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 / sysgod@sysgod.org]

--- FMail/Win32 1.60+
 * Origin:  Cyberia: All your msgbase are belong to us! (3:712/848)

.