Hello g00r00,

They shouldn't be getting cut off at 256 characters, the line length
is unlimited (or at least that is the intention) with the latest pre-alpha. If you find otherwise please let me know because that
would be a bug.

This is indeed the case. I did some testing yesterday with..

Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 Linux/64 Compiled 2020/04/09 22:56:56.

Please let us know if you would like further testing/input.

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

This is indeed the case. I did some testing yesterday with..

Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 Linux/64 Compiled 2020/04/09 22:56:56.

Please let us know if you would like further testing/input.

Ttyl :-),
Al

what happened to the subject and your name?



* Origin: kakistocracy (2:280/464.47)

Hello Oli,

what happened to the subject

I'm not sure why suject lines get a little mixed up. It might be a slackware thing but I haven't been able to figure out why that happens.

and your name?

I haven't had any replies so I'm just trying to be sure my mail got through since it was in important feedback.

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

This is indeed the case. I did some testing yesterday with..

Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 Linux/64 Compiled 2020/04/09 22:56:56.

Please let us know if you would like further testing/input.

Thanks for letting me know.

I have uploaded a 4/11 version which should/may address this issue. I found a function that was using an old 255 character string type, so the line of text was accidentally getting cut off when passed to that function.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/11 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (1:129/215)

Hello g00r00,

Thanks for letting me know.

No problem, thanks for looking into this.

I have uploaded a 4/11 version which should/may address this issue. I found a function that was using an old 255 character string type, so
the line of text was accidentally getting cut off when passed to that function.

I just tested this and long lines are still being truncated at about 255 characters.

Let us know if an update is available to test.

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

I have uploaded a 4/11 version which should/may address this issue. found a function that was using an old 255 character string type, so the line of text was accidentally getting cut off when passed to that function.

I just tested this and long lines are still being truncated at about 255 characters.

Can you send me a pkt which you are using to test with to mysticbbs@gmail.com?

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/11 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (1:129/215)

Hello g00r00,

I just tested this and long lines are still being truncated at
about 255 characters.

Can you send me a pkt which you are using to test with to mysticbbs@gmail.com?

Can do, it'll be in your email shortly.

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Can you send me a pkt which you are using to test with to mysticbbs@gmail.com?

Can do, it'll be in your email shortly.

I didn't have a chance to run the packet through to test yet, but I did end up finding one more place that used an old DOS type where it would potentially cause it to get truncated at 255 characters. That should be fixed now in the latest build on the prealpha area.

I'll try to get a test done sometime soon as well, if you don't beat me to it.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/13 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (1:129/215)

Hello g00r00,

I didn't have a chance to run the packet through to test yet, but I
did end up finding one more place that used an old DOS type where it
would potentially cause it to get truncated at 255 characters. That should be fixed now in the latest build on the prealpha area.

I'll try to get a test done sometime soon as well, if you don't beat
me to it.

The current prealpha v1.12 A46 Linux/64 Compiled 2020/04/13 15:00:48 is working
well in my tests.

Messages look good in Mystic when reading and replying and outgoing .pkt's also
look good to me.

Thank you for this and all you do with Mystic.

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

The current prealpha v1.12 A46 Linux/64 Compiled 2020/04/13 15:00:48 is working well in my tests.

Messages look good in Mystic when reading and replying and outgoing
.pkt's also look good to me.

Thanks for your help with this! Glad to have it fixed up!

I'm going to enable some tossing optimizations in the next build so if you notice anything weird coming from Mystic systems after the build you tested with please let me know.

Thanks again.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/13 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (1:129/215)

*** Quoting John Smith from a message to g00r00 ***

The current prealpha v1.12 A46 Linux/64 Compiled 2020/04/13 15:00:48 i
well in my tests.

Messages look good in Mystic when reading and replying and outgoing .p
look good to me.

Just curious to see if the latest build has been compiled for OS/2 as well :)

--- Telegard/2 v3.09.g2-sp4/mL
* Origin: Omicron Theta/2 * Southaven, MS * os2bbs.org:2300 (1:261/20)

Hello g00r00,

I'm going to enable some tossing optimizations in the next build so if
you notice anything weird coming from Mystic systems after the build
you tested with please let me know.

We have noticed that when Mystic is tossing incoming mail to connected links it
doesn't seem to be looking in the seen-bys. Even if a link is listed in the SEEN+BYs Mystic is still tossing that mail to the linked node anyway.

Aside from that that though I think all is well.. :)

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

We have noticed that when Mystic is tossing incoming mail to connected links it doesn't seem to be looking in the seen-bys. Even if a link is listed in the SEEN+BYs Mystic is still tossing that mail to the linked node anyway.

