Fidonews is published weekly by SEAboard, Fido 1/375. You
are encouraged to submit articles for publication in
Fidonews. Article submission standards are contained in the
file FIDONEWS.DOC, available from Fido 1/375.
Disclaimer or don't-blame-us:
The contents of the articles contained here are not our
responsibility, nor do we necessarily agree with them;
everything here is subject to debate. We publish EVERYTHING
received.
Waiting for Nets
I don't know about you, but I'm eagerly awaiting June 12th.
That's the day we start using multiple nets, and I can start
making some sense out of my node list.
I also know of several Fidos in this area that have just
started up, and that are waiting for their node numbers.
Bad news, guys. No new node numbers until the 12th. Hang
in there! Just a little longer now!
Seriously, this isn't like the wait for version 10i. That
was dependant on testing and debugging, and we all know how
THAT works. This is a definite. As of June 12th we switch
over to the new system. No ifs, ands, or buts! You MUST
have Fido version 10i or greater by then, or you'll be
dropped from the node list.
Oh, yes, in case you haven't heard, there is a "greater"
now. Tom Jennings released Fido version 10j for the IBM-PC
and the DEC Rainbow a few days ago. This is mainly a bug
fix release. (300+ people can find a bug faster than you
would beleive!) There was some sort of problem with the
FIDONEWS -- 27 May 85 00:00:26 Page 2
Index command for messages. Also, Fido was dropping a
character every now and then when it was unpacking its
packets (a very subtle bug; you probably never even
noticed). I don't know what all else was done, but it's
mainly cleanup type stuff. And sorry, still no debug
messages during downloads.
Also no "list of nodes in a file" any more. It's a shame,
too. After all, he'd just gotten around to documenting it.
I haven't checked with TJ on this, but I suspect I may be
partly responsible for the loss of this one. I gather it
was mainly there to make it easier for TJ to send out
Fidonews, but I use Robot instead. Regardless, it's a
feature that I know several people will miss.
I've spoken to the guys in St. Louis, and they've promised a
couple of articles about the upcoming changes. I don't
think they'll get here in time for this issue, but they
should be ready by next week. Ben Baker promised an article
on what, exactly, it means to be a regional administrator,
while Ken Kaplan is working on an article describing how the
nodelist is going to change. Both articles should be very
informative, and I'm sure you won't want to miss either of
them.
Briefly, the nodelist format is changing drastically. The
master list will no longer be useable directly by Fido; you
will have to run it through a new version of NODELIST.EXE
before you can use it. The point of this is to combine the
nodelist and the fidolist into a single file, which
NODELIST.EXE will use to generate a Fido style NODELIST.BBS
and/or a human readable list of nodes. The new format
should make it easier for all the various hosts and admins
to keep thing up to date, since only one file needs
updating.
Once Ken has the current node list converted to the new
format, he'll start splitting it up and mailing the various
pieces to the hosts and admins who will be maintaining them
in the future. I'm hoping to get an article in the near
future describing the whys and hows of maintaining a
regional list. In the meantime, PLEASE don't anybody go
assigning node numbers until we are on the new system!
Things are going to be confusing enough as it is. Just hang
in there, guys. Only a couple of weeks to go!
National Fido Directory
In order, an apology, an explanation, an update, and a plea.
First the apology. I spoke too soon last issue, and
incorrectly. Dave Horowitz is NOT the guy coordinating the
national directory. He's been pushing for it and working on
the programs, but his system doesn't have the space to
handle it. Matt Kanter at Fido 1/79 has volunteered to
contributed a machine to handle the data, so he's the one
FIDONEWS -- 27 May 85 00:00:30 Page 3
running it.
Next the explanation. The idea is to create a national
directory of Fido users, showing which nodes they can be
reached at via Fidonet (sort of a Fido phone book). This
would be done by having various (hopefully most, if not all)
sysops send an abstract of their user list (NOT including
any passwords!) to a central point, where the data would all
be collected, sorted, and formatted into a master list.
Contribution would be completely voluntary. It would be
nice if you contributed, but it's no problem if you can't or
won't. (Some company boards, for example, can't release
their user list without breaching confidentiality.)
Now the update. Dave has written a program, called
SHIPUSER, which Matt has been busily sending to boards all
over the country. If you haven't seen it by now, you can
pick it up at 1/51, 1/79, 1/375, and probably at any major
host in your area. SHIPUSER reads a USER.BBS file and
creates a text file giving the name, city, and number of
times called. Matt is figuring on munging it all by hand
the first time, then automating it later if this catches on
(as I hope it does).
And finally, the plea. Please run SHIPUSER on your user
list and send its output to Fido 1/79. This is a great
idea, and we'd all benefit from a national directory, but
(like many things in Fidodom) it depends on your voluntary
contribution to make it work.
Articles Wanted
Another thing in Fidoland that needs your contribution to
work is Fidonews. Last issue was kind of skimpy, and right
now it looks like this issue will be even smaller. If
you're not sure about the format standards, just ask and
we'll send you a copy of FIDONEWS.DOC. This newsletter is
nothing without YOUR input!
Remember, this newsletter is written strictly by and for its
readers. Make your voice heard!
