Subj : Re: Nodelist Parser...
To   : Ozz Nixon
From : Wilfred van Velzen
Date : Thu Jun 28 2018 09:58:28

Hi Ozz,

On 2018-06-27 17:16:37, you wrote to All:

 ON> Okay, a more serious nodelist question...

 ON> What is a nodelist parser supposed to do with a line that has two INA
 ON> addresses?

A node can have multiple domains. binkd.config can handle that too. So it 
depends on what your nodelist parser is producing, what you do with it...

 ON> Right now, I am taking the second, mainly because one line just
 ON> has INA:9600, which totally tripped up my address validation code.
 ON> [fixed].

That's a bug in the nodelist. An INA: is not supposed to specify a port number!

 ON> There are a couple lines that have for example ITN:domain.address, no
 ON> IBN, no INA, and phone is -Unpublished-, however, it is not marked as
 ON> Pvt or Down. What rule of thumb should be applied?

So they are connectable by telnet. So the lack of Pvt or Down is correct.

 ON> I have Rhenium polling every node right now in the background - just so I
 ON> can validate my nodelist parser. Finding a lot of systems that are IP 
based
 ON> are not available - I know someone is going to defend this with ZMH...
 ON> however, I haven't gotten to implement XM,CM,etc. logic. Rhenium is doing
 ON> this so I can collect VER information (what systems are running what, 
along
 ON> with collecting M_ADR list for what networks others are in around the
 ON> world).

 ON> * This is running in single thread poll - so I would not mess up anyone,
 ON> including my ISP if I spawned off a few thousand threads.  Regards, Ozz

It would be interesting to see the statistics of the result, when you are done! 
;)

Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
 * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

.