It used to at one point but I believe people seemed to think it should be done using the PATH instead, which is what it does now.

It looks like I still have the SEEN-BY checking code in there commented out, although I have no idea if it still works with the current code.

Maybe one reason for this is that some systems and many tossers have the
option to modify or remove SEEN-BY?

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/17 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (1:129/215)

Hello g00r00,

It used to at one point but I believe people seemed to think it should
be done using the PATH instead, which is what it does now.

The path does have a role to play but path lines are not the same as seen-bys. Every node who has seen the message should be listed in the seen-bys but not necessarily the path lines. Once a node has seen a message we don't want to send that message there anymore.

Mystic doesn't seem to be looking at the path now either.

It looks like I still have the SEEN-BY checking code in there
commented out, although I have no idea if it still works with the
current code.

My details are sketchy at best. I'm sure there is an FTSC doc that talks about SEEN+BYs that could give you better direction that I can. I'll take a look and see what I can find and pass the filename to you.

Maybe one reason for this is that some systems and many tossers have
the option to modify or remove SEEN-BY?

Yep, we don't want any of that.

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Hello g00r00,

I'm sure there is an FTSC doc that talks about SEEN+BYs that could
give you better direction that I can. I'll take a look and see what I
can find and pass the filename to you.

There is fts-0004.001. It's quite an old document from around 1987!

It talks about the old conference mail system that I think is more or less what
we still use today.

That and other docs can be found at the FTSC website..

http://ftsc.org

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

The path does have a role to play but path lines are not the same as

Thanks for the explaination, but please realize I wrote a tosser and multiple mailers from scratch that implement these things so I do understand what they are. :)

Mystic doesn't seem to be looking at the path now either.

It does check path when tossing against the address associated to the message base being processed, as long as the address associated is a 3D address only. I can see the logging in my test network from circular PATH checking. If you have a specific situation where you think that isn't the case then let me know.

My details are sketchy at best. I'm sure there is an FTSC doc that talks about SEEN+BYs that could give you better direction that I can. I'll
take a look and see what I can find and pass the filename to you.

I am not looking for any direction on SEEN-BY lines at the moment.

They are implemented correctly in Mystic, but as said the dupe checking based on them was intentionally disabled a while back (a long long time ago). They don't work well past 3D addresses and at least back in the day they were commonly stripped or trimmed.

The PATH checking and CRC is mostly sufficient in dupe loops unless you're intentionally setting up a situation (which I think you guys are) that creates a "bad topology" as defined in FTSC. Ironically the FTSC for SEEN-BY and PATH will actually tell you that their purpose is to identify and dissolve those "bad" topologies.

Anyway I don't mind re-enabling it though if you're willing to test it.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/17 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (1:129/215)

Hello g00r00,

The path does have a role to play but path lines are not the same
as

Thanks for the explaination, but please realize I wrote a tosser and multiple mailers from scratch that implement these things so I do understand what they are. :)

No one is questioning your knowledge or experience.

The PATH checking and CRC is mostly sufficient in dupe loops unless
you're intentionally setting up a situation (which I think you guys
are) that creates a "bad topology" as defined in FTSC. Ironically the FTSC for SEEN-BY and PATH will actually tell you that their purpose is
to identify and dissolve those "bad" topologies.

I'm talking about the fsxNet hubs. They are linked together and meshing. I think they are doing all that right?

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Re: Re: >er ter ter ter long lines (paragraphs)
By: g00r00 to John Smith on Sun Apr 19 2020 16:21:01

It used to at one point but I believe people seemed to think it should be

done using the PATH instead, which is what it does now.

It looks like I still have the SEEN-BY checking code in there commented out,

although I have no idea if it still works with the current code.

tossers should do both... path checking is the CPD (Circular Path Detection) which was implemented to prevent dupe loops... it also works with VIA lines in netmail to detect and stop netmal routing loops...

the seenby should always be checked to prevent sending dupes... always...

seenbys should also be sorted in net order and the list of seenbys rewritten each time addresses are added to it...

this is old school common knowledge... i don't know if there's a document covering it or not... possibly the only one is FTSC-0004 but it is possible there may be something in the historical library along the line of "this is what i found out"...


)\/(ark
--- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
* Origin: SouthEast Star Mail HUB - SESTAR (1:3634/12)

We have noticed that when Mystic is tossing incoming mail to connecte links it doesn't seem to be looking in the seen-bys. Even if a link i listed in the SEEN+BYs Mystic is still tossing that mail to the linke node anyway.

It used to at one point but I believe people seemed to think it should
be done using the PATH instead, which is what it does now.

