theory.
It is. I support FTP, Vmodem, TransX, UUEncode email and emsi (along
with Binkp of course) for SciNet (we even have a node that can offer
mail via dialup).
If you get any of them setup and want a link to test with, you can sign
up for SciNet and I can feed you any way you want (I sound like a drug dealer).
I just HPT from the husky project and it has a diskpoll util that can
toss mail to/from a local disk folder, that makes offering FTP feeds a breeze. Setup an FTP server and toss to and from the local path.
On 02-19-20 23:14, Netsurge wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Wonder if it's the same one I use for VKRadio, which Paul has a copy of (well, I did send it to him). :)
Could be. I have modified it to add a few static hosts and to also
support SciNet's email <> netmail gate. It includes SPF and DMARC
entries for all of the f.#.n# entries as well as vanity domains that
nodes may wish to use for email. It grabs those from the SciNet
nodelist which includes the U flag to identify what their vanity domain
is like in Paul's case it's ,U,agency.scinet-ftn.org.
BTW, I must join SciNet sometime. Thought I started down that road, but must have got distracted (pretty easy for me ;) ).
Get EMSI or Vmodem going if you like a challenge and come join is. Oh
look a squirrel.
Mystic can do the same. The question is how best to offer FTP in a way that offers security between users (so no oopses by downloading wrong mail, etc), but not falling foul of permissions issues moving the files to/from the various FTP directories. So some questions on setting up
the FTP server. I may also have to add a dedicated IP for FTP mail, because Mystic has its own FTP server for user access, and using port 21 would be best.
Wonder if it's the same one I use for VKRadio, which Paul has a copy (well, I did send it to him). :)
Could be. I have modified it to add a few static hosts and to also
support SciNet's email <> netmail gate. It includes SPF and DMARC
I also have some static hosts in the zone file I'll need to provision for... I was wondering how best to do that,,
I also have some static hosts in the zone file I'll need to provision for... I was wondering how best to do that,,
I will drop my perl script into your inbound. It is pretty well
commented and you will see where I add static A records, search for twgs and you should find the section of the script that adds the A records.
On 02-20-20 00:09, Netsurge wrote to Vk3jed <=-
That is easy. I run the FTP server on linux. Each node who gets mail
via FTP has an account that is chroot'd and jailed to their home dir.
They can only access their home dir. I then toss their mail to their in
or out folder inside their home folder. When they login, they only see their mail and can't change dirs to anyone elses folder.
1. I'm running Mystic on Linux, and I have an FTP server already (Mystic's FTP server)
2. If I do it on the same machine, I have to somehow jump through permissions hoops (Mystic runs as a different user to anyone else).
On 02-21-20 10:35, Netsurge wrote to Vk3jed <=-
1. I'm running Mystic on Linux, and I have an FTP server already (Mystic's FTP server)
You can run something like vsftp as the secondary FTP server and run in
on an alternate port such as 2121 then make sure you use the IFT:2121
flag in your nodelist entry.
2. If I do it on the same machine, I have to somehow jump through permissions hoops (Mystic runs as a different user to anyone else).
See note above, running an additional FTP server would isolate user
access from Mystic's userbase. You would then just create local users
who would be limited to their own directories.
I supposed that would work, though I would have to manually (i.e. hardcoded into the script) generate the A and AAAA records, alongside
the SRV record. Other than adding a bit of Perl code once off, similar
to what I do for additional NS records for slave DNS servers, no biggie, because all my IPs are static. And as I know that, I don't need to go through the whole checking that DNS is in sync routine.
On 02-22-20 00:20, Netsurge wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I am not sure what script you are using, but the one I have does all of that. If it finds a nodelist flag for internet transport like IBN,ITN,IFT,etc that has a number associated with it that isn't the default port like IBN:24555,IFT:2121,ITN:2323,etc it will generate the needed SRV records for you. My scripts follows FTSC-5004 to a T.
It will generate a SRV record for the protocol with the non standard
port. I don't know if it will generate SRV records (with default ports) for the other protocols.
I'm talking about the case where you have IBN,IFT:2121,ITN...
It will generate a SRV record for the protocol with the non standard port. I don't know if it will generate SRV records (with default por for the other protocols.
I'm talking about the case where you have IBN,IFT:2121,ITN...
It should only create SRV records when an non standard port is use on any flag beginning with the letter 'I' which identifies an internet capable transport method. Standard ports as to be assumed if you are flying an
'I' flag. If the node entry isn't flying an 'I' flag then they will not have a DNS entry. BinkD, Argus, etc all follow this standard. Look up 77:1/100@scinet-ftn.org, if it has an entry and no SRV record then try 24554, if there is a _binkp SRV record then use that port. The same
would apply for software transferring via FTP: Is there a record for it, if so is there a SRV record, if not use port 21, if there is a _ftp SRV record then use that port, etc..
Having all of the nodelist information available in DNS
means that anyone on the Internet can extract relevant
information without having to have an up-to-date copy of
the nodelist, or a parser etc.
Having all of the nodelist information available in DNS
means that anyone on the Internet can extract relevant
information without having to have an up-to-date copy of
the nodelist, or a parser etc.
The idea of the FTSC spec was to have mailers be able to connect to a
node directly, not to be used as a phone book. Software like BinkD
follows the spec, if there is a packet marked crash and you don't have
an entry for said node it will try to look it up.
That's the bit that's unfortunate. The whole thing
suffers from a certain poverty of imagination.
It would be nice to use DNS as a nodelist lookup
mechanism, regardless of the original intent.
That's the bit that's unfortunate. The whole thing
suffers from a certain poverty of imagination.
It would be nice to use DNS as a nodelist lookup
mechanism, regardless of the original intent.
There is no reason why it can't be expanded as long as you meet
FTS-5004.
I offer email <-> netmail and add the needed MX,SPF,DMARC,etc
entries for all nodes which is over and above 5004, although I am not
sure what good a node that is dial-up only would offer having a DNS record. As it stands, if you are reachable via the internet then you are processed via DNS.
The advantage, even with entries for dial-up only nodes,
are several.
The advantage, even with entries for dial-up only nodes,
are several.
You would need an entire generation of software that would need to catch up, and frankly thank ain't gonna happen.
This was the reason the FTSC was created in the first place, to have a
set of standards. That was when there was 20,000+ nodes in Fidonet, no email and no internet in general.
I agree it could have it's advantages, like TXT entries for dial up
nodes, but unless we can go back in time and update all of the software people use, there is no use.
You could create your own FTN style network that would require this, but then you are shutting out anyone using software that isn't compatible. I personally would rather focus my time and energy on growing the hobby and keep what we have, it is a far cry from the 80s and 90s.
On 02-22-20 11:18, Netsurge wrote to Vk3jed <=-
It will generate a SRV record for the protocol with the non standard
port. I don't know if it will generate SRV records (with default ports) for the other protocols.
