Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 05:34 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:39 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:20 pm

My guess is that you have 2:221/1.58 explicitly listed as a linked node in echofg?

No, only 2:221/1.

Do you have points of 2:221/1 configured in echocfg->Linked Nodes?

Do you have 2:ALL or 2:221/ALL configured in echocfg->Linked Nodes with routing specified?
--
digital man (rob)

Breaking Bad quote #13:
I got twenty bucks that says he's a beaner. - Hank Schrader
Norco, CA WX: 53.0øF, 21.0% humidity, 0 mph NE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 05:44 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 05:34 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:39 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:20 pm

My guess is that you have 2:221/1.58 explicitly listed as a linked node in echofg?

No, only 2:221/1.

I saved the log files and commentary to https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt, that should be easier to read.

$ wget https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt
--2023-02-16 17:34:01-- https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt Resolving realitycheckbbs.org (realitycheckbbs.org)... failed: Name or service not known.
wget: unable to resolve host address

Also, the detail we're looking for would be in your sbbsecho.log file, yet you seem to be copying/pasting from the console output of sbbsecho.

I looked back through the history of messages in this sub and it appers that
we had almost the exact same conversation in May of last year (Subject: "Host-routed netmail to points"). You were pasting BinkIT log output here instead of the relevant portions of sbbsecho.log and then you finally concluded the discussion with this:

-------------------------------------8<---------------------------------------

The sbbsecho.log file is the relevant log to be looking at in this
case. --

I looked in the log and saw some weird entries showing 5 digit zone numbers.
On a lark, I tried changing "Fuzzy Zone Operation" in echocfg to "no", and
now I'm seeing the routing messages in my sbbsecho.log.

If I can reproduce the error again, I'll post the log files. For now, it
seems like it's behaving as expected.

Thanks for your help! -------------------------------------8<---------------------------------------

I don't think anything changed in SBBSecho in this regard since that time.
--
digital man (rob)

Breaking Bad quote #12:
[Walt] Looks like Keith Richards with a glass a warm milk! - Hank Schrader Norco, CA WX: 52.8øF, 20.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Digital Man wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

Compiling answers to a handful of messages:

Not sure why https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt wouldn't resolve
for you - I was able to ssh into dreamhost, my web host on the outside
and see it OK using Lynx. Maybe it was a transient issue?

I was able to get through to https://reality.synchro.net and saw the
error on the cert mismatch. Is there a way to pass a secondary hostname
to letsyncrypt.js? Odd, since one of my subdomains hosted on the bbs, radio.realitycheckbbs.org works with my LE cert.

I did have an entry for 2:ALL in my sbbsecho.log, but I removed it and
still saw the same behavior.

I didn't see anything in my sbbsecho.log corresponding to that snippet
from the event log, I'll crank up the log level and see what I can see.










--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 10:30 pm

Digital Man wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

Compiling answers to a handful of messages:

Not sure why https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt wouldn't resolve
for you - I was able to ssh into dreamhost, my web host on the outside
and see it OK using Lynx. Maybe it was a transient issue?

Yeah, works now.

I was able to get through to https://reality.synchro.net and saw the
error on the cert mismatch. Is there a way to pass a secondary hostname
to letsyncrypt.js?

Yes, the [domains] section of ctrl/letsencrypt.ini wiki.synchro.net/module:letsyncrypt#domains

Odd, since one of my subdomains hosted on the bbs,
radio.realitycheckbbs.org works with my LE cert.

I did have an entry for 2:ALL in my sbbsecho.log,

So there would be a different "Routing NetMail" log line in that case (if that 2:ALL linked node had a route specified).

but I removed it and still saw the same behavior.

When? What does the log report?

I didn't see anything in my sbbsecho.log corresponding to that snippet
from the event log, I'll crank up the log level and see what I can see.

