FidoNews is published weekly by the International FidoNet
Association as its official newsletter. You are encouraged to
submit articles for publication in FidoNews. Article submission
standards are contained in the file ARTSPEC.DOC, available from
node 1:1/1.
Copyright 1988 by the International FidoNet Association. All
rights reserved. Duplication and/or distribution permitted for
noncommercial purposes only. For use in other circumstances,
please contact IFNA at (314) 576-4067. IFNA may also be contacted
at PO Box 41143, St. Louis, MO 63141.
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.
Table of Contents
1. EDITORIAL ................................................ 1
2. ARTICLES ................................................. 3
(COLLEGE - A new echo) ................................... 3
Linking FidoNet to Other Networks ........................ 7
Packet BBS to Dial-Up BBS Linking ........................ 12
DOCUMENTATION FOR OZONE.EXE Version 2.11 ................. 13
Quick BBS And Trade Wars...A Superb Combination .......... 15
(REPORTER, the SEAdog.log analyzer) ...................... 18
Star of Bethlehem Explained .............................. 19
3. COLUMNS .................................................. 23
Let's YACK about IFNA Powers ............................. 23
4. NOTICES .................................................. 27
The Interrupt Stack ...................................... 27
Latest Software Versions ................................. 27
5. COMMITTEE REPORTS ........................................ 28
FidoNews 5-08 Page 1 22 Feb 1988
Well, it has been awhile since I graced these pages. While I had
meant to have an editorial in almost every issue, personal
demands on my time have not allowed it until now. First off I'd
like to thank all of you who have been sending in articles. I may
not have sent some of you any reply, but your work is greatly
appreciated. If I see any sign on an article being submitted
(usually at least a null message in my netmail area), I try and
remember to send out a thank you message. The only problem is
that I can't count on any such message these days. If you sent in
an article and didn't receive any reply, my apologies as I do
appreciate the fine articles I have been receiving.
In the "good ole days" all we had to deal with was Fido and
SEAdog. While many of us may reminisce about these times, I think
we all appreciate the variety that has appeared in FidoNet.
Thanks in no small part to the FidoNet Technical Standards
Committee, we now have a multitude of different software packages
from which to choose. No longer do we argue on which version of
Toss/ScanMail to use, instead we have at least four different
packages to worry about. While some of these are specific to
bulletin board programs that do not use the FidoNet message
structure, we must still keep in mind how any change will affect
all users. FidoNet has grown up. Anytime a new package is
written, the author MUST keep in mind how it will affect those
not running their program(s). No matter how far advanced network
software becomes, there will always be those who only run Fido
version 11w.
While this may not make much sense to some of us. These people
have gotten their software to work reliably and are reluctant to
change to anything new (to them). There is nothing wrong with
this attitude, it is an old saw about how when something works-
don't touch it. Many of us have spent a large number of hours
trying to learn how these programs work (and don't work) and only
now are achieving any degree of reliability. While some will
always choose to try the new, there should also be a place for
those who are content with what they have.
Why do I bring this up? Because FidoNet is based on RELIABLE
communication between systems. While many may only be concerned
about EchoMail, there is much more to FidoNet than EchoMail. This
isn't to say that EchoMail isn't important these days, because it
is. EchoMail may be one of the most important concepts ever
introduced to FidoNet. But EchoMail is only a part of FidoNet,
and even it is based on reliable communication. While catching up
on some EchoMail conferences this past weekend, I noticed how
this idea seems to be fading. If it ever does vanish, we may very
well see the end to FidoNet. After all, if I can no longer count
on my mail getting through, why bother sending it at all.
Another idea that seems to be vanishing is RESPONSIBILITY.
FidoNet is not a right. When you joined FidoNet you were
FidoNews 5-08 Page 2 22 Feb 1988
accepting the responsibility for several things. Primarily to
"not excessively annoy others," "not be easily annoyed," and most
important of all to make your node available only to other nodes
during National Mail Hour (NMH). While NMH may be a little
outdated these days with so many running continuous mail programs
like SEAdog and BinkleyTerm, it is still important to observe
NMH. Many nodes are unable to process mail at anytime of the day,
and can only send and receive mail at specified times. To these
people, NMH is the only way they can reliably send and receive
mail. When the nodes they're trying to contact are always busy
due to receiving a large batch EchoMail or allowing users, it
only serves to annoy others. In time, it could even be classed as
excessively annoying.
New software could easily cause the net to come apart in days.
The base FidoNet protocol is very important. Any program meant
for use in FidoNet NEEDS to be able to fall back and use this
original. Without this, no one would ever know where it was safe
to try sending mail. While this may be considered archaic by
some, it is the basis of this network. Without complete
compatibility, we are endangering something that many of us have
worked hard to see continue. I ask that all network software
authors keep this in mind, lest they become known as the
destroyer of FidoNet just because they need the ego trip of a
"title" like creator of whateverNet.
This is getting depressing and I need to take a break. Let's hope
the echo conferences leave me in a better mood by next week. In
the meantime, feel free to contact me on any ideas you might have
on an article. I'd be happy to help out if possible. If you do
send an article, please try and make it match the submission
guidelines (which can be file requested SEAdog style as
ARTSPEC.DOC from 1:1/1). I'm receiving an awful lot of articles
that don't even come close and it's creating an awful lot of
work. I'm sure you want your submissions to be printed as
quickly as possible, and if something doesn't match specs it will
usually add another week to seeing it go out.
Your Editor,
Dale Lovell
1:1/1 (1:157/504)
216/642-1034 (data)
Home Work
3266 Vezber Drive Parma Computer Center
Seven Hills, OH 44131 5402 State Road
216/524-1875 (voice) Parma, OH 44134
216/661-1808
-----------------------------------------------------------------
COLLEGE is for those people running or using an electronic bulletin
board system at a high school, college or university. Hopefully we
will cover such topics as: funding, getting new hardware/software,
how to support users, helping non technical users with computing and
running gateways to other networks. Perhaps we can even share user
documentation and ideas on providing new services, extending the user
base, etc.
If you have any ideas, or just want to get some information, please
feel free to join in. If you know of other schools that run a BBS,
please let them know about us!
You can link in by sending me mail at 1:107/320. I will send to you
if you are in a PC Pursuit city.
I wrote this article in able to get the story straight regarding
the sad shape the EchoList has deteriorated to! Along with some
praise there have been many flames. I hope this article will
explain it all.
