| |
SM3LKS > BPQ 23.08.99 07:30l 264 Lines 9077 Bytes #-9915 (0) @ EU
BID : 43598_SM3LKS
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: BPQ Obsolete
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0LX<DB0CZ<HB9EAS<HB9GL<SV1AAW<HA3PG<OH2RBI<OH2RBJ<
OH1RBD<OH1RBU<OH0RBA<SM0NQR<SK0CT<SL0ZS<SM0NUE<SK0QO<SK0MK<SK5UM<
SK5AE<SK5BB<SK4HC<SK4EA<SK4BW<SM3ESS<SK3BG<SK3UB<SK3JR<SM3LKS
Sent: 990820/1736Z @:SM3LKS.Z.SWE.EU #:43598 [Ostersund] LinFBB7.00g $:43598_SM
From: SM3LKS@SM3LKS.Z.SWE.EU
To : BPQ@EU
SM7UZI@SK7IQ.MALMOE.M.SWE.EU wrote:
>>I think you just insulted all packetusers in the world by that statement.
>>You just said that most users don't know what they are doing, and not
>>knowing what packetradio is.
>You think so?
>I don't think the packetuser who are an example of the above mentioned
>type understands that he should get insulted.
The insults keeps coming from you, now clearly stating that the amateurs
that don't know anything about packet doesn't understand anything at all.
This time I don't just think you insultet them.
I'm telling you this time it is not any question aboute it anymore.
You _have_ insulted them.
>>I agree with you that some users don't know how to set their tnc, but they
>>are not so many, and they are often getting help from others that know how
>>to do it.
>They are many!
>The help they get is often to use the same setup as their neightbour, which
>is not the way to do it!
>Not very good!
OK, then we should have a different setup for every station in the network.
Resulting in some working setups, and a lot of poor working setups.
The network will surely breakdown then.
...snip...
>>What is your explanation of what a packetdriver is ?
>>(Just to assure that we are talking the same language)
>The software that handles the ax25 communication.
I didn't get any any more knowledge from that.
(I do know what it is, but not everyone does)
I always thought that the part of the software that handles the ax25 was
the protocoldriver, and the packetdriver sits between it and the
application you use. (But I might been wrong all these years)
...snip...
>>Summary: you havn't seen it in action.
>I'm I supposed to have done that?
The original question was: "Have you seen it in action ?"
The question was asked becaused you said you knew how the system worked,
and I think nobody knows how a system works unless they have seen it in
action.
...snip...
>>>You haven't compared with any other setup!
>>How do you know that ?
>>Do you know what comparisons I've done ?
>>I didn't se you in the neighborhood when I did them ?
>>I havn't told you what comparisons I've made.
>No, but if it would have been of any interest I guess you had told me.
>A bit shildish to day?
No, but I don't like anyone telling me what I've done or not, as you did.
Nobody knows what I've done unless I've told them, or they were in the
neighborhood.
...snip...
>>Almost every bulleting that I've seen originating from FlexNet-fans has
>>this single standard responce: "Use FlexNet !"
>>(You are not the only one, but the message is exactly the same)
>One reson is maybe that the differences between flexnet and other packet
>drivers is hard to explain to many users who don't have the basic packet
>knowledge to know if it is bad or good.
OK, but I, and I think that goes for many people, don't want these kind of
messages (They, if any, are childish replies):
(They all have the same reply as you could see. The swedish station
referred to in message 1 is you if I don't remember wrong)
(Message 1)
-----------
From : IK1IYU@IK1IYU.IPIE.ITA.EU
To : BPQ@EU
Date/time : 0806/0012 (0805/1528)
Bid : 13050-IK1IYU
Title : Re: BPQ Obsolete
>From: G3TIK@GB7DAA.#33.GBR.EU
>
>To : BPQ@EU
>
>GE All
>
>If BPQ is so obolete wouls the Swedish station please give some
>recommendations for an alternative which can:
>
>A) Run on the same machine as the BBS software.
>
>b) Run under DOS, as many BBSs do not have the facility of a machine capable
> of running Win95 or Win98 which they can dedicate to the BBS sole use.
>
>c) If he does have a suitable alternative would he please do a write up of
> the installation. I have been reviewing TheNet for use at the BBS here,
> but the documentation, as with most computer help files, is written by
> someone who has a very good knowledge of the working of the software.
...snip... (some of the original message deletet)
A) FlexNet !
B) FlexNet !!
C) FlexNet !!!
