Replying to a message of mark lewis to Darryl Gregorash:

 ml> my thinking is that the virtual modem mats is talking about
 ml> is really nothing more than software. 

Of course it is; it is virtual, an emulation :)

 ml> i'm doing it over here. absolutely no changes to =ANY= of
 ml> my existing comm based software has been necessary... i did
 ml> have to configure some port addresses but that's not the
 ml> same...

You are also running a rather more powerul mailer than I am, Mark :)

Let us not even begin to try pretending that the virtual modem is any kind
of workable solution for the sysop running shareware Frodo, or Binkley, or
anything like that.. because it is not.

 DG>> That is workable, I suppose, but the way they are talking,
 DG>> a  static IP must be present in the phone field.

 ml> if it wasn't for everyone wanting to not break old software,

Do not include me in that "everyone" :).. but I am also _for_ the
notion of whoever breaks something being responsible to provide a fix for
the users of the now-broken stuff :)

 ml> we could get around this in the nodelist quite simply by
 ml> prefixing the IP or DOMAIN numbers with a symbol (or two if
 ml> one wants to specify a protocol)...

 ml>    ie:  #bbs.wplace.dyn.ml.org
 ml>         $bbs.wplace.dyn.ml.org

Agreed, this would be an excellent way to do things. Unfortunately, it is
said, it breaks current nodelist compilers, as well as the nodelist update
software used by *Cs.. oh well, someone could write up a nodelist
translator to get back to St Louis format for anyone who can't handle the
domains and the dollar signs, and someone could always hack David Nugent's
MakeNL-clone code :)

 ml> my thoughts on this (for two years or so) have been that the
 ml> above would handle the two protocols, telnet and vmodem,

Umm, why only telnet and vmodem? Why not ftp too? (We are speaking of
mailers here, of course.. if we were speaking of BBS software, I would
include http in the list of why-not's)

 ml> i will say that this is one time that i really really really
 ml> wish that we could put a timelimit on the support of legacy
 ml> software. it would be really great to say, "on blah blah,
 ml> we will be putting the new nodelist format online for
 ml> network use. if you haven't upgraded or replaced your
 ml> software by that time, sorry." 

Unnecessary, so long, as you say, as a nodelist converter is available to
take all those odd-balled Internet addresses, and convert those nodes into
PVT systems for the legacy software. Once the initial nodelist is
converted, nodediffs could be translated by the same software, before being
applied to the converted nodelist. 