* Originally in POLITICS
* Crossposted in FN_SYSOP

Hi John,

On 2021-05-16 16:42:53, you wrote to Lee Lofaso:

My Akas will be 4:92,0,1 and 4:920,0,1 as well as 4:920/69. It'll get there :-)

What are you going to do with the /1 AKA's? You don't really need them from a technical point of view...

Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

On 16 May 2021, Wilfred van Velzen said the following...

What are you going to do with the /1 AKA's? You don't really need them from a technical point of view...

Unfortunately that's how our ZC assigns the nodes to the regions.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Fidonet Brasil - R80 Internet Gateway (4:80/1)

Hello Flavio!

What are you going to do with the /1 AKA's? You don't really need
them from a technical point of view...

Unfortunately that's how our ZC assigns the nodes to the regions.

Having an official RC-address seperated from the personal address
that is used for all routing etc. is not a bad idea at all. The RC
role can move, the personal address stays. Echomail transport
should not be done over the RC address.

Waiting for Ward weighing in to tell me, i have pre-2k-thinking on
that...

Matthias
--- GoldED+/W64-MSVC 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: MHS Systems (2:301/1)

Hi Flavio,

On 2021-05-17 22:39:38, you wrote to me:

What are you going to do with the /1 AKA's? You don't really need
them from a technical point of view...

Unfortunately that's how our ZC assigns the nodes to the regions.

That is not the ZC's job, but the RC's...

Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Hi Matthias,

On 2021-05-18 08:34:45, you wrote to Flavio Bessa:

What are you going to do with the /1 AKA's? You don't really need
them from a technical point of view...

Unfortunately that's how our ZC assigns the nodes to the regions.

Having an official RC-address seperated from the personal address
that is used for all routing etc. is not a bad idea at all. The RC
role can move, the personal address stays. Echomail transport
should not be done over the RC address.

For echomail links that's a good idea. But for netmail routing along the C based node list structure that is not the case.

But we were talking about the RIN number 4:92/1, and he also mentioned 4:920/69 as AKA, which I assume would be his "regular" nodenumber. In which case you don't need the 4:920/1 vanity number, for the purpose you mentioned.


Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

What are you going to do with the /1 AKA's? You don't really need
them from a technical point of view...

Unfortunately that's how our ZC assigns the nodes to the regions.

Are you now saying that your ZC assigns nodenumbers for the whole zone?

Does that means that RCs are not managing their region but everything is within one big text-file at the ZCs location ?

\%/@rd
--- DB4
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Michiel,

I understand it is not easy to suddenly get rid of the POTS age thinking. For me the transition was gradual...

It seems to be a problem confronting those returning sysops who were gone for a decade or two or three and have no feeling for why things have become the way they are, expecting it to be "business as usual as in 1990".

The newest addition to that list is this John-person from Panama (previously from the RSA) who was a node for 3 months and a week in 1990 and then dropped-out. End of April he rejoined after 30+ years and has already published a manifesto in the Facebook-based Fidonet-group on everything which is wrong, what needs to be changed, has all the answers.

The learning curve? Not needed anymore ... this is an instant society. Instant gratification ...

\%/@rd
--- DB4
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Hi Matthias,

On 2021-05-18 13:06:20, you wrote to me:

For echomail links that's a good idea. But for netmail routing along
the C based node list structure that is not the case.

Basically true, but *Cs are not always the most reliable systems
to handle mail. I know of one that tosses manually, whenever he has
the time. And i know more than one that don't answer their netmails
at all. That's not filling me with confidence.

That there are problems at RC systems is true, but a different problem... And not a reason not to use the /0 nodenumbers for netmail routing.

But we were talking about the RIN number 4:92/1, and he also
mentioned 4:920/69 as AKA, which I assume would be his "regular"
nodenumber. In which case you don't need the 4:920/1 vanity number,
for the purpose you mentioned.

Agree. The 4:92/1 is not needed ... and it's gone from the nodelist already:

Region,92,Panama,Pedasi_Los_Santos,John_Dovey,-Unpublished-,300,CM,IBN:elga
to.synchronetbbs.org Host,920,Panama,Pedasi_Los_Santos,John_Dovey,-Unpublis
hed-,300,CM,IBN:elgato.synchronetbbs.org ,1,El_Gato_De_Fuego_BBS,Pedasi_Los
_Santos,John_Dovey,-Unpublished-,300,CM,IBN:elgato.synchronetbbs.org

There's no sign of 4:920/69 in the nodelist.

His mailer tells me:
18 May 13:10:46 [1188] rcvd msg ADR 4:920/1@fidonet 4:920/0@fidonet 4:92/0@fidonet 4:92/1@fidonet

This is STILL not in synch with the nodelist.

I get the impression there is a communication problem between the ZC (who creates the Z4 nodelist all by him self) and the RC...

Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Hi Michiel,

On 2021-05-18 12:46:03, you wrote to Matthias Hertzog:

MvdV> Today systems are multitasking, tossing runs in the backgrouns and
MvdV> takes seconds,

Seconds is slow! This is on my system:

# grep 'Toss Active:' fmail.log | tail -n 20
12:00:57.852 Toss Active: 0.0046 sec.
12:00:58.288 Toss Active: 0.152 sec.
12:07:21.403 Toss Active: 0.0035 sec.
12:12:52.002 Toss Active: 0.060 sec.
12:20:37.284 Toss Active: 0.0082 sec.
12:20:38.887 Toss Active: 0.0040 sec.
12:21:06.655 Toss Active: 0.0040 sec.
12:24:15.912 Toss Active: 0.0039 sec.
12:35:53.112 Toss Active: 0.150 sec.
12:37:44.726 Toss Active: 0.173 sec.
12:47:57.977 Toss Active: 0.057 sec.
12:51:56.201 Toss Active: 0.156 sec.
13:13:54.145 Toss Active: 0.395 sec.
13:35:27.366 Toss Active: 0.434 sec.
13:59:03.113 Toss Active: 0.156 sec.
13:59:33.053 Toss Active: 0.028 sec.
14:02:54.893 Toss Active: 0.0040 sec.
14:05:52.528 Toss Active: 0.166 sec.
14:09:03.328 Toss Active: 0.376 sec.
14:16:31.590 Toss Active: 0.149 sec.

;-)


Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Hello Matthias,

On Tuesday May 18 2021 14:16, you wrote to me:

Again: *Cs are not always very reliable systems. One of then tossing manually, others seem to let their systems run fully unattended, not responding to netmails and therefore not able to enable a secure link.

Unfortunaltely there are a lot of sysops who's technical competence and motivation are below what is needed to run a reliable system. The sad fact is that today it also applies to sysops that have risen to an NC or even a RC position. In the past the pool was much larger and so it was easier to find competent and motivated people. That is one thing that has changed for the worse. IMNSHO one of the problems is the resistance against changing node numbers. To me it is just a number. One does not own it and there is no right to keep it or get it back when returning from absence. Today we have a lot of (very) small nets and there is difficulty in finding *Cs. IMNSHO it would benefit the smooth operation of the network if these small nets were merged into larger nets so that the pool from which to draw competent *C became bigger.

There is no technical reason any more for not using *C systems for
echomail and I see no problems in using the /0 address when
convenient.

I agree, there is no TECHNICAL reason to NOT do it like this. But
there are OPERATIONALS reasons that make it more wise to use other systems.

Speaking of backbones... Once in what seems another life, I was cosysop of a backbone: the Dutch TipTop gate, AKA 2:28:777. The nightly tossing run took hours. That is history. The formal rule has always been "you can get your echomail anywhere you want. In practice this was almost always cost prohibitive. So most syspos depended on the service of a "backbone". Today it is standard practice to just link wherever it is convenient.

I understand it is not easy to suddenly get rid of the POTS age
thinking. For me the transition was gradual...

That has absolutly nothing to do with POTS thinking.

Oh but it has. You just haven't seen the light yet... ;-)

It's a fact, that not all *Cs are well operated. If they are, i route
via them, it not, i avoid them. I will not dislose the list of non responding RCs and the one that tosses manually, but i have such a
list. Unfortunatly.

I am not denying that there are *Cs that perform below standards. But for echomail distributed by the FidoWeb that is not a problem. Netmail is another story. A serious problem is the nodelist. The main task of the *Cs is maintaining the nodelist. There is a lot of dead wood in the nodelist...


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)

Hello Michiel!

That has absolutly nothing to do with POTS thinking.

Oh but it has. You just haven't seen the light yet... ;-)

And what do you think was the reason i'vee tried to get in touch
with said sysops? Getting a link & feed like it's done nowdays.

You know part of my setup, so you can be sure of that i've learned what
fidoweb is.

It's a fact, that not all *Cs are well operated. If they are, i
route via them, it not, i avoid them. I will not dislose the list
of non responding RCs and the one that tosses manually, but i
have such a list. Unfortunatly.

I am not denying that there are *Cs that perform below standards. But
for echomail distributed by the FidoWeb that is not a problem.

I never said that. But using fidoweb/whatever-you-want/etc. is quite
difficult if sysops don't even answer.

Netmail is another story. A serious problem is the nodelist. The main
task of the *Cs is maintaining the nodelist. There is a lot of dead
wood in the nodelist...

That might in fact be the case.

Matthias
--- GoldED+/W64-MSVC 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: MHS Systems (2:301/1)

Hello, Wilfred van Velzen.
On 18/05/2021 15.21 you wrote:

Hi Michiel,
On 2021-05-18 12:46:03, you wrote to Matthias Hertzog:
MvdV> Today systems are multitasking, tossing runs in the backgrouns and MvdV> takes seconds,
Seconds is slow! This is on my system:
# grep 'Toss Active:' fmail.log | tail -n 20
12:00:57.852 Toss Active: 0.0046 sec.
12:00:58.288 Toss Active: 0.152 sec.
12:07:21.403 Toss Active: 0.0035 sec.
12:12:52.002 Toss Active: 0.060 sec.
12:20:37.284 Toss Active: 0.0082 sec.
12:20:38.887 Toss Active: 0.0040 sec.
12:21:06.655 Toss Active: 0.0040 sec.
12:24:15.912 Toss Active: 0.0039 sec.
12:35:53.112 Toss Active: 0.150 sec.
12:37:44.726 Toss Active: 0.173 sec.
12:47:57.977 Toss Active: 0.057 sec.
12:51:56.201 Toss Active: 0.156 sec.
13:13:54.145 Toss Active: 0.395 sec.
13:35:27.366 Toss Active: 0.434 sec.
13:59:03.113 Toss Active: 0.156 sec.
13:59:33.053 Toss Active: 0.028 sec.
14:02:54.893 Toss Active: 0.0040 sec.
14:05:52.528 Toss Active: 0.166 sec.
14:09:03.328 Toss Active: 0.376 sec.
14:16:31.590 Toss Active: 0.149 sec.
;-)

;-) indeed. ;-)

How many times per day do you run 'fmail toss' ?

Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

--
Tommi

--- FastEcho/2 1.46.1 Revival
* Origin: nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland (2:221/1.0)

Hi Tommi,

On 2021-05-19 05:51:30, you wrote to me:

MvdV> Today systems are multitasking, tossing runs in the backgrouns
and
MvdV> takes seconds,
Seconds is slow! This is on my system:
# grep 'Toss Active:' fmail.log | tail -n 20
12:00:57.852 Toss Active: 0.0046 sec.
12:00:58.288 Toss Active: 0.152 sec.
12:07:21.403 Toss Active: 0.0035 sec.
12:12:52.002 Toss Active: 0.060 sec.
12:20:37.284 Toss Active: 0.0082 sec.
12:20:38.887 Toss Active: 0.0040 sec.
12:21:06.655 Toss Active: 0.0040 sec.
12:24:15.912 Toss Active: 0.0039 sec.
12:35:53.112 Toss Active: 0.150 sec.
12:37:44.726 Toss Active: 0.173 sec.
12:47:57.977 Toss Active: 0.057 sec.
12:51:56.201 Toss Active: 0.156 sec.
13:13:54.145 Toss Active: 0.395 sec.
13:35:27.366 Toss Active: 0.434 sec.
13:59:03.113 Toss Active: 0.156 sec.
13:59:33.053 Toss Active: 0.028 sec.
14:02:54.893 Toss Active: 0.0040 sec.
14:05:52.528 Toss Active: 0.166 sec.
14:09:03.328 Toss Active: 0.376 sec.
14:16:31.590 Toss Active: 0.149 sec.
;-)

;-) indeed. ;-)

How many times per day do you run 'fmail toss' ?

That depends on the number of times my links deliver pkt files on my system. ;)

But you can see at these speeds there is no need to delay tossing, or do it only periodically. ;)

Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Hello, Wilfred van Velzen.
On 19/05/2021 8.52 you wrote:

Hi Tommi,
On 2021-05-19 05:51:30, you wrote to me:

MvdV> Today systems are multitasking, tossing runs in the backgrouns
and
MvdV> takes seconds,
Seconds is slow! This is on my system:
# grep 'Toss Active:' fmail.log | tail -n 20
12:00:57.852 Toss Active: 0.0046 sec.
12:00:58.288 Toss Active: 0.152 sec.
12:07:21.403 Toss Active: 0.0035 sec.
12:12:52.002 Toss Active: 0.060 sec.
12:20:37.284 Toss Active: 0.0082 sec.
12:20:38.887 Toss Active: 0.0040 sec.
12:21:06.655 Toss Active: 0.0040 sec.
12:24:15.912 Toss Active: 0.0039 sec.
12:35:53.112 Toss Active: 0.150 sec.
12:37:44.726 Toss Active: 0.173 sec.
12:47:57.977 Toss Active: 0.057 sec.
12:51:56.201 Toss Active: 0.156 sec.
13:13:54.145 Toss Active: 0.395 sec.
13:35:27.366 Toss Active: 0.434 sec.
13:59:03.113 Toss Active: 0.156 sec.
13:59:33.053 Toss Active: 0.028 sec.
14:02:54.893 Toss Active: 0.0040 sec.
14:05:52.528 Toss Active: 0.166 sec.
14:09:03.328 Toss Active: 0.376 sec.
14:16:31.590 Toss Active: 0.149 sec.
;-)

;-) indeed. ;-)
How many times per day do you run 'fmail toss' ?

That depends on the number of times my links deliver pkt files on my system. ;)

I know. But how many? Statistics please? ;)

But you can see at these speeds there is no need to delay tossing, or do it only periodically. ;)
Bye, Wilfred.

--
Tommi

---
* Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)

Hi Tommi,

On 2021-05-19 10:37:40, you wrote to me:

How many times per day do you run 'fmail toss' ?

That depends on the number of times my links deliver pkt files on my
system. ;)

I know. But how many? Statistics please? ;)

Why?

But here are some figures:

# grep 'Toss Active: ' fmail.log | wc -l
1841

And my current fmail.log spans from:

------------ Mon 2021-05-10, FMail-lnx64-2.1.0.18-Beta20170815
10:58:39.574 Toss

To:

------------ Wed 2021-05-19, FMail-lnx64-2.1.0.18-Beta20170815
09:39:40.665 Toss

You do the math... ;)


Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Hello Michiel!

I did so, but my OCD prevents me of throwing out an unfinshed
list.

OCD??

Google is your friend :-) Ofcessive Compulsive Disorder.
I don't have that, but i like to have things done right and complete.

I have links with all Regions in Z2 with the exception of R48. That
didn't happen overnight. Patience is a virtue. It took years. I also
have many links to other zones. Many of these links are a relic from
my time as FTSC chairman. I have no urge to publish a list of all my links.

Same here regarding regions an other zones, but still working on it.

discuss it with the *Cs of the affected regions/nets. But then:
Who cares...

