Subj : Netmail routing
To   : g00r00
From : Paul Hayton
Date : Thu Jan 28 2021 09:41 pm


Can I check routing logic with you?

If an echomail node is defined in Mystic and netmail comes in for it from
another node, Mystic will route that netmail to the known node. Tick.


Now if that recipient netmail node sits lower down the echomail node list
(so it has a greater echomail node ID number) than another defined echomail
node that just happens to have a routing rule that would otherwise apply to the
incoming netmail... .. Mystic will still ignore that routing rule and route the
netmail direct to the known defined echomail node? It seems the answer is also
yes.

As an example in 21:1/100 HUB..

I have echomail node 21:3/100 with a routing rule 21:3/* and this is sitting
in the list of echomail nodes with and ID of 111

Then later on I have echomail node 21:3/102 define with no routing rule.

I send a netmail from 21:1/101 to 21:1/100 the HUB then does this

+ Jan 28 21:27:05    Importing 112647db.pkt (21:1/101 to 21:1/100)
+ Jan 28 21:27:05    Route (21:1/101 to 21:3/102) via 21:3/102

So ignores the routing rules of 21:3/100 and just routes to 3/102 because
it's known, albeit further down the list.

Righto.. now in this example (for various reasons) I wanted 3/102 to be able
to poll 21:1/100 and collect filebox traffic, but I wanted to route my netmail
to 3/102 it via 3/100 HUB

It seems there's no way to do this...

I know most routing tables work on the last rule that matches applies, and
clearly there's a defined direct route with 3/102 defined in 1/100 HUB .. but
would there be a way to override that behavior to create a forced rule to
direct 3/102 netmail to 3/100 instead?

Any suggestions/thoughts appreciated.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Windows/32)
 * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (3:770/100)

.