Subj : Easier solution?
To : Charles Cruden
From : Scott Little
Date : Fri Jan 03 2003 09:01 am
[ 01 Jan 03 14:03, Charles Cruden wrote to Scott Little ]
CC> I tried a few entries with nlmake here, and it didn't seem to
CC> complain, nor did FDNC. (Mind you, FD/FDNC has some accounting for IP
CC> nodes, so that probably helped.) For nodelist compilers in general,
CC> I'd imagine the worst it would do would be to reject that node, which
CC> given it's an IP node to begin with would exactly be a bad thing. For
CC> segment compilers it becomes more of a problem. OTOH, there are fewer
CC> segment compilers to worry about....
If segment processors were the only problem here there'd be no problem - they
can easily be replaced. The problem is the software on little ol' nodes that
make use of the nodelist.
CC> I suggested the IP# heading, but if something can be found that all
CC> agree on, it can be pretty much anything.
Like domain names, if IP# doesn't cause BBSs everywhere to barf because the
phone number isn't to spec, go for it.
CC> end up at the same spot. Then you just choose which address you want
CC> to use based on the contact method you want to use.
How does a user know what protocol an address uses? Do I need to manually look
in the nodelist for everyone I send direct mail to to check if they have
another listing? They have to be linked together with yet another flag so
software can dynamically route.
-- Scott Little [fidonet#3:712/848 /
[email protected]]
--- FMail/Win32 1.60+
* Origin: Cyberia: All your msgbase are belong to us! (3:712/848)
