Digital Man,

Hey, I found a bug, or maybe feature request..

Both at-codes for MSG_FROM_NET and MSG_TO_NET do not work when trying to use the padding functionality such as -R20 or -R####, similarly with L.

It would be very useful to have this especially to use it with Nightfox's DDMsgReader because, well, simply put, to /see/ this information and put it into the header in a usable manner. :)

)))[Psi-Jack -//- Decker]

... I'm a soldier, not a diplomat. I can only tell the truth.

---

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Psi-Jack to Digital Man on Sun Jul 19 2015 04:39 pm

Digital Man,

Hey, I found a bug, or maybe feature request..

Both at-codes for MSG_FROM_NET and MSG_TO_NET do not work when trying to use the padding functionality such as -R20 or -R####, similarly with L.

It would be very useful to have this especially to use it with Nightfox's DDMsgReader because, well, simply put, to /see/ this information and put it into the header in a usable manner. :)

I think it may be the way in you which you're trying to use those at-codes rather than those specific at-codes?

I don't see anything unique about hte MSG_FROM_NET or MSG_TO_NET at-codes compared with all the others. The padding modifiers are really only supported in display files (e.g. *.asc) - is that how you're using them?

digital man

Synchronet "Real Fact" #21:
The second ever Synchronet BBS was the Mid-Nite Hacker BBS (sysop: The Zapper). Norco, CA WX: 69.9øF, 94.0% humidity, 2 mph NW wind, 0.86 inches rain/24hrs
---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net

Hey, Digital Man.

You had mentioned stuff about upcoming features for Synchronet, and I wanted to try to touch base on a few areas that I'm interested in, maybe can get a little attention on them. :)

FTN stuff definitely could use a little loving, for example. SBBSEcho's AreaMgr I really would like to see some aspects such as:

%LIST and associated commands providing descriptions from *.na files if avail. %RESCAN being able to rescan both by which areas, and by how many messages to pull in the scan. Ex: %RESCAN FIDO_SYSOP 1000 -- To rescan only FIDO_SYSOP for the last 1,000 messages (as available of course).

Second, being able to set per-NetMail flags would be EXTREMELY helpful. For example, I'm writing a netmail to someone that is not my default-route for that zone, or even that specific single address (per sbbsecho.cfg). I might actually /want/ to send that message flagged Crash or Direct, instead of whatever the global default is set to be. Sp long as my mailer itself knows how to contact the address, it should be allowable to do that, maybe with a permission requirement to utilize that specific feature.

Along the same lines, the FROM address. Right now, Synchronet's fuzzy_zone logic picks the first matching zone number based on the destination address. If, for example, I just happen to have multiple addresses on the same zone, I really want to be able to choose which from address to use. Again maybe a permission to require to specifically set that.

Likewise in the same boat, SBBSEcho needs to be able to set which full address it will send AS/FROM (not just zone), to various links, like, Areafix might need to come from 24:110/0 (RC address) instead of 24:110/2 (the BBS address itself).


I say all this because I've tried external entities like GoldEd+ and Husky Project's msgEd, and while they CAN do a lot of this by itself, SBBSecho when it tosses the netmail will still (i think), route it however the routing rules are done, even though in my external netmail manager I told it direct.

I'd like to basically use Synchronet as my NetMail editor entirely, not depending on an external tool for that feature. (Although, D'Bridge coming to Linux may change all this, we'll see. <G>)

Synchronet's probably got one of the best support for Windows and Linux console support, which is why I really like it. GoldEd+ and msgEd have limitations on console support, and cryptic use that makes them painfully hard to adapt and use.

)))[Psi-Jack -//- Decker]

... Dachshunds are really small crocodiles with fur.

---
þ Synchronet þ Decker's Heaven -//- bbs.deckersheaven.com

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Psi-Jack to Digital Man on Mon Jul 20 2015 10:22 am

FTN stuff definitely could use a little loving, for example. SBBSEcho's AreaMgr I really would like to see some aspects such as:

%LIST and associated commands providing descriptions from *.na files if avail. %RESCAN being able to rescan both by which areas, and by how many messages to pull in the scan. Ex: %RESCAN FIDO_SYSOP 1000 -- To rescan only FIDO_SYSOP for the last 1,000 messages (as available of course).

Second, being able to set per-NetMail flags would be EXTREMELY helpful. For

that's cool. one suggestion for you is not to play around when connected to msg networks and flood them with dupes :D
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBS

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Psi-Jack to Digital Man on Mon Jul 20 2015 10:22 am

Second, being able to set per-NetMail flags would be EXTREMELY helpful. For example, I'm writing a netmail to someone that is not my default-route for that zone, or even that specific single address (per sbbsecho.cfg). I might actually /want/ to send that message flagged Crash or Direct, instead of whatever the global default is set to be. Sp long as my mailer itself knows how to contact the address, it should be allowable to do that, maybe with a permission requirement to utilize that specific feature.