I'm talking about the case where you have IBN,IFT:2121,ITN...
It should only create SRV records when an non standard port is use on
any flag beginning with the letter 'I' which identifies an internet capable transport method. Standard ports as to be assumed if you are flying an 'I' flag. If the node entry isn't flying an 'I' flag then
they will not have a DNS entry. BinkD, Argus, etc all follow this standard. Look up 77:1/100@scinet-ftn.org, if it has an entry and no
SRV record then try 24554, if there is a _binkp SRV record then use
that port. The same would apply for software transferring via FTP: Is there a record for it, if so is there a SRV record, if not use port 21,
if there is a _ftp SRV record then use that port, etc..
On 02-23-20 06:37, tenser wrote to Netsurge <=-
In a way, this is kind of unfortunate. Part of the reason
one might want to put all of the nodelist information into
DNS zone is to avoid having to consult the nodelist text
file at all. DNS is a reliable, distributed, replicated
database with well-defined update properties.
Having all of the nodelist information available in DNS
means that anyone on the Internet can extract relevant
information without having to have an up-to-date copy of
the nodelist, or a parser etc.
On 02-23-20 12:46, tenser wrote to Netsurge <=-
On 22 Feb 2020 at 04:38p, Netsurge pondered and said...
Having all of the nodelist information available in DNS
means that anyone on the Internet can extract relevant
information without having to have an up-to-date copy of
the nodelist, or a parser etc.
The idea of the FTSC spec was to have mailers be able to connect to a
node directly, not to be used as a phone book. Software like BinkD
follows the spec, if there is a packet marked crash and you don't have
an entry for said node it will try to look it up.
That's the bit that's unfortunate. The whole thing
suffers from a certain poverty of imagination.
It would be nice to use DNS as a nodelist lookup
mechanism, regardless of the original intent.
On 02-22-20 19:12, Netsurge wrote to tenser <=-
That's the bit that's unfortunate. The whole thing
suffers from a certain poverty of imagination.
It would be nice to use DNS as a nodelist lookup
mechanism, regardless of the original intent.
There is no reason why it can't be expanded as long as you meet
FTS-5004. I offer email <-> netmail and add the needed MX,SPF,DMARC,etc entries for all nodes which is over and above 5004, although I am not
sure what good a node that is dial-up only would offer having a DNS record. As it stands, if you are reachable via the internet then you
are processed via DNS.
On 02-23-20 13:56, tenser wrote to Netsurge <=-
In short, DNS for nodelists solves all of the
same problems that DNS solved with respect to
hosts.txt. The insight there that, even if
every host on the Internet didn't support DNS
it was useful for those that did, is the same.
On 02-23-20 15:34, tenser wrote to Netsurge <=-
Sorry, let me be clear: I'm not suggesting that
one totally discard nodelist generation and
distribution for legacy systems. I'm suggesting
using DNS in lieu of a nodelist for sufficiently
capable systems as a complement to the current
way of doing things.
If one took the DNS distributed data as the record
of truth and generated the nodelist from that
(instead of the other way around) you'd still reap
many of the benefits of administrative decentralization
while maintaining legacy compatibility.
Second, one of the things that I, personally, am
interested in is development of new software. I
suspect there are other retro-enthusiasts out
there who feel the same way out of a similar sense
of nostalgia. Why discourage that? It seems like
a fine way to grow the hobby to me, though I'm
admittedly biased.
I've spent a fair amount of time with a bunch of
FTSC documents lately as I wrote my own binkp
implementation and am writing my own FTN<->NNTP
gateway software (binkd was too buggy and the
upstream maintainer isn't terribly responsive;
existing FTN<->NNTP gateways have bit rotted and
are similarly buggy and have a poor story around
latency). Anyway, I think there's significant
room for improvement and innovation. It sounds
fun. It sounds experimental. It might be
much simpler in terms of implementation than
what's out there now.
Why not explore the space a little? If people
just want to be into the art and running old
code then there's certainly nothing wrong with
that. I don't see how that means that others
can't experiment with new implementation ideas,
though.
No reason we can't start a common practice that gets documented as a
FTSC spec in the future. ;)
I like to see progress that allows an appropriate degree of backwards compatibility as the way to go. Those looking to the future can do so, while those who want to run "pure" legacy systes can do so and still
join in the fun.
I've spent a fair amount of time with a bunch of
FTSC documents lately as I wrote my own binkp
implementation and am writing my own FTN<->NNTP
gateway software (binkd was too buggy and the
upstream maintainer isn't terribly responsive;
What's binkd got to do with NNTP? <confused look>
You might need to be a bit more specific in what you're trying to
achieve. Synchronet can gate newsgroups, but Synchroner, AFICT, can't
gate in a way that allows downstream systems to have their own Internet domain, in contrast to my old GIGO SMTP/NNTP gateway, which did generate addresses that were reachable via email (gated to netmail).
Yep, there's room for all to play in this santpit. :)
On my system, the messaging subsystem is based
on an NNTP server. In order to participate in, say,
fsxNet, I'd like to take FTN traffic and store it in
the news server, and take responses posted via NNTP
and gate them back to FTN. I thought this would be
relatively straight forward to set up: I'd use binkd,
fidogate, and INN. However, I've found binkd buggy
and empirically observed that it crashes a lot, and
fidogate has bit-rotted to the point of near
uselessness. INN was the easiest to set up, though
I used to run a USENET server back in the day and
Rich $alz is a smart dude who left a lot of his legacy
in it, so that's less surprising. Anyway....
On 02-24-20 12:46, tenser wrote to Vk3jed <=-
On 24 Feb 2020 at 09:15a, Vk3jed pondered and said...
No reason we can't start a common practice that gets documented as a
FTSC spec in the future. ;)
Indeed! That would be a goal. Or even superseding FTN
entirely and coming up with new networking infrastructure.
On 02-24-20 12:49, tenser wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Yes. For me, I think the way to go is to have a compatibility
layer at the edge of my little network of cooperating hosts.
I can provide a compatibility facade to things that care about
that, but feel free to discard all the legacy burden inside.
On 02-24-20 13:09, tenser wrote to Vk3jed <=-
What's binkd got to do with NNTP? <confused look>
Ah. Some explanation is in order....
On my system, the messaging subsystem is based
on an NNTP server. In order to participate in, say,
fsxNet, I'd like to take FTN traffic and store it in
the news server, and take responses posted via NNTP
and gate them back to FTN. I thought this would be
relatively straight forward to set up: I'd use binkd,
fidogate, and INN. However, I've found binkd buggy
and empirically observed that it crashes a lot, and
fidogate has bit-rotted to the point of near
uselessness. INN was the easiest to set up, though
I used to run a USENET server back in the day and
Rich $alz is a smart dude who left a lot of his legacy
in it, so that's less surprising. Anyway....
