| |
I0OJJ > JNOS2 25.11.19 12:22l 95 Lines 4124 Bytes #-2344 (0) @ WW
BID : 95413_AA6HF
Read: DF7EAV DJ6UX GUEST
Subj: Re: Re: This BID thing and DUPES and stuff
Path: DB0FHN<DB0FFL<OE5XBL<F1OYP<F4DUR<LU4ECL<IW8PGT<HB9ON<IW0QNL<JH4XSY<
JE7YGF<N9PMO<GB7YEW<GB7BEX<GB7CIP<AA6HF<N2NOV<GB7CIP<GB7COW<I3XTY<
I0OJJ
Sent: 191101/1805z @:I0OJJ.ITA.EU [Rome] #:31529 $:b5f47_I0OJJ
>From i0ojj%i0ojj.ita.eu@n2nov.ampr.org Fri Nov 1 14:31:17 2019
Received: from n2nov.ampr.org by n2nov.ampr.org ([JNOS]) with SMTP
id AA819015 ; Fri, 01 Nov 2019 14:31:17 EDT
Message-Id: <B5F47_I0OJJ@gb7cip.bbs>
>From: i0ojj@i0ojj.ita.eu
X-JNOS-User-Port: Circuit (CIPOUT:GB7CIP-13 GB7CIP) -> Sending message
> Date: 01 Nov 19 16:53:00 GMT
> From: n1uro@n1uro.#cct.ct.usa.noam
> To: jnos2@ww
> Subject: Re: This BID thing and DUPES and stuff
>
> R:191101/1700z @:I0OJJ.ITA.EU $:33410_N1URO
> R:191101/1700Z @:N6RME.#NCA.CA.USA.NOAM #:31067 [El Dorado] $:33410_N1URO
> R:191101/1657Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM #:17373 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:33410_N1URO
> R:191101/1647Z 518@N3HYM.MD.USA.NOAM BPQ6.0.19
> R:191101/1657Z 10763@GB7YEW.#79.GBR.EURO LinBPQ6.0.18
> R:191101/1656Z @:ZL2BAU.#79.NZL.AUNZ #:53782 [Waimate] $:33410_N1URO
> R:191101/1653Z @:N1URO.#CCT.CT.USA.NOAM #:33410 [Unionville] $:33410_N1URO
>
> From: N1URO@N1URO.#CCT.CT.USA.NOAM
> To : JNOS2@WW
>
>
> Maiko;
> In regard to a missing bid thus being generated locally...
> I think what Hank was missing in his spec was the fact that it's probably
> assummed that the message is being generated locally by and end user on the
> BBS thus the responsibility of assigning a bid falls on that local BBS to
> generate one. In logical terms this makes perfect sense. It would also make
> sense for a BBS receiving mail from a remote BBS *not* to accept mail
> without a bit whatsoever and generate it's own BID.
>
> By doing this, imagine the number of BBS that could take an @WW bulletin and
> dupe it an excessive amount of times globally! This makes no sense to do at
> all. The best way for xNOS to handle this is to force a remote BBS when a SID
> is passed (thus identifying the incoming connection as a BBS) to then demand
> that a BID is sent with mail. Of course, this may cause havok with end users
> who run muliple BBS such as the case with myself and I0OJJ however there is
> a very valid and logical work-around already in NOS.
>
> In NOS, a user who's perms contain +8192 (user is a BBS) is automatically
> assumed to be a BBS thus a BID is expected in all mail. I think this is
> Gus' issue. However, as my "part 2" example showed, when the user's flags
> do NOT contain +8192 then a user may send mail in the format of:
> - SP to-call < from-call
> and JNOS allows the mail to continue normally. In fact, the user can send
> as many mails as they wish however if the user decides to be a wise-guy and
> paste in a SID, then JNOS2 will require mail to be send with a BID. Even FBB
> requires a SID to engage in proper forwarding:
> BBSURO:N1URO-4 >
> FA P VE3CLG WW SYSOP 2223_VE3CLG 688
> *** Error : Only numeric values can be accepted.
>
> BBSURO:N1URO-4 >
>
> Gus,
> If you have your user flags set to contain +8192, try to remove that and you
> will see JNOS acts as it should. You do not need to be set as a BBS in JNOS2
> in order to engage in forwarding no matter if it's FBB 0, 1, or 2 type
> forwarding. I'm set to a standard user and my FBB forwards to my JNOS with
> FBB 2 just fine, and also with my MFNOS which only allows for uncompressed
> forwarding just fine as well. Just insure that you don't need to hit "more"
> to get the mailbox prompt and your OpenBCM will send it's SID, and mail will
> forward normally, AND you as a user can still send mail as you're used to.
>
> 73
> ---
> SendBBS v1.1 by N1URO for LinFBB
All true the above statement, but...
the management of two/three PBBS require for me some mental
efforts for doing the things well.
The use of 8192 (alone) with an associated password have on
JNOS2 the benefit to allow to obcm, linfbb, dptnt etc to
have a perhaps more safe login and forwarding.
Note that my site is continually targeted by big government
and research/industrial hackers, so I can't release my hands
with a User setup.
To not forget that all my facilities: JNOS2, obcm, dxspider,
XNET, WL2K gateway, and others are fully reachable throw
ampr.org 44net, flexnet, INP3, Netrom, etc. so all is
open on the side of amateur radio protocols :)
--
73 and ciao, gustavo i0ojj/ir0aab/ir0eq
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
