Subj : NNCP
To   : Oli
From : Charles Blackburn
Date : Sun Oct 02 2022 08:43 am

  Re: NNCP
  By: Oli to Exodus on Sun Oct 02 2022 12:17:05

 E>> Why are we always trying to reinvent the wheel?

 Ol> Even basic Fidonet security is broken by design (packets, EMSI, binkp). NNCP has some nice new features and improvements
 Ol> over UUCP / FTN / SMTP:

i beg to differ... dont forget the era that this was designed in... also dont forget that UUCP can be encrypted anyway... in fact i still do :D if you have something that's already encrypted going into uucp then the uucp is going to be encrypted minus the routeing stuff but if you're on a network, does that really matter.

anso think about the speeds of the transmission medium at the tim, it was slow AF compared to today. UUCP can and actually is pretty fast using the modern trnasport medium of tcp etc.

you're also talking about people that (at the time) were experimenters and tdiy'ers not cybersecuroty professionals... hell that title didnt even exist back then.

 Ol> https://nncp.mirrors.quux.org/Comparison.html

 Ol> I#M still not sure if it would be possible to replace FTN echomail with NNCP https://nncp.mirrors.quux.org/Multicast.html

i don't even se the point of trying it in the first place. because that's not how an FTN works.

what you're effectively asking is to redisgn the FTN from the ground up. because that's what it would take.

if we were just talking about transfer protocols that's one thing. but at that point, why not just go with email attachments and be done with it.

regards
===

Charles Blackburn
The F.B.O BBS   21:1/221 618:250/36
bbs.thefbo.us IPV4/V6
DOVE-Net FSX-Net MicroNET USENET
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Linux
 * Origin: The FBO BBS - bbs.thefbo.us (21:1/221)

.