I fixed a few bugs in binkd, but this apparently
caused problems for people trying to compile it for
Windows 9x and OS/2; ongoing maintenance of that
program will be a burden due to forced compatibility
with legacy systems and the inability to take
advantage of e.g. newer language features and
libraries. Also, the upstream maintainer has been
sitting on a pull request for a few weeks now with
no response, so I'm fearful of successful collaboration
going forward.
Fidogate also doesn't seem like a great fit: the
story for bidirectional gatewaying between news
and FTN seems to be based on cronjobs and batching.
There's nothing wrong with that per se, but it
gives a poor story with respect to latency and I
think one can do better with cooperating daemons
that ping each other over a real IPC channel (like a
Unix domain socket) to kick off processing. In
the end, I decided that neither binkd nor fidogate
is worth the effort to fix and maintain, so I
started writing my own.
See above. I'm not using Synchronet though, or really
any BBS package. The Fat Dragon is kind of weird in
the sense that the system itself _is_ the BBS. In that
way it's more of a public-access Unix system with
emphasis on a specific application area (BBS-type "stuff")
as opposed to a traditional BBS.
Yep, there's room for all to play in this santpit. :)
Sometimes with respect to time it feels like a bit of
a tarpit, but hey. :-D
I have done a lot of work to bring fidogate back from it's near brink of death. I still have a few things here and there to fix. I've got the source here if you want it.
Sure; I'd love to have a look at it. If nothing else,
it's another reference on how some of the weirder corner
cases are handled. Is your source out in the open
somewhere? I combed github pretty thoroughly, but
mostly came up short.
fidogate, and INN. However, I've found binkd buggy
and empirically observed that it crashes a lot, and
Strange. I've found binkd works fairly well for the most part, but I am running on Linux, not Windows.
Other than Synchronet, there seems no current solutions for gating NNTP
to FTN that I'm really aware of. I used to run a GIGO gate back in the 90s, which worked well, and I could gate for whole FTNs and select BBSs
at the same time, with the help of an external utility. :)
No, it's on my private git lab server. I will send you the details.
FTN that I'm really aware of. I used to run a GIGO gate back in the
Sounds like sooner or later, those legacy platforms will have to be dropped, or the project forked. :/
On 02-24-20 15:26, tenser wrote to Vk3jed <=-
25 kloc of bad C code did not leave me with a warm fuzzy...
Granted, about half of that is compatibility for ancient
systems, but still: 3.2 kloc just to drive a simple
protocol? Nah, I'm good.
Fidogate is still out there.... Avon sent me a copy of SoupGate,
but I suspect writing a server that presents itself as a
streaming NNTP server on one end and prepares packet bundles
and pings the binkp server on the other shouldn't be _too_
hard to whip up.
On 02-24-20 15:11, Spectre wrote to Vk3jed <=-
FTN that I'm really aware of. I used to run a GIGO gate back in the
Going to have to take another run at something like that myself, my
last few retries on UFGATE haven't gotten me any closer to a result.
Sounds like sooner or later, those legacy platforms will have to be dropped, or the project forked. :/
Just stick a fork in it and call it done. :P
tenser wrote to Vk3jed <=-
On my system, the messaging subsystem is based
on an NNTP server. In order to participate in, say,
fsxNet, I'd like to take FTN traffic and store it in
the news server, and take responses posted via NNTP
and gate them back to FTN. I thought this would be
relatively straight forward to set up:
That's the bit that's unfortunate. The whole thing
suffers from a certain poverty of imagination.
It would be nice to use DNS as a nodelist lookup
mechanism, regardless of the original intent.
There is no reason why it can't be expanded as long as you meet FTS-5004. I offer email <-> netmail and add the needed MX,SPF,DMARC,etc entries for all nodes which is over and above 5004, although I am not sure what good a node that is dial-up only would offer having a DNS record. As it stands, if you are reachable via the internet then you are processed via DNS.
I agree it could have it's advantages, like TXT entries for dial up nodes, but unless we can go back in time and update all of the software people use, there is no use.
You could create your own FTN style network that would require this, but then you are shutting out anyone using software that isn't compatible. I personally would rather focus my time and energy on growing the hobby and keep what we have, it is a far cry from the 80s and 90s.
I agree it could have it's advantages, like TXT entries for dial up
nodes, but unless we can go back in time and update all of the software
people use, there is no use.
Sorry, let me be clear: I'm not suggesting that
one totally discard nodelist generation and
distribution for legacy systems. I'm suggesting
using DNS in lieu of a nodelist for sufficiently
capable systems as a complement to the current
way of doing things.
If one took the DNS distributed data as the record
of truth and generated the nodelist from that
(instead of the other way around) you'd still reap
many of the benefits of administrative decentralization
while maintaining legacy compatibility.
You could create your own FTN style network that would require this, but
then you are shutting out anyone using software that isn't compatible. I
personally would rather focus my time and energy on growing the hobby and
keep what we have, it is a far cry from the 80s and 90s.
I've spent a fair amount of time with a bunch of
FTSC documents lately as I wrote my own binkp
implementation and am writing my own FTN<->NNTP
gateway software (binkd was too buggy and the
upstream maintainer isn't terribly responsive;
existing FTN<->NNTP gateways have bit rotted and
are similarly buggy and have a poor story around
latency). Anyway, I think there's significant
room for improvement and innovation. It sounds
fun. It sounds experimental. It might be
much simpler in terms of implementation than
what's out there now.
FTN that I'm really aware of. I used to run a GIGO gate back in the
Going to have to take another run at something like that myself, my
I've still technically got a working GIGO setup, but it's on a virtual HDD
tenser wrote to Vk3jed <=-
On my system, the messaging subsystem is based
on an NNTP server. In order to participate in, say,
fsxNet, I'd like to take FTN traffic and store it in
the news server, and take responses posted via NNTP
and gate them back to FTN. I thought this would be
relatively straight forward to set up:
I'm all for a challenge, but if you're looking for an easy solution, Synchronet supports NNTP and can gate between different net.types out of the box. You'd set up Synchronet as a leaf node of your NNTP server, connect FTN areas using newslink.js, and set the message areas to gate between message networks. Then you could feed your Mystic BBS from Synchronet.
specThat's the bit that's unfortunate. The whole thing
suffers from a certain poverty of imagination.
It would be nice to use DNS as a nodelist lookup
mechanism, regardless of the original intent.
No reason we can't start a common practice that gets documented as a FTSC
in the future. ;)
Fidogate is still out there.... Avon sent me a copy of SoupGate,
but I suspect writing a server that presents itself as a
streaming NNTP server on one end and prepares packet bundles
and pings the binkp server on the other shouldn't be _too_
hard to whip up.
There is no reason why it can't be expanded as long as you meet FTS-5
But there are also enough reasons to not do it.
If we really want to do
it the same way it is done in the Internet, we also could use SMTP, NNTP and get rid of the stupid zone, net and node numbers, binkp mailer, pkt tossers ... ;)
Poor story around latency? Which software and latency are you talking about?
