Hi Michiel!

Wednesday July 12 2006, Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Carol Shenkenberger:

 RT>>> Well, the ZMH thing for one, my suggestion is make ZMH = UTC, and
 RT>>> then set of nodelist flags, which denote x-hrs+/- from UTC for
 RT>>> correct time for nodes location, dependant on londitudinal
 RT>>> location ... ,

 CS>> Yes, and i liked that one.  It's only complication is automation

 MV> I think it is impossible to do with most existing software. But...

 CS>>  but I think we ¨could work out something there, most of us.

 MV> ... I think Russel is right: we have only a finite amount of time and so
 MV> we have to make choices on how we spend it.

 MV> Presently I think it would be a waste of time trying to solve the ZMH
 MV> problem. Why? Because I think it is a red herring.

 MV> At first I thought the Z7 advocates had a point. But them I realised
 MV> creating a Z7 would not solve the problem they claimed exists. Add to that
 MV> that several solutions were offered: Region "ZMH", Net
level "ZMH". Flags,
 MV> etc , etc, but none of these got any serious response. This lead me to
 MV> suspect that the alleged ZMH problem was just an excuse.

You forget one more case: suspend ZMH on Zone-level. As ZMH established by
ZC, he can establish it time as "worktime of any node".

In the our region routing for netmail and echoes is main and really work
comunication, so direct alls need only for troubles. If trouble exist - so
node is not busy, so call to it may make at any time (analogue ZMH). If
trouble is not exist - routing is beatiful and more speed method of connect
to node then direct call in ZMH.

Or ZC can make ZMH equal "Node mail hour" (with state it as flag
on the nodelist, for example - #XY)...

This is many cases to resolve of this problem but Ward is not deciding it
any case. I know about his letter about "ignore problems", but I
not know "writing" decision as Zone Policy or Nodelist flag
enactment.

 MV> If it ever was a problem, it is a problem that is dying out anyway.
 MV> FidoNet is slowly shifting from POTS to IP. More and more are shifting to
 MV> a permanent connection to the InterNet and so ZMH is no longer an issue
 MV> for them.

And I say more: all intercity connects in the our region establishe by the
Internet (may be exist low same phone links, but I think they special
networks as "company private networks" for example - railway or
oil networks).

 MV> ZMH is a non problem.  Trying to solve non problems is a waste of time.

Yes, for you (and other sysops of you area) it is not a problem. But for us
it is a problem - live on the law (Policy, with ZMH) or on the real work
(ZMH == Node work mail time).


Regards, Vladimir Donskoy

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20060703