It looks like I still have the SEEN-BY checking code in there commented out, although I have no idea if it still works with the current code.

I uploaded "seenbytosser.zip" to the Prealpha area which has a Win32 and Linux64 version of the tosser which has the SEEN-BY checking on if you'd like to test it. This also leaves on the PATH checking too so it does both plus
the typical CRC stuff.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/17 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (1:129/215)

the seenby should always be checked to prevent sending dupes... always...

They shouldn't *always* be checked when tossing, but I agree with what you're getting at. Its good to apply it to all 3D scenarios. If its applied to point systems, 5D scenarios, or gating then it will break things.

seenbys should also be sorted in net order and the list of seenbys rewritten each time addresses are added to it...

Yep yep, I'm aware of how it works! :)

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/19 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (1:129/215)

On 19 Apr 2020 at 06:13p, g00r00 pondered and said...

I uploaded "seenbytosser.zip" to the Prealpha area which has a Win32 and Linux64 version of the tosser which has the SEEN-BY checking on if you'd like to test it. This also leaves on the PATH checking too so it does both plus the typical CRC stuff.

Thank you, I am testing this with the fsxNet NET 1 HUB.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/13 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (3:770/100)

Hello g00r00,

I uploaded "seenbytosser.zip" to the Prealpha area which has a Win32
and Linux64 version of the tosser which has the SEEN-BY checking on if you'd like to test it. This also leaves on the PATH checking too so
it does both plus the typical CRC stuff.

One of the hubs is running this version. Currently mail passing through that hub loses all it kludges. There are no header kludges at all, no msgid, no tzutc, nothing.

The path line doesn't mention the originating node after that, it seems to originate at the hub.

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

I uploaded "seenbytosser.zip" to the Prealpha area which has a Win32 Linux64 version of the tosser which has the SEEN-BY checking on if yo like to test it. This also leaves on the PATH checking too so it doe both plus the typical CRC stuff.

Thank you, I am testing this with the fsxNet NET 1 HUB.

Make sure you have the one dated 4/20. I made a mistake in the first one - the old code required a little update so the 4/19 dated one is probably horribly broken.

Hopefully all of that happened while you were asleep though!

Keep in mind if this is enabled, things like FidoNet or anything past 2D addressing will be problematic. For example a message in Fido that passes through 1:1/1 will never toss to 2:1/1 or 3:1/1 because "1/1" will be seen as already sent. I suspect this is one of the reasons we ended up turning it off to begin with.

I will try to have another update that will detect that scenario when tossing and be smart enough to let those messages go through but the current version only does that for point systems (not intra-zone).

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/20 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (1:129/215)

One of the hubs is running this version. Currently mail passing through that hub loses all it kludges. There are no header kludges at all, no msgid, no tzutc, nothing.

I have also been running the same tosser. Are you seeing those issues here?

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/20 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (1:129/215)

One of the hubs is running this version. Currently mail passing through that hub loses all it kludges. There are no header kludges at all, no msgid, no tzutc, nothing.

Rather than wait to hear back from the test message I sent you, I decided to set up a test here and I can see the issue.

Its unrealted to the SEEN-BY changes, it was related to some optimizations I did before that. I've backed out those optimizations for now and they're showing up again.

I am going to update the prealphas now which will have the tosser it in with the seen-by and this fix.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/20 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (1:129/215)

Hello g00r00,

One of the hubs is running this version. Currently mail passing
through that hub loses all it kludges. There are no header
kludges at all, no msgid, no tzutc, nothing.

I have also been running the same tosser. Are you seeing those issues here?

No, I don't see that here. Hopefully Paul can check the date of the one he is using and will be able to update.

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Hello g00r00,

I am going to update the prealphas now which will have the tosser it
in with the seen-by and this fix.

Awesome. Let us know when those are ready.

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

I am going to update the prealphas now which will have the tosser it in with the seen-by and this fix.

Awesome. Let us know when those are ready.

Sorry I might not have been clear but they were uploaded right when I posted that! The should be dated 4/20/2020.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/20 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Sector 7 (1:129/215)

On 20 Apr 2020 at 11:56a, g00r00 pondered and said...

Make sure you have the one dated 4/20. I made a mistake in the first
one - the old code required a little update so the 4/19 dated one is probably horribly broken.

Hopefully all of that happened while you were asleep though!

I'd just pulled down the stand alone zip that had the x 2 MUTIL's in them James.. so yeah perhaps I did get an earlier one. Just reading some of the threads here and I'll look to pull down the latest pre-alpha and update the
HUB to that ASAP. Thanks for looking at this.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/13 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (3:770/100)