Subj : Re: List of IPv6 nodes To : Tommi Koivula From : Gary McCulloch Date : Fri Sep 25 2026 07:50 pm Subject: My nodelist entry and FTS-5001 There has been some question about whether my nodelist entry reaches my mailer or only my BBS. Below is the entry, what FTS-5001 says about it, and a check anyone can repeat against their own copy of the nodelist. Quotations are from FTS-5001, Revision 6, "Nodelist flags and userflags", dated 2017-08-13, section 5.9 (Internet Capability Flags). MY ENTRY -------- ,50,Reign_Of_Fire_BBS,Ooltewah_TN,Gary_McCulloch,1-423-541-8271,300, CM,INA:call.rofbbs.com,IBN,ITN:6800 CM continuous mail INA:call.rofbbs.com default server address for the IP flags IBN binkp ITN:6800 telnet, port 6800 WHAT THE STANDARD SAYS ---------------------- Section 5.9.2, Server Address Flags: "INA This flag sets a default server address used for any Internet Protocol Flag that does not specify its own." Section 5.9.1, Internet Protocol Flags: "Internet Protocol flags use the syntax: [:][:] ...and is the decimal service port number. A port number should only be specified if it is not the default port number for that protocol." and from the same table: "IBN 24554 Binkp (FTS-1026 - FTS-1030)" "ITN 23 Telnet connection using FTS-1 or any other protocol designed for classic POTS and modem." HOW THAT APPLIES ---------------- IBN carries no address and no port. Per 5.9.2 the address comes from INA, and per 5.9.1 the port is the default for the protocol. So bare IBN reads as: binkp at call.rofbbs.com, port 24554 This is not an omission. The standard says a port "should only be specified if it is not the default port number for that protocol", so writing IBN:24554 would be contrary to that guidance. Bare IBN is the prescribed form. ITN:6800 is a different flag for a different service. ITN is telnet -- how a human caller reaches the board -- and its default is port 23. Mine is not on 23, so the port is stated, exactly as 5.9.1 requires. On reading 6800 as a port rather than a hostname, section 5.9 states: "Nodelist parsing software is expected to be able to determine whether a parameter carried by a flag is an IPv4 quad, an IPv6 address encased in square brackets, a host name, an email address or a port number by itself." Two services, two flags, one hostname. That is what INA is for. ITN has no bearing on mail; removing it would not move mail anywhere, it would only stop advertising the BBS to callers. IT IS ALSO THE COMMON FORM -------------------------- Of the 1248 node entries in the day 268 nodelist: 897 carry IBN only 128 carry IBN and ITN together 10 carry ITN only 181 carry neither Among the 128 carrying both: ,19,FTSC_Administrator,Groton_CT,Andrew_Leary,1-860-446-6118,33600, H16,V34,VFC,V32T,XA,CM,INA:ftsc.bnbbbs.net,IBN:24555,IFC,ITN:60177, PING,TRACE Zone,1,North_America_(268),Toronto,Nick_Andre,1-647-847-2083,9600,CM, XX,INA:bbs.darkrealms.ca,IBN,ITN,PING,TRACE ,130,D'Bridge_Help,Toronto,Nick_Andre,1-647-847-2083,9600,CM,XX, INA:bbs.darkrealms.ca,IBN,ITN The FTSC Administrator and the Zone 1 Coordinator both publish IBN and ITN in one entry, and 1:19 uses the same one-numeric-parameter form, ITN:60177, that I use. THE ADVERTISED PORTS ANSWER --------------------------- Tested from outside, on both stacks: call.rofbbs.com:24554 binkp greeting, SYS Reign of Fire BBS call.rofbbs.com:6800 BBS telnet call.rofbbs.com publishes A and AAAA records and both ports answer over IPv4 and IPv6. IF MAIL TO ME IS ACTUALLY FAILING --------------------------------- I would much rather fix a real fault than argue about flag syntax. If mail to 1:154/50 is not getting through, please send the session log from your side -- the connect attempt and what your mailer reported. That will show the cause far faster than reading flags back to each other. Gary McCulloch Reign of Fire BBS 1:154/50 www.rofbbs.com + call.rofbbs.com:6800 call@call.rofbbs.com 423-541-8271 IPv4 & IPv6 + ACIS Member. AmigaNet ArakNet C=Net DescipleNet FidoNet PiNet RetroNet --- C-Net/5 * Origin: Reign of Fire : ROF FTN : ArakNet 2.0 : www.rofbbs.com (1:154/50) .