| |
N1URO > PACKET 24.12.20 23:12l 64 Lines 2886 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 56934_N1URO
Read: GUEST
Subj: I0OJJ > Re: about the JNOS2 and ...
Path: IW8PGT<I3XTY<GB7COW<GB7CIP<N1URO
Sent: 201224/2209Z @:N1URO.#CCT.CT.USA.NOAM #:56934 [Unionville] $:56934_N1URO
I0OJJ wrote...
> References:
> -----------
> 1. BBS Hierarchical Addressing Protocol - Dave Wolf, WO5H et
> al. - August 30th, 1994.
> 2. International Routing Designators - Jenkins, Lew N6VV et
> al. - October 1, 1988.
> 3. Some comments on the Hierarchical Continent Address
> Designator - Clark, Tom W3IWI - September 22, 1990.
Looking at all of the above dates, the latest is 1994. That's over 25 years
ago! Many things have changed since then which justifies revisiting all of
the PBBS standards. The documentation I have is newer which is dated 2012.
> Forgot to praise John G8BPQ as a *wiseman* amateur to force his
> BPQ/linbpq to accept only the *two* letter field to indicate the
> Continent part on the packet radio H-Addressing, TNX.
This goes back to what I said in my last message. How do we elmer others when
the rule is to do "whatever"? Is properly elmering potential new sysops of
no concern? If we don't act all together in unity and govern ourselves with
our own gentleman's agreements then our privs risk being taken away including
the rights to operate a BBS.
In previous mails you also mention that "europe" did not agree on this
document drafted by W0RLI, accepted by TAPR. I am very sorry Gus but
Europe *did* indeed not only accept this document but with G1NNA and F6FBB
contributing to it shows that europeans did accept this document. Even
Victor Poor who was an earlier member of the Winlink team contributed and
accepted this document.
> Hope that Maiko could do the same in the next JNOS2 :)
Did you see Maiko's H-address?
VE4KLM.#WPG.MB.CAN.NOAM <---
I wouldn't count on this happening anytime soon. :)
Not only that, it's not our place to tell Maiko what to do or what not to do
with his code and/or his BBS. With globally accepted standards however we
could give him a nudge.
> In our case the 'rewrite' file do the job to address or readdress
> the messages so that messages may be properly dispatched; it does
> not matter what is the recipient: Personal, Bulletin, ampr,org,
> winlink2000, and so on,
> The *rewrite* file can do about anything as a 'Swiss-knife', HI!!!
One issue with any rewrite is that if the local sysop is not properly
elmered in just how powerful it is, they can really make a mess of things.
With everyone doing their own thing then we can't ask that standards of a
rewrite be followed nor can we expect one... and we're beginning to see more
and more of this occurring unfortunately. Giving the amount of support for
JNOS2 and other systems that I end up giving this is easily seen more often
than not lately.
> Impossible to cure the ignorance but at least let's try.
Without standards, you will never be able to cure anything. Not being willing
to discuss things only adds to the ignorance it doesn't help problem solve.
73
---
SendBBS v1.1 by N1URO for LinFBB
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