There is no reason why it can't be expanded as long as you meet FT
But there are also enough reasons to not do it.
What are the reasons NOT to do it? I'm honestly curious.
On 02-25-20 04:39, Spectre wrote to Vk3jed <=-
FTN that I'm really aware of. I used to run a GIGO gate back in the
Going to have to take another run at something like that myself, my
I've still technically got a working GIGO setup, but it's on a virtual HDD
It seemed overly obstreporous when I looked at it in passing, maybe I should try this one again and see if you've got any pointers... Please Standby! :P
On 02-24-20 20:19, Oli wrote to Vk3jed <=-
That's the bit that's unfortunate. The whole thing
suffers from a certain poverty of imagination.
It would be nice to use DNS as a nodelist lookup
mechanism, regardless of the original intent.
No reason we can't start a common practice that gets documented as a FTSC
spec
in the future. ;)
The FTSC is more or less dead ...
The FTSC is more or less dead ...
I believe we have one member of the FTSC in here, who may beg to differ. ;)
I am happy to discuss this via Netmail or email, out of respect for Avon
I don't really want to carry on Fido-related nonsense here.
On 02-24-20 17:27, Atreyu wrote to Vk3Jed <=-
Actually, sadly this is mostly correct. There are no longer an
abundance of proposals being discussed by developers that the FTSC
needs to catalog as proposal or standard. There are very few FTN
products being actively developed anymore. BinkD was really the last "protocol" that was accepted as standard.
I am happy to discuss this via Netmail or email, out of respect for Avo I don't really want to carry on Fido-related nonsense here.
May the Z1C and RC12 burn for their participation in Fidonet. Long live othernets!
I am happy to discuss this via Netmail or email, out of respect for Avon
I don't really want to carry on Fido-related nonsense here.
Yeah some good points there, but again, the flip side is perhaps we as a community need to give the FTSC new stuff to catalogue. :)
aren't coming back. So F 'em. Salvage what
you can out of the technology and make these networks
what you want them to be.
On 02-25-20 14:58, tenser wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I see the situation on fight-o-net similarly; who
cares what the FTSC does or doesn't do? For that
matter, who cares what the Fidonet *Cs say about,
well, anything? It's the same four or five bitter
guys saying the same stuff and hashing out the same
stupid arguments over and over again, like they
have been for decades now. Maybe that mattered
(for small values of mattering) back in the day
when there was more than a few hundred systems on
Fidonet, but those days are long gone and just
aren't coming back. So F 'em. Salvage what
you can out of the technology and make these networks
what you want them to be.
I agree with this, I don't think anyone needs to care what FTSC want unless you want your software to run on fidonet. This isn't fidonet, network x isn't fidonet.. the problem I see is interoperability, if one starts network x with technology y, then it will be limited to who supports technology y. if you can keep the old compatible, that's good, but then the new stuff is kind of pointless unless people move to implement it. You then have individuals who work on different projects having to work together to implement technology y, and agree on
standards for technology y, and maybe then you get FTSC 2.0
I say, be a trailblazer. Implement new stuff and let the rest catch up.
If it's worth while and not to complex etc, they will.
PS, how come your messages are narrow? (not 80chars) I notice your
posting on agency, is it some offline mail messager? It's not a problem, looks quiet neat, just curious what you're using.
But given that FTSC's role has typically been to document existing practice, everything points to working on progressing the hobby. If
they want to, they'll document what you're doing. If not, who cares? :)
And if Fidonet doesn't follow our lead, their loss, again, who cares? :)
I am happy to discuss this via Netmail or email, out of respect for Avo I don't really want to carry on Fido-related nonsense here.
Sure! Drop me a note at cross@fat-dragon.org. Thanks!
And if Fidonet doesn't follow our lead, their loss, again, who cares? :)
At this point, from a pure technology perspective, I see no advantage whatsoever to using binkp instead of HTTP and I see no advantage
to the legacy formats instead of a text-based structured format.
It doesn't have to be RFC1036, but something like JSON as a message interchange would have eliminated so many problems (and since it's
text, I'd wager it'd compress down pretty well). Of course it didn't
exist in the 80s and 90s, and that's fine, I'm not trying to suggest people back there should have been fortune tellers who foresaw
the benefits of structured formats, but whereas binkp showed up in
the 21st century, nothing else did.
I believe we have one member of the FTSC in here, who may beg to differ. ;)
Yeah some good points there, but again, the flip side is perhaps we as a community need to give the FTSC new stuff to catalogue. :)
On 25 Feb 2020 at 12:11p, apam pondered and said...
I agree with this, I don't think anyone needs to care what FTSC want unless you want your software to run on fidonet. This isn't fidonet, network x isn't fidonet.. the problem I see is interoperability, if o starts network x with technology y, then it will be limited to who supports technology y. if you can keep the old compatible, that's goo but then the new stuff is kind of pointless unless people move to implement it. You then have individuals who work on different project having to work together to implement technology y, and agree on standards for technology y, and maybe then you get FTSC 2.0
Thanks. That captures it nicely.
I say, be a trailblazer. Implement new stuff and let the rest catch u If it's worth while and not to complex etc, they will.
Who's with us??
;)No reason we can't start a common practice that gets documented as a FTSC
spec
in the future. ;)
The FTSC is more or less dead ...
I believe we have one member of the FTSC in here, who may beg to differ.
On 02-24-20 17:27, Atreyu wrote to Vk3Jed <=-
Actually, sadly this is mostly correct. There are no longer an
abundance of proposals being discussed by developers that the FTSC
needs to catalog as proposal or standard. There are very few FTN
products being actively developed anymore. BinkD was really the last
"protocol" that was accepted as standard.
Yeah some good points there, but again, the flip side is perhaps we as a community need to give the FTSC new stuff to catalogue. :)
On 25 Feb 2020 at 10:56a, Vk3jed pondered and said...
Yeah some good points there, but again, the flip side is perhaps we as a
community need to give the FTSC new stuff to catalogue. :)
Some number of years ago, over on grex.org, we had
something of an existential crisis. The people who
had started the system were drifting away, but still
wanted to maintain significant control over the
system and the direction we took it in. There were
lots of tedious flame wars and it was frustrating
all around.
I was on the BoD at the time, and had a conversation
with someone who finally said to me, "Just do what
you want. They're not going to follow through on
what they've been talking about doing for the last
10 years, so take Grex and make it what you want it
to be." It was a real revelation to me. The next
day, we started making changes and while there was
a small bit of grumbling, it just didn't matter.
The community changed and now it's actually decently
healthy.
I see the situation on fight-o-net similarly; who
cares what the FTSC does or doesn't do? For that
matter, who cares what the Fidonet *Cs say about,
well, anything? It's the same four or five bitter
guys saying the same stuff and hashing out the same
stupid arguments over and over again, like they
have been for decades now. Maybe that mattered
(for small values of mattering) back in the day
when there was more than a few hundred systems on
Fidonet, but those days are long gone and just
aren't coming back. So F 'em. Salvage what
you can out of the technology and make these networks
what you want them to be.
