Subj : Nodelist Phone Field (consistency?)
To   : Benny Pedersen
From : mark lewis
Date : Thu Jun 21 2018 11:46 am

 On 2018 Jun 21 00:35:38, you wrote to me:

 ON>>>> why not use 000-0-0-0-0

 BF>>> And what will happen if you try to connect to IP number 0.0.0.0?

 ml>> you don't... if your mailer even tries, then you have it
 ml>> misconfigured...

 BP> this is a old bug in binkd versions, it was fixed when i used no-ip.com :)

binkd? how? it doesn't even know how to read the official distributed fidonet
nodelist... or any other nodelist for that matter... we won't even mention that
 binkd is little more than a simple protocol engine with BSO capabilities... it
 isn't even a full mailer... it could be, though... it could even be a dynamic
BSO mailer which would eliminate the need for external 3rd party tools like
bonk and son-of-bonk which are used to qualify mail to be sent and reroute
netmails to another hop automatically when the qualified mail changes...

 ml>> the 000- psuedo "area code" would prevent that in POTS mailers... IP
 ml>> capable mailers will see the string and know not to call it... valid
 ml>> IPs listed this way will have the 000- stripped and the IP used in
 ml>> the same fashion as a POTS number... frontdoor has been doing this
 ml>> for two decades now...

 BP> phonefield must not be used for ip numbers, even if its valid ips or not

go away, benny... this practise has been in place since the mid '90s...

 BP> 0.0.0.0 is ANYNET in linux, so he would try to connect to world of all
 BP> ipv4 at the same time, and waiting for ACK from all to continue
 BP> deliver something

no they wouldn't because a properly programmed and configured FTN mailer would
not even attempt to connect to that number...

 BP> TCP power :)

no, programmer power...

)\/(ark

Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it
wrong...
.... The next tagline is recommended for mature readers only.
---
 * Origin:  (1:3634/12.73)

.