Subj : Pack error
To   : Martin Foster
From : Renato Zambon
Date : Sat Mar 03 2001 10:28 am

SA>> ROUTE-TO 2:2503/0       2:2503/*
MF>                          ^^^^^^^^
MF>                          Perhaps this should be 2:2503/*.*

* is ok, ? can also be used, ex.: Route-to 2:335/533 2:33/* 2:33?/*

SA>> ROUTE-TO 2:252/666      2:440/666.* 2:440/666

Yes, it's redundant... but I don't know what is wrong with the route.

I use fe pack for email/ftp-links (not for those that calls directly):

Route-to 1:396/1 1:* 2:* 5:* 6:*
Route-to 2:244/1111 2:24/* 2:24?/* 2:24??/*
Route-to 2:335/533 2:33/* 2:33?/*
Route-to 2:333/805 2:333/*
Route-to 2:346/3 2:34/* 2:34?/*
Route-to 3:774/605 3:*
Route-to 4:900/525 4:*
Except   4:4/3 4:80/* 4:80?/*
No-route 4:901/343
Route-to 4:930/1 4:93/* 4:93?/*
Route-to 12:1251/1 12:1251/1.* 4:805/4.*

[]s

---
* Origin: HidraSoft BBS * Aruja', SP, Brasil * 55-11-4654-2024 * (4:801/161)

You are viewing proxied material from cvs.synchro.net. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.