Many moons ago (April 1986) I became a Fido Sysop. Much thanks go
to Gee Wong for alot of hand holding and assistance when I
started up. I was a long time user of a couple of Fido BBS and
thus I knew the terrain of FidoNet. I had read all the back
issues of FidoNews before becoming a sysop so not much was new.
Little did I know this was going to be the dawn of EchoMail!
There were only a handful of conferences. The ones I recall were
SYSOP, TECH and MAGICK. Believe it or not you could count the
number of conferences on both hands! It didn't take long before
conferences were springing up everywhere.
The growth was so rapid that nobody knew how many nor what type
of conferences existed. I wanted to know! So I took it upon
myself to collect data about what conferences existed and share
it with whomever was interested. In the summer of '86 I worked
out a draft and I then begged for information but almost nothing
came. I then put Plan B into action. If the data won't come to me
well I'll have to go to the data! I spent many months collecting
echomail conference information from any and every source.
I published that first official list in Jan '87 and then EchoList
became recognized as a place to list and find conferences. There
were still other sources for echomail information, but EchoList
was the only publication of its kind.
Well Plan B worked but this fame had its price, now not only did
I scan many echos collecting data to update the EchoList I was
getting updates from moderators as well and even would be
moderators. The burden was getting to heavy and delays started to
occur. I asked for assistance and got some replies. I attempted
to deligate some tasks to aid in automation but but I guess my
selection of assistants was poor because after they would get the
spcification of what I needed they would fade away. I was
attempting to off load my work to others and it wasn't working.
This additional fustration slowed me down even more.
The flames stared rolling in about how out of date EchoList was
so I got frantic and rushed to get an update done. I did it but
it burned me out. This was the June '87 issue and I was about to
throw in the towel and pull the plug on the PC for good. Yes the
EchoList was bigger and better than previous versions but that
also meant big and better flames as well :-) Then guess what
happens... IFNA presents an award to me at the Aug '87 Fido
convention. Well the recogniztion cheered me up a bit and I went
back to the old habbits of applying updates from moderators and
other sysops which wanted their net listed as well as scanning
the echos for updates and everything else! Well I should have
taken a fresh new direction but I didn't....
FidoNews 5-08 Page 5 22 Feb 1988
I got a list published in Dec '87 but it didn't have time to
apply all the updates. I thought some updates would be better
than none. Well not everybody agreed :-( After this issue and one
more failure in recruiting some help I saw it was time for me to
get things done. I just had to automated this beast it's time was
long overdue!
I talked to a few sysops and kicked around a few ideas. I'm
finally (sigh of relief) going to learn from my mistakes :-) In
the past I wanted everthing listed. I don't know why, just call
me crazy (and maybe a perfectionist?). I had some sort of idea
(carried from the old days) that I had to collect the data
because not everybody would send it to me. If I did get updates
well that would be gravy. As Echomail Scribe I can't do it all,
I'm only a human not a computer. What this means is rather than
put all the responsibility at the top we need to push it down to
the "moderators". What this means is that if the moderator really
wants to support the conference they will need to send in an
update at least once a month. If this is not done the conference
will not be listed. This way I won't be banging my head against
the wall doing all the work. You (the moderators) of course will
get a share some of thoese flames :-)
A deadline will be fixed at a later date for monthly updates.
With this policy we will no longer have listings carried over
from list to list. That means no outdated garbage! AMEN (the
number one complaint). I am working on the specification for the
format of an EchoList update message. That should appear shortly.
I and a couple of sysops are currently working on the programs
that will be used. Everything will be automatic! At this time I
would like Echomail moderators who currently produce regional or
net conference lists to contact me. We might as well share these
utilities so we can all benifiet. I know the format of these
reagional/net lists are different but I am certain we can work
something out.
Of course this new method is radical if not revolutionary but I
think it's time has come. If the conference moderators can't take
the time to send information well there is nothing I can do about
it. If the topic is that important I'm certain somebody will be
responsible enough to volunteer to be the moderator.
All this brings us to a sticky point. What about all those
conferences that don't have moderators? Well somebody will have
to step forward or they won't be listed it is as simple as that.
You may be wondering about how to get conferences which don't
exist listed. I mean the "if anybody wants to start an echo about
ABC contact me" listings... I must frankly say, I don't know what
I'm going to do about that. They might be listed or there might
be a seperate "wish list" produced. I have to think about this
one and I welcome your comments.
The future? Well I have many things I would like to see happen.
For example one of the most frequently asked questions I get is
where can I link into XYZ conference? Well I just refer them to
the moderator. What I would like to see is a utility like
FidoNews 5-08 Page 6 22 Feb 1988
megalist that can run online and assist in such queries, as well
as topic searches. Maybe even a program that would be a server to
do this via netmail! As well, I would like to draw maps of the
topology for a conference and even compute routing delivery
times. I realize there are many other things people would want
and of course I can't do it all so I want to pulish a database
version of the list which can be used by anybody's utilities.
Well alot of water has passed under the bridge both good and bad.
I hope this story has given you insight into the problems I've
had. With this new vision I hope I can count on your assistance
and support! It isn't going to be easy. I'm certain we'll have
some growing pains, but in the end we will have something that
serves the network as a whole. United we're echomail, devied
we're just netmail. Keep an eye out for the EchoList update
message format coming soon.
FidoNet: An experiment in COMMUNICATION
----------------------------------------
by Steven K. Hoskin
( STEVE HOSKIN at 1:128/11 )
Introduction:
The header on the FidoNet NewsLetter says to encourage users
to submit to the NewsLetter; I am a user; this is an article.
I'm planning on joining IFNA, though I'm not yet a member.
I'll be putting up a part-time BBS presently; when I can afford
another computer I'm going to dedicate it to the FidoNet as a
full-time FidoNode. I'm a computer programmer, both by trade and
by hobby, and I'm familiar with the concept of the FOSSIL, though
I'm not intimately familiar with using it...yet.
I therefore consider my input to be of some minor value, but
currently I feel its of value due to my status as an "outsider
looking in" on the problems with FidoNet in its current
situation.
I speak of dissent. I speak of flames. I speak of
attitudes. I speak of AlterNet. I've been reading the IFNA Echo
off a friend's board, and I don't like a lot of what I've read. I
still read it, hoping to see the old FidoMood return ("...be
reasonably polite..."). Occasionally it does, but mostly I see
flames. While I commonly use the terms FidoNet, FidoNode,
FidoList, FidoMood, FidoPolicy, FidoDoc, FidoLink, FidoManners
and FidoSysOp, please note that I do not use the term FidoFlames;
I consider them quite unbecoming to the intent of FidoNet.