I care. I always say: "if there is garbage in the nodelist it affects
us all". I do care. But not enough to spend the rest of my life
chasing down dead wood and trying to wake comatose *Cs. There is more
to life than Fidonet...

Which means: You don't care :-) I understand it, fully.

Google translate is your friend.

It's not THAT important to me.

I have a few Russian echos as well.
As far as I can judge most of the traffic there is indeed real. There
are real people behind the numbers. I would go as far as to claim that
for the last two decades the vast majority of what was written in
Fidonet was written in Cyrillic.

As long the technology is used, that's fine. If it helps people, even better.

Best wishes,
Matthias
--- GoldED+/W64-MSVC 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: MHS Systems (2:301/1)

Hello Michiel!

A recipe for disappointment. Doing things right is hard enough. Doing things right AND complete is impossible. Ever heard of G”del's incompleteness theorem? ;-)

I've workd three years in a company where one of the board colleagues
pushed the opinion, that getting 90% of the customers happy is more
than enough.

While it's clear, that never all customers can be happy, he forced
10% of a happy client base to be unhappy after his actions took place.

His actions failed on a regular basis which he excused by saying "One can
never get 100% of the clients happy", forgetting that he was the cause for their unhappyness.

Me as the then-CTO of the company had to take care of the rest. Being
customer focussed as CTO while having a non-customer focussed
marketing guy was not an easy job ... and i was happy to leave after
three years. That was nerve-wrecking.

However: I know, that 100% ("complete") is not possible, but i keep
it my goal to try and try again. I'm not disappointed, if i don't
succedd because i know, i've tried as hard and as good as i can.

This is set in relation of time and ressources. My results are
usually a bit better as others', but it takes more ressources.

Speaking of ressources means time ... and i have plenty of it ...
but as mentioned earlier, retired people never have time. THAT
is a real dilemma.

You will keep working on it. It is a work in progress that is never finished. Nodes come and go an so do the links come and go.

True.

But is not in my job description.

At least you have a job description.

As long the technology is used, that's fine. If it helps people,
even better.

Not only is the technology used, a lot of today's Fidonet technology /comes/ from sysops who's native language is written in Cyrillic.

Which is great!

Matthias
--- GoldED+/W64-MSVC 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: MHS Systems (2:301/1)

On 18 May 2021, Ward Dossche said the following...

Are you now saying that your ZC assigns nodenumbers for the whole zone?

Does that means that RCs are not managing their region but everything is within one big text-file at the ZCs location ?

No Ward, I am not telling that.

Whenever he has a new region to assign to someone or there is a change
into the current RC, he already configures his system to export mail to
4:XX/1.
In my case, it was convenient as I have created a separated system to distribute mail to Brazilian systems. I agree that it should have been
4:80/0, but that was how he had configured it so I carried on.
The Brazil Internet hub (this system) is MO (as you can see at the nodelist), and has both 4:80/0 and 4:80/1 as AKAs. To me, that's convenient,
as if I have to stand down as being RC80 I can simply hand over the system to the next coordinator.
In case of R92, we tried to argument, but fell on deaf ears.

Regarding segments, I have R80 nodelist segment, Patricio does have his
for R88, and John has R92. We send our updates to the ZC and he publishes
every Wednesday, so it takes a few days for it to be completed.
The initial register for John had his system wrongly located at Panama City, when the correction was done to Pedasi the 4:92/1 disappeared and he
had to get this fixed.

In addition, I check the nodelist periodically for typos and errors and suggest changes, not only for my region but also for the other R90, R88 and R92. There are a few typos at R90 nodelist that will be corrected soon.

I will discuss with Manuel again on the feasibility of changing this way
of working, let's see how it goes. If I can at least make the change from
80/1 to 80/0 I will be happy. Again, I am sorry for the mess, but I am new to this and am trying to tidy up things down here.

Regards,
Flavio.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Fidonet Brasil - R80 Internet Gateway (4:80/1)

On 18 May 2021, Matthias Hertzog said the following...

Agree. The 4:92/1 is not needed ... and it's gone from the nodelist already:

There's no sign of 4:920/69 in the nodelist.

There is now. He is preparing another system as you can see at the
nodelist from latest Wednesday update.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Fidonet Brasil - R80 Internet Gateway (4:80/1)

On 18 May 2021, Michiel van der Vlist said the following...

The rule that *C systems should not be used for echomail was already outdated in the POTS age. It was based on Single User, single task
systems that took hours to toss the mail and could not answer calls
during that time. Today systems are multitasking, tossing runs in the backgrouns and takes seconds, not even minutes. There is no technical reason any more for not using *C systems for echomail and I see no problems in using the /0 address when convenient.

I agree with your thoughts. Unfortunately here at Z4 we had a huge
amount of systems being disconnected, coordinators retiring, and
we had literally to collect the pieces and start over.

I can say that we are still learning, and due to cultural reasons,
not having a good command of English generally in our zone is a
major problem and a drawback when it comes to administrative work.

We will get there, we just need some time. I could say that we have
improved already when comparing to 5 years ago.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Fidonet Brasil - R80 Internet Gateway (4:80/1)

On 18 May 2021, Matthias Hertzog said the following...

That has absolutly nothing to do with POTS thinking. It's a fact, that
not all *Cs are well operated. If they are, i route via them, it not,
i avoid them. I will not dislose the list of non responding RCs and
the one that tosses manually, but i have such a list. Unfortunatly.

