Subj : human-readable nodelist format
To : Jan Vermeulen
From : mark lewis
Date : Thu Dec 26 2002 03:45 pm
jv> Quoting mark lewis on Thu 19 Dec 2002 21:51 to Jan
jv> Vermeulen:
jv> ml> oooooo... question for you...
jv> Let's see what help you can get from me...
jv> ml> the PING and Tyz flags appear in the Z2 prolog _under_ the
jv> ml> "approved user flags" heading... does this mean that they are only
jv> ml> U,ser flags and not normal flags in Z2?
jv> The PING and Tyz flags appear in the Z2 prolog:
jv> _below_ the "user flag" definition
jv> but _above_ the "approved user flags" heading
jv> Thusly they're not user flags.
hummm... reading what you've written, it would appear that they /are/
userflags... just not _approved_ userflags...
jv> That was an easy one, was it not?
seems that way... just looking for confirmation and information...
jv> ml> i also note that the Z2 prolog doesn't state that the IEM flag is
jv> ml> depricated like FTS-5001 states... i've not noted the IEM flag used
jv> ml> in Z2 but do note the EMA flag appearing to be used in the same
jv> ml> type vein as IEM...
jv> Z2 has nearly one hundred IEM flags flying, even the ZC
jv> himself. If you have a problem with that, please ask Ward.
not a problem... what i was noting is that EMS shows up in my "error"
reports... those IEM flags must be "properly" implemented in so far as my util
currently checks for them...
jv> ml> additionally, i personally note that V42B does not imply V42
jv> ml> capability... one is error correction and the other is data
jv> ml> compression and neither relies on the other or implies the other...
jv> ml> does Z2 view them differently? if so, why?
jv> As far as I know, that relation has been in the
jv> nodelist for at least 10 years so I assume there is a good
jv> reson for that.
jv> Maybe because modems were marketed that way?
v42 and v42b are protocols... like v90 and mnp and exactly that way... one is
data compression and the other is error correction... the specs for each do
not define the other as necessary or a mandated fallback capability...
from what i've seen over all these years, they got "grouped" together simply
because the ITU-T (can't remember their original name) used 42 in both of them
and the average layman wasn't able to tell that they weren't related...
jv> ml> FWIW: yes, i'm working on a nodelist analysis util...
jv> With what purpose beyond fun?
to look at "strict adherence to the published specs" concerning the nodelist
format and flags used in it...