A lot of the flames have to do with AlterNet. Why?? Oh,
sure, they broke away from FidoNet, but the FidoNet Policy
documents up to and including Policy3 have all said that's one
of your options if you don't like what's happening here.
You could raise the argument of split nets and problems
therefrom, and all I will say is I agree. Their breaking away
from FidoNet now leaves two nets, whereas one controlling entity
- the NodeList - kept the system manageable. I don't like the
FACT that they broke away from FidoNet, but I don't hold it
against them.
FidoNet is an experiment in COMMUNICATION. Not
EXCOMMUNICATION. Not CENSORSHIP. COMMUNICATION. To quote
somebody from the IFNA echo, "...communication is the name of the
game...". I couldn't agree more. Look, AlterNet was quite
clearly formed because a group of FidoNet SysOps were getting
tired of the flaming out there on FidoNet. I consider their
reason a good one. I personally think they should've kept in
there, batting it out, working to make a better FidoNet; that's
MY opinion and I AM entitled to it. The SysOps of AlterNet are
entitled to theirs also.
Okay, so they broke away. What do we do now? IFNA Echo
FidoNews 5-08 Page 8 22 Feb 1988
can tell you a lot about what COULD be done; there are thousands
of possibilities. The upcoming article is geared towards
expressing MY opinion about which of the multitude of options
really ought to be used. If you wish to respond to my article,
you can reach me as STEVE HOSKIN at 1:128/11 and I W E L C O M E
your responses. Do not send me E-Mail on the IFNA Echo; I am not
permitted to send mail on that Echo. If you respondto me
directly at the board I call "home", then you will probably get a
direct response. If you "flame" me, I suppose you are entitled
to do so, but I feel this is in violation of the intent of
FidoNet and may think the lesser of you. Besides, you probably
won't get a reply. If you politely state your views and politely
express weaknesses in mine - I can almost guarantee you a
response. In my book, insults are about the weakest form of
communication known to man. Insults are perhaps second only to
assumptions and silence as being the strongest form of
non-communication.
Okay, the wordy stuff is out of the way, here comes the
meat of this article -- MY opinion on what should be done about
AlterNet.
AlterNet: What to do?
----------------------
by Steven K. Hoskin
( STEVE HOSKIN at 1:128/11 )
- In each human heart are a tiger, a pig, an ass, and a
nightingale. Diversity of character is due to their
unequal activity.
- Ambrose Bierce
AlterNet has formed; SysOps have either left FidoNet or
have gone dual-identity because they were tired of violations of
one of FidoNet's first rule: Thou shalt not excessively annoy
others. Many hoped for peace of mind in AlterNet; many simply
joined it in case it worked well and still maintained FidoNet
connections, hoping that one day the nets would work together,
and their node could be a gateway. Nobody but the SysOp who
joins AlterNet knows why, but the solid fact remains: ALTERNET IS
HERE.
Okay, what do we do about it? The IFNA Echo is loaded with
opinions on AlterNet and what to do about it.
For the most part I see two REAL options:
1. Leave them alone and hope it fails so they come home to
FidoNet; hopefully they will help us grind through the
problems of being a Non-Profit Organization and getting
the controls we're legally required to have and the
freedom we need to keep FidoNet in its current
structure. Perhaps they would then get back in the
FidoNews 5-08 Page 9 22 Feb 1988
batter's box, helping us to clean up FidoNet, assisting
in enforcing policies that encourage SysOps to politely
state their point of view, rather than stoop down to
what has apparently become known as "flaming".
2. Communicate with them, regardless of their success rate,
and find a way to link both NodeLists together in such a
way that Me, the NitNoy user in FidoNet, can send a
message to my friend in an area best covered by
AlterNet, or better yet, to my friend who has called an
AlterNet BBS his "home" board and sees no reason to
subscribe to another.
Note that option 1 does not mention any kind of censoring.
Censorship is a price of its own virtue; it induces a lack of
communication; this is a destructive force. Communication is
meant to be a positive force. There is no need for censorship in
an adult community. I think of FidoNet as an adult community. I
hope it does not prove me wrong.
Well, AlterNet is succeeding and AlterNet is growing. It's
toolatefor the first of those two options: ALTERNET IS HERE TO
STAY.
That leaves the other option: cooperation, teamwork and
COMMUNICATION. That's what it's all about, isn't it?
Communication? Not communication in FidoNet. Communication.
Plain and simple. The logistics and technical specifications of
this form of communication aren't simple, but the concept of
communication IS.
The Technical Issue: How do I call AlterNet?
I've seen three messages in the IFNA echo that prompted this
article. I will not name names (as I don't remember them) and I
will not copy the text of those messages into this article. I may
quote (or attempt to, from memory), but that's as far as it will
get. My point here is to bring out an idea that may make
communication between FidoNet and AlterNet possible without TOO
much work from the average SysOp. In fact, what work could be
done by the average SysOp would be optional; failure to do the
little extra work might result in a more expensive operation, but
the extra few minutes would not be required.
The third article I read was actually the trigger. It got
me to thinking (perhaps a dangerous thing to do), and while
thinking, I started recalling other messages I'd read. The
author of this message is obviously a sensible fellow; he's
already based his message on the assumption that FidoNet and
AlterNet will be attempting to communicate. This message
discussed gateways to AlterNet. It commented on how just having a
few gateways isn't the way to go; the AlterNet node you were
trying to call might be in the same town, yet the message would
go to New York and back to find the gateway (New Yorkers, use
Sacremento as your example :-) ). Rather, the message
FidoNews 5-08 Page 10 22 Feb 1988
directing software would have to be smart enough to find the
closest AlterNet node, so the SysOp wouldn't have to manually
look things up in the NodeList.
The second article I read sarcastically discussed Zone
organization. The ending of the message said something like
"...why not base the zones on area codes? Naw, that'd be to
easy...". I'm sorry the individual felt he had to be sarcastic
to get his point across; though it worked, I think I would've
still seen this message if it weren't sarcastic; I feel that I
would've received the author's point if it were not sarcastic;
and I feel that I would have been able to apply its logic
quicker if I were not distracted by the sarcasm. The author may
have had previous messages go unnoticed, so perhaps the sarcasm
was well-founded, or at least well-meant, but I feel that it
distracted my application of the concept.
