Subj : Re: Husky Config
To   : Avon
From : Al
Date : Tue Jan 12 2021 02:03:20

  Re: Re: Husky Config
  By: Avon to Al on Tue Jan 12 2021 08:26 pm

 Av> Based on this I take it that rules that set noroute instructions for a
 Av> given node should be stated above rules that set more catch-all/blanket
 Av> routing statements?

Yes, I have all my links (for the most part) listed at the beginning of the route file and the catch-all's down at the bottom.

 Av> route crash noroute 3:770/100
 Av> route crash 3:712/848 3:*

 Av> I think should work OK.. but if I reversed those lines... would HPT route
 Av> all netmail intended to 3:770/100 via 3:712/848?

Yes, if "route crash 3:712/848 3:*" was listed first, netmail for 3:770/100 would be routed there. Your example above is what you want.

 Ttyl :-),
         Al

.... 75%, no, 72% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
--- SBBSecho 3.12-Linux
 * Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (21:4/106.1)

.