FIDONEWS -- 27 May 85 00:00:32 Page 4
============================================================
NEWS
============================================================
The following was uploaded to FIDO#74 (The Bear's Den) by
one of my regular users. I am not sure what board it came
off of, but message is clear, and it applies to all of us
(SYSOP and user).
------
Msg # 588 Dated 03-01-85 12:50:27
From: SYSOP
To: ALL
Re: TPSECRET.BAS
To all SYSOPs and USERS:
We have another trogan horse amongst us... it is called
TPSECRET.BAS and was Uploaded here two days ago by a SAM
HOLMES (from Laurel, MD, a 1200 baud caller). This protected
(SAVEd with ,P) BASIC program simply does a very nasty "KILL
*.*" and a "KILL A:*.*"... Beware of this program and this
person... If SAM HOLMES turns out ot be a real person, I
will contact the T-Systems' lawyer, and begin a law suit...
for rarely are such Uploads from "real" people, and such a
prank is certainly destructive enough to warrant action. If
Sam turns out to be the Uploadee, I will keep everyone
informed of progress...
This is a copy of a letter I sent to Inforworld on
an article that appeared. I'm submitting it to the
newsletter since it seems that Infoworld won't publish it.
(Or, maybe I just didnt wait long enough.)
InfoWorld
Attention: Kevin Strehlo
Re: "Modem Battle Brewing" article, 29 April
Tom Jennings
2269 Market St. #118
San Francisco CA 94114
Here's some stuff on that article, I just had to
respond. Thanks for reading so far. If you have any
questions, comments or whatever you can call me at the above
number any day from 8 AM til midnight.
There were some serious errors made in the article
"MODEM BATTLE BREWING" on page 16 of the 29 April issue on
the XMODEM protocol.
Before talking about the specific problems, a
misconception needs to be cleared up. The word "XMODEM"
refers to both the protocol and is also the name of a
specific CP/M program for remote bulletin boards. "XMODEM"
is now taken to mean the binary protocol, not the name of a
specific program residing on someones disk. This can be very
confusing, but unless you are talking about a specific copy
of a specific program, Xmodem refers to the protocol.
It is completely untrue that Xmodem cannot run
beyond 1200 baud, and equally untrue that it does not detect
errors reliably.
The original Xmodem program, XMODEM, MODEM7 and all
it's variants, have a software bug that prevents them from
operating at above 300 baud. It is a bug in the
implementation, not the protocol, and has been there for
years. My implementations of Xmodem (and many others') have
been used for over three years at up to 38,400 baud (as fast
as my serial ports go) with no problems whatsoever. The same
program can communicate to any original XMODEM program on
MSDOS or CP/M. In the FidoNet Bulletin Board Network, a
public domain packet switching system consisting of more
than 250 computers in the US and Europe, many nodes are
using 2400 baud modems quite reliably, thank you.
The error checking isn't quite as bad as many would
lead you to believe. The original program by Ward
FIDONEWS -- 27 May 85 00:00:36 Page 6
Christensen had only a simple checksum error check; later
versions implement a CCITT CRC-16 error check. Also, there
is some doubt as to whether CRC error checking is all that
much better than checksums over dialup telephone lines;
while it is true that adjacent single bit errors can get
through Xmodem's checksum process, errors on phone lines are
almost always burst errors (that is, many bytes are trashed
by noise on the telephone), these are very rare, and so in
"real life" Xmodem is quite reliable. In any case, CRC-16 is
available. In any case, the worst case error rate is
something like 0.035% using checksums. No protocol can
guarentee 100% accuracy, no matter what they may claim.
Xmodem has many faults, such as half duplex
operation and requiring an eight-bit data channel (can't be
used through Telenet or TymNet...), but it extremely easy to
implement, and is very reliable if done right. It is surely
far from perfect, but is very suitable for small computer
use where the constraints don't matter.
You will also notice that the biggest detractors are
firms with commercial interest in their own protocols. As to
the importance of the Xmodem protocol in the real world,
keep in mind that the modem manufacturers (and many others)
who came out with software products with "improved" (read:
incompatible) protocols were forced by the micro marketplace
to retrofit Xmodem. Two examples are SMARTCOM and CROSSTALK.
Ward Christensens protocol has problems, as he will
admit, but it is still very strong and usable in the current
environment. There are probably 10,000 bulletin board
systems in the US that support Xmodem, and probably ten
times or more individuals that use Xmodem with bulletin
boards or for point to point use. It may be an "underground"
protocol, but it works well in practice, and introducing new
protocols will have to take this huge base of users into
account.
============================================================
NOTICES
============================================================
*** Calendar of Events ***
27 May 85 through 31 May 85; Spring 1985 DECUS symposium,
New Orleans, LA. Among other events, Kurt Reisler
(sysop Fido 74) will give a 1 hour talk on Fido.
2 Jun 85 Submissions deadline for next issue of Fidonews.
12 Jun 85 Start of Multinet Fido; Make sure you have Fido
version 10i. Stay in net 1 until this date, then
switch over to your new net number.
If you have any event you want listed in this calendar,
please send a note to node 1/375.