The first of the three articles commented on the Zone
system, apparently responding to some previous message about
making AlterNet a separate Zone in our NodeList, and responding
VERY negatively. The author got sarcastic, going on about how
all different Nets could break off and be little Netletts in the
NodeList, each one under a different Zone. The sarcasm was
again not well taken by me, but there was a point in the message
that made me think about the AlterNet/FidoNet link problem.
The sarcasm borders on what I believe are currently being
called "flames", but these messages gave me an idea, and I
discussed this idea with another programmer, Terry Curtis
(also a user at 1:128/11), and he augmented my idea some. Here's
what we came up with:
Let's say FidoNet and AlterNet, sensible entities that they
are, are ready to communicate; both parties have dropped any
prejudices and dogmas, have agreed that communication is the way
to go, and are interested in allowing cross-communications. At
least for the direct International In/Out type message area.
Those of you familiar with the operation of Echos will have to
tackle the usability of this concept with EchoMail. But for the
average user out there, who just wants to compose his message on
a local board and have it sent cheaply to another BBS user on the
other net, and have that user read it on his local BBS, here's an
idea that might make it work.
The NodeList is compiled, or so I've gathered from my
limited reading of FidoNews and FidoDocs. Therefore, there's some
kind of data file or database out there at EACH AND EVERY Node on
the Net. Or, if I'm technically incorrect and NetWork mail is
routed through the Network and to the Coordinators, then perhaps
a more technically correct statement is that the data file or
database is AVAILABLE FOR USE, directly or indirectly, by every
Node in the Net. In the case of AlterNet, they're taking the
same logical structure with them, so the same theory should
apply. If there's a data file or database out there, then it can
be accessed by a program. Obviously, or the Fido/Opus/SEADog/
TBBS/anything else program wouldn't be able to automatically call
FidoNews 5-08 Page 11 22 Feb 1988
other BBSs in the Net.
Well, the NodeList is currently Zoned anyway, why NOT place
AlterNet in a special Zone? It eliminates problems emminating
from multiple occurances of Net/Node numbers (since this is
technically now Zone:Net/Node), and makes communication possible
on the technical level, while maintaining two seperate
controlling entities, one in each of the respective networks.
Okay, now that we can get AlterNet's NodeList into ours as
a special zone, and ours into theirs, how about the automated
cost-cutting procedures? Well, the NodeList has the area codes
in it, so there's one way to narrow down the costs. Also, how
about a program that each SysOp COULD run to further reduce costs
by allowing him or her to enter the local exchanges? There can be
long-distance billing involved even in a call to a place in the
same area code, so let each SysOp enter a list of exchanges that
are consideredlocal calls. Now the program has some criteria as
to which node in Zone 55 (or whatever Zone AlterNet becomes) is a
good node to call. Now the program narrows it down to the same
area code, and, if possible, the list of SysOp-approved
exchanges.
From what I can see, for Network Mail anyway, this should
provide some sort of cost-effectiveness to the cross-net
communications. When possible, the program will call within
the same area code; when possible, it will also make a local
call within that area code. Which removes this problem as a
reason to NOT communicate with other Nets.
I talked with a friend about the idea and made it better.
Now THAT's what communication is all about.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FidoNews 5-08 Page 12 22 Feb 1988
Bob Arnold KB2ECI
Random Access BBS (260/320)
Linking a PBBS to an OPUS/FIDO System
I've been looking at the possibilities of linking an amateur
radio packet bulletin board system into my OPUS based dial-up BBS
to provide faster mail forwarding than now currently possible by
"normal" packet channels. Some background is in order for the
non-hams reading this.
A PBBS differs considerably from the dial-up systems commonly
found in the FIDO(tm) network. A PBBS is a computer system (most
often an IBM) using special software and a special modem called a
TNC (Terminal Node Controller) connected to an amateur's radio
equipment. Many PBBS's are found between 145.01 to about 145.09
Mhz in many areas of the country. A national channel at 145.01
Mhz carries much of the message traffic forwarded across the
country. Since channel usage is so high, much of the message
traffic takes from 3 to 10 days to make it from coast to coast.
I believe there is a cost effective way to speed things up
until such time as a high speed national RF backbone system is
available to handle the bulk of the message traffic. Here's the
plan.
I've noticed quite a few amateur radio operators running
network compatible dial-up BBS's from my messages concerning this
subject and some preliminary developments in a few of the echo
conferences. If some of those ham operators running network
compatible dial-up systems also run a packet radio BBS on another
computer (or the SAME machine using a multi-tasker) it's possible
to forward messages between compatible PBBS software by sending
plain ASCII text files using the dial-up network. The technique
has received some testing in various areas of the country but
never has been tried in the scale I propose to set up.
I'll not bore FIDONEWS readers who are not hams with the full
details but instead encourage interested and suitably equipped
ham radio/ BBS operators to contact me at 260/320 via normal
netmail. I'm attempting to get a development echo going so that
interested hams can participate. All it takes is a message to me
for more information. I'll give you the name of a file to request
for that information and set you up for the developer's echo to
be hosted by my system.
OZONE is a useful utility designed to make the
incorporation of the Anetlist into the Nodelist.
Using Xlatlist 2.85 you can add nodes from the Anetlist
into the nodelist using the OZONE statement in the control
file you use with Xlatlist.
However, as the Anetlist gets larger, this will mean
adding new entries by hand. So OZONE.EXE was born to help
in making this task easier.
OZONE.EXE will read the Anetlist and produce a straight
text file you can add to the Xlatlist.ctl file. It saves
you from typing in new OZONE statements each week.
HOW DO I RUN OZONE.EXE
======================
The correct command line has changed in this version.
OZONE ZONE# INPUT.FILE.NAME OUTPUT.FILE.NAME
ZONE# GETS REPLACED WITH THE ZONE NUMBER TO BE PROCESSED.
INPUT.FILE.NAME GETS REPLACED WITH THE PATH AND NAME OF THE
ANETLIST YOU WISH TO PROCESS.
OUTPUT.FILE.NAME GETS REPLACED WITH THE NAME OF THE FILE YOU
WISH TO CREATE OR YOU CAN USE LPT TO SEND IT TO THE PRINTER.
DOS redirection is now possible by use of the > Dos command.
OZONE does not in any way alter either the Anetlist or the
Nodelist that is being processed.
WHERE CAN I GET OZONE.EXE
=========================
You can either file request it from 107/246 or download
it from that same board. The request name is OZONE.ARC and
will be honored at all times except NMH and the hour
before and after NMH.
