Subj : linked
To   : Gordon Lewicky
From : Frank Vest
Date : Sun Dec 15 2002 12:33 am

On (14 Dec 02) Gordon Lewicky wrote to Frank Vest...

Hello Gordon,

 FV> I understand your point.  Would the "location" field be better? Or is
 FV> where you live as important to you as your name and your system name?
 GL> Well, if we're gonna throw out the geography rule, then to me at
 GL> least, location is important since we can no longer depend on
 GL> zone, region, net! And I sure can't figure out where
 GL> bbs.micronet.com is! :)
 GL> Actually, I'm getting somewhat annoyed at this trend to
 GL> impersonality in this supposed network of computer enthusiasts.
 GL> If I want impersonality, I'll go on the net.
 GL> I happen to enjoy knowing who the sysop is, what their bbs name is,
 GL> and where they park their butt! :)

Ok. I'll agree with that as well. I don't like it either.

 FV> Using a flag to indicate the IP or domain address is fine too. As long
 FV> as it is /one/ flag instead of one for every IP protocol.
 GL> I may be wrong, but basically there are only 2 different connect
 GL> addresses, domain name or ip, and email addy. Surely we can
 GL> accomodate these 2 somewhere in the line without mucking around
 GL> with sticking them where they shouldn't be.
 GL> Seems to me that the coupling the addy with the applicable inet
 GL> connect flag works or we develop new fields or files for inet
 GL> addressing and leave the connect flags denoting non-standard
 GL> ports.
 GL> But this kludging addys into various former fields is
 GL> exacly that, kludging.

With one flag to denote IP capabilities and the IP/domain to that
would work for me. It's better than a flag for each IP protocol.


Regards,

Frank

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/flv
http://biseonline.com/r19

--- PPoint 3.01
 * Origin: Holy Cow! I'm A Point!! (1:124/6308.1)

.