Subj : PATH kludge on exported echomail
To   : deon
From : Digital Man
Date : Wed Feb 02 2022 16:56:08

  Re: PATH kludge on exported echomail
  By: deon to Digital Man on Thu Feb 03 2022 11:20 am

 > Hi DM,
 >
 > A discussion in fido was started based on the PATH kludge on one of my
 > echomails.
 >
 > My system 3:632/509, exported a message and sent it directly to 1:320/259 -
 > and from there would have been forwarded on to other systems.
 >
 > d> Nope, I'm direct to 320/219.
 > d> P@TH: 320/219 292/854
 >
 > A downstream system asked, (their view of the PATH kludge is above)  why
 > isnt my node address the first in the PATH statement?
 >
 > Should it be?

It depends on what rules you're following. When zones were introduced to FidoNet and for a long time after, the norm was strip PATH and SEEN-BY lines when the message crossed a zone boundry (because there could be ambiguity between 3:632/509 and 2:632/509, since neither the zone information is not included in the addresses on these lines).

In the more modern "FidoWeb" world, it's customary to keep the addresses in tact, even when crossing zone boundaries (within FidoNet), since the net/node numbers are now assured to be unique even among all zones (e.g. there can be no 2:103/705 since there already is a 1:103/705).

I suspect that in your example, one of the echomail systems along the path
(most likely 1:320/219) stripped the incoming PATH line(s) when the message was re-packed for a foreign zone.
-- 
                                            digital man (rob)

Sling Blade quote #15:
Doyle Hargraves: What'cha doin' with that lawn mower blade Karl?
Norco, CA WX: 57.1øF, 15.0% humidity, 7 mph WNW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
 * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

.