1. Forum
  2. DOVE-Net
  3. Synchronet Discussion

  • "ping" FTN node, qwk mail

    From ryan@VERT/MONTEREY to Digital Man on Mon Mar 9 01:33:00 2020
    Hey Digital Man,

    I have a couple questions for you if you don't mind answering. Full
    disclosure I use Mystic but I enjoy communicating with people that use Synchronet and have a couple questions more or less related to interoperability.

    First off, I was told that by sending netmail to "ping"@<some node>, if <some node> is a Synchronet board, there's some type of response. This would be a cool capability to bring to Mystic, particularly for troubleshooting traffic flow, hub problems, etc. Do you have a writeup somewhere of what this is, or could you point me to the part of the synchronet codebase which implements this?

    Second, I notice that Mystic and Synchronet wrap text differently. On FTN
    mail I think we all know what the stylistic discrepancies are, but for some reason on qwk (I subscribe to DOVEnet) it seems like the mail looks even different than FTN. I find that the 80th character on each line is cut off, effectively removing one character per line. Any ideas what this could be related to?

    Thanks!

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: monterey bbs
  • From Netsurge@VERT to ryan on Mon Mar 9 10:04:32 2020
    First off, I was told that by sending netmail to "ping"@<some node>, if <some node> is a Synchronet board, there's some type of response. This would be a cool capability to bring to Mystic, particularly for troubleshooting traffic flow, hub problems, etc. Do you have a writeup somewhere of what this is, or could you point me to the part of the synchronet codebase which implements this?

    On a side note, any node in an FTN network that is flying the "PING" flag has this capability.

    |15frank |08// |15netsurge
    |07disksh0p|08!|07bbs |08% |07bbs.diskshop.ca |08% |07mystic goodness |11SciNet |03ftn hq |08% |07https://scinet-ftn.org

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: % disksh0p!bbs % bbs.diskshop.ca % SciNet ftn hq % (1:229/101)
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From James Coyle@VERT to Netsurge on Mon Mar 9 21:09:19 2020
    On a side note, any node in an FTN network that is flying the "PING"
    flag has this capability.

    Ahhh then there must be a standard document for this, if there is an official nodelist flag.

    I feel like someone did send me the information like a decade ago lol

    If anyone knows of a link let me know. My internet is really limited where I am right now so searching isn't as easy as one would expect especially if I am busy streaming Masterchef in a language I can't understand lol

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/03/09 (Windows/64)
    * Origin: Sector 7 (1:129/215)
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Netsurge@VERT to James Coyle on Mon Mar 9 11:19:32 2020
    Ahhh then there must be a standard document for this, if there is an official nodelist flag.

    There is no technical standard for it but FTS-5001.006 refers to it:

    5.10. Robot flags
    -----------------

    PING
    ----

    Specified as exactly "PING" with no arguments. Nodes flying this
    flag will adhere to the following functionality:

    1) PING-function:

    If a message destined to "PING" arrives at its final destination
    and this final destination flies the "PING"-flag, then the
    receiving node will bounce the message back to the original sender
    clearly quoting all the original via-lines.

    If a message destined to "PING" arrives at its final destination
    but this final destination does _not_ fly the "PING"-flag then the
    message may be deleted from the inbound-queue without further
    follow-up.

    2) TRACE-function:

    If a message destined to "PING" arrives at a node which flies the
    PING-flag but is merely passing-through to another destination
    then the in-transit node will notify the sender of this occurrence
    and will forward the original mail unaltered towards its final
    destination.

    WARNING: the sender's name (in either direction) must *NEVER* be
    "PING".