As said before, I am learning. I have even created a flood of
old messages here due to a mishap recently, but that added to
my learning curve. I really appreciate each and every feedback
I have received from you, Ward, Wilfred, Michiel and so many
others that have helped me along the way here.

Unfortunately there are also some people that do not take
feedbacks lightly and are not willing to learn... These are
the major challenges of these century, I could say..

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Fidonet Brasil - R80 Internet Gateway (4:80/1)

On 18 May 2021, Wilfred van Velzen said the following...

I get the impression there is a communication problem between the ZC (who creates the Z4 nodelist all by him self) and the RC...

It definetely was, but I hope we will tidy this up along the way.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Fidonet Brasil - R80 Internet Gateway (4:80/1)

On 18 May 2021, Michiel van der Vlist said the following...

And what about nets that only list POTS only systems? Is that realistic these days?

Believe me or not, there is ONE guy in Argentina running a BBS with
only a POTS line. He has RemoteAccess/FrontDoor, and refuses to use
any technological update away from the 1990s.

We have been trying to hook him back into Fidonet, but unfortunately
most of the lines there have been switched to digital (his is an
exception) and we can't feed him. We are even considering exchanging
packets over floppy disks...

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Fidonet Brasil - R80 Internet Gateway (4:80/1)

Hello Flavio!

As said before, I am learning. I have even created a flood of
old messages here due to a mishap recently, but that added to
my learning curve. I really appreciate each and every feedback
I have received from you, Ward, Wilfred, Michiel and so many
others that have helped me along the way here.

:-) we all learn. Don't worry, i was not blaming you for the mishap.
And you're not one of the guys that never responds. I prefer people
doing things, learn, analyze mishaps and stay active over the ones who don't answer at all. "Learning by doing" is great and as long there is progres, everything's fine.

Go ahead with your work. If i can be of any help, just let me know.

I'm in contact with John Dovey via Telegram, so if i can help indirectly,
just get in touch with me.

Matthias
--- GoldED+/W64-MSVC 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: MHS Systems (2:301/1)

Flavio,

We will get there, we just need some time. I could say that we have improved already when comparing to 5 years ago.

100%.

\%/@rd
--- DB4
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Matthias,

I'm in contact with John Dovey via Telegram, so if i can help indirectly, just get in touch with me.

Haaaaa ... one sysop with a 20yr Fidonet-hiatus talking to one with a 30yr one whose total Fidonet experience since his first listing in 1990 is something like 121 calendar days ... there must be a lot talk about ...

\%/@rd
--- DB4
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Ward!

Are you done with humiliating people for today? At least i try to help.

Matthias


19 May 21 20:33, you wrote to me:

Matthias,

I'm in contact with John Dovey via Telegram, so if i can help
indirectly, just get in touch with me.

Haaaaa ... one sysop with a 20yr Fidonet-hiatus talking to one with a
30yr one whose total Fidonet experience since his first listing in
1990 is something like 121 calendar days ... there must be a lot talk about ...

\%/@rd
--- DB4
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Matthias
--- GoldED+/W64-MSVC 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: MHS Systems (2:301/1)

Re: Re: Nodelist
By: Ward Dossche to Matthias Hertzog on Wed May 19 2021 20:33:38

Haaaaa ... one sysop with a 20yr Fidonet-hiatus talking to one with a 30yr one whose total Fidonet experience since his first listing in 1990 is something like 121 calendar days ... there must be a lot talk about ...

<eyeroll>

BoonDock
===
* El Gato de Fuego * 4:92/69 (FidoNet) * Pedasi, Panama


John
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Win32
* Origin: El Gato de Fuego - Pedasi, Panama (4:92/69)

Matthias,

Are you done with humiliating people for today? At least i try to help.

It's another day now.

Are you done pouncing upon everyone who posts? Not every second message in any echo (in a matter of speech) needs to come from you ...

John doesn't seem to need help, judging by his manifesto in the FB Fidonet group which identifies him as the inventor of the Fidonet-wheel, the -fire and -hot water ... all on the same day.

Take care.

\%/@rd
--- DB4
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

John,

Haaaaa ... one sysop with a 20yr Fidonet-hiatus talking to one with a B>WD> 30yr one whose total Fidonet experience since his first listing in 1990 B>WD> is something like 121 calendar days ... there must be a lot talk about.

<eyeroll>

Please publish your manifesto here ... The Fidonet FB group is populated by mostly former sysops who are not present here.

You can only get your ideas some attention by going public 'inside' Fidonet.

\%/@rd
--- DB4
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

On 19/05/2021 00:35, 2280/5555 wrote to Matthias:

MvdV> There is a lot of dead wood in the nodelist...
Bring out your dead. Bring out your dead...

--
Regards
David

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbi
* Origin: Pittsworth, QLD (3:640/305)

Hello Wilfred!

19 May 21 09:55, you wrote to Tommi Koivula:

But here are some figures:

# grep 'Toss Active: ' fmail.log | wc -l
1841

And my current fmail.log spans from:

------------ Mon 2021-05-10, FMail-lnx64-2.1.0.18-Beta20170815 10:58:39.574 Toss

To:

------------ Wed 2021-05-19, FMail-lnx64-2.1.0.18-Beta20170815 09:39:40.665 Toss

You do the math... ;)

In almost 9 days, 1841 toss runs, or a little over 200 times per day.