DO I HAVE TO PAY TO USE OZONE.EXE
=================================
I have received many questions on how to set up Quick
BBS to allow Trade Wars to run properly. This article will
try to explain what needs to be done to run Trade Wars at
the current time.
First, in the ensuing discussion I will be referring
to TW2.EXE, TWINT500.EXE and TWEDIT.EXE. These and all
the other files come out of the archive file which is
named TW2E151B.ARC with a date of 10-02-87 and a file
length of 277315 bytes. You will also need RBBSDOOR.EXE
which is available on most Quick BBS systems.
While the routines presented below may work with most
versions, they definitely work with the version in the
archive file listed above.
Step 1 is simple. Extract the files from the archive
into your Quick BBS sub-directory. At this time this is
the BEST place for the Trade Wars files.
Step 2 is also simple. Extract the files from RBBSDOOR
into this directory as well. Follow the directions with
RBBSDOOR and edit the .DEF file to reflect your Name, the
COM port in use and System Name. Now copy RBBS-PC.DEF to
RBBS.LOC and edit the .LOC file to reflect a COM port of 0
instead of your current COM allocation. Both of these
files will be used later.
Step 3 involves setting up your menus. Create or add
to your doors menu a line for Trade Wars. Use menu TYPE 7
with the following command (data) line:
RBBSDOOR.EXE *B *F *L *G TW2.EXE
Assuming that you have done everything properly, this
will call and run Trade Wars AFTER the steps below have
been followed.
Step 4 asks you to exit the menu editor and run
TWINT500.EXE. Answer the few questions and let it create
the data files for you. Please READ (Yes, Ollie) READ the
docs for TRADE WARS at this time! Also included in the
archive file is a file name READ-ME.DOC. Yes you guessed
it, this one MUST BE READ. There are several files that
must be in this sub-directory for Trade Wars to run. They
are listed in READ-ME.DOC. Check and make sure they are
all there, or you will certainly be driven crazy later!
Step 5 gets a little more complicated now. Due to the
way Trade Wars was designed you need to do the following
FidoNews 5-08 Page 16 22 Feb 1988
to run it in LOCAL mode from the console. First create a
batch file called TWLOC.BAT as follows:
echo off
cd \AAAAAAAA
;changes to Quick BBS Sub-Directory (Change to Yours)
echo off
cd \AAAAAAAA
copy rbbs-pc.def rbbs.bak /v
copy rbbs.loc rbbs-pc.def /v
rbbsdoor.exe %1 %2 %3 %4 twedit.exe
copy rbbs.bak rbbs-pc.def /v
cd \AAAAAAAA
exit
Finally here are some tips while a caller is using
Trade Wars.
FidoNews 5-08 Page 17 22 Feb 1988
F9 turns ON the snoop mode and allows you to see what
is going on while he is on-line.
F8 allows you to change the callers time remaining in
the Trade Wars Game.
Trade Wars handles both carrier detect and i/o re-
direction so NEITHER a watchdog program nor the use of
CTTY, IBMAUX, or GATEWAY is needed.
Many thanks to Paul at 107/337, The Head Doctor at the
Mental Ward, and Bob Westcott for their help with this.
Bob writes the DOOORWARE for RBBS systems and is
planning on converting almost all RBBS DOORWARE to Quick
BBS format in the near future! (I Can't Wait!!)
If you need any of the files they can be requested
under the following names from 107/246.
REPORTER, from CM Computing, will give you a lot of information
about how your SEAdog system is running, but in a more compact
format than SEAdog.log.
REPORTER.ARC is available via file request from 107/320. File
requests are not honored from 3am-6am.
Version: Demo 0.9
Function: Analyzes SEAdog.log and generates a report.
Features: The report details the following information:
- Period that SEAdog.log covers
- Total time SEAdog was up
- Total time SEAdog was down
- Percentage of time SEAdog was up
- Total number of incoming and outgoing calls
- Number of actual connections
- Details on incoming and outgoing calls
- Number of human callers
- Total number of file requests
- Summary of files requested
- Total number of files received
- Summary of files received
Price: This program is shareware. Please send a check for
$25 to CM Computing for a registered copy.
Updates: Reporter is constantly being upgraded. Please check
with us for the current version.
SEAdog is a trademark of System Enhancement Associates
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FidoNews 5-08 Page 19 22 Feb 1988
Star of Bethlehem Explained
Fredric Rice
(103/503)
Original reference material may be found at Griffith
Observatory, located at 2800 East Observatorty Road, Los
Angeles, California. 90027. Request back issue of Griffith
Observer, December 1890, page 9, for Ronald A. Oriti, "The Star
of Bethlehem". Direct requests to Dr. Edwin C. Krupp and staff.
You may aquire subscriptions to the Griffith Observer through
the same address. It provides a great quantity of understandable
information concerning astronomy, (And is well worth the price!)
--------------------
Perhaps the greatest asked question concerning the brith of
Chist is an astrological event described in the New Testament.
The Star of Bethlehem has been questioned and researched by
many science and astrological groups with widely differing
opinions. We might even say we may never know.
Here is an opinion held by many as the to explination for the
Star of Bethlehem. Though what is contained herein does not in
any way mean it's the actual truth, it is what scientist have
that fits the facts.
--------------------
During the rein of the Romans, a calendar was used based upon
the founding of the city of Rome. The Romans defined this year
as year 1 A.U.C, or "ab urbe condita" which means "from the
founding of the city". The Romans did not have the concept of
zeros at the time Rome was founded. (It was to be thought of by
the Arabs much later).
The calendar was changed more than 500 years after Christ had
been killed, and the new calendar was based upon his birth.
Dionysius Exiguus changed the calendar in the year 533 A.D. He
had researched his records to determine the year of Christs
birth and had found a statement made by Clement of Alexandria
which said that Christ was born during the 28'th year of the
rein of Augustus Caesar. Augustus was proclaimed Emperor in the
year of 726 A.U.C. so he added 28 years to it giving the year
754 A.U.C. as the birth year of Christ. This year he called
1 A.D.
Dionysius was unawair that Augustus had ruled under the name
of Octavian for four years before the title of Augustus was
given to him by the Roman Senate. For this reason, we would need
to subtract four years from his calendar to find the correct
birth year. This would turn out to be 4 B.C., or the year 750
A.U.C.
This is fine if you want to rely on historical records, which
at that time were hundreds of years old, to be free from error.
