Rick Van Ruth (3:640/954) wrote to Carol Shenkenberger at 21:32 on 10 Nov 2002:

 RVR> Isn't that what started all this? How *C's are ignoring those
 RVR> standards? How stupid things like 1-000-000-000 (or
 RVR> 000-000-000-000) are used for phone number fields? How they allow
 RVR> IBN and other such flags without including the FQDN or IP address?

One should be careful.  If one does not like being listed as a private
node, there's very little one can do other than use a non-functional phone
number in that field.  As for the IBN flag, I was told that once my IP
address appeared in the BBS name, adding it to the IBN flag was redundant.

I add that using one flag to serve two different purposes is unacceptable. 
What is used to designate a POTS node as unreachable should not be used for
an IP which is accessible 24/7.  Instead, accept the Zone 1 solution
because it works. 

Take care,

Steven Horn (steven_a_horn{at}yahoo.ca)
Moderator, ALASKA_CHAT 

--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+