Yeah some good points there, but again, the flip side is perhaps we as a
community need to give the FTSC new stuff to catalogue. :)
Isn't FTSC just an extension of fighto net? To be honest, I've never
had much
to do with 'em but I don't ever recall anyone paying an awful lot of attention to them either
Spec
It stands for Fidonet Technical Standards Committee if memory serves. It's standards body that all FTN technology come from / is approved by. In othe words, we can safely ignore it and build whatever the hell we want if we fe like it.
Fidonet follow a lead, bahaha. That circle jerk will do nothing but
bitch and complain while 50 and 60 year old men eat nacho chips in their underwear at their moms house.
If one took the DNS distributed data as the record
of truth and generated the nodelist from that
(instead of the other way around) you'd still reap
many of the benefits of administrative decentralization
while maintaining legacy compatibility.
But the cool thing about FTN is that it just needs a plaintext file to connect nodes. No domain registrations that cost money and make some people rich. DNS is already a good target for censorship and stuff is happening that is outside the control of the user (sysop).
I find that simply ignoring Fidonet, FTCS and the old farts fighting
each other makes it all go away pretty fast.
Frankly, Fidonet has depended on the Internet for
years. Bush's 1993 CACM article describes how the
North America<->Europe link was gated over the
Internet since late 1991: "This saves FidoNet
operators thousands of dollars a month." https://archive.psg.com/930000.fidonet-acm.pdf
I find that simply ignoring Fidonet, FTCS and the old farts
fighting each other makes it all go away pretty fast.
That's certainly true. FTSC is mostly relevant as a
repository of documents that describe the systems people
currently using.
That is so. I haven't had a modem in 20 years now. Do they still manufacture modems today? I doubt it.
8x3 file names made perfect sense in 1989 but not so much in 2020. If we could leave things like that behind and work with today's realities it would be much easier to move forward.
That is so. I haven't had a modem in 20 years now. Do they still
manufacture modems today? I doubt it.
They absolutely still make modems. I just refreshed all of the ones we have connected to our core routers and mpls routers. If our MPLS goes down or a bad config is applied the only option is to dial into the routers albeit via POTS or cellular.
8x3 file names made perfect sense in 1989 but not so much in
2020. If we could leave things like that behind and work with
today's realities it would be much easier to move forward.
If you want maximum compatibility then you have to cater to the
lowest denominator. I am a top tier filegate hub and there are
plenty of people still running older tic processors which only
support 8.3.
If you want maximum compatibility then you have to cater to the lowest denominator. I am a top tier filegate hub and there are plenty of people still running older tic processors which only support 8.3.
It is great to innovate and come up with new ways of doing things, but with a hobby that is well into it's death throws, locking out people because you won't support 8.3 files is only going to put the last nail
in the coffin.
On 02-25-20 15:38, tenser wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Precisely! Look, suppose we collectively come up
with a new inter-BBS networking initiative and it
ends up being neat. Suppose the FTSC comes in and
says, "hey, this is neat, we'd like to document
it..." then the answer (from my perspective) would
be, "sure. Have at at." But by the same time, I
wouldn't feel compelled to be beholden to them.
On 02-24-20 22:08, Netsurge wrote to Vk3jed <=-
And if Fidonet doesn't follow our lead, their loss, again, who cares? :)
Fidonet follow a lead, bahaha. That circle jerk will do nothing but
bitch and complain while 50 and 60 year old men eat nacho chips in
their underwear at their moms house.
On 02-25-20 17:40, alter ego wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Re: Re: Netmail
By: Vk3jed to Oli on Tue Feb 25 2020 08:42 am
I believe we have one member of the FTSC in here, who may beg to differ. ;)
I believe that is my queue to say something ...
"Something" :)
Actually, I cant say anything, otherwise I have to shoot you after
saying it. ...deon
... Monogamy leaves a lot to be desired.
On 02-25-20 18:04, Spectre wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Yeah some good points there, but again, the flip side is perhaps we as a community need to give the FTSC new stuff to catalogue. :)
Isn't FTSC just an extension of fighto net? To be honest, I've never
had much to do with 'em but I don't ever recall anyone paying an awful
lot of attention to them either
On 02-25-20 10:13, Oli wrote to Vk3jed <=-
25 Feb 20 08:42, you wrote to me:
No reason we can't start a common practice that gets documented as a FTSC
spec
in the future. ;)
The FTSC is more or less dead ...
I believe we have one member of the FTSC in here, who may beg to differ.
;)
We have 5 FTSC members in the FSXNET nodelist ...
On 02-25-20 10:32, Oli wrote to Vk3jed <=-
But software developers already are unable to keep up with the existing standards and some of them
are FTSC members. Missing REPLY kludges, slow binkp implementations,
bugs, and I'm not talking
about tossers that fuck up formatting for in-transit echomail ...
On 02-25-20 08:37, Atreyu wrote to Joacim Melin <=-the
On 25 Feb 20 12:48:33, Joacim Melin said the following to Spectre:
It stands for Fidonet Technical Standards Committee if memory serves. It's standards body that all FTN technology come from / is approved by. In
words, we can safely ignore it and build whatever the hell we want if wee
like it.
While you are correct, the FTSC is just a paper tiger. It does not
invent any standards; merely documents them.
On 02-26-20 03:18, tenser wrote to Oli <=-
Frankly, Fidonet has depended on the Internet for
years. Bush's 1993 CACM article describes how the
North America<->Europe link was gated over the
Internet since late 1991: "This saves FidoNet
operators thousands of dollars a month." https://archive.psg.com/930000.fidonet-acm.pdf
Fidonet has been piggy-backing off of the Internet
for almost 30 years, and at this point, for all
intents and purposes, FTN-style networks _and_ BBSes
as a whole are mostly applications running on the
Internet. Yes yes, there might be a few people
clinging to dialup someplace, but in general that's
just not the case anymore.
So in order to participate in any FTN-style network,
at this point, you're practically obliged to have
Internet access, for which you're already paying.
The cost of a domain registration amortized over a
year is pennies per day.
The reality is that without the Internet, Fidonet
would be completely, not just mostly, dead. I don't
see any serious reason why it shouldn't use more
Internet standards and technology.
As for censorship in the DNS, I don't buy it, either.
all things outside of the system operator's control. The
same argument you're making against DNS already applies to
FTN and nodelists.
By distributing things over DNS, those issues are
entirely sidestepped. Administrative decentralization
is baked into the protocol by design and prevents one
person at the top from shutting off a particular
individual unless they're willing to take out an
entire administrative domain.
Not to mention the problems with the preparation,
maintenance and distribution of that text file.