These records were hand written and could not be photocopied.
FidoNews 5-08 Page 20 22 Feb 1988
The New Testament in Matthew says that Christ was born in the
days of Herod. Josephus who lived in the first century said that
Herod died a few days after an eclipse of the moon visible in
Jerico a few days before the Passover. This date can be
calculated with a good deal of accuracy to an eclipse on March
13, 4 B.C. Passover was on April 12'th. Herod, then, died
somewhere around the first of April, 4 B.C.
Remember that Christs parrents were required to pay their
taxes in the city of Bethlehem. There are three major tax
collections recorded on the walls of temples in Ankara, Turkey.
They were 28 B.C., which is too early for our tax collection
year, 8 B.C., and 14 A. D, which is too late). This leaves us
with the major tax collection year of 8 B.C. This lands us close
to the 4 B.C. that agrees with our other information.
The month and day can not be infered from any information we
can piece together at the moment, yet we do know that early
Christians celebrated the birth of Christ on December 25'th
because that day was a holiday for the Romans who used to feed
the Early Christians to lions, (December 25'th was the Winter
Solstice during that time. The daylight hours start to grow
longer).
If you would like to narrow the month down a little, you
might look again at the Bible at Luke which states that the
shepherds were guiding their flock by night. It was the practice
of the time to guard flocks during the time of year that the
lambs were giving birth.
So there we have it. We might be looking at the spring of 6
A.D or 7 A.D., (A year or two before the taxes were due). We
must then discover an astrological event that occured sometime
around these years.
Fireballs, comets, eclipes, all of these were known to the
peoples of Earth, in the East and in the West. For this reason,
we can exclude these type of astrological events. If every time
a a comet was seen in the skys, we would have wise men seeking
everywhere all the time.
We can assume that the "Three Wise Men" were astrologers. Who
else would be able to detect an event in the heavens that
described the location of the King of the Jews?
Astronomers have determine the planetary posistions for the
suspect years and the results were quite interesting.
Calculations show that on May 27'th, 7 B.C. , Jupiter passed
within one degree North of Saturn, falling into the same
celestial longitude and were therefore in conjunction. This is
expected to happen once in about 20 years.
This particular conjunction occured in the constellation of
Pisces. In those days, Pisces was thought of as the "Hebrew
Sign". Saturn was also thought of as the "Hebrew Wanderer".
FidoNews 5-08 Page 21 22 Feb 1988
This made the conjunction very important for the Jewish people.
The Magi might have read this conjunction as a sign that a
great man was to be born to the Jews. Stellar events were not
over with yet, though, more important movements in the skys
further enforced this belief.
After passing Saturn, Jupiter began to slow down, and on the
15'th of July, it stopped. Then it began to back up and passed
Saturn for a second time! (Backwards motion as seen from the
Earth is known as retrograde motion). The second passing had
taken place on the 5'th of October.
Twice! This was indeed a great man being born.
Retrograde motion ended and Jupiter began to proceed forward
again on November 10'th. Once again Jupiter passed Saturn on
December 1'st.
Three passes of Saturn in one year, and all in Pisces!
Further, in Febuary of 6 B. C., Mars came into the picture and
joined the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn. Three planets in
Pisces the Hebrew sign, and three passes of Jupiter, (are these
three planets and passes the reason for describing three wise
men?), all within the same year! Let's go find this great Jew!
You can ignore all of these facts as conjecture and guess
work, because that's what they really are. We do know that the
three conjunctions did take place, and in Pisces. Whether this
is enough to cause astrologers to look for Jeasus is unknown.
In the end, it is you, reader, who has to weigh the facts and
believe what you will believe.
--------------------
Additional information:
1) The first conjunction of 27'th of May, 7 B. C., would have
been visible from the East in the morning.
2) The second conjunction of October 5'th would have been
visible in the South at midnight.
3) The third conjunction of December 1'st, 6 B.C. would have
been visible in the West before sunset.
4) It is said that the Star of Bethlehem moved to stand over the
spot where the King of the Jews was to be born. Taking into
account the previous three items of additional information,
we might say that the "Star" moved from the East to the West.
5) For clairification, the word "Star" may mean any astronomical
object, being one item or many. This is much the same as
describing fish. You may say, "See the fish?" and mean one or
several. "Star" can also be used to describe a conjunction of
stars or an occultation of astronomical objects.
FidoNews 5-08 Page 22 22 Feb 1988
6) There are computer programs being marketed that will describe
the attributes of planetary objects for the astrologer.
Though I must admit, I wouldn't spend a cent on an astrology
package, these would offer accurate posistionings. There are
Public domain software packages that do the same thing, yet
at a less than highly accurate result. The best PD package is
ASTR-3 or ASTR-4, mailed to all Regional nodes last year.
7) If you would like to write your own rograms for figuring
planetary posistions, the library will contain books with the
required formula and tables. There are also several books in
print that offer the astronomer and astrologer BASIC
programs, though again I wouldn't spend a cent on them; PD
has enough.
--------------------
Additional Reading:
1) If interested, read the Bible. Matthew and Luke offer the
best information available to the common questioner of the
Star of Bethlehem.
I seem to have formed a lot of opinions about FidoNet
lately, so I figured it was time to send in my IFNA membership
application and start a column. My understanding is that the
latter may occur without the former, but I feel strongly about
FidoNet and its survival, so I'll pitch in my $25 and my 2 cents.
I can't say specifically what this column will cover, it's
kind of a catch-all; but I suppose for awhile my emphasis will be
on technical issues of FidoNet and political issues of IFNA. The
primary feature to remember is that this is MY opinion, and I
believe that EVERYBODY is entitled to one. I do also believe,
however, that one should express one's opinions in a clean and
polite manner. An old Chinese proverb goes something like this:
"The first man in an argument who strikes his opponent has
just admitted that his argument is no longer valid."
I therefore consider resorting to insults and injury (flames
and censoring?) to be indications that someone has just accepted
the fact that he or she has lost an argument, and is unwilling
or incapable of maturely handling that concept.
As far as I'm concerned, FidoNet IS an adult community, and
immaturity has no place here - except in general humor.
This week's openner is going to touch a lot of soft spots -
and for those who are close to becoming FidoNet burnouts,
perhaps a hardenned spot. If anyone is hurt by this, contact me
via Network Mail and we can discuss it. Perhaps your point will
get published in future editions of this column. But I air here
my opinions, and I certainly am NOT out to piss anybody off.
