Subj : way ot, was need some maximus ... To : Richard Webb From : Russell Tiedt Date : Sun Mar 08 2009 09:00 pm Hello Richard. 26 Feb 09 20:11, you wrote to me: RW>> I sent you nm through Janis once iirc, and same thing RW>> happened. REsent through my primary uplink, 3634/12 and it RW>> arrived and you replied. I have a direct link to 3634/12 ... RW> True enough. AS Janis explains, bbbs seems to be rather RW> sticky about its interpretation of fidonet tech standards. RW> MEthinks it has to do more with the way squish handles RW> routing when used with static mailers such a binkley, RW> although I don't know what the heck it is. MEthinks that's RW> why Sean's nm to you is somewhere in limbo world as well RW> . BBBS is a good, package, just when I looked at it, I got the impression, it was built for some other network, and FidoNet got tacked on afterwards ... RW> I'm linked to both fido_sysop and fn_sysop. Also, since RW> this is essentially an argument between squish and bbbs RW> which causes the problem tub might be appropriate as well. RW> Seems to be that imho anyway. I am connected to all of those ... Russell --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5 * Origin: Rusty's BBS - Bloemfontein, Free State, South Africa (5:7105/1) .