Subj : linked To : Peter Knapper From : Frank Vest Date : Sat Dec 14 2002 11:59 pm On (15 Dec 02) Peter Knapper wrote to Frank Vest... Hello Peter, FV> If you don't list your IP or domain, you don't fly the IP flag. PK> You are of course, then saying there is no other possible way to find PK> out how to contact that node, which of course is not correct....;-) FV> Not at all. Each Node can set up contacts with each other without the FV> use of any Nodelist. Even POTS Nodes can do this. :) PK> Ok, I think I can see where you are heading. Let me re-phrase my PK> statement slightly. By saying a sysop can't list an IP FLAG if he does PK> not list the his domain name in the Nodelist, you are placing a PK> limitation on the PUBLIC method of telling people about your system PK> that can work perfectly well. PK> A PVT listing tells you its PVT, but it does not list its Phone number PK> in the Nodelist and yet you may still be able to contact that node if PK> privately given the number and hours of service. PK> I don't see why there is a need to penalise IP operations over PSTN in PK> such a manner. No penalty involved there. Why would one fly a PVT flag in the Nodelist and then list a phone number? Same for IP Nodes. Why fly an IP flag and not list your IP/domain? I think we're on the same wave here. We just don't know it. :-)) PK> droppped, more and more people moved over to that way of working, its PK> really just a natural progression. FV> And as a method of listing Fidonet Nodes in the Nodelist becomes used FV> more, it will be moved to as well. PK> When Fidonet started, it NEEDED to create the Nodelist, there was no PK> common PHONE directory available to look up. With IP, such a directory PK> already exists (the DNS). If Fidonet ignores that, then you will end Without listing the IP/domain in the Nodelist, there is little way to use the DNS except for a default domain like fidonet.net or something like that. FV> Telepathy is ok forall I care... as long as it works. :-) PK> I would need to see DIRECT proof that it works first........;-) FV> You and me both. (I'm sending you my connection info via telepathy FV> right now. Did you receive it??) :-)) PK> First prove to me that you sent it, before I confirm if I did receive PK> it (or not).........;-)) I'm concentrating, dag nab it! FV> One Nodelist with a flag that tells the IP mailer that this is an IP FV> capable Node with a "phone number" of while the pots FV> mailer will look for a phone number in the "phone" FV> field and use it if configured to do so seems better to me. PK> Its this type of mangling that concerns me....;-( FV> How so? PK> Well it depends on how you read what you said above. If the DATA for PK> goes INTO the nodelist, just where are you going to put PK> it without breaking existing functionality of the Nodelist? Change the PK> System name or Location fields, and you difuse the functionality of PK> those fields for all nodes (not just PSTN). Current standards prohibit PK> using a FLAG for that info, so I don't see how one can keep that info PK> in the Nodelist without breaking SOMETHING at least. Create a new standard. PK> However, if you NOT suggesting to put into the Nodelist, PK> then the MOST practical place left is the DNS, which is fine with me. And use some default domain for Fidonet? PK> I just thought of another possibilty. Fidonet constructs a server that PK> provides ALL that info from one single point (an online Nodelist???), PK> allowing Fidonet to retain "control" over its own destiny. Except that PK> means Fidonet re-invents the wheel by re-creating what already exists, PK> but that may just keep some people happy........;-) To do this would require that Fidonet become a "legal" entity. I'm not sure how that would fly. :/ FV> All that is being done is adding a flag to tell the IP mailer FV> to look in the DNS record for or poll a finger daemon FV> or some such "standard" Internet listing to get the connection FV> information (IE: protocol-port). PK> However we don't really need a Finger Daemon, the IBN flag in the PK> Nodelist is all thats needed to tell people to find BinkP by looking PK> up the DNS for that node. And for those that use telnet mailers? or FTP? What about future protocols and mailers? Do we add flags to no end for them? PK> Now IF its also necessary to advise people that a different PORT is to PK> be used, then we have a couple of options, list the PORT in the FLAGS PK> field, or use SRV type DNS records for this purpose. Personally, I PK> prefer to use the DNS for this (although I doubt that any Fidonet S/W PK> currently exists that can use SRV records), because its related more PK> to DNS than Nodelist type data. You got me on the technical end there. I'm not a tech person. 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) .