Subj : FTS-5001
To   : Markus Reschke
From : mark lewis
Date : Sun Dec 09 2018 11:40 am

 On 2018 Dec 06 19:44:42, you wrote to Fred Riccio:

 MR> First we have to get all the details of the undocumented standard.

there is no such thing...

 MR> How are port numbers handled?

like normal...

 MR> If we take Carol's nodelist entry as example and assume she runs binkd
 MR> on port 8080 we would have:

 MR>   INA:shenks.synchro.net,IBN:shenks.dyndns.org:8080

 MR> Does the port 8080 also apply to shenks.synchro.net?

no...

 MR> Or is the standard binkp port assumed for shenks.synchro.net?

yes unless there's an IBN:8080 flag to which the default domain from the
"system name" field or the INA flag would apply... since she is using the
standard ports, this question doesn't even apply to her nodelist entry...

 FR>> FYI, I agree that using two IBN records, as documented in FTS-5001,
 FR>> would have been a LOT cleaner than one INA and one IBN, but one of
 FR>> each DOES work.  To quote a past FTSC chair, "If you do it this way,
 FR>> it will work".

 MR> Contradicting standards aren't very helpful.

i don't see any contradiction... what i do see is that *Cs need to have a good
understanding about the nodelist flags, how they are applied, and how they are
used... going IP has increased the complexity of indicating a system's
capabilities via nodelist lines... it is no longer just a matter of which
mailer you use (for the X* flags) or which modem protocols but now also
multpile domains and ports, too...

)\/(ark

Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it
wrong...
.... We are in the Cooking Section, save your fantasies for Unmitigated Sex!
---
 * Origin:  (1:3634/12.73)

.