The relevant log lines are "INFO" level.
--
digital man (rob)

Sling Blade quote #8:
Karl Childers: I don't reckon I got no reason to kill nobody.
Norco, CA WX: 46.5øF, 27.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 06:32 pm


I took out the 2:ALL statement in sbbsecho.ini, changed the log level to debugging, created a netmail for 2:221/1.58, and saw this in my log file:

Routing NetMail (4.msg) to boss-node 2:221/1
Node (2:221/1) successfully locked via: ../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.bsy Adding NetMail (4.msg) to new packet for 2:221/1: ../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.cut
Deleting c:\sbbs\binkit\netmail\4.msg (from line 5344)

Which looks like the expected behavior - 2:221/1 is listed in my linked nodes list.
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Win32
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Digital Man wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

I also tried reality.synchro.net with HTTPS, but you don't have your
TLS cert set correctly:
$ wget https://reality.synchro.net/sbbsecho.txt
--2023-02-16 17:46:48-- https://reality.synchro.net/sbbsecho.txt Resolving reality.synchro.net (reality.synchro.net)... 98.210.238.44 Connecting to reality.synchro.net (reality.synchro.net)|98.210.238.44|:443... connected.
The certificate's owner does not match hostname

I tried reality.synchro.net:8000 via HTTP, but it downloads a SHOUTcast error message file instead. --

--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
þ Synchronet þ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 10:52 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 06:32 pm

I took out the 2:ALL statement in sbbsecho.ini, changed the log level to debugging, created a netmail for 2:221/1.58, and saw this in my log file:

Routing NetMail (4.msg) to boss-node 2:221/1
Node (2:221/1) successfully locked via: ../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.bsy Adding NetMail (4.msg) to new packet for 2:221/1: ../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.cut
Deleting c:\sbbs\binkit\netmail\4.msg (from line 5344)

Which looks like the expected behavior - 2:221/1 is listed in my linked nodes list.

Cool. So do we now want to change the expected behavior?

While analyzing this section of sbbsecho.c, I did notice this change which struck me as potentially undesireable:
https://gitlab.synchro.net/main/sbbs/-/commit/ffe69b43623db42984a286433e62f4256

With this change (apparently as the result of a suggestion or request by Alterego), if the destination address is 1:2/3.1, but our local system has an AKA of 1:2/3.2, no routing would occur (to a boss node or based on explicit routing configured in echocfg->Linked Nodes) and that seems like a bug to me. But still unrelated to your observations.
--
digital man (rob)

Breaking Bad quote #26:
Your commercials suck ass. I've seen better acting in an epileptic whorehouse. Norco, CA WX: 59.6øF, 20.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 10:21 pm

Digital Man wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

I also tried reality.synchro.net with HTTPS, but you don't have your TLS cert set correctly:
$ wget https://reality.synchro.net/sbbsecho.txt
--2023-02-16 17:46:48-- https://reality.synchro.net/sbbsecho.txt Resolving reality.synchro.net (reality.synchro.net)... 98.210.238.44 Connecting to reality.synchro.net (reality.synchro.net)|98.210.238.44|:443... connected.
The certificate's owner does not match hostname

I tried reality.synchro.net:8000 via HTTP, but it downloads a SHOUTcast error message file instead. --

This reply appears to have been cut off (only included quoted text). Just FYI. --
digital man (rob)

Rush quote #23:
Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose
Norco, CA WX: 59.6øF, 20.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 10:59 am

Which looks like the expected behavior - 2:221/1 is listed in my linked
nodes list.

Cool. So do we now want to change the expected behavior?

Would it be correct to assume that my 2:ALL "linked node" entry in echocfg was being applied to my point netmail, and because no routing was specified in the 2:ALL entry, that sbbsecho packet the point netmail according to the wildcard entry? It seems like when I removed the 2:ALL entry that sbbsecho packed point mail for the boss (that *was* defined in sbbsecho.ini.)

If that's the case, that would fit the behavior I was seeing.

Since Synchronet doesn't know how to route to a point, I'd think it would make to sense to first pack all point netmail for the Boss node and then let explicit linked node entries or catch-all entries handle mail routing/flavor to the boss.

Then, if you had a specific routing arrangement with a node, you could specify them in the linked node section. If not, a zone:ALL rule could route/flavor the mail to the boss however you choose.