Andrew

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

Matthias,

He's installing ErrFlags now, he didn't know it before someone told him about. In my case, you've told me. In John's case, i've told him.

In which case, tell him about the ERRFLAGS.ZC2 configuration-file and suggest he gets the file-echo linked-up as well ... either from you or direct from the source.

Take care,

\%/@rd

--- DB4
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Hi Andrew,

On 2021-05-19 11:13:46, you wrote to me:

But here are some figures:

# grep 'Toss Active: ' fmail.log | wc -l
1841

And my current fmail.log spans from:

------------ Mon 2021-05-10, FMail-lnx64-2.1.0.18-Beta20170815
10:58:39.574 Toss

To:

------------ Wed 2021-05-19, FMail-lnx64-2.1.0.18-Beta20170815
09:39:40.665 Toss

You do the math... ;)

In almost 9 days, 1841 toss runs, or a little over 200 times per day.

Cool! Isn't it... Mail is flowing, who said fidonet was dead... And I'm not even connected to the busy file-announce and cooking areas. ;)


Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Hi Ward,

On 2021-05-20 07:26:38, you wrote to Matthias Hertzog:

He's installing ErrFlags now, he didn't know it before someone told
him about. In my case, you've told me. In John's case, i've told him.

In which case, tell him about the ERRFLAGS.ZC2 configuration-file and suggest he gets the file-echo linked-up as well ... either from you or direct from the source.

Can ErrFlags filter out all those stupid ,999,...,new_sysop,... entries?

Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Wilfred,

Can ErrFlags filter out all those stupid ,999,...,new_sysop,... entries?

Yes.

\%/@rd
--- DB4
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Hi Ward,

On 2021-05-20 13:01:17, you wrote to me:

Can ErrFlags filter out all those stupid ,999,...,new_sysop,...
entries?

Yes.

And would you be willing to implement that? ;)

Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Wilfred,

Can ErrFlags filter out all those stupid ,999,...,new_sysop,...
entries?

Yes.

And would you be willing to implement that? ;)

Have a guess ... it would be the uncanning of the can of worms ... no ?

\%/@rd
--- DB4
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Hi Ward,

On 2021-05-20 17:54:53, you wrote to me:

Can ErrFlags filter out all those stupid ,999,...,new_sysop,...
entries?

Yes.

And would you be willing to implement that? ;)

Have a guess ... it would be the uncanning of the can of worms ... no ?

That's what I'm hoping for... ;)

Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Hello, Wilfred van Velzen.
On 20/05/21 18:21 you wrote:

Can ErrFlags filter out all those stupid

,999,...,new_sysop,... Wv>> entries? WD> Yes. And would you be
willing to implement that? ;)

Have a guess ... it would be the uncanning of the can of worms
... no ?

That's what I'm hoping for... ;)

Sadist! :P
--
Ciao.
Fabio.
--- Hotdoged/2.13.5/Android
* Origin: ]\/[imac Boss Android Point (2:335/364.3)

Ward Dossche <ward.dossche@2:292/854> wrote:

Matthias,

He's installing ErrFlags now, he didn't know it before someone told him
about. In my case, you've told me. In John's case, i've told him.

In which case, tell him about the ERRFLAGS.ZC2 configuration-file and
suggest he gets the file-echo linked-up as well ... either from you or
direct from the source.

Got it, thank you.
--- SBBSecho 3.12-Linux
* Origin: El Gato de Fuego - elgato.synchronetbbs.org (4:920/1)

Wilfred,

And would you be willing to implement that? ;)

Have a guess ... it would be the uncanning of the can of worms ...

no ?

That's what I'm hoping for... ;)

Are you a fish? Or a bird? ...

Besides ... there's only one case of "new_sysop" in zone-2.

\%/@rd

--- DB4
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Hi Ward,

On 2021-05-21 11:27:43, you wrote to me:

And would you be willing to implement that? ;)

Have a guess ... it would be the uncanning of the can of worms ...

no ?

That's what I'm hoping for... ;)

Are you a fish? Or a bird? ...

Neither, maybe I'm a fisher? ;)

Besides ... there's only one case of "new_sysop" in zone-2.

One too many...

I understood the "uncanning of the can of worms", in this regard, as a hint to a particular other zone, with many 999 nodes, where this filter would really clean things up!


Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Ward Dossche wrote to Wilfred van Velzen <=-

I agree, the 999- or 9999-entries are ridiculous.

Ridiculous, but there is a purpose. In R10, I've seen a handful of people
who apply via email but never get to polling. I've started checking to see
if they have a mailer active before proceeding nowadays.

By getting an application via netmail from /9999, I know that the applicant
at least has a basic understanding of the net structure, has a nodelist configured, and understands the tech. While it's a barrier to entry that
some people may find excessive, it does help ensure that the applicant knows what he/she is doing.


... Start where you are. Use what you have. Do what you can.
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)

Hi Kurt,

On 2021-05-21 07:00:00, you wrote to Ward Dossche:

I agree, the 999- or 9999-entries are ridiculous.

Ridiculous, but there is a purpose. In R10, I've seen a handful of people who apply via email but never get to polling. I've started checking to see if they have a mailer active before proceeding nowadays.

