Subj : What would YOU do?
To   : Fred Riccio
From : Carol Shenkenberger
Date : Sat Dec 08 2018 06:07 pm

  Re: What would YOU do?
  By: Fred Riccio to The Candidates on Fri Dec 07 2018 10:05 am

 FR>>> Node 1:275/100@fidonet  shenks.dyndns.org;shenks.synchro.net    -
 MR>> This is what I've meant with the confusion about which "standard" 
 MR>> applies. Apparently Jerry's converter follows the undocumented 
 MR>> feature Carol mentioned. So it would extract additional addresses 
 MR>> which aren't intended for binkp for a node entry following the FTSC 
 MR>> docs (if listed take just the address in the IBN flag). How do we 
 MR>> resolve this dilemma? 

 FR> It seems that we have at least two methods that are used to deal with 
 FR> multi-homed systems, both methods are currently used and very popular. 

 FR> Jerry's script processes one INA and one IBN record (both with addresses)
 FR> as multi-homed. Binkp.net seems to ignore the fact that multi-homed
 FR> systems even exist, it returns only one address for all combinations of
 FR> INA/IBN. We haven't been told what Markus' and Uli's tools do, so there
 FR> may be two other methods. FTS-5001 does not document either one of these
 FR> methods.


 FR> How will you clean this up? Be specific. "Change FTS-5001" isn't a good 
 FR> answer. Tell us WHAT you will change and what you will change it to. Keep
 FR> in mind that FTSC standards document "current practice".

This may be a case of a proposal to standardize it.  If we have at least one
functional tool that uses the dual listing, that can be a base for an actual
FTS instead of a FSP.

  xxcarol
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS telnet://shenks.synchro.net (1:275/100)

.