This would simplify sending replies to point netmail, in my opinion.

Or, am I missing something?

Thanks again for your time in looking into this.

--k
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Win32
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Fri Feb 17 2023 12:01 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 10:59 am

Which looks like the expected behavior - 2:221/1 is listed in my linked >> nodes list.

Cool. So do we now want to change the expected behavior?

Would it be correct to assume that my 2:ALL "linked node" entry in echocfg was being applied to my point netmail, and because no routing was specified in the 2:ALL entry, that sbbsecho packet the point netmail according to the wildcard entry? It seems like when I removed the 2:ALL entry that sbbsecho packed point mail for the boss (that *was* defined in sbbsecho.ini.)

The 2:ALL linked node entry would have only played a role *if* it had a route specified. And in that case, yes, the NetMail would be routed, but to the specified 2:ALL route, not the point's boss node.

If that's the case, that would fit the behavior I was seeing.

The sbbsecho.log file would include an INFO-level "Routing NetMail" line (withOUT "boss-node") in this case. If the log doesn't include that, then this is not happening.

Since Synchronet doesn't know how to route to a point, I'd think it would make to sense to first pack all point netmail for the Boss node and then let explicit linked node entries or catch-all entries handle mail routing/flavor to the boss.

Then, if you had a specific routing arrangement with a node, you could specify them in the linked node section. If not, a zone:ALL rule could route/flavor the mail to the boss however you choose.

This would simplify sending replies to point netmail, in my opinion.

Or, am I missing something?

I think an explicit linked node configuration should always take precedence. No?

I'm not sure what you mean by "Synchronet doesn't konw how to route to a point". You can tell SBBSecho (not Synchronet) how to route to points both explicity and with wildcards and there's the boss-node fall-back if the boss-node is explicity configured.
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #32:
FREQ = File Request
Norco, CA WX: 63.6øF, 19.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 12:58 pm

I'm not sure what you mean by "Synchronet doesn't konw how to route to a point". You can tell SBBSecho (not Synchronet) how to route to points both explicity and with wildcards and there's the boss-node fall-back if the boss-node is explicity configured.

I'm mis-using some of the terminology.

SBBSecho, unless told otherwise by specifying the boss node in sbbsecho.ini, will create an outbound packet for the full point address, and binkit is unable to deliver the mail.

If you define the boss node, SBBSecho will create a packet containing the point's netmail for the boss node, which makes sense.

Since points are not in the network's nodelist and are dependent on the boss node to receive and deliver files on its behalf, why not automatically route all point mail to their respective boss nodes by default?



--- SBBSecho 3.20-Win32
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Fri Feb 17 2023 02:39 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 12:58 pm

I'm not sure what you mean by "Synchronet doesn't konw how to route to a point". You can tell SBBSecho (not Synchronet) how to route to points both explicity and with wildcards and there's the boss-node fall-back if the boss-node is explicity configured.

I'm mis-using some of the terminology.

SBBSecho, unless told otherwise by specifying the boss node in sbbsecho.ini, will create an outbound packet for the full point address, and binkit is unable to deliver the mail.

If you define the boss node, SBBSecho will create a packet containing the point's netmail for the boss node, which makes sense.

Since points are not in the network's nodelist and are dependent on the boss node to receive and deliver files on its behalf, why not automatically route all point mail to their respective boss nodes by default?

I think SBBSecho changed to do that. Do you mind creating a feature request at https://gitlab.synchro.net/main/sbbs/-/issues and providing this detail?

The code we're discussing now was added 3 years ago (at your request) and a request for test results was made by me at the time (in the commit message), but I don't think ever got those results/feedback. I'd like to better track the
change request/rationale and the results this time. Thanks,
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #89:
XJS = External JavaScript (SSJS embedded within HTML/CSS)
Norco, CA WX: 66.0øF, 17.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 02:59 pm

I think SBBSecho changed to do that. Do you mind creating a feature request at https://gitlab.synchro.net/main/sbbs/-/issues and providing this detail?

Will do.