On 02-25-20 13:17, Al wrote to Netsurge <=-
There is a fullname keyword that tics can use so we can have our cake
and eat it too.. if we want to.
I think there are multiple interpretations of "modem" these days. I see that they do still make dialup modems, but these days, "modem" could
also refer to a modem for cable, DSL, fiber-optic, etc. for broadband internet.
There is a fullname keyword that tics can use so we can have our cake and eat it too.. if we want to.
Compatibility with 8.3 shouldn't be a concern on network
backbones, for example; but each hub serve legacy clients
that require 8.3 by exposing a service that dynamically
translates longer file names into 8.3 or something like
that.
That problem is not limited to FTN! Software that doesn't adhere to standards has been a problem everywhere. IOW, something, while we want
to minimise, we can't afford to get hung up on it, or nothing will
happen. :)
Haha, well, that's their loss. :P Yes, I am on Fidonet, but I'm only an ordinary node, which is probably what I'll stay as for as long as I'm in Fidonet. :)
Compatibility with 8.3 shouldn't be a concern on network
backbones, for example; but each hub serve legacy clients
that require 8.3 by exposing a service that dynamically
translates longer file names into 8.3 or something like
that.
Great idea but there is no way to know who is using what, and if you are going to say "ask them", well then that kills the whole concept of
keeping things compatible.
Like I said earlier, I am all for moving forward. I posted here months
ago that I was working on a NNTP based mailer so that end users and downlinks a-like would be able to get mail. Progress will bring us forward, but to eliminate or not support already established
technologies and protocols, no matter how old or out dated they are will only dwindle the numbers which aren't all that much to begin with.
I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise.
On 02-26-20 13:05, tenser wrote to Vk3jed <=-
On 26 Feb 2020 at 09:08a, Vk3jed pondered and said...
That problem is not limited to FTN! Software that doesn't adhere to standards has been a problem everywhere. IOW, something, while we want
to minimise, we can't afford to get hung up on it, or nothing will
happen. :)
That's certainly true, but I contend that the issue is
particularly acute in FTN networking because the standards
are often ambiguous, and implementations are less than
rigorous.
On 02-25-20 19:04, Netsurge wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Haha, well, that's their loss. :P Yes, I am on Fidonet, but I'm only an ordinary node, which is probably what I'll stay as for as long as I'm in Fidonet. :)
I, along with a few others here are part of the administration and we can't even stand it.
There is a fullname keyword that tics can use so we can have
our cake and eat it too.. if we want to.
Sounds like that would be a good keyword to use, so we can make
full use of LFNs where available and have backwards compatibility
with 8.3 only systems.
I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise.
The suggestion was made multiple times to not hatch out tics in 8.3 format.
The antics in certain echos are just ludicrous. :/ I've seen primary school kids who behave better.
My own sense is that Fidonet in particular has been
a bastion of censorship for decades, and we see both
vestiges of this in behavior, and the technology makes
it particular susceptible to the whims of individuals:
the whole nodelist thing is ultimately dependent on the
good will of a few individuals (the people who prepare
and distribute the nodelist). If one of them decides
they don't like you? They simply remove your entry.
For Fidonet in particular, I've heard horror stories about
people trying to get node numbers and it taking months; in
a way this is a form of censhorship. Simply put, these are
Not to mention the problems with the preparation,
maintenance and distribution of that text file.
8x3 file names made perfect sense in 1989 but not so much in 2020. If we could leave things like that behind and work with today's realities it
would be much easier to move forward.
I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise.
The suggestion was made multiple times to not hatch out tics in 8.3 format.
I, along with a few others here are part of the administration and we can't even stand it.
Masochists? :D
On 02-25-20 17:27, Al wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Yep, that keyword is for compatibility. The file is transported with an 8x3 filename in the "File" keyword as always along with the "Fullname" keyword with the actual filename. Nodes that support the Fullname
keyword can import the file with the actual filename and nodes that
don't simply ignore it and import the 8x3 file.
MBSE is the only package I know of that supports "Fullname" although
there may be others. MBSE actually knows the file by it filename (8x3)
and it's fullname stored as a symlink.
A bit of stuff there but we remain compatible.
On 02-25-20 23:22, Netsurge wrote to Vk3jed <=-
The antics in certain echos are just ludicrous. :/ I've seen primary school kids who behave better.
You should take a peek at some of the admin echos.
But the Filebone is not technically "my problem"...
can't even stand it.
Masochists? :D
Not the kind where pleasure is derived from pain.
Not to mention the problems with the preparation,
maintenance and distribution of that text file.
That's mickey-mouse easy for me to do. Only Linux ZC's make it complicated.
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)
technology, but it has to play nice with existing systems and you must
be prepared to deal with inevitable flaming... if you are persistent and
TID: Mystic BBS 1.12 A45
MSGID: 21:1/101 5ab421bf
REPLY: 21:1/176 16032D47
TZUTC: 1300
Ehh most changes those people don't even notice. Mystic has had TLS and AES encrypted mail for a couple of years now for example and none of them probably know about it.
Odd, this was a blank message from you?
I guarantee you any Fido ZC who engages in that behavior would either
lose their hat or most likely be burnt alive at the stake by everyone in the network. A Fido ZC is watched and studied very carefully by those seeking to have a flame-fest with even the slightest of mistakes. That includes mistakes in RC segments which in turn are considered by some as mistakes by NC's.
Odd, this was a blank message from you?
Yes, lack of caffeine is a hell of a thing. :-/
I'm watching you like a hawk, waiting for your next mistake Mr ZC. Oh, look, a squirrel.
standardsBut software developers already are unable to keep up with the existing
standards and some of them
are FTSC members. Missing REPLY kludges, slow binkp implementations,
bugs, and I'm not talking
about tossers that fuck up formatting for in-transit echomail ...
That problem is not limited to FTN! Software that doesn't adhere to
has been a problem everywhere. IOW, something, while we want to minimise,we
can't afford to get hung up on it, or nothing will happen. :)
you'reSo in order to participate in any FTN-style network,
at this point, you're practically obliged to have
Internet access, for which you're already paying.
The cost of a domain registration amortized over a
year is pennies per day.
And that's one domain registration per FTN. If a FTN had 100 nodes and
paying $20/year for your domain, that's only 20c/year/node. Hardlyexorbitant.
Oh good, I thought it was some form of "silent protest". 8-)
We shall have to correct your behavior through positive re-enforcement.
I'm just saying that I don't believe much will change in Fidoland, when ZCs, FTSC members and developers
of contemporary fidonet software are not really interested in standards and good interoperability. This
AESThere is nothing stopping you or anyone from introducing a new
technology, but it has to play nice with existing systems and you must
be prepared to deal with inevitable flaming... if you are persistent and
Ehh most changes those people don't even notice. Mystic has had TLS and
encrypted mail for a couple of years now for example and none of them probably know about it.