Enough sales pitch, let's delve into this one. Today's
topic is -
IFNA: What should it do?
Yes, there are thousands of answers to this question;
peruse the IFNA Echo sometime. Well, here's MY opinion. IFNA
was originally meant to be just another special interest group,
or so I was given to understand at the time. I've seen several
recent messages to the effect that this is PRECISELY what IFNA
FidoNews 5-08 Page 24 22 Feb 1988
was when it started.
Fine, things change (don't we ALL know that), and now IFNA
is trying to become the "guardian of FidoNet's future." It's
a nice thought. A group of people, originally meant to just be
just another SIG, now attempting to be a constructive AND
RELIABLE source of emergency administration of the day-to-day
operation of the Net. And a democratically controlled group, at
that.
Some people appear to have the opinion that IFNA should
control the net. Some people are afraid that IFNA is TRYING to
control the net. Some people have the opinion that IFNA should
go crawl away and die. Some people are of the opinion that IFNA
HAS crawled away and might just as well die. Some people aren't
sure what they think IFNA should do, but that it should do
SOMETHING. And some people haven't said didly-squat about what
they think about IFNA.
With notable exceptions, the messages on the IFNA echo are a
strong indication that this last group is the most desirable. At
least THEY'RE not out to insult anybody.
FidoNet started (and I hope my memory of the facts are in
order) with a group of friends passing messages back and forth;
eventually it got big enough where some kind of control over the
NodeList was needed, and Fido Policy was formed. In the early
Policy DOCs, the National Coordinator was "top dog" (pun
intended). He could do ANYTHING he wanted to ANYBODY in the net.
Right down to excommunicating a node. It WAS his option. But the
Policy document stated that such high-level interference would be
avoided unless the situation was deemed of importance to the
survival of the Net. Appeals in the structure were allowed for
case decision, and a fair amount of justice was dealt. With the
power came the responsibility. And everybody assumed that such
responsibility would be well-bourne.
I doubt if you'll find many people that would say that it
was not.
But the NodeList kept growing; Users from all over the
world found a great idea in FidoNet; a "free" network service for
its users (with the added bonus of cheap Network Mail), allowing
the speedy communication of Network Mail at the highest Bps rate
in the area. Many such users became FidoNet SysOps so that they
could provide this great service to their respective areas.
And the story goes on. And the National Coordinator
position gave way to the InterNational Coordinator as the "top
dog", and the idea that one person might someday be overtaxed in
attempting to keep the NodeList current and properly and fully
distributed began to form. And protection of the NodeList as a
constantly changing and potentially annoying document became more
of an issue (I'm referring to the old lady with the 2am phone
call from a computer user using an outdated NodeList). And the
FidoNet's friendly association of gathering, known as The
FidoNews 5-08 Page 25 22 Feb 1988
InterNational FidoNet Association, thought that the power of many
might succeed where the power of one might someday fail. And
thus was born the idea that perhaps IFNA could take over certain
key responsibilities within the FidoNet structure, and thereby be
available to step in when the usual source of such administration
became disabled.
I faded from FidoNet about this time, so my history of how
the IFNA charter was formed, the going Non-profit, the election
of the BoD and *Cs is somewhat misty. I am trying to catch up on
it, but to be honest I'm still not TOTALLY sure just what a *C
is.
I returned to FidoNet, only to find massive unrest in the
Net. Mostly over this IFNA/control thing. And though I liked the
idea of an organization whose interests were to keep FidoNet
running, I had no idea just WHERE I stood on the just what power
and what limitations should be granted to IFNA. Until now.
The National Coordinator's job was to keep the Net running
and help in appeal decisions when needed, and butt out
otherwise. And, for the most part, this worked.
IFNA, as I see it, is just a voted-in, multi-person entity
replacing that position. Let IFNA produce the NodeList; let
IFNA own the NodeList from a copyright protection standpoint;
let IFNA be prepared to step in if net RULES are being blatantly
disobeyed; and let IFNA butt out for anything else, except for
those things that IFNA has done in the past, such as prepare
FidoCon and sundry SIG gatherings.
This is fine, but "net rules" is a broad and mostly
undefined term. The original FidoNet had 3 rules:
1) Thou shalt not be excessively annoying;
2) Thou shalt not be too easily annoyed;
3) Thou shalt honor the National Mail Hour.
This set of rules worked great; why not just keep them?
They're simple, they're direct, and without a lot of legal
wording they get the point - the CONCEPT - of network
communication and cooperation across. So why change them?
The National Coordinator was TRUSTED to use good judgement
in the application of his right to step into Net operations; so
why not TRUST IFNA the same way? The IFNA BoD members are voted
in by the SysOps, so theoretically they will act as desired by
the SysOps they represent or lose the job. This indirectly
gives the SysOp a say in just what IS annoying and what is NOT.
This gives the SysOp a say in just what constitutes not honoring
the NMH (is it now the IMH?) and what constitutes a forgivable
flounder or an unfortunate mishap. Through communication
(something FidoNet SHOULD be intimately familiar with (-: )
between SysOp and BoD member, the SysOp now indirectly does what
FidoNews 5-08 Page 26 22 Feb 1988
used to be done by the National Coordinator.
As it should be.
FidoNet is a collection of SysOps; therefore the SysOps
should run FidoNet. If this means IFNA must drop its Non-Profit
status - do it. If we are spending as much money as I think on
IFNA stuff, then there won't be any taxes to pay anyway.
I don't see much reason for other powers to be granted
IFNA, as the day-to-day operation of the Net usually requires
work by each and every SysOp, Network Coordinator, Regional
Coordinator, Zone Coordinator and InterNational Coordinator.
It always has.
It always will.
So why should there be administrative interference in this
technical-level operation? No reason I can dream of. Just let
the IFNA top brass take over the real heart of FidoNet - the
NodeList. And make it responsible for producing it ON TIME -
EVERY TIME. Without fail. With reasonably planned contingency
procedures, backup copies of NodeLists and trained people to do
whatever is needed to get the NodeList out to everybody as if
nothing had gone wrong.
Even if the InterNational Coordinator died in a fire that
consumed him and his entire computer system.
Even if the IFNA president's computer decided to drop its
read-write heads onto track 0 of the hard disk.
Even if 11 people on a 12-person IFNA BoD came down with
Bubonic plague. Number 12 could step in to produce and
distribute the NodeList ON TIME.
And, in keeping with the tradition started by the National
Coordinator, allow IFNA to step in if the members of the net
decide that the operation and survival of the Net is in danger
and a situation MUST be corrected.
