| |
N1URO > ALL 18.06.21 12:02l 98 Lines 4984 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 3846_N1URO
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: I0OJJ > BBS Software
Path: IW8PGT<I3XTY<GB7COW<GB7YEW<AL0Y<KD8FMR<PY2BIL<OK2PEN<N1URO
Sent: 210618/0956Z @:N1URO.#CCT.CT.USA.NOAM #:3846 [Unionville] $:3846_N1URO
Gus;
[snip]
> The fact that, almost in this part of world,
> we (my system, in particular) can send thousands
> messages in ten seconds demonstrates that there
> is no limitation about transfer speeds and no
> limits in our ultra-gigabytes Hard Disks.
That has nothing to do with anything. Just because there's faster speeds
available now, it's not good practice to be sending junk "just because
we have faster speeds and more disk space". There's those on HF who still
use only 300 baud speeds to retrieve messages. They wish to see clean mails
that they can read and understand, what the computers say to each other is
not something they desire to have to sort through.
> How many actual Ham people know NNTP and how many
> of them is capable to use it?
I have run NNTP servers for decades on both packet and internet usenet. Not
once have I passed a message that had bad content within them or from users
that did not display a proper and legal callsign. Internet mail stays on the
internet, packet mail stays on packet. It's very simple.
> I was not aware about any bad language or profanity
> at al, stored on that technical mailing lists...
There was hundreds of such mails that came through severely laced with such
content, and many that did not have legal callsigns. I never said that this
was done intentionally however it did occur! There's a very good saying that
applies here: when in doubt, leave it out. Surely importing internet based
messages should have raised clear doubt and you should have set up a test
system OFF the network so you could have read through some of the messages
and seen the horrible content contained within them. I still have hundreds
of them in my hold queue to be killed.
> We (me) are sane enough and skilled to use advanced
> software... but first of all, in this context we are
> ham radio; no one with a sane brain can invent to
> do a bad job on introducing illegal stuff!
Be that as it may, you did introduce stuff that to packet is like covid and
it has infected systems around the globe. Fortunately it is easier to cure
than covid is however that doesn't mean licenses aren't in jeopardy for
relaying those mails. Critical damage has been done and there's no reversing
it now.
> Furthermore, about the actual JNOS2 developer, He is
> a God benediction for the ham Community, and so, when
> contacted should be ONLY for improvements or for
> further software developments, and not to annoy him
> with claims!
I have not said a single negative thing about the developer of JNOS2 at all.
While logically his tool added another dimension for the transport of
bulletins, it was overlooked at the dangers of importing 3rd party
communications and/or illegal contents. Linking NNTP to the global internet
has -always- been a horrible idea which is why it was never done to begin with.
> Now you can enjoy since NNTP has been *practically*
> dropped since there are no NNTP server on 44-net!
I don't know how you can say this. I know of a couple NNTP servers that have
been on 44net for many years without the issues that occurred recently. NNTP
should *only* be used between 44net stations so you can insure the mails
drafted are from licensed hams who will respect and honor the licenses of
others world wide. Instead it was chosen to link to global internet usenet
newsgroups and import the vulgar content into the global packet community.
Again and I will repeat for clarity:
I'm not saying that the experimentation is bad... it just should never be
done on a global working network and fully tested. There are NNTP servers on
44net but instead of querying the masses to see who is running one you linked
to the global internet and that's where the issue is. W0RLI before becoming
SK wrote SNOS and it's method of mail transfer is NNTP, and it's been out
for approximately 20 years. Safety precautions could have been placed into
JNOS' NNTP but it was not, and hundreds of hams around the world now have
hundreds of bad mails to sort through, and hundreds of systems have relayed
such bad mails as well making them as responsible for the damages done. Just
because you failed to see some of the bad contents that does not mean they
don't exist... even if the intentions were not malicious in nature.
As a note in regards to 44net:
There are many who don't understand the concept of how it all works and with
the tools available today one doesn't really have to as long as they follow
how to configure them. One primary objective of 44net is to insure that the
remote end is a licensed ham operator and not a potential pirate from the
internet. This is one of the key reasons we use it. A benefit of it is that
we obtain static IP(s) in the process. Keeping our services within 44net
helps filter out mails we wish not to receive on the network as a whole. When
we introduce things from outside 44net an instant risk is involved to which
the effects of such were recently seen.
73
---
SendBBS v1.1 by N1URO for LinFBB
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
