Hi, Tommi!

On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 09:53:00 +0200 Tommi Koivula writes:

 ZK>>>> In case of subject longer then allowed 71 + NUL bytes HPT send
 ZK>>>> the whole PKT with the incorrect message to bads.

 ZK>>>> Would it be more practical to be more error tolerant and just
 ZK>>>> cut it to the allowed limit, or it's considered as modification
 ZK>>>> of messages and forbidden by some document?

 MD>>> Fidonet Policy v.4.07

 MD>>> ========= Here the quote begins ===========
 MD>>> 2.1.5  No Alteration of Routed Mail

 MD>>> You may not modify, other than as required for routing or other
technical
 MD>>> purposes, any message, netmail or echomail, passing through the system
 MD>>> from one FidoNet node to another.
 MD>>> ========= Here it ends =============

 ZK>> Isn't it an "other technical purpose"? ;)

 TK> It depends who you ask. ;)

 TK> I made a quick test: I set my terminal to 132x45 and entered a
 TK> message to JAM base with GoldED with subject of 100 chars. It
 TK> stayed there until "hpt scan" when it was cut to 72 chars. However
 TK> this happened in my msgbase, not in transit mail.

Agree, it's a different case.

 TK> So it would be best to fix fidogate (?) not to send out illegal
 TK> pkt's.

Oh, just to avoid wrong conclusions -- the original question was not
because of fidogate producing incorrect packets, in this place it
behaves correctly.

I mentioned it in connection with handling incoming packets. I compared
it to what hpt is doing (found one problem actually) and started
thinking of what would be the best way.


--- Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)