...snip... (signaturetext removed)
(Message 2)
-----------
(If a canadian station can read bulletins @EU shows that some european
sysop has a bad forward-routing. @EU should not go outside europa)
From : VA2SO @ VA2RCH.#SAG.PQ.CAN.NA
To : BPQ @EU
Date/time : 0805/1236 (0805/1022)
Bid : U79F6KDL_008
Title : Re: BPQ obsolete
D) Flexnet !!!!
E) Flexnet !!!!!
F) Flexnet !!!!!!
73 from Don Camillio
------------
(End of example)
...snip...
>>I don't accept things to progress just because "it's time to do it".
>>History has shown us that progress just for the cause of progress isn't
>>so effective as it should have been if it came naturally.
>>We must let the progress have it's own pace, you can't push it.
>Not, but this changes of packet nodes etc have been going on for the last ten
>years, it is nothing new.
>It came naturally in the rest of europe, where they are interested in
Then let it come natural here too, don't push it.
...snip...
>But we don't seems to have a real demand for a better packet network, I
>don't think it will come natural here.
If "we don't seems to have a real demand for a better packet network",
why should we change it.
If the need for a better network exists, the progress will come natural.
...snip...
(the next 3 lines has been inserted to easier understand the arguments.)
:::Some one has to begin, and to setup a net/rom link via a flexnet network is
:::possible so you will not destroy the network.
:::Only improve it!
>>OK, how do you do that when FlexNet doesn't support NET/ROM-routing ?
>>(Perhaps I have misunderstood some of the previous bulletins that said
>>that FlexNet doesn't soppurt "that very strange routings" ?)
>The whole point by using flexnet is that net/rom is not used!
>You must have misunderstood everything!
>
>You can link net/rom and flexnet nodes to gether, but you have to do a manual
>hop at the nodes between the networks.
Then you have "destroyed" the network, dividing it to 2 networks with
flexnet as a bridge that you have to cross manually.
...snip...
>>The calling program was assuming either "Connected to...",
>>"Failure with..." or "Busy". The result was that it was waiting for the
>>correct responce until it disconnected due to time-out.
>Failure is time out.
Yes, but this "Failure" was in the out-channel, and the timeuot was
in the in-channel of flexnet.
If you get a timeout in the out-channel, the program reports that to
the in-channel, no disconnect is done until the calling station
requests it, or timeout occurs on the in-channel.
In the example the calling station didn't give a disconnect command, and
timeout occured.
Whatever you say, the culprit was the flexnetstation.
What part of the setup is not of any interest to me, or the one that had
the problem with it.
The problem was solved however, by doing a special forwardsetup for that
special forward-link, but the problem still exists in the flexnetstation
so other stations may still have problems.
...snip...
>I also like to cut and paste!
>About rmnc and what makes it good:
...snip... (german quote deleted)
Do you have that in a language we can understand ?, like english.
English is, without competition, a better language to use in international
messages if you want the most of us to understand you.
Any other language should only be used in national messages, addressed to
amateurs that speeks that language.
(You could of course use chinese, if you want the most of the earths
population to understand you.)
Would you understand a finnish, french, or spannish qoute ?.
I don't think so, but most of us understands english.
(Don't answer that please, it was a retorical question.)
...snip...
>>The same amount of processortime as if you are using FlexNet.
>The does you got your self some scsi hds?
OK, but the question was not relative to any special kind of hd.
(SCSI is faster than (E)IDE, everyone knows that.)
My answer is still the same; processortime for a hd is the same regardless
of the application used, as long as comparison is made with the same OS
and the same hd.
...snip...
>>AX25-daemon: ax25d (ax25-utils-2.1.42a)
>>NET/ROM-daemon: netromd (ax25-utils-2.1.42a)
>>Userfrontend of the node: LinuxNode v0.2.4 (ax25-utils-2.1.42a)
>>BBS-software: LinFBB v7.00g
>Get rid of net/rom node and take a look at x-net (linux ent) or flexnet!
>Much better routing!
Why should I, it is working, and it works very well.
I have no flexnet-nodes for a very long distance to connect to.
When, and only then, a flexnetstation is setup in the neighbourhood I
might consider to start using flexnet-routing, but _only_ then.
>Fbbs compressed forward shrinks this signature in to nothing!
Not every BBS uses FBB-compression.
AA4RE, MBL, RLI, MSYS, NNA, CBBS, etc.. -types of BBSes that don't use
FBB-compression is still in use on several places.
(some of them might actually do it now, but not all)
...snip... (signaturetext still removed)
73 de SM3LKS
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
