Nп/п : 65 из 100
От : Wilfred van Velzen 2:280/464 06 ноя 24 22:10:20
К : Dan Clough 06 ноя 24 00:14:01
Тема : Re: Nlcheck report
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@MSGID: 2:280/464 672bdb9e
@REPLY: 781.fido_nodelist-police@1:135/115
2b910dd2
@TID: FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
@RFC-X-No-Archive: Yes
@TZUTC: 0100
@CHRS: CP850 2
@PID: GED+LNX 1.1.5-b20240306
Hi Dan,
On 2024-11-06 14:42:45, you wrote to me:
SM>>> 1:103/1
SM>>> ,1,bbsdev.net,Lake_Forest_CA,Stephen_Hurd,-Unpublished-,300,CM,XW,IB
SM>>> N
SM>>> Non Pvt node has no connection info.
SM>>> Am I right?
WvV>>> No. The host name is in the system name. Of course it would be
WvV>>> better/more clear to have it behind the IBN flag or as an INA. But this
WvV>>> line is not wrong.
DC>> I believe it is wrong. Mailers don`t look at the second field to find a
DC>> hostname to connect with. They look at the INA: field.
WvV>> Then those (which?) mailers are doing it wrong. ;-)
WvV>> The script I use to convert the nodelist to a binkd compatible list, is
WvV>> considering the system name field. So I can connect to this node if I
WvV>> want to...
DC> Yep, apparently I was wrong on this. Doesn`t make much sense to me, but
DC> Okay.
As Kees said, it is the old way from a time when INA: didn`t
exist yet. And to remain compatibel with the old way, it`s still in the
standards...
Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
* Origin: NPC Station (2:280/464)
SEEN-BY: 124/5016 153/757 154/30 203/0 221/0
240/1120 5832 280/464 5003 5555
SEEN-BY: 292/854 8125 301/1 310/31 341/66 234
396/45 455/19 460/58 467/888
SEEN-BY: 5001/100 5005/49 5015/255 5019/40 5020/400
715 848 1042 4441 12000
SEEN-BY: 5030/49 722 1081 5061/133 5075/35 128
@PATH: 280/464 5555 5020/1042 4441