Subj : alternative DateTime (ref: fts-0001.016)
To   : Maurice Kinal
From : Rob Swindell
Date : Fri Dec 18 2020 08:18 pm

  Re: alternative DateTime (ref: fts-0001.016)
  By: Maurice Kinal to Rob Swindell on Sat Dec 19 2020 01:39 am

 > Hey Rob!
 >
 >  RS> FidoNet is a legacy protocol that must (what I've observed) be
 >  RS> enhanced only in backwards-compatible means.
 >
 > I am sorry but I am forced to call BS on the above and will cite the common
 > usage of the "Type 2.2" pktheader scam as evidence to support my BS call.

I find it interesting you would cause the type 2.2 packet header a "scam".

 > On the surface it appears that it succeeded in supplanting the orignal and
 > documented pktheader as spelled out in fts-0001.016 which by default is the
 > defacto standard regarding this issue.  If backwards compatibilty is the
 > true goal then why isn't the pktheader in fts-0001.016 not supported by ALL
 > concerned especially the echomail movers?

Isn't it?

 > I am only aware of one that can
 > still support it ... or at least could the last time I checked.  Does your
 > software support it?

Indeed, it does. And type 2.2 packet headers are backward compatible with type 2.0/stone-age headers, so it's pretty easy to autodetect the type and support all the type-2 variants of incoming packets.

 > On the surface it appears that a coup took place by what I can only describe
 > as backstabbing weasels given the lack of evidence to support such a shift
 > in so-called standards.

Whoa there skippy! What on Earth are you talking about?

.