Subj : proposed new nodelist                                    [2]
To   : Jasen Betts
From : Frank Vest
Date : Sun Jul 21 2002 08:48 pm

On (21 Jul 02) Jasen Betts wrote to Frank Vest...

Hello Jasen,

FV> The translation software would make the old style list and take only
FV> what is required for that list from the new style. No matter what the
FV> Node put in the new style, the old style would almost certianly be
FV> correct... I think.
JB> Maybe syntatically correct... there'd still be uncontactable hosts,
JB> etc, so it wouldn't be functionally correct.

That will happen anyway. Until humans can be made perfect, there will
be errors and uncontactable Nodes. :-)

FV> Ah ha! I think I see what you mean. The new style list would have two
FV> or three lines for each Node
JB>  nah, one line,  I just split them that way for easier reading. (I
JB> should  have said)  the POTS section has the same number of commas as
JB> the IP section  or any  other type or connection, so if old(future)
JB> sofrware finds something  it doesn't understand it knows to just skip
JB> 3 commas and there'll be another  connection to look at (or a new line
JB> with a new node).

Oh. Ok. I see. Still, I can see a good thing in having "tags" for each
section and having them in a separate line.

FV> . The first line would always be the
FV> "basic" Node information. The next line(s) would depend on the type of
FV> connection capabilities and be designated by either the POTS or IP
FV> flag, or both, as needed?  If I got this thought my thick head right?
JB>  Pretty much, but also ISDN atleast where where it's incompatible with
JB> POTS  PACNet too if it's still running, even packet radio if someone's
JB> got X25  fido software and there's no rules against it...

That would be the "good" in having separate lines for each tag. The
ability to list different types of connection types and such.

FV> This would work just fine with me... Probably be easier to read and
FV> translate to boot.
JB> I hadn't thought of that but, having a reminder (int the form of
JB> connection-type keyword) every three fields would reduce the "forest
JB> of commas" problem

Probably. I'm not sure I'm technical enough to get int this area.

FV> I was thinking that the *Cs would be the ones running the conversion
FV> program to generate the old style list for distribution along with the
FV> new list... IE:
JB> they could but the node in their net may be sing different software
JB> and therfore want different information in their nodelist.

Well... I assumed that both Nodelist formats would be distributed and
that the conversion program would be available for Nodes to use if
desired. A Node that wanted different information in a Nodelist could
simply use the new format and convert it to their liking. :-)

JB> those with IP nodes would want IP numbers, those with modems would
JB> want phone numbers, those with a different brand of modem might want a
JB> different phone number etc...

JB> And for each of these nodes the NC has to keep a current nodelist and
JB> then build a new one, compare the two and then produce a diff.

See above. :-)


Regards,

Frank

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/flv
http://biseonline.com/r19

--- PPoint 3.01
# Origin: Holy Cow! I'm A Point!! (1:124/6308.1)
* Origin: Baddog BBS (1:218/903)

You are viewing proxied material from vert.synchro.net. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.