    On a side note, did you get my email?

    |15frank |08// |15netsurge
    |07disksh0p|08!|07bbs |08% |07bbs.diskshop.ca |08% |07mystic goodness |11SciNet |03ftn hq |08% |07https://scinet-ftn.org

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: % disksh0p!bbs % bbs.diskshop.ca % SciNet ftn hq % (1:229/101)
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Rampage@VERT/SESTAR to ryan on Mon Mar 9 11:00:12 2020
    Re: "ping" FTN node, qwk mail
    By: ryan to Digital Man on Mon Mar 09 2020 01:33:00


    ryan> First off, I was told that by sending netmail to "ping"@<some node>, if
    ryan> <some node> is a Synchronet board, there's some type of response. This
    ryan> would be a cool capability to bring to Mystic,

    i thought mystic already had this? ISTR testing it back with the v1.11betas but i might be mixing that up with something else...

    ryan> particularly for
    ryan> troubleshooting traffic flow, hub problems, etc. Do you have a writeup
    ryan> somewhere of what this is, or could you point me to the part of the
    ryan> synchronet codebase which implements this?

    it is part of sbbsecho since that's the mail tosser... but when it was first introduced some decade or more back, it was done with netmail trackers and handlers... anyway, here's the currently available documentation that i'm aware of... details for specific programs (eg: ot-track, netmgr, etc) are available...

    http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5001.006

    ----->8 snip 8<-----

    5.10. Robot flags
    -----------------

    PING
    ----

    Specified as exactly "PING" with no arguments. Nodes flying this
    flag will adhere to the following functionality:

    1) PING-function:

    If a message destined to "PING" arrives at its final destination
    and this final destination flies the "PING"-flag, then the
    receiving node will bounce the message back to the original sender
    clearly quoting all the original via-lines.

    If a message destined to "PING" arrives at its final destination
    but this final destination does _not_ fly the "PING"-flag then the
    message may be deleted from the inbound-queue without further
    follow-up.

    2) TRACE-function:

    If a message destined to "PING" arrives at a node which flies the
    PING-flag but is merely passing-through to another destination
    then the in-transit node will notify the sender of this occurrence
    and will forward the original mail unaltered towards its final
    destination.

    WARNING: the sender's name (in either direction) must *NEVER* be
    "PING".

    ----->8 snip 8<-----


    )\/(ark

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ The SouthEast Star Mail HUB - SESTAR
  • From ryan@VERT/MONTEREY to Rampage on Mon Mar 9 10:18:00 2020
    it is part of sbbsecho since that's the mail tosser... but when it was fir roduced some decade or more back, it was done with netmail trackers and ha ... anyway, here's the currently available documentation that i'm aware of tails for speci

    Thanks! Looks like we're all on the same page now. Could be a nice feature to have in Mystic as well, so I appreciate your help.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: monterey bbs
  • From Digital Man@VERT to ryan on Mon Mar 9 14:52:13 2020
    Re: "ping" FTN node, qwk mail
    By: ryan to Digital Man on Mon Mar 09 2020 01:33 am

    Hey Digital Man,

    I have a couple questions for you if you don't mind answering. Full disclosure I use Mystic but I enjoy communicating with people that use Synchronet and have a couple questions more or less related to interoperability.

    First off, I was told that by sending netmail to "ping"@<some node>, if <some node> is a Synchronet board, there's some type of response. This would be a cool capability to bring to Mystic, particularly for troubleshooting traffic flow, hub problems, etc. Do you have a writeup somewhere of what this is, or could you point me to the part of the synchronet codebase which implements this?

    It's a feature of SBBSecho based on FTS-5001: http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5001.006

    Second, I notice that Mystic and Synchronet wrap text differently. On FTN mail I think we all know what the stylistic discrepancies are, but for some reason on qwk (I subscribe to DOVEnet) it seems like the mail looks even different than FTN. I find that the 80th character on each line is cut off, effectively removing one character per line. Any ideas what this could be related to?

    No. If you view the message text in a QWK reader, I assume it looks fine? It's probably just that Mystic doesn't like long-line paragraphs (so-called "flowed" text: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2646.txt).


    digital man

    This Is Spinal Tap quote #22:
    David St. Hubbins: Here lies David St. Hubbins... and why not?
    Norco, CA WX: 72.0øF, 34.0% humidity, 1 mph WSW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@VERT/REALITY to Netsurge on Tue Mar 10 06:33:00 2020
    Netsurge wrote to James Coyle <=-

    WARNING: the sender's name (in either direction) must *NEVER* be
    "PING".

    Yeah, Fidonet was a great technology, until someone named ping sent a PING request from a node flying the PING flag to another PING node...


    ... The exception also declares the rule
    --- MultiMail/XT v0.52
    þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org