Subj : Re: Issues with running makenl for a region
To : Andrew Leary
From : Dan Clough
Date : Thu Mar 06 2025 08:04 am
-=> Andrew Leary wrote to Dan Clough <=-
DC> So this is the crux of my (original) question. If it arrives without
DC> a CRC, then one can assume that MakeNL was not used to produce the
DC> segment. To repeat my original question, is MakeNL really needed? A
DC> segment is just a text file that gets "processed" by MakeNL, and it
DC> sounds like all that MakeNL is actually doing is calculating a CRC.
DC> Is that serving any valid purpose, especially now that we know the
DC> validity of the CRC is ignored anyway?
AL> MakeNL does more than just compute a CRC for the segment file. It does
AL> some basic error checking of segments, to include insuring there are no
AL> duplicate node numbers in the segment, checking that any phone numbers
AL> have the correct number of parts, making sure that there are no invalid
AL> keywords, etc.
Okay, yes.
DC> In other words, can't the *C's just edit their segments with their
DC> text editor of choice, and then get it to the upstream *C via whatever
DC> method they like (netmail or email)? What role does MakeNL perform in
DC> this process that actually matters?
AL> MakeNL was designed to automate the submission process. If you email
AL> or netmail the segment, the upstream coordinator most likely has to
AL> manually save it on their system in the proper place for MakeNL to find
AL> and process it. Sending it as a file attach to your coordinator is the
AL> best way to allow it to be processed automatically. In fact, MakeNL's
AL> SUBmit directive in the .CTL file automates the creation of a file
AL> attach netmail to get the file where it needs to go.
Understood, and that is all very useful. I use it that way myself
(automated file attach / netmail to RC).
I guess what got me down this path was how Ward is describing that he
receives garbage segments, and then "fixes" them, which I understand is
needed and not "wrong". The value of the CRC function seems to be
compromised (useless, in fact) in that scenario, and if a *C is going to
edit a segment (or even a whole nodelist) as they see fit, what's the
point of the CRC or even MakeNL? Seems like it would be more correct
for upstream *Cs to hold the segment submitter accountable for doing it
correctly, and fire them if they're unable or unwilling to do so.
AL> It is certainly possible to edit a segment in a text editor, save it as
AL> an ASCII text file, and manually send it to your upstream coordinator
AL> by creating a file attach or copying it into a filebox directory, as
AL> appropriate for the mailer you are using. In this case, you would lose
AL> the benefits of MakeNL error-checking your segment prior to submission.
AL> Potentially this could cause your updates to be delayed if there is a
AL> typo or other error in your submission.
Agreed. Thanks for your explanation and information.