We shall have to correct your behavior through positive re-enforcement.
I'm two cups in at this point.
Oops; I should drink coffee before posting.
So in order to participate in any FTN-style network,
at this point, you're practically obliged to have
Internet access, for which you're already paying.
The cost of a domain registration amortized over a
year is pennies per day.
And that's one domain registration per FTN. If a FTN had 100 nodes ayou're
paying $20/year for your domain, that's only 20c/year/node. Hardlyexorbitant.
That is the single point of failure and not distributed at all. What hapened to fidonet.org? ;)
But I'm not sure what we are talking about. (1) The FTS-5004 nodelist distribution over DNS or (2) a DNS-based alternative to the
Nodelist? For the later you need some new standard that hasn't been proposed yet.
Do we want to change everything
from node number based addressing to domain based addresses? Then it is not really Fido anymore, but
some alternative (and there are lots of communication platforms that already work well). Are there some other ideas?
8x3 works perfectly fine for the back-office operation of Fidonet,
its only when it comes to Filebone stuff where its a limitation.
But the Filebone is not technically "my problem"...
My system cannot process Tic files in anything other than 8x3.
But the Filebone is not technically "my problem"...
In truth it's not much more than an inconvenience but we really shouldn't need to consider things like "short" or "long" filename. It's just a filename.. nothing to be afraid of.
There is nothing stopping you or anyone from introducing a new
technology, but it has to play nice with existing systems and
you must be prepared to deal with inevitable flaming... if you
are persistent and
Ehh most changes those people don't even notice. Mystic has had
TLS and AES encrypted mail for a couple of years now for example
and none of them probably know about it.
I'm fresh out. I'm off to the store to get another tin.
I'm going to begin inserting into the Zone 1 segment, many random famous quotes from the user with the apparent financial wealth...
Hub,101,Diskshop_BBS,Toronto_ON,Frank_Fucking_Dorf_Linhares
If it wasn't for the fact that there are many downlinks here on
this system,
I'd sooner just be Netmail-only altogether save for a few echoes.
Netmail is what I really enjoy the most; its how I chat with FTN
friends privately.
Even with many things on Passthru, anything beyond 8x3 arrives here
in the "manual" directory for my inspection. I just have not had
the time or motivation to make beyond-8x3 happen here.
The next net 229 segment you send me will be modified by me before I send yo back the regional segment (circle jerk anyone). My net 229 entry shall now b
Hub,101,Diskshop_BBS,Toronto_ON,Frank_Fucking_Dorf_Linhares
Of course, none of you have ever heard me speak,
but try and picture this spoken with a New York
accent: "What da fuck is a dorf?"
Its about time we have some Fucks in Fidonet... we've never had them before.
Its about time we have some Fucks in Fidonet... we've never had them before.
As your RC I command you to do it, then again, as my ZC you could deny it. Have I mentioned that this is a circle jerk?
Of course, none of you have ever heard me speak,
but try and picture this spoken with a New York
accent: "What da fuck is a dorf?"
$ The Millionaire $ <- dorf
Oh good, I thought it was some form of "silent protest". 8-)
In my defense, I was waiting for the grouphead to warm up and the
boiler to get up to pressure.
We shall have to correct your behavior through positivere-enforcement.
I'm two cups in at this point.
Ehh most changes those people don't even notice. Mystic has had
TLS and AES encrypted mail for a couple of years now for example
and none of them probably know about it.
This is really something that should be built so it can work with different software.
I'm not sure how the FTSC goes about documenting new things. A proposal before a standard can be determined?
Its only a circle jerk if there's a happy ending.
Well, that's clear; but like, what's the etymology
of the word "dorf"?
On 02-26-20 17:09, Oli wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I'm just saying that I don't believe much will change in Fidoland, when ZCs, FTSC members and developers
of contemporary fidonet software are not really interested in standards and good interoperability. This
is not the Internet, the IETF and cooprations that have the resources
to get things done. We are just
some leftover users from the 90s with a bunch of poorly maintained software (with a few exceptions). Getting
the bugs fixed and improving the software (based on already exisitng standards)
are the low hanging
fruits.
On 02-26-20 17:13, Oli wrote to Vk3jed <=-
So in order to participate in any FTN-style network,
at this point, you're practically obliged to have
Internet access, for which you're already paying.
The cost of a domain registration amortized over a
year is pennies per day.
And that's one domain registration per FTN. If a FTN had 100 nodes and
you're
paying $20/year for your domain, that's only 20c/year/node. Hardly
exorbitant.
That is the single point of failure and not distributed at all. What hapened to
fidonet.org? ;)
But I'm not sure what we are talking about. (1) The FTS-5004 nodelist distribution over DNS or (2) a DNS-based alternative to the
Nodelist? For the later you need some new standard that hasn't been proposed yet. Do we want to change everything
from node number based addressing to domain based addresses? Then it is not really Fido anymore, but
some alternative (and there are lots of communication platforms that already work well). Are there some other ideas?
In my defense, I was waiting for the grouphead to warm up and the boiler to get up to pressure.
You'll have to pedal faster to make up te slack ;)
I'm two cups in at this point.
Making up for lost doses?
It can be, but people historically aren't interested. I did the opportunistic TLS step up extension for BINKP and documented it.
At least one person had a meltdown about opportunistic TLS and I
believe the BINKD people outright said they would never do it when
someone asked (?).
I'm not sure how the FTSC goes about documenting new things. A
proposal before a standard can be determined?
I could write a proposal for the AES256 encryption but as someone
else who is part of the FidoNet team said here, proposals do little
to nothing these days because people will argue over nothing and accomplish nothing.
To be honest I think a more effective approach would be to work
with Rob from Synchronet to build things.
We could get something done and instantly have a large adoption
rate and then others can follow or not. The alternative being that
we make a FTN proposal and it sits there doing absolutely nothing.
MBSE is the only package I know of that supports "Fullname" although
there may be others. MBSE actually knows the file by it filename (8x3)
and it's fullname stored as a symlink.
MBSE is the only package I know of that supports "Fullname"
although there may be others. MBSE actually knows the file by
it filename (8x3) and it's fullname stored as a symlink.
Actually, MBSE did a bad job of long file names. I ran MBSE and
lost a few files because of it.
It would convert a long name to a short name, and then symlink to
it as you say - but the conversion was 8.3 - it was 11 chars. ie: mystica112a45_l32.rar would be converted to and stored as
mystica1.12a, and the long name linked to it. So ..l64, ..l32..,
..o64, ..w64, ..w32 all pointed to the same file. :(
It also didnt handle the TIC's themselves, if they were longer than
11 chars - it would try and delete the filename when it internally converted its name to 11 chars (which resulted in a file not
found). Same problem also, when it would try and throw the files
into the bad dir, when it existed in the target directory...
I did document it and posted it in MBSE - but I dont think that it
went anywhere...
