Subj : proposed new nodelist
To : Haakan Karlsson
From : Goran Eriksson
Date : Wed Jul 24 2002 09:00 pm
GE> Secondly, how would you convert a zone or region independent entry
GE> that doesn't announce any POTS capability?
HK> I don't recognize the problem, maybe I am overlooking something in
HK> how the nodelist works.
Converting such a node to a Pvt listing might cause problems.
FTS-5000 says:
> Pvt --
> Defines a private node with unlisted number. Private nodes
> are only allowed as members of local networks.
Even my oldest copy of the FidoNet nodelist specification (FSC-2 dated
1988-01-02) has an identical requirement. (I would appreciate pointers to any
other versions of FSC-2, other versions of FTS-2 than 1988-11-06 and/or other
versions of FTS-5 than 1989-02-05, 1996-06-01 and 2001-01-03.)
I've not been able to find any explicit, trustworthy and contemporary
motivation for this requirement, but I'm speculating as follows:
The only ones required by administrative FidoNet policy to offer inbound
netmail routing are the network hosts. (I know that many ZC's, RC's and hubs do
the same, but that's another thing.) Therefore putting a Pvt node outside a
local network (e.g. as region or zone independents) would mean that there is
noone who is required (by policy) to forward netmail to that node.
In any case, MakeNl vigorously enforces this restriction and therefore I
wouldn't be surprised if some other nodelist processing tool also rejects such
nodes. Furthermore, it would be nice to have the 'old style' nodelist so
compatible with MakeNl that MakeNl can be used to recreate a missing nodediff
from two 'old style' nodelists created by the sort of conversion programs that
has been discussed here.
