Is everyone up there running barefoot Opus? I did for a while, but I 
put Binkley online when I started carrying othernets - about mid-to-late '72 
I think.  I started running Opus 1.70 when it came out, and did upgrades over 
time until 1.73A arrived, and the files I have for FREQ are the same ones I 
got through normal Fido distribution around October '91 ... I just checked 
and the archive here of OMAKE173.LZH is dated 09-29-91 ... and I don't 
program, so its 'virgin', undisturbed copies from the original distributions. 
If in doubt, FREQ it and unarc in a temp directory & compare the files - 
thats an easy test
        Of course, there is no proving that everyone up there has the same 
hardware and modems set up with the same configs - I've seen all kinds of 
handshake errors with other systems over the years - even people that 'knew' 
they had things right.   Just look at all the different revisions of USR 
Sportsters out there ... even within the same year they use different ROMs 
and such.
        When I had 4 lines here (2 Couriers and 2 Supra V.FCs), I had 
problems connecting with different systems in my local Net109 - sometimes 
even with the same BBS - sometimes cured by just polling using the other 
courier and phone line -  sometimes telco lines can vary like mad from day to 
night as well. 
Sometimes my only choice was to use a different hub when I just couldn't get 
consistant connects.  It happens.
 BS>  You, in a very cooperative spirit, attempted to post Netmail
 BS> on my board.  You were unsuccessful. 
Do you mean exchange netmail,. or post it via dialup login? Is William 
running barefoot?  Are you using the native Opus tosser and not a plug-in 
like QMAIL?  Is he? 
        Not to be simplistic, but there are a few things that have to happen 
to post netmail on another system, not the least of which is simple Fido 
handshaking. Opus flat will not connect to certain versions of TBBS, for 
instance - easily resolved by running Bink.  I've had problems in the past 
with certain versions of PCB - I don't link to any these days, so I can't 
address your problems there. But Bink cures so many ills that I'm not sure 
why most folks don't run it, unless drive space is a real problem ... the 
price is right  ... and the spirit is right. 
 BS> USR modem that has problems connecting to another USR 
 BS> modem.  A second point is that Stu and I have well over 
 BS> a thousand consecutive connections at 28,800 bps, and 
 BS> transfer rates in excess of 3000 cps. Aside from 
        Uh, Barefoot Opus doesn't DO 28.8k ... you have to hack the batch 
files to lie about connect speed and such - much easier done with Binkley.
 BS>         Again, Willie, using a non-compliant mailer, 
 BS> why can I consistently pass mail to Stu, and just as 
 BS> consistantly, not pass mail to you, and especially when 
 BS> you and Stu presumably have identical OPUS 1.73a packages?
        Uh - maybe thats why its non-compliant ... because its not 
consistent, and someone's setup won't tolerate the error, and others aren't 
quite configured right and thus don't fail on that non-compliancy? I mean, 
you really have to see everyones config files as well as dump their NVRAM 
settings to be sure ...
 BS>         Willie, you still don't understand.  I'm running PCBoard Ver 
 BS> 15.22, including the internal mailer which very definately is 
 BS> is not FidoNet compliant.  
        Then whats the point - if its not FTSC compliant, take it offline.
Sheesh, its real simple, and wouldn't be tolerated in Net109 (Wash, DC) if it 
had problems. There isn't going to be an Opus 1.74 anytime soon as a bug fix 
of the 1.73A errors - any release now would be a fullblown upgrade, not a 
simply a bug fix. 
 BS> running identical copies of barefoot OPUS.  In normal 
 BS> operating mode, you and I can connect with each other, 
 BS> but we cannot pass mail.  
        Not much of a connect then, is it?  Sounds like a modem handshake 
failure of some kind. The modems talk, but basically just pass garbage.
 BS> On the other hand, Stu and I can connect to each other, and we can  
 BS> pass mail.  In  this sequence, nothing  has changed on my system -  
 BS> the  only change has been from you to Stu. Granted this 
 BS> outlines a problem.  Since there is no change in my PCBoard 
 BS> setup, the problem has to be in OPUS - there is no other
 BS> place it could be.
        Again ... telco problems and bad connects can explain this ...
 BS> I personally have no problem in meeting the requirements of 
 BS> FTS-0001.  You see, since December 24, 1995, I've been using 
 BS> BinkleyTerm 2.59C as my mailer.  If this mailer is not
 BS> FTS-0001 compliant, then I don't know what is 
        Uh, if you have EMSI enabled in Binkleyterm, you may hang when 
connecting to barefoot Opus systems. Opus doesn't speak EMSI - it predates 
.
        FTSC is fine and dandy - but the bottom line is VALID connects ...
there are certain quirks in the Fido standards that aren't exactly the way 
they are defined, but most of the older coders understood that and wrote for 
the other software, not for simply the specs.  The day/date stamp is a 
perfect example of that - as is the overzealous dupe detector in native 1.7x 
... thats why most of us went to plug-in mail tossers/packers like QMAIL or 
SQUISH.
I know the Wildcat code writers had a hell of a time getting this concept 
down for a while  - their programs worked by the book, but had problems with 
many systems running older code like Fido BBS and Opus.  
        Sorry I don't have a barefoot setup running here any more to help 
with your test ... my other software requires made it neccessary to switch to 
a better multitasker than DOS/DV - and Opus doesn't deal with Win-NT too well 
...
        I'm not trying to slam you, just saying that maybe you and William 
have more tests and configuring to do ...  Non-compliant PCB connects aren't 
particularly useful tests for troubleshooting Opus ...
                                -= )-(eather =-
 
--- Maximus/NT 3.01b1
---------------