Text 4007, 118 rader
Skriven 2012-09-15 23:44:03 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
   Kommentar till text 3979 av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
Ärende: Pvt nodes vs points
===========================
 ml> there are none who have it listed in field 6... that was never
 ml> allowed to happen...

 RW> Last sentence of FTSC document 5000, describing the contents of
 RW> field 6. 

 RW>     This field may also contain the IP address for an IP node    
 RW> utilizing the country code of 000.

 RW> You were saying?

the politics have not allowed for it to happen... just look at the nodelist in
other zones that have replaced non-PVT entries carrying 000-w.x.y.z with PVT
-Unpublished- and moved the w.x.y.z to another field or simply dropped it...

 RW>> And then there is software that will look at one of those and
 RW>> determine that there is no IP address to send mail to. The PVT
 RW>> flag tends to make that impossible, unless you know to set a
 RW>> netmai message to DIRECT. That works sometimes, but not always.

 ml> this is highly dependent on the software in use... you've already
 ml> witnessed one package that's behind the times and you've been using
 ml> another one that was close but falls down quite a bit requiring
 ml> manual intervention...

 RW> I was, before DB, using software that required human intervention
 RW> or an old DOS command called a 'batch file'.

i still use such and am required to make overrides and adjustments in more than
one place all-the-while not being able to provide for multiple connection
method... but the main reason for this is that those developers left the
network because of much crap like this and so they left us with what they had
produced at that point... if they had stayed, the network would have other
alternatives to only binkp for internet connections now... telnet was a common
method before they left... secure link? why does fidonet traffic need to travel
over an encrypted link? would hackers really be looking at our fidonet traffic?
yeah, ok... so maybe they would... at which point, those developers would have
come up with an encryption method or they would have embraced encrypted telnet
or ssh or any of several other encrypted comms linking methods... but we can
thank many others for their leaving and not carrying on with the visions they
had for fidonet :( :? :/

[trim]

 ml>  or would you expect to find such in the binkd echo?

 RW> I'm not in the binkd echo because that isn't the area to problem
 RW> solve DB..

but it IS the area in which to bring up, discuss and solve BINKD problems... no
matter who is the root cause of them... this also provides further technical
pointers and assistance to those maintaining hybrid systems implementing
binkd... this is the first and foremost reason why i even turned on that
area... it is also why i still have it turned on and have provided updates and
information to change erroneous FAQs posted in that area ;)

 ml> do you expect the maintainer of dbridge to also support binkd or no??

 RW> Whatever he does, support or not, if the software works as he
 RW> designed it, 

*he* didn't design binkd... *he* only hybridized it much the same way that i
hybridized binkd with Frontdoor... the main difference being that he has done
it in binary code whereas i do not have the source code to FD and so i have had
to do the same tasks in scripts with other external utils that others have
written... either that or write those glue programs myself...

much like the bbs flaws that many have touted, *he* has the sources whereas *i*
do not...

 RW> then he gets my vote for being the most competent with his 
 RW> package. Any other input is merely making unnecessary noise and
 RW> complicates the issues. 

not when the contributions are taken at facevalue and understood to be what
they are...

 RW>> As you know, I don't cater to text file configurations in a day
 RW>> when GUI works much better.

 ml> GUI don't "work so much better"... it may be prettier and it may be
 ml> only a click away but...

 RW> That's true, but I don't have to sit here and have a dozen open
 RW> books to get the friggin thing configed with a fucking antique
 RW> typewriter mentality.

are you willing to pay for a GUI to provide such simplicity for those textfile
only programs you use? that's where the main question comes into play... many
want "free" as in "free beer" but when it comes down to brass tacks, their
"free" is much different that the "free" originally offered :/

 RW>> But that makes a software author work that much harder and we're
 RW>> shit out of software programmers these days.

 ml> oh goo grief... do you really want me to write you a GUI editor for
 ml> the binkd conf file??

 RW> If it worked, that would be the only way I'd use Binkd.

right... but you're already using binkd! ;)

 ml> geez... i can set up a paypal link for contributions if that's really
 ml> all that bugging the shit out of ya...

 RW> Great...get with the fucking program.

ummmhummm...

 ml> smh

 RW> some more horsehit (coming)?

"Shaking My Head" is what that acronym stands for...

)\/(ark

 * Origin:  (1:3634/12)