Subj : Something new...
To : mark lewis
From : Richard Webb
Date : Fri Oct 16 2009 12:14 am
Hi Mark,
On Thu 2037-Oct-15 18:48, mark lewis (1:3634/12) wrote to Richard Webb:
RW> that as Bink is a static mailer. SAme inbound/outbound dirs though
RW> pointed to by all versions.
ml> hummm... therein lays the problem... can tossers handle multiple
ml> routings for static mail bundles?? FD can because it is dynamic in
ml> building its outbound stuffs but if a BSO style tosser cannot build
ml> multiple ?lo files indicating different "status'" for the same
ml> static outbound bundles for separate nodes, this may be a problem...
RW> not an option. Instead, what you do is process the
RW> nodelist. EXample, you've got a node you regularly connect
RW> with and crash packets to. This node has both pots and your other
RW> common scheme. YOu don't want to dial pots to send
RW> those crash bundles. so, you replace that node's pots phone no
RW> with unpublished using your favorite nodelist compiler.
<snip>
ml> ugh... i really do like FD's nodelist compiling stuff... all FD does
ml> is generate b-tree indexes on the nodelist and then if there are
ml> overrides for any nodes, those go into the b-tree index so they are
ml> used instead of the default nodelist data... with FD being able to
ml> use environment variables for nodelist entries, one simply replaces
ml> the phone number with the environment variable and then the mailer
ml> (FD) looks to the environment variable for the number to use...
YOu're not using the raw nodelist with bt, at least with
version 7. IT creates its indexes it needs.
Substitution of number to dial or node's flags is easy, at
least in xlaxnode or tbbsnc. Just put it in the control
file. WAnt to use the flags or dial number from the raw
nodelist as is, just comment that line out of your control
file, and recompile.
When I was feeding Daryl Stout for awhile last summer before he got everything
squared away I was substituting and
stuffing his pots number into my nodelist.
ml> if i have stuff for a node that has both POTS and FTN over telnet,
ml> and i want to "crash" (i use immediate instead of crash) what i have
ml> waiting for them via POTS, i simply go to one of the POTS nodes,
ml> look at that mailer's outboud queue and change the flavor of that
ml> destination system's bundle(s) from hold to "normal", "crash" or
ml> "immediate"... all the other nodes still retain their settings for
ml> that destination... the one mailer node then does the connection and
ml> signals the others when it is successful so they will rescan and
ml> rebuild their outbound control files... i don't have to shut down
ml> all the mailers, take the few minutes to recompile the nodelist and
ml> restart all the mailers...
YEp, can see that. I don't think squish uses flavors such
as immediate and direct the way dynamic mailers do however.
OF course, with bink you've got one set of outbounds as
well between all nodes. so, the only thing other binkleys
need to be aware of is that you're connected on a certain
node.
Everybody still communicates between themselves with busy
flags in the appropriate directory <g>.
TWo ways of going about the same thing.
RW> Most nodelist compilers that create a nodelist binkley can
RW> use will let you do the above quite handily iirc.
ml> i'm sure ;)
YEp, quite easy. AS I noted xlaxnode's fairly easy, and I"m sure fastlst and
qnode were as well. I think some still use fastlst, but I haven't heard
anybody mention qnode in years
<g>.
<snip>
RW> YEp, similar. YOur tosser and other utilities build the
RW> *.*lo files. There will be a file in my outbound when I
RW> write this message created/updated by squish with a file
RW> name of 0e32000c.clo detailing paths and filenames to be
RW> sent to you.
ml> right... and there's the main difference... there's only one ?lo
ml> file for all the mailer nodes to see and use... it cannot be a hlo,
ml> flo and clo all at the same time so that individual mailer nodes can
ml> act on it the way they need to...
NOpe, that's why you manipulate the information available to those nodes such
as MIke Tripp and I both described. hE
detailed another method using the cost field.
RW> so, if you and I had multiple connection schemes between us
RW> such as telnet and pots and I were running multinode I'd
RW> possibly want to prefer the telnet connection. But, in my
RW> case maybe I"d prefer the pots, only use the telnet if there were
RW> trouble on lines between us. IF I want to prefer the
RW> telnet I change your pots entry to unpublished so that bt
RW> pots doesn't try to dial you.
ml> right... that is one method... it can also be done like this with FD
ml> but it is much easier and simpler to simply set that mailer node's
ml> routing table to hold that mail during that scheduled event... so
ml> these mailer nodes see that mail as "hold" and those see that exact
ml> same stuff as "normal" (or "immediate" or "crash" or whatever) and
ml> each can act on it separately...
YEp, horses for courses.
<snip again>
RW> When I helped a friend get it all going I referred to
things I'd
RW> seen in this echo quite a bit, but that was way back in
RW> the day <g>.
ml> as was with many echos in fidonet, there was a huge amount of
ml> information on almost any subject that traveled between all of our
ml> systems... it really is sad that folk have folked to the internet
ml> for eye-candy without the real meat of the meal...
INdeed it is. I really enjoyed turning newbies onto it as
well. iT was fun to see the light come on when they figured out how just plain
useful it could be.
Regards,
Richard
--- timEd 1.10.y2k+
* Origin: Radio REscue net operations BBS (1:116/901)
