Subj : Nodelist Development
To   : alterego
From : Al
Date : Mon Jun 01 2020 16:35:52

165
Hello alterego,

 Og>>> Infact.. the original nodelist *was* a bbs list.
 Al>> Bzzzt! Wrong.
 Al>> The nodelist has always contained info for mailer sessions. Most
 Al>> entries

 al> So the only point that breaks down for me, is why was the "MO" flag
 al> created, if the nodelist was never intended for human consumption as
 al> well?

I could come up with a couple of reasons for you but off the top of my head I 
don't know.

Your the FTSC guy.. not me, aren't we supposed to be asking you such questions!

 al> Sure, as technology as evolved, mailers no longer use POTS to
 al> communicate, but IP - so port definitions were created to faciliate
 al> that. I think its reasonable for the human element to evolve to
 al> include the port info as well.

I'm going to ramble on a bit now. Feel free to move on at this point if you'd 
rather skip Al's musings.

Let me start by saying I think it's a good idea to include BBS connect info in 
the nodelist. If there was a way to include it in the nodelist I would be first 










































































































































































































































to update my own BBS info (if I had any) and those in my net. But I think that 
is problematical, let me explain why.

The nodelist has been a problem since day one. A good number of people have 
worked like dogs to bring it to where it is today. BBS connection info was 
never a consideration and that is largely why it is not included today.

In the heyday of BBSing the size of the nodelist was an issue. It took a long 
time to apply a diff and recompile the nodelist. The time it took to scrape the 










































































































































































































































nodelist for the desired info was also an issue.

The above is not an issue today but those issues have a lot to do with where we 










































































































































































































































are today.

The nodelist has evolved, the most recent evolution was the inclusion of 
protocol:port numbers. There have been other evolutions too but that will 
suffice for this example.

I think the nodelist does a pretty good job of doing what it was intended to 
do.

I think there is a good argument for adding BBS connect info to the nodelist 
but nodelist tools would need updating. I would not add my own BBS connect info 










































































































































































































































today for fear of breaking my friends nodelist compiler.

I just scrapped this out of the current (Fidonet) nodelist..

=== Cut ===
   o The FidoNet NodeList is compiled so that computer systems within FidoNet
     may communicate with each other.  Use and intra-FidoNet distribution
     rights are granted to all FidoNet system operators for the purposes of
     communication within FidoNet or applying for a FidoNet node number.
SEEN-BY: 1/100 2/100 101 106 107 108 111 114 115 116 118 1202 128 130 132 137
SEEN-BY: 2/138 140 141 145 147 150 151 159 160 161 162 163 167 3/100 4/100

.