Forget all the other aspects of politics. Forget legal
problems of going Non-profit. Just run the net. And keep your
mitts off if things happen to be working okay right now.
FidoNet kept working through thick and thin because all
FidoNet SysOps shared many threads, one of which was respect for
each other. This rarely broke down, since the rules were rarely
broken.
Why change that? It worked, you know. And it will
continue to work, as long as that's all IFNA tries to do. Keep
the net running. Absolutely its primary and possibly only task.
Just keep that ol' net arunnin'.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FidoNews 5-08 Page 27 22 Feb 1988
16 Jul 1988
A new areacode, 508, will form in eastern Massachusetts and
will be effective on this date. The new area code will be
formed from the current areacode 617. Greater Boston will
remain areacode 617 while the rest of eastern Massachusetts
will form the new areacode 508.
25 Aug 1988
Start of the Fifth International FidoNet Conference, to be
held at the Drawbridge Inn in Cincinnatti, OH. Contact Tim
Sullivan at 108/62 for more information. This is FidoNet's big
annual get-together, and is your chance to meet all the people
you've been talking with all this time. We're hoping to see
you there!
24 Aug 1989
Voyager 2 passes Neptune.
If you have something which you would like to see on this
calendar, please send a message to FidoNet node 1:1/1.
Utility authors: Please help keep this list up to date by
reporting new versions to 1:1/1. It is not our intent to list
all utilities here, only those which verge on necessity.
At 10:02 am Chairman of the Board Ken Kaplan called to order the
third official meeting of the IFNA Board of Directors. At that
time, 21 of the 22 directors were present or represented, and
the 22nd arrived (after a six-hour drive) within the hour.
Initial reports indicate that the meeting, which so far has
spanned a fourteen hour period, has been very successful due to
the implementation of rules which resulted in the automatic
assignment to sub-committee (for review and recycling) of those
items of business for which resolution was not reached in
pre-determined time limits of discussion.
Among the various items of business were discussions of legal
implications peculiar to Missouri by IFNA Registered Attorney
Mark Rubin, presentation of the 1987 Financial Report, reports
by Divisional Directors and standing committees, and a slate of
two dozen additional items of old and new business.
Of particular note was a very exciting presentation by the
FidoCon '88 organizing committee which indicates that this
year's will be the biggest and best ever!
Minutes, financial data, condensations of reports, and
presentations of the many items of business handled are scheuled
to be reported in these pages during the coming weeks.
IFNA Publications Committee Report
December 1987 - February 1988
PROGRESS DURING THIS PERIOD:
1. Thom Henderson resigned as editor of Fidonews.
2. Dale Lovell became new editor of Fidonews effective
January 1, 1988.
3. Fidonews is being published weekly as before.
4. The 'Open' publication policy is still in effect.
PROBLEMS:
Thom Henderson's resignation and subsequent handing over of
duties to Dale Lovell was accomplished with very little trouble.
Thom stopped publishing 1 issue earlier the he had agreed which
meant 1 week without Fidonews, but Dale has kept things running
smoothly ever since.
We still receive article submissions that don't even come close
to specs. This is resulting in Dale spending much more time than
should be necessary preparing each week's issue. He has
contacted the worst offenders and is planning on mentioning this
topic in an upcoming editorial.
PROGNOSIS FOR THE NEXT PERIOD:
1. Fidonews business as usual.
2. Review documents submitted by Steve Bonine to be used as
general pamphlets about IFNA/Fidonet.
3. Provide services as needed.
COMMENTS:
The committee feels and recommends that the current policy on
Fidonews submissions continue. In short that policy is:
'Anything received is published'. The exception to this is
anything the Editor feels is libelous, very offensive, or as
criminal intent. Who decides these things? The person we've
chosen to act as Editor. After choosing him/her, we must trust
this person to do the job for which he was appointed. If we find
we cannot trust him, we must find someone else.
As head of the publications committee I feel I should be in
charge of deciding when it is time to replace the Editor.
However I am always responsible to recommendations from the BOD
FidoNews 5-08 Page 30 22 Feb 1988
when necessary.
Respectfully submitted, Tim Sullivan, Chairperson, 108/62
Membership for the International FidoNet Association
Membership in IFNA is open to any individual or organization that
pays a specified annual membership fee. IFNA serves the
international FidoNet-compatible electronic mail community to
increase worldwide communications.
Member Name _______________________________ Date _______________
Address _________________________________________________________
City ____________________________________________________________
State ________________________________ Zip _____________________
Country _________________________________________________________
Home Phone (Voice) ______________________________________________
Work Phone (Voice) ______________________________________________
Zone:Net/Node Number ____________________________________________
BBS Name ________________________________________________________
BBS Phone Number ________________________________________________
Baud Rates Supported ____________________________________________
Board Restrictions ______________________________________________
Your Special Interests __________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
In what areas would you be willing to help in FidoNet? __________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
Send this membership form and a check or money order for $25 in
US Funds to:
International FidoNet Association
c/o Leonard Mednick, MBA, CPA
700 Bishop Street, #1014
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813-4112
USA
Thank you for your membership! Your participation will help to
insure the future of FidoNet.
Please NOTE that IFNA is a general not-for-profit organization
and Articles of Association and By-Laws were adopted by the
membership in January 1987. The first elected Board of Directors
was filled in August 1987. The IFNA Echomail Conference has been
established on FidoNet to assist the Board. We welcome your
input to this Conference.
The IFNA publications can be obtained by downloading from Fido
1:1/10 or other FidoNet compatible systems, or by purchasing
them directly from IFNA. We ask that all our IFNA Committee
Chairmen provide us with the latest versions of each
publication, but we can make no written guarantees.
System Enhancement Associates SEAdog $60.00 _____
SEAdog price as of March 1, 1987
ONLY 1 copy SEAdog per IFNA Member
Fido Software's Fido/FidoNet $100.00 _____
Fido/FidoNet price as of November 1, 1987
ONLY 1 copy Fido/FidoNet per IFNA Member
International orders include $10.00 for
surface shipping or $20.00 for air shipping _____
SUBTOTAL _____
HI. Residents add 4.0 % Sales tax _____
TOTAL _____
SEND CHECK OR MONEY ORDER IN US FUNDS:
International FidoNet Association
c/o Leonard Mednick, MBA, CPA
700 Bishop Street, #1014
Honolulu, HI. 96813-4112
USA
