Subj : FastLst 2.02
To : Bob Jones
From : Mike Luther
Date : Sat Jul 21 2001 05:43 pm
Bob ..
BJ> I've been using QNode. I'm looking for something that
BJ> will allow me to compile newer options, such as IP and
BJ> DNS information into the compiled nodelist, so that I
BJ> can have binkley "dial out" on VModem ports in
BJ> addition to handling POTS traffic.
Likewise.
BJ> Any comments or ideas?
Yes.
On the list of some-day-over-the-rainbow, is a utility that could take the ASCI
version of the NodeLists and simply parse it looking for the magic byte
patterns. When it came to that .. I'd simply plug it the way needed for Qnode
etc...
If I recall this all right when I was thinking about it, I either had to prang
the NodeList to make it work with Ray's SIO easily, or, I had to convice Ray
that he should modify VMODEM to accept a "-" mark as a "." mark,or, I had to
somehow get the FTSC to let us modify the NodeList formula so that we could
carry the "." mark directly in the thing for the purpose.
Of course if that got done, then what would it break as to the NodeList
compilers out there.
I was playing with BBBS as well here when I was putting up TELNET for test
purposes on 1:117/3001. It has its own NodeList compiler tool. To drive it
you use an ASCI text file as well, per my memory. When I was playing with it,
I simply went in and hand edited the NodeList with a file editor. Then I let
it compile it.
I found out that some NodeList compilers keep a CRC checksum on the final
source for the thing and what it produces. They would tell me that there was a
CRC error in the NodeList when I hand edited it! But it never seemed to make
any difference and ran anyway both in BINK/MAX and BBBS here. So I wound up
thinking how to patch this or that...
By the way. In setting up this whole affair on Windows 9x and 2K or ME, I
fergit now .. I wound up using COMIP for the TELNET shim. It can, if my memory
is correct, handle the "-" convention as a dialing convention for the TELNET
work!
Thus, I think the nicest solution would be if Ray would cooperate. To thata
extent, I wrote him an Email suggesting it. Never heard back. However,there
was a period of time there when I think he was sulking over IBM's treatment of
him (like others?). I paid for a couple more instances of SIO for other sites.
It took a while to get them. Then, shortly after than,suddenly he began
working on SIO's next version again.
It may be he will think about this now...
Your thoughts?
--> Sleep well; OS/2's still awake! ;)
Mike @ 1:117/3001
--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Ziplog Public Port (1:117/3001)
