Subj : Re: Join DiscipleNet To : Gary McCulloch From : Wilfred van Velzen Date : Fri Oct 09 2026 07:31 pm Hi Gary, On 2026-10-08 19:52:52, you wrote to All: GM> Same for a second fault you did not see: thirty-one of my nodes were GM> subscribed to no nodelist file base at all, so the weekly hatch had GM> never sent them a nodelist. On DiscipleNet that was four of the nine. GM> Fixed as well, in time for tomorrow's run. That is an issue unrelated to the nodelist. And I don't know if you should push the nodelist to any of them, without their consent? GM> THE UNSECURED SESSION, AND MARK'S QUESTION GM> You are right that this needed declaring, and I had no business GM> calling it correct without saying why. GM> My hub accepts sessions only from systems listed in its own nodelist. GM> Applications do not arrive by netmail here They could if you allowed it. And why not? It's a good way for applying nodes to prove they have a grasp of the technology... GM> - they come through a web form at rofbbs.com/rofftn/application.php - GM> so the hub never needs to take a session from a system it does not GM> already know, and I would rather it did not. Mark, that is the answer GM> to yours: a new sysop does not have to netmail me, and does not have GM> to get past the hub to apply. GM> What was missing is that the nodelist said none of this. IBN:24556 GM> promises binkp and says nothing about who may call, so your scan was GM> right to read the refusal as a fault rather than as policy. The flag GM> for it already exists - LO, "accepts calls Only from Listed GM> addresses", FTS-5001 section A - and twenty-five nodes in the Zone 1 GM> nodelist carry it. Mine carried it nowhere. It is now on all fifteen GM> hub entries across the five networks and ships in tomorrow's lists. You are confusing "listed only" with "secured only". They are not the same! In your small network with just 1 region and net, they seem the same, but that is a coincidence. In a bigger network with more then 1 Region and/or Net, one coordinator does not have secure links with all nodes in the net, but still could fly the LO flag. So nodes that only allow secured only sessions, should be marked Pvt. And that is not an option for Zone, Region, Host and Hub systems, for a good reason! GM> WHAT IS STILL WRONG GM> Several member entries advertise IBN and do not answer one. Those GM> systems are moving mail - they poll me rather than accept calls - so GM> the boards are fine and my nodelist is the thing that overstates them. GM> I am sampling each of them daily for a week rather than acting on one GM> probe, and then correcting the flags for the ones that are genuinely GM> poll-only. That is my data to fix, not theirs. It is indeed good practice to not just draw conclusions from 1 data point. For instance node 12:316/21 was connectable today, but wasn't earlier. But when you can not connect over a longer period (like a couple of weeks), the node should go through the Hold, Down and removal stages in the nodelist. GM> If you run the same test against tomorrow's I would genuinely like to GM> see the output, and I will say so publicly either way. Nodelist for Friday, October 9, 2026 -- Day number 282 parsed, 13 IP-nodes processed (0.000 sec) 12:1/0 call.rofbbs.com:24556 2605:8600:60:199d:aa5a:bfc6:5328:c881 - Got binkp error: Unsecured session not allowed. 12:1/0 call.rofbbs.com:24556 68.169.145.190 - Got binkp error: Unsecured session not allowed. 12:12/0 call.rofbbs.com:24556 2605:8600:60:199d:aa5a:bfc6:5328:c881 - Got binkp error: Unsecured session not allowed. 12:12/0 call.rofbbs.com:24556 68.169.145.190 - Got binkp error: Unsecured session not allowed. 12:316/0 call.rofbbs.com:24556 2605:8600:60:199d:aa5a:bfc6:5328:c881 - Got binkp error: Unsecured session not allowed. 12:316/0 call.rofbbs.com:24556 68.169.145.190 - Got binkp error: Unsecured session not allowed. 12:316/1 call.rofbbs.com:24554 2605:8600:60:199d:aa5a:bfc6:5328:c881 Ok. 12:316/1 call.rofbbs.com:24554 68.169.145.190 Ok. 12:316/10 endofthelinebbs.com:24554 2a0c:e680:1:9ee6:f1d0:1:124:5016 Ok. 12:316/10 endofthelinebbs.com:24554 185.242.212.12 Ok. 12:316/11 altairminibbs.net:24554 217.198.137.127 Ok. 12:316/21 toolazy.ddns.net:24554 185.111.156.130 Ok. 12:316/62 bbs.linuxnode.net:24554 144.202.70.247 Error: Connection refused 12:316/66 bbs.www.underground.us:24554 76.223.54.146 Error: Connection timed out 12:316/66 bbs.www.underground.us:24554 13.248.169.48 Error: Connection timed out 12:316/67 bbs.bottomlessabyss.net:24554 207.253.168.132 No such AKA. 12:316/70 sysops-finest.org:24554 2a06:98c1:3121:: Error: Connection timed out 12:316/70 sysops-finest.org:24554 2a06:98c1:3120:: Error: Connection timed out 12:316/70 sysops-finest.org:24554 188.114.96.0 Error: Connection timed out 12:316/70 sysops-finest.org:24554 188.114.97.0 Error: Connection timed out 12:316/76 exoplanetbbs.net:24554 108.15.36.45 Ok. 12:316/100 call.rofbbs.com:24552 2605:8600:60:199d:aa5a:bfc6:5328:c881 Ok. 12:316/100 call.rofbbs.com:24552 68.169.145.190 Ok. So node 12:316/21 is now online, and the 'No such AKA' errors are gone for the Zone and Region systems. But the "Unsecured session not allowes" errors are wrong for administrative systems. GM> Thanks for the sweep. It found more in an afternoon than I had found GM> in a year of looking at it myself. I'm glad you see my reports as constructive criticism. The sweep was done with a nice perl script by Stas Mishchenkov. Anyone with a linux system can use it to do nodelist scans. It can be downloaded here: https://brorabbit.g0x.ru/perl/callip.pl Bye, Wilfred. --- FMail-lnx64 2.3.4.1-B20260520 * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464) .