I am using tls with one node, we both run binkd. I connect with a couple of mystic nodes (probably more!) so I'll see if they'd like to try it and see if we can get it going.
Heino (BBBS author) about things I'd like to see in BBBS. He does care
for BBBS although he likes the FTS to look at or perhaps a proposal that clearly explains the goals and how to's would be enough for him or other software authors to have a look at what we are trying to accomplish and
be a part of that.
On 02-27-20 09:09, g00r00 wrote to Al <=-
To be honest I think a more effective approach would be to work with
Rob from Synchronet to build things. We could get something done and instantly have a large adoption rate and then others can follow or not.
The alternative being that we make a FTN proposal and it sits there
doing absolutely nothing.
On 26 Feb 2020 at 05:13p, Oli pondered and said...
And that's one domain registration per FTN. If a FTN had 100 nodes ayou're
paying $20/year for your domain, that's only 20c/year/node. Hardlyexorbitant.
That is the single point of failure and not distributed at all. What
hapened to fidonet.org? ;)
No, that's an administrative failing. The problem there
was relying on a single individual to "own" that domain.
There are a couple of potential solutions:
1. Have a distributed organization be the owner of the
domain, so that it's not beholden to a single person.
2. Replicate the _data_ across several domains so that
if any one goes away, there's a backup that can
become the primary.
But I'm not sure what we are talking about. (1) The FTS-5004 nodelist
distribution over DNS or (2) a DNS-based alternative to the
Nodelist? For the later you need some new standard that hasn't been
proposed yet.
We should probably start with the former, but I see no
serious impediment to using that as a basis for the
latter.
wantedWell, that's clear; but like, what's the etymology
of the word "dorf"?
That is a good question, I kinda just came up with it on the spot. I
to avoid calling him a Fucking moronic nimrod so he didn't mount hispulpit
and preach about the evils of swearing.
Rob fromOn 02-27-20 09:09, g00r00 wrote to Al <=-
To be honest I think a more effective approach would be to work with
Synchronet to build things. We could get something done and instantlyhave a large
adoption rate and then others can follow or not. The alternative beingthat we
make a FTN proposal and it sits there doing absolutely nothing.great. If
I agree, just do it. If someone wants to document it as a standard,
they don't, who cares? You're still advancing the art and working withother
developers to do so.
1. Have a distributed organization be the owner of the
domain, so that it's not beholden to a single person.
2. Replicate the _data_ across several domains so that
if any one goes away, there's a backup that can
become the primary.
That sounds nice in theory, but it's unlikely that it will happen and it adds a lot of complexity. The nodelist is intentionally that
simple. The coordinator bullshit and power structure was an unfortunate side effect, but the nodelist itself is a very reliable and
decentralized lookup mechanism.
But yeah, let's revive IFNA ;)
But I'm not sure what we are talking about. (1) The FTS-5004 nodelis
distribution over DNS or (2) a DNS-based alternative to the
Nodelist? For the later you need some new standard that hasn't been
proposed yet.
We should probably start with the former, but I see no
serious impediment to using that as a basis for the
latter.
How would that be more decentralized?
Is it short for Dorftrottel (German for village idiot)?
On 02-27-20 14:09, Oli wrote to Vk3jed <=-
It still would be good to announce that people are working on stuff. An IETF working group is open to anyone and discussions are public
(mailing list, (recordings of) meetings, drafts).
That is so. I haven't had a modem in 20 years now. Do they still
manufacture modems today? I doubt it.
They absolutely still make modems. I just refreshed all of the ones we
have
connected to our core routers and mpls routers. If our MPLS goes down
or a
bad config is applied the only option is to dial into the routers
albeit via
POTS or cellular.
And if Fidonet doesn't follow our lead, their loss, again, who cares? :)
Fidonet follow a lead, bahaha. That circle jerk will do nothing but
bitch and
complain while 50 and 60 year old men eat nacho chips in their
underwear at
their moms house.
I wouldn't say I collect modems but I keep every one I manage to get my hands on. Have several USR v.everything modems, a USR SPortster and some other modems as well. Used to use one for my BBS (and maybe I should
start doing that again... :) ) and I guess I keep them because of sentimental reasons and also because they may end up having some value
one day.
I see the situation on fight-o-net similarly; who
cares what the FTSC does or doesn't do? For that
matter, who cares what the Fidonet *Cs say about,
well, anything? It's the same four or five bitter
guys saying the same stuff and hashing out the same
stupid arguments over and over again, like they
have been for decades now. Maybe that mattered
(for small values of mattering) back in the day
when there was more than a few hundred systems on
Fidonet, but those days are long gone and just
aren't coming back. So F 'em. Salvage what
you can out of the technology and make these networks
what you want them to be.
this spoken with a New York accent: "What da fuck is a dorf?"
Hey there,
Ok, so I receive netmail, I just can't send it. :) Erm, all you sent me
was the BBS name?
Dropped you a quick netmail to your 1/152 node, can you have a look and netmail me back please :)
If a netmail arrives in my inbound, and it is not for me, and I have no routing infomation applicable to it, should I attempt to send it on?
So far, only if a netmail is entered locally with no routing information it's sent to binkd in hopes it can deliver it.
apam wrote to All <=-
If a netmail arrives in my inbound, and it is not for me, and I have no routing infomation applicable to it, should I attempt to send it on?
that is, assuming binkd has nodelist support...
Could someone send me Netmail. I messed around with some stuff again, and want to be sure I didn't break it.
Could someone send me Netmail. I messed around with some stuff again,
and want to be sure I didn't break it.
Could someone send me Netmail. I messed around with some stuff again,
and want to be sure I didn't break it.
Could someone send me Netmail. I messed around with some stuff again, and want to be sure I didn't break it.
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Ground Control (21:3/140)
132
Could someone send me Netmail. I messed around with some stuff again, and want to be sure I didn't break it.
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Ground Control (21:3/140)
Just sent a netmail your way.
Until recently, I would remote desktop into my work laptop with my home
PC and 2 monitors. I'd have a separate work environment and play environment, and that helped separate the two areas. One the weekends, I'd close the work laptop.
Docker is a lot of fun, I'm running Proxmox with LXC containers and have an Ubuntu docker host running in a VM. Nginx Proxy Manager, Pi-Hole and
a couple of apps are running in containers.
Avon wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
On the weekends I physically put the laptop away and clear the table I
use for both work and play. But also on the weekends I have spent more time lately doing stuff outside and away from the desk I am writing
this reply.
I think that's a good move for my soul :)
One habit I need to get back into (once the dust settles from a recent kitchen remodel and all of the equipment is gone) is taking my lunch outside. I did that all through 2020 and sort of fell out of the habit
as time went on.
Sysop: | echicken |
---|---|
Location: | Toronto, Ontario |
Users: | 2,224 |
Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
Uptime: | 06:58:06 |
Calls: | 14,143 |
Files: | 295 |
Messages: | 551,242 |