Subj : -Unpublished- with speed > 300
To   : Ward Dossche
From : Michiel van der Vlist
Date : Tue Mar 05 2024 08:52:09

Hello Ward,

On Monday March 04 2024 14:18, you wrote to me:

 Mv>> So... Anything other than "300" following "-Unpublished-" is
 Mv>> wrong.

 WD> Question: In the times of the internet it seems that the "speed"-field
 WD> has achieved irrelevance. No?

If that were indeed the case, why do you stll check submitted nodelist segments for 'valid' values of the speed field? Why did you reject '299' that was submitted for 2:280/5555 for today's daily and replace it by '9600'?

In the very beginning with the first generation modems it was required to set the speed of the calling modem to the speed of the callee. That was the original purpose of the speed field.

When modems became smart enough to negotiate the optimum modulation method and attainable speed between themselves and the DCE-DTE speed was decoupled from the line speed, the speed field became largely irrelevant. It became more an indication of what was attainable. (Together with the modem flags)

With the introduction of ISDN only nodes, the speed field was given a new meaning. '300' was given the meaning of "do not attempt to call POTS". As documented by the FTSC.

This was carried over to IP only nodes when they were introduced. Also documented by the FTSC.

My not so humble opinion is that it is not a good idea to go against FTSC standards just because some of them may not appear to be as relevant as they once were. That does not mean we can never change anything but the pros must be weighed against the cons. In this particular case, what are the pros of dropping the coupling between '300' and '-Unpublished-'? I don't see any and the con is that you never know what you break.

Dropping the restrictions on the speed field may lead to it becoming a vanity stage and we may see all kind of nonsense. If the restrictions were dropped I should put '400M' in the speed field for 2:280/5555 because 400 Mbps is the actual speed of my fiberglass connection with the internet. Or I could use it to advertise the size of my pissing contest equipment. Is that what we want? I don't think so.

I say stick to the FTSC standard and use only '300' after '-Unpublished-'.

Sidenote: I would not mind if ERRFLAGS were updated with an option to enforce it.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
 * Origin: Nodelist Police Station (2:280/5555)

.