By getting an application via netmail from /9999, I know that the applicant at least has a basic understanding of the net structure, has
a nodelist configured, and understands the tech. While it's a barrier
to entry that some people may find excessive, it does help ensure that
the applicant knows what he/she is doing.

We were talking about listing those 999 nodes in the nodelist. Not about the usage by new nodes, that of course is usefull.


Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

We have been trying to hook him back into Fidonet, but unfortunately
most of the lines there have been switched to digital (his is an
exception) and we can't feed him. We are even considering exchanging
packets over floppy disks...

It would be interesting to hear if he is able to connect to 2:203/0. I have a POTS line answering there. The speed will probably be higher than floppy-mail.



..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

We were talking about listing those 999 nodes in the nodelist. Not
about the usage by new nodes, that of course is usefull.

Oh, my mistake. That doesn't make sense, unless the NC/RC don't accept mail from unlisted nodes?


... Is the style right?
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)

But... if the NC wishes to only accept applications form net/999 and not accep
mail from unlisted nodes (s)he should make use of a private nodelist with that
ntry. No need to bother the entire Fdionet community.

Pardon my ignorance, but does listing the /999 in the nodelist cause a
bother for others in the community? Are there some softwares that don't like those entries?


* SLMR 2.1a * ETHERNET - A device for catching the ether bunny.
--- SBBSecho 3.12-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Re: Re: Nodelist
By: Flavio Bessa to Matthias Hertzog on Wed May 19 2021 09:43 am

On 18 May 2021, Matthias Hertzog said the following...

That has absolutly nothing to do with POTS thinking. It's a fact, that not all *Cs are well operated. If they are, i route via them, it not,
i avoid them. I will not dislose the list of non responding RCs and
the one that tosses manually, but i have such a list. Unfortunatly.

As said before, I am learning. I have even created a flood of
old messages here due to a mishap recently, but that added to
my learning curve. I really appreciate each and every feedback
I have received from you, Ward, Wilfred, Michiel and so many
others that have helped me along the way here.

Unfortunately there are also some people that do not take
feedbacks lightly and are not willing to learn... These are
the major challenges of these century, I could say..

I am with you Flavio. I think Z4 is making good strides over time. People who want it all 'right now' need to recognize that it takes time.

I like what I see.

xxcarol
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
* Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS (1:275/100)

Re: Nodelist
By: Andrew Leary to Wilfred van Velzen on Wed May 19 2021 11:13 am

Hello Wilfred!

19 May 21 09:55, you wrote to Tommi Koivula:

But here are some figures:

# grep 'Toss Active: ' fmail.log | wc -l
1841

And my current fmail.log spans from:

------------ Mon 2021-05-10, FMail-lnx64-2.1.0.18-Beta20170815 10:58:39.574 Toss

To:

------------ Wed 2021-05-19, FMail-lnx64-2.1.0.18-Beta20170815 09:39:40.665 Toss

You do the math... ;)

In almost 9 days, 1841 toss runs, or a little over 200 times per day.

Andrew

Thats a little under what I run but not by much. BRE leage here.

xxcarol
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
* Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS (1:275/100)

Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Nighthawk <=-

Unfortunately that's how our ZC assigns the nodes to the regions.

That is not the ZC's job, but the RC's...

I meant when a region is created or restored, our ZC creates an
mail/netmail export point to the XX/1 address of that specific
region.

Of course when I as RC have a new node on my region, I assign
the nodenumber based on my criteria.



... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
___ MultiMail/Mac v0.52
--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A42 2019/02/01 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Saturn's Orbit BBS - Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (4:801/188)

Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Nighthawk <=-

Believe me or not, there is ONE guy in Argentina running a BBS with
only a POTS line.

If it is just one system, I can believe it. A whole net is another
story.

Correct.

He has RemoteAccess/FrontDoor, and refuses to use any technological
update away from the 1990s.

I wonder if he gets any users...

He does have one or two, believe me. I used to dial-in from
Brazil but my laptop (which has a modem) had a disk drive
failure and I stopped to access. Even internationally, I was
able to connect at 9600 bps.

We have been trying to hook him back into Fidonet, but unfortunately
most of the lines there have been switched to digital (his is an exception) and we can't feed him. We are even considering exchanging packets over floppy disks...

I don't think that is going to work. It may work for him, but in this
day and age people are used to get an answer the same day if not
sooner. A floppy disk express will take days and not many will be interested in communcating with him
or his users under those conditions. It is a recipe for deception.

Perhaps you could try via VOIP. Some sysops have tried that and the milage varies. But I am afraid that this is not going to work anyway. Someone who is locked in in the 90 ways of thinking will probalby not
fit in anyway. Sometimes
one just has to say: "this is not going to work" and move on...

Indeed. Anyway regular phone lines are in extinction in Argentina,
and the local VoIP terminals do not seem to work with data calls.

I thought on setting up a MO node with my Windows98-with-modem
laptop and feeding him from Brazil but then my laptop got this
hard drive issue I have to fix.

Nevertheless, we can always set it up just for the fun of it.