The code we're discussing now was added 3 years ago (at your request) and a request for test results was made by me at the time (in the commit message), but I don't think ever got those results/feedback. I'd like to better track the change request/rationale and the results this time.

I think there were two issues going on at the time, happy to help this time. --- SBBSecho 3.20-Win32
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 10:59 am

With this change (apparently as the result of a suggestion or request by Alterego), if the destination address is 1:2/3.1, but our local system has an AKA of 1:2/3.2, no routing would occur (to a boss node or based on explicit routing configured in echocfg->Linked Nodes) and that seems like a bug to me. But still unrelated to your observations.

Why does that seem to be a bug?


...ëîåï

---
þ Synchronet þ AnsiTEX bringing back videotex but with ANSI

Re: Re: routing to points
By: deon to Digital Man on Sat Feb 18 2023 10:30 am

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 10:59 am

With this change (apparently as the result of a suggestion or request by Alterego), if the destination address is 1:2/3.1, but our local system has an AKA of 1:2/3.2, no routing would occur (to a boss node or based on explicit routing configured in echocfg->Linked Nodes) and that seems like a bug to me. But still unrelated to your observations.

Why does that seem to be a bug?

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet "Real Fact" #39:
Synchronet first supported Windows NT v6.x (a.k.a. Vista/Win7) w/v3.14a (2006) Norco, CA WX: 64.1øF, 17.0% humidity, 5 mph N wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to deon on Fri Feb 17 2023 04:18 pm

Why does that seem to be a bug?

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?

So you cant have a direct link to 1:2/3.1?


...ëîåï

---
þ Synchronet þ AnsiTEX bringing back videotex but with ANSI

So you cant have a direct link to 1:2/3.1?

not unless you have a point list with 1:2/3.1fni noitcennoc s'
connection info in it.

John H. Guillory
call sign KF5QEO
URL: kf5qeo.servebbs.net
KF5QEO's Shack BBS

... Tech support is just a busy signal away

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
* Origin: KF5QEO's Shack -- kf5qeo.servebbs.net

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmai
to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by defau
. No?

I would certainly think so.


* SLMR 2.1a * Are you pulling my leg! ...nahh, that's just the dog!

---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

deon wrote to Digital Man <=-

So you cant have a direct link to 1:2/3.1?

You can, if you specify 1:2/3.1 in echocfg and provide a source address.

There seems to have been some definition drift with points. When I
started out, the whole idea behind a point was to have a mail-only or
private system that wasn't accessible during ZMH, or wasn't up 24/7. The
point initiated contact with the boss, and the point was, by design, unreachable by systems using a nodelist.

The point would connect to the boss, not vice versa. Everything that was
to go to the point was routed through the boss first. No one, even the
boss, would need a direct route to the point.



... Powered By Celeron (Tualatin). Engineered for the future.
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: deon to Digital Man on Sat Feb 18 2023 10:05 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to deon on Fri Feb 17 2023 04:18 pm

Why does that seem to be a bug?

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?

So you cant have a direct link to 1:2/3.1?

Sure, but I also might not. The way this requested-enhancement was implemented, it wouldn't make any difference: the mail would not be routed to the boss.
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet "Real Fact" #27:
Rob Swindell (digital man) was born approximately 4 hours before the Unix epoch Norco, CA WX: 66.2øF, 20.0% humidity, 0 mph NE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: John Guillory to deon on Sat Feb 18 2023 08:33 am

not unless you have a point list with 1:2/3.1fni noitcennoc s'
connection info in it.

John H. Guillory
call sign KF5QEO
URL: kf5qeo.servebbs.net
KF5QEO's Shack BBS

oh, now i see. your url is wrong. that is why you are not connectable.
you are using a free bbs server the person setup for you on synchronetbbs.org sad
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to deon on Sat Feb 18 2023 11:38 am

Why does that seem to be a bug?

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?

So you cant have a direct link to 1:2/3.1?

Sure, but I also might not. The way this requested-enhancement was implemented, it wouldn't make any difference: the mail would not be routed to the boss.

Oh, in that case I agree it might be a bug.

I would have thought, if I'm a point, all mail would go to my boss (for final delivery), unless I had a specific relationship (and thus a configuration) directly to another system (including other points, either with a same boss as me, or a different boss).


...ëîåï

---
þ Synchronet þ AnsiTEX bringing back videotex but with ANSI

Re: Re: routing to points
By: deon to Digital Man on Sun Feb 19 2023 09:28 am

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to deon on Sat Feb 18 2023 11:38 am

Why does that seem to be a bug?

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?

So you cant have a direct link to 1:2/3.1?

Sure, but I also might not. The way this requested-enhancement was implemented, it wouldn't make any difference: the mail would not be routed to the boss.

Oh, in that case I agree it might be a bug.

I would have thought, if I'm a point, all mail would go to my boss (for final delivery), unless I had a specific relationship (and thus a configuration) directly to another system (including other points, either with a same boss as me, or a different boss).

The logic was changed/fixed in a commit today. Try it out. Are you also Alterego?
--
digital man (rob)

Rush quote #84:
Looming low & ominous, twilight premature t-heads rumbling a distance overture Norco, CA WX: 66.9øF, 21.0% humidity, 0 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to deon on Sat Feb 18 2023 08:11 am

The point would connect to the boss, not vice versa. Everything that was
to go to the point was routed through the boss first. No one, even the
boss, would need a direct route to the point.

And it could still be that way "by default", right?

My point (no pun intended), is if the point defines some direct links, then they should be honoured, as well as the ability to receive direct connections from other systems (if the sysop desired).


...ëîåï

---
þ Synchronet þ AnsiTEX bringing back videotex but with ANSI

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to deon on Sat Feb 18 2023 02:57 pm

The logic was changed/fixed in a commit today. Try it out. Are you also Alterego?

Cool.

I'm not actually using any points at the moment, but I probably will down the track. So I'll let you know if something is not up.

I used the alias Alterego at some point, but dont anymore.

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?

Following on with this example, if I'm 1:2/3.2 and I want to send a Netmail to 1:2/4.2, *and* I have a configuration with 1:2/4.0 will sbbsecho package up my netmail for 1:2/4 or 1:2/3?

If it uses 1:2/3, I assume I can overrite it with a route 1:2/4.ALL to 1:2/4.0?


...ëîåï

---
þ Synchronet þ AnsiTEX bringing back videotex but with ANSI

Re: Re: routing to points
By: deon to Digital Man on Sun Feb 19 2023 10:59 am

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to deon on Sat Feb 18 2023 02:57 pm

The logic was changed/fixed in a commit today. Try it out. Are you also Alterego?

Cool.

I'm not actually using any points at the moment, but I probably will down the track. So I'll let you know if something is not up.

I used the alias Alterego at some point, but dont anymore.

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?

Following on with this example, if I'm 1:2/3.2 and I want to send a Netmail to 1:2/4.2, *and* I have a configuration with 1:2/4.0 will sbbsecho package up my netmail for 1:2/4 or 1:2/3?

The netmail would be routed to 1:2/4.0.

If it uses 1:2/3, I assume I can overrite it with a route 1:2/4.ALL to 1:2/4.0?

SBBSecho doesn't do any routing based on the originating-address, only the destination address.
--
digital man (rob)

This Is Spinal Tap quote #40:
Morty the Mime: Come on, don't talk back, mime is money, come on, move it. Norco, CA WX: 57.5øF, 32.0% humidity, 6 mph SE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

deon wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

My point (no pun intended), is if the point defines some direct links, then they should be honoured, as well as the ability to receive direct connections from other systems (if the sysop desired).

That flies against the notion that defined a point - a private system
that doesn't connect directly to the rest of the world, because it's not
up 24/7 or isn't able to honor ZMH.

That being said, Z2 may see things differently; they distribute a
point list publicly - in the traditional sense a point list is just used
by the boss node.

If a point is accessible and makes arrangements to share their contact
info with an upstream node, that node can enter the information needed
to connect in the linked nodes section of sbbsecho, and the upstream
node can connect directly. That would override the default rule.




... Onward, to meatspace!
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net