| |
UT1HZM > PACKET 28.02.25 00:00l 41 Lines 1491 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 32623_UT1HZM
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: Hierarchical (P, T) vs Flood Area (B) Messages
Path: IW8PGT<LU4ECL<K1AJD<VE3CGR<PI8ZTM<DK0WUE<PD0LPM<PD1JBO<IW2OHX<UT1HZM
Sent: 250227/1908Z 32623@UT1HZM.KREM.POL.UKR.EU BPQ6.0.24
Hi sysops!
N5MDT wrote:
>
> The problem is that not all BBS software works the same. Should it? Maybe.
>
> A lot of things have changed since 2012 and as is admitted in the document routing to the state level has some ambiguity and so certain accommodations must be made. It specifically says in that same document:
>
> "A simplified method would be to add the whole Hierarchical string to every message. This would remove any confusion."
>
But that can create new problem - when some BBS s/w could not support HA-elements
in bull area field (mean field after '@' sign of SB-message)!
So lets keep HA-elements only for routing of P-mails, as it was done for decades.
> Unfotunately, things like @AMSAT, @ARRL, etc. don't get routed automatically in BPQ either and
> special routes must be entered if the sysop wants to forward those.
Thats normal behavior in other general world-wide known BBS s/w too, like in NOS, FBB, Baybox (open-bcm) that
most of us used in past and acceptable in best actual bbs s/w too. (here I'm mean BPQmail ;-) )
Its easy: if your fwd-partner wants @AMSAT, @ARRL etc - just put requested areas in his FWD-config.
In most cases its not too much of general bulls @-areas, so its not hard to do!
In general its normal practice of exchange bulls areas on agreements of sysops.
Not automatically and also not by flooding "from all to all" (failure use of '*' sign).
So thanks for N2NOV remembering this classic 'gentleman's rules'.
73, Sergej.
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