... Quero a alegria, a melancolia me mata aos poucos - Clarice Lispector
___ MultiMail/Mac v0.52
--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A42 2019/02/01 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Saturn's Orbit BBS - Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (4:801/188)

Daniel Path wrote to Nighthawk <=-

wow. that rocks! i think this is the retroest thing i heard in the last few years, and i have to tell you it's great. if you have the
opportunity for this, you should go for it :)

i don't know if i can help. but i have an old modem hooked on to the
bbs via a voip box. i don't know if we can connect it to a local
provider in Brasil :)

Every now and then we get a request at the local Facebook groups:

"Hey, I have a modem here and want to dial in somewhere"

Quickly one of our sysops set up a sexpots point, we share the
phone number, but nobody ever dials... ;)



... Heisenberg may have slept here.
___ MultiMail/Mac v0.52
--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A42 2019/02/01 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Saturn's Orbit BBS - Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (4:801/188)

Bj”rn Felten wrote to Nighthawk <=-

We have been trying to hook him back into Fidonet, but unfortunately
most of the lines there have been switched to digital (his is an
exception) and we can't feed him. We are even considering exchanging
packets over floppy disks...

It would be interesting to hear if he is able to connect to 2:203/0.
I have a POTS line answering there. The speed will probably be higher
than floppy-mail.

Oh yes, but the cost of that call would be good. ;)



... Quero a alegria, a melancolia me mata aos poucos - Clarice Lispector
___ MultiMail/Mac v0.52
--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A42 2019/02/01 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Saturn's Orbit BBS - Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (4:801/188)

I must admit that my eyes hurt when I see /0 addresses in SEEN+BY's and PATHs.

Why? What do YOU expect the use of one's admin number to be?

Everything distributed to or from N203, and since a number of years back to/from R20, goes via 2:203/0. My 2:20/0 node entry is another one of those totally non technically needed ones that I have to uphold.

In Sweden (formerly R20) we always made sure to use our admin numbers for what they were intended. That way, whenever a Host or Hub wanted to resign, it took minimal of work to make the transfer. All the connections and passwords just could be copied to new one, and the downlinks didn't have to change anything -- they could even make the transfer over night without lifting a finger.

But then again, we didn't use our BBSs with all their shortcomings to transfer mail via, we had the /0 address setup in a totally separate different computer space, with usually everything on pass through.


..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Hello Carlos,

On Wednesday June 16 2021 16:37, you wrote to me:

So, why or when could be convenient using any /0 address *for
echomail*?

It is convenient when the sysops concerned find it convenient.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)

On 17/06/2021 05:17, 1229/426 wrote:

I had noticed this and intended to ask about it. So, why or when could be
convenient using any /0 address *for echomail*?

Dude... its 2021, not 1991.

And yet some insist on using 1991 hardware and/or protocols...

--
Regards
David

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbi
* Origin: Bucca, QLD (3:640/305)

On 17 Jun 21 08:46:16, David Drummond said the following to Nick Andre:

Dude... its 2021, not 1991.

And yet some insist on using 1991 hardware and/or protocols...

Who cares... haven't heard from you in awhile, how are ya?

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)

On 17/06/2021 10:28, 1229/426 wrote:

  NA> Dude... its 2021, not 1991.

And yet some insist on using 1991 hardware and/or protocols...

Who cares...

Those bitching about things not working perhaps.

haven't heard from you in awhile, how are ya?

I'm OK for a bloke of my limited years.

I've been here most of the time, just lurking...

--
Regards
David

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbi
* Origin: Bucca, QLD (3:640/305)

Daniel,

we are doing the same here N371, i've received only one
complainment till today :)

Who is it from ?

:) i don't want to expose. it was not a big deal.

I was hoping to unearth something critical hindering the growth into millions of nodes for Fidonet...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - Jun 14 2021
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Re: Nodelist
By: Carlos Navarro to Nick Andre on Thu Jun 17 2021 06:53 am

16 Jun 2021 14:17, you wrote to me:

I must admit that my eyes hurt when I see /0 addresses in
SEEN+BY's and PAT

I had noticed this and intended to ask about it. So, why or when
could be convenient using any /0 address *for echomail*?

Dude... its 2021, not 1991.

Not so long ago... I come from the early 2000s... :-)

In the first paragraph I was joking.

The second was a sincere question, I want to understand how some things work now.

Carlos

Carlos, this is more one of those 'zone differences'. I don't think there is any true advantage to it but some configurations common in some of Z2 use it. In Z1, they'd be more apt to use the /1 for echomail. (it can be configured to do the same 'passthruogh' that another mentioned here). More 'just what you are used to'.

Most use their own personally assigned address. 1:261/38, 1:275/100 etc.

Yes, 1:275/100 is 'supposed' to be a hub asignment by convention but a former NC275 put me on it as my personal one and I never bothered to swap it. Had too many connections very fast to make that an easy task. Among other things, I was the backbone draw for 275/271 within months of arrival (though never listed as an NEC).


In the late 90's, people weren't too concerned about such trivia. It's like when I became RC13, I didn't step down from the FTSC. Some didn't like that. Then Bin Li (Z6C) preassigned me as RC?74? (Japan, Phillippenes, Guam). I wasn't there yet. Some didn't like that but I was just as suprized as aanyone else when I was told about it. It may have been a week before another took over officially as RC13? It was in progress at the time. Still FTSC, Later Z6C and FTSC. Then dissolved the zone as I left via vote to move Z6 to Z3. Unanimous so I modem checked all Z3 then asked Scott Little if we could shift them to the most connectable site for their needs and he was agreeable. So, what I say there, is a lot of what is done now, is by common agreement with variations as needed. It some find /0 use for echomail, go for it! Harms no one!

xxcarol

--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
* Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS (1:275/100)