Subj : Re: Squish Archiving
To   : Marty Blankenship
From : Bob Jones
Date : Thu Jan 05 2006 10:01 pm

BJ> The two "Send Direct" lines should come before the 
 MB> "Send Normal" line.  If
BJ> 92:602/100 and 510:507/0 are the nodes seeing the 
BJ> problem, then this is
BJ> probably the cause of the issue.

 MB> Originally I had the send normal line after the send direct lines. I just 
 MB> changed then before I posted the messages and it didn't 
 MB> make a difference. I 
 MB> have many send direct lines in my route.cfg file and 
 MB> those 2 nodes aren't the 
 MB> only ones seeing my fidonet address on the archived 
 MB> packets. I can load up 
 MB> frontdoor and look at the archived bundles and they all have my fidonet
 MB> address on them instead of my networks aka.

I suspect that with Squish being 4D and not 5D aware, along with trying to run 
a single copy of squish is the problem.  The only time I was involved with a 
non-Fidonet address, I only talked to nodes in Fidonet, so my Fidonet node 
number wouldn't have caused problems.....

Interesting....  Results from using Inspecta (mentioned in other recent 
messages) would be able to confirm the problem.  One solution is to make 
seperate squish runs for each different network, using it's own control file.  
The only potential glitch with that is that you will need to do some special 
zone definitions for all but the main FTN configuration if you are using 
Binkley Style Outbound areas.....  Now, if you aren't using that, then the 
problem may be one with the interactions between squish and your front end.  
Since I run Binkley, and I know there is an option for an alternate style, that 
may be where the problem is....

Bob Jones, 1:343/41

--- Maximus/2 3.01
 * Origin: Top Hat 2 BBS (1:343/41)

.