| |
N1URO > SYSOP 30.05.18 07:36l 65 Lines 3753 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 1415_N1URO
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: White Pages > KE6JJJ
Path: IW8PGT<IR2UBX<IK6ZDE<VE2PKT<N1URO
Sent: 180530/0529Z @:N1URO.#CCT.CT.USA.NOAM #:1415 [Unionville] $:1415_N1URO
From: N1URO@N1URO.#CCT.CT.USA.NOAM
To : SYSOP@WW
Jeremy et al;
I think the most logical way to view WP is to look at it from a more logical
standpoint. By narrowing this down it should give quite a clear answer as
to how these mails show be sent, eliminating a political resolution vs that
of a more pure technical one.
First, who uses these mails? Humans or robots (the bbs database)? Since the
White Pages system is engaged to assist humans in routing their mails in a
parallel almost to how DNS converts human name schemas to numerics in the form
of IPv4 or IPv6 addresses, it would then make sense to say that the robot
makes the most use of these mails than that of the general human PBBS user
population. If this were not true, then it'd be up to the human to read
the WP mails prior to sending a message without proper H-addressing so they
know how to properly format their destination in the message header. Also
since most BBS users do NOT know the format of the data within these mails,
to them it's like trying to translate something without the aid of babelfish.
Let's face it, since White Pages users just want to enter a mail message
to user@pbbscall and let White Pages do the rest for them. This makes the most
sense as well since a computer can be programmed to handle things in an
automated way why not do such.
Second, since the robots are the sole entity who processes these mails and the
human need not even know they exist, why spew them out as bulletins which the
user would waste their time and bandwidth on RF listing when they go to bring
up a general bulletin listing on a BBS? I honestly don't at all see any logic
in this whatsoever and as a network administrator the last thing you wish to
do is flood your network with junk traffic. We all see enough of this with
spam emails, why would we wish to emulate such with mails that are intended
for a robot to see, and process? For those who actually listen to their users
especially those on HF "less is more" meaning the less junk data I need to
process, the more valuable the network is for me. Now think if everyone sent
White Pages updates as @WW bulletins (and by everyone I mean every single
BBS listed on F1OYP's global BBS list) can you imagine the drain on RF
networks this would cause? While I haven't done the math at various
baud networks one could make a logical estimate that an emergency NTS
piece of traffic would most likely take DAYS to get through depending on
it's origin and destination. Is this how an ecomm network should run?
I don't think so.
So when you look at both usage (who uses these mails) and functionality
(who needs to actually SEE these mails) and compare them to that of
network pollution (as if the wired internet doesn't have it's own issues
here - something we need not emulate!) it would most likely be from a
technical point of view best not to send White Page mails as global or
even regional bulletins but as private to the bbs they are intended for.
Unfortunately there will be those who feel more entitled to a political
environment for White Pages and disregard that of keeping junk traffic away
from their user bulletin listings which is why EastNet rejects type B mail
with WP@* in the header. Another thing to think about from a security point
of view is what's to stop a corrupted White Page bulletin from infesting
and destroying other's databases. Integrity of data should be somewhat of
a priority amogst us all. The elders like myself I'm sure have seen it
all from bulletins getting sent without any proper EOF in them, to
changed MIDs and BIDs, to topics rewritten, to duped mail, etc. The
more we can do our parts to control this from occurring the better and
cleaner systems globally will be.
73 de N1URO
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