I think you can already do what you're asking for. Read this and let me know: http://synchro.net/docs/networking.html#SendingFidoNetNetMail

digital man

Synchronet "Real Fact" #25:
The Synchronet Web Server was written predominantly by Stephen Hurd (Deuce). Norco, CA WX: 82.8øF, 63.0% humidity, 6 mph SE wind, 0.52 inches rain/24hrs
---

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Digital Man to Psi-Jack on Mon Jul 20 2015 04:47 pm

Second, being able to set per-NetMail flags would be EXTREMELY
helpful. For example, I'm writing a netmail to someone that is not my
default-route for that zone, or even that specific single address (per
sbbsecho.cfg). I might actually /want/ to send that message flagged
Crash or Direct, instead of whatever the global default is set to be.
Sp long as my mailer itself knows how to contact the address, it
should be allowable to do that, maybe with a permission requirement to
utilize that specific feature.

I think you can already do what you're asking for. Read this and let me know: http://synchro.net/docs/networking.html#SendingFidoNetNetMail

Hmmm.. Yes, you're right. Perhaps then better documented is in need. That page, for example, describes CR, FR, FA, and RR. CR is basically Direct and Immediate, IIRC, what about Hold, and just Direct without the immediate?

But, yeah, hmm. With those, does help a lot with at least the sending status to use. I'll put this into my posting function I wrote to display to appropriate access levels, as a general reminder, so I don't forget this.

)))[Psi-Jack -//- Decker]

---
þ Synchronet þ Decker's Heaven -//- bbs.deckersheaven.com

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Digital Man to Psi-Jack on Mon Jul 20 2015 16:47:20

I think you can already do what you're asking for. Read this and let me know: http://synchro.net/docs/networking.html#SendingFidoNetNetMail

I find that a little confusing. My issue however is this. How can I send a netmail Direct, to a node that is not in synchronet's or Binkd's nodelist complete with PW, etc. The route to tables seem to prevent this
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: The Lions

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Joe Delahaye to Digital Man on Tue Jul 21 2015 09:15 am

I think you can already do what you're asking for. Read this and let
me know:
http://synchro.net/docs/networking.html#SendingFidoNetNetMail

I find that a little confusing. My issue however is this. How can I send a netmail Direct, to a node that is not in synchronet's or Binkd's nodelist complete with PW, etc. The route to tables seem to prevent this

Synchronet itself doesn't have any concept of a "nodelist". However, per the page Digital Man showed you, you would, set TO to be Name@zone:net/node[.point], and in the SUBJECT line, to make it at leash Crash, which is the equivalent of Direct and Immediate, your subject would be:

CR: your_password

Space optional after the colon.

So long as binkd knows how to contact that address, your fine.

)))[Psi-Jack -//- Decker]

... Never try to out-stubborn a cat.

---
þ Synchronet þ Decker's Heaven -//- bbs.decke

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Joe Delahaye to Digital Man on Tue Jul 21 2015 09:15 am

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Digital Man to Psi-Jack on Mon Jul 20 2015 16:47:20

I think you can already do what you're asking for. Read this and let me know: http://synchro.net/docs/networking.html#SendingFidoNetNetMail

I find that a little confusing. My issue however is this. How can I send a netmail Direct, to a node that is not in synchronet's or Binkd's nodelist complete with PW, etc. The route to tables seem to prevent this

Synchronet doesn't use a Fido nodelist, so your mailer would have to know how to reach that node (for direct). I can't think of why you'd need a password (assuming that's what you meant by "PW") to send a netmail message. The route_to directives (in the sbbsecho.cfg file) do no prevent sending direct netmail.

digital man

Synchronet "Real Fact" #51:
Answers to Frequently Asked Questions: http://wiki.synchro.net/faq:index
Norco, CA WX: 77.9øF, 70.0% humidity, 9 mph SE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Psi-Jack to Joe Delahaye on Tue Jul 21 2015 12:28:16

I find that a little confusing. My issue however is this. How can I
send a netmail Direct, to a node that is not in synchronet's or
Binkd's nodelist complete with PW, etc. The route to tables seem to
prevent this

Synchronet itself doesn't have any concept of a "nodelist". However, per the page Digital Man showed you, you would, set TO to be Name@zone:net/node[.point], and in the SUBJECT line, to make it at leash Crash, which is the equivalent of Direct and Immediate, your subject would be:

CR: your_password

I know it does not need the nodelist at all. I meant the nodelist created by echoconfig in the Nodes section. Crash BTW, is not Immediate or Direct from what I was told. Crash netmail is still routed if the routing table says so. Direct as the name suggests is supposed to go direct to the recipient <G> Most of the entries in my nodes section have a status of None, except for those who call here to get their mail and they are placed on Hold. I recently sent a netmail to a person NOT in the Nodes section, and thus it got routed as per the table. Sort of defeated the purpose of the test netmail (Freq).
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: The Lions Den BBS, Trenton, On, CDN (1:249/303)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Digital Man to Joe Delahaye on Tue Jul 21 2015 17:46:22

I find that a little confusing. My issue however is this. How can I
send a netmail Direct, to a node that is not in synchronet's or
Binkd's nodelist complete with PW, etc. The route to tables seem to
prevent this

Synchronet doesn't use a Fido nodelist, so your mailer would have to know how to reach that node (for direct). I can't think of why you'd need a password (assuming that's what you meant by "PW") to send a netmail message. The route_to directives (in the sbbsecho.cfg file) do no prevent sending direct netmail.

I realize that DM. I meant the nodelist created in the config setup in the Nodes portion. If a node is not in there, it seems to get marked as route to. I use Binkd and it too has a 'nodelist' of sorts. Both places use a PW but only as a session PW. Hope that makes more sense
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: The Lions Den BBS, T

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Joe Delahaye to Digital Man on Wed Jul 22 2015 09:57 am

I find that a little confusing. My issue however is this. How can I
send a netmail Direct, to a node that is not in synchronet's or
Binkd's nodelist complete with PW, etc. The route to tables seem to
prevent this

Synchronet doesn't use a Fido nodelist, so your mailer would have to
know how to reach that node (for direct). I can't think of why you'd
need a password (assuming that's what you meant by "PW") to send a
netmail message. The route_to directives (in the sbbsecho.cfg file)
do no prevent sending direct netmail.

I realize that DM. I meant the nodelist created in the config setup in the Nodes portion. If a node is not in there, it seems to get marked as route to. I use Binkd and it too has a 'nodelist' of sorts. Both places use a PW but only as a session PW. Hope that makes more sense

Well, I tried a different approach to this just to see..

I used GoldEd+ to write a Netmail, flagged Direct so it wouldn't, in theory, get routed. sbbsecho packed it, and routed it via my default zone route, completely ignoring the Direct flag on the message.

)))[Psi-Jack -//- Decker]

---
þ Synchronet þ Decker's Heaven -//- bbs.deckersheaven.com

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Joe Delahaye to Digital Man on Wed Jul 22 2015 09:57 am

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Digital Man to Joe Delahaye on Tue Jul 21 2015 17:46:22

I find that a little confusing. My issue however is this. How can I
send a netmail Direct, to a node that is not in synchronet's or
Binkd's nodelist complete with PW, etc. The route to tables seem to
prevent this

Synchronet doesn't use a Fido nodelist, so your mailer would have to know how to reach that node (for direct). I can't think of why you'd need a password (assuming that's what you meant by "PW") to send a netmail message. The route_to directives (in the sbbsecho.cfg file) do no prevent sending direct netmail.

I realize that DM. I meant the nodelist created in the config setup in the Nodes portion. If a node is not in there, it seems to get marked as route to. I use Binkd and it too has a 'nodelist' of sorts. Both places use a PW but only as a session PW. Hope that makes more sense

If you set the netmail attributes CRASH or HOLD, the message should not be routed regardless of what is or is not in the sbbsecho.cfg file.

digital man

Synchronet "Real Fact" #45:
Synchronet External X/Y/ZMODEM protocol driver (SEXYZ) was introduced in 2005. Norco, CA WX: 81.7øF, 59.0% humidity, 12 mph SE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
þ Synchronet þ Ver

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Psi-Jack to Joe Delahaye on Wed Jul 22 2015 03:27 pm

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Joe Delahaye to Digital Man on Wed Jul 22 2015 09:57 am

I find that a little confusing. My issue however is this. How can I
send a netmail Direct, to a node that is not in synchronet's or
Binkd's nodelist complete with PW, etc. The route to tables seem to
prevent this

Synchronet doesn't use a Fido nodelist, so your mailer would have to
know how to reach that node (for direct). I can't think of why you'd
need a password (assuming that's what you meant by "PW") to send a
netmail message. The route_to directives (in the sbbsecho.cfg file)
do no prevent sending direct netmail.

I realize that DM. I meant the nodelist created in the config setup in the Nodes portion. If a node is not in there, it seems to get marked as route to. I use Binkd and it too has a 'nodelist' of sorts. Both places use a PW but only as a session PW. Hope that makes more sense

Well, I tried a different approach to this just to see..

I used GoldEd+ to write a Netmail, flagged Direct so it wouldn't, in theory, get routed. sbbsecho packed it, and routed it via my default zone route, completely ignoring the Direct flag on the message.

