Subj : linked
To : Gordon Lewicky
From : Frank Vest
Date : Sun Dec 15 2002 12:33 am
On (14 Dec 02) Gordon Lewicky wrote to Frank Vest...
Hello Gordon,
FV> I understand your point. Would the "location" field be better? Or is
FV> where you live as important to you as your name and your system name?
GL> Well, if we're gonna throw out the geography rule, then to me at
GL> least, location is important since we can no longer depend on
GL> zone, region, net! And I sure can't figure out where
GL> bbs.micronet.com is! :)
GL> Actually, I'm getting somewhat annoyed at this trend to
GL> impersonality in this supposed network of computer enthusiasts.
GL> If I want impersonality, I'll go on the net.
GL> I happen to enjoy knowing who the sysop is, what their bbs name is,
GL> and where they park their butt! :)
Ok. I'll agree with that as well. I don't like it either.
FV> Using a flag to indicate the IP or domain address is fine too. As long
FV> as it is /one/ flag instead of one for every IP protocol.
GL> I may be wrong, but basically there are only 2 different connect
GL> addresses, domain name or ip, and email addy. Surely we can
GL> accomodate these 2 somewhere in the line without mucking around
GL> with sticking them where they shouldn't be.
GL> Seems to me that the coupling the addy with the applicable inet
GL> connect flag works or we develop new fields or files for inet
GL> addressing and leave the connect flags denoting non-standard
GL> ports.
GL> But this kludging addys into various former fields is
GL> exacly that, kludging.
With one flag to denote IP capabilities and the IP/domain to that
would work for me. It's better than a flag for each IP protocol.
Regards,
Frank
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/flv
http://biseonline.com/r19
--- PPoint 3.01
* Origin: Holy Cow! I'm A Point!! (1:124/6308.1)