The direct ("DIR") flag in a message is stored in a kludge line rather than an attribute in the message header. The CRASH and HOLD flags are attribute flags in the header and more widely supported. Try using CRASH instead.

digital man

Synchronet "Real Fact" #80:
Vertrauen has had the FidoNet node number 1:103/705 since 1992.
Norco, CA WX: 81.5øF, 59.0% humidity, 5 mph ESE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Digital Man to Psi-Jack on Wed Jul 22 2015 02:33 pm

I used GoldEd+ to write a Netmail, flagged Direct so it wouldn't, in
theory, get routed. sbbsecho packed it, and routed it via my default
zone route, completely ignoring the Direct flag on the message.

The direct ("DIR") flag in a message is stored in a kludge line rather than an attribute in the message header. The CRASH and HOLD flags are attribute flags in the header and more widely supported. Try using CRASH instead.

I have tested and confirmed this works. Using CR: subject, netmail was packed ignoring the routing and sent direct. Thanks fo having a binkd nodelist processed and available, I was able to send it direct to the destination.

I honestly didn't realize "DIR" was a kludge.

So, in curiousity then..
SCFG->Networking->NetMail Defaults to Direct.
Does this touch the kludge line to add the flag, or how does it make sbbsecho not route, exactly? Or is this a feature more for ArchMail/AttachMail and not BSO/FLO like the KILLSENT option in the same place Kill NetMail After Sent?

)))[Psi-Jack -//- Decker]

---
þ Synchronet þ Decker's Heaven -//- bbs.deckersheaven.com

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Psi-Jack to Digital Man on Wed Jul 22 2015 09:11 pm

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Digital Man to Psi-Jack on Wed Jul 22 2015 02:33 pm

I used GoldEd+ to write a Netmail, flagged Direct so it wouldn't, in
theory, get routed. sbbsecho packed it, and routed it via my default
zone route, completely ignoring the Direct flag on the message.

The direct ("DIR") flag in a message is stored in a kludge line rather than an attribute in the message header. The CRASH and HOLD flags are attribute flags in the header and more widely supported. Try using CRASH instead.

I have tested and confirmed this works. Using CR: subject, netmail was packed ignoring the routing and sent direct. Thanks fo having a binkd nodelist processed and available, I was able to send it direct to the destination.

Okay, cool. SBBSecho doesn't search for or act on the FLAGS kludge line (where the "DIR" flag is stuff) in outbound netmail. It could be enhanced to do so, but since the whole .msg parsing/packing thing (for outbound netmail) is on the
chopping block anyway, I'm not eager to enhance it.

I honestly didn't realize "DIR" was a kludge.

It'a a "flag" stored in the "FLAGS" kludge line. FSC-53 has the details.

So, in curiousity then..
SCFG->Networking->NetMail Defaults to Direct.
Does this touch the kludge line to add the flag, or how does it make sbbsecho not route, exactly?

It adds the "DIR" to the "FLAGS" the kludge line but has no effect on SBBSecho.

Or is this a feature more for
ArchMail/AttachMail and not BSO/FLO like the KILLSENT option in the same place Kill NetMail After Sent?

Right, it's a holdover from FD/attach-style mailer support (where the mailer does all the routing).

digital man

Synchronet "Real Fact" #16:
"Vertrauen" (ver-trow-en) translates to "trust" in German, and was a band name. Norco, CA WX: 75.1øF, 69.0% humidity, 8 mph SE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Psi-Jack to Joe Delahaye on Wed Jul 22 2015 15:27:21

I realize that DM. I meant the nodelist created in the config setup
in the Nodes portion. If a node is not in there, it seems to get
marked as route to. I use Binkd and it too has a 'nodelist' of
sorts. Both places use a PW but only as a session PW. Hope that
makes more sense

Well, I tried a different approach to this just to see..

I used GoldEd+ to write a Netmail, flagged Direct so it wouldn't, in theory, get routed. sbbsecho packed it, and routed it via my default zone route, completely ignoring the Direct flag on the message.

Was the node you were writing the netmail to, in the Nodes section of the SBBS sconfiguration? If not, that may have something to do with it.
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: The Lions Den BBS, Trenton, On, CDN (1:249/303)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net

Re: Bug found in @-codes.
By: Digital Man to Joe Delahaye on Wed Jul 22 2015 14:30:45

If you set the netmail attributes CRASH or HOLD, the message should not be routed regardless of what is or is not in the sbbsecho.cfg file.

I checked just now, and indeed I had DIRECT set as default for netmail messages, I changed to CRASH as default. and we shall see what that does.
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
* Origin: The Lions Den BBS, Trenton, On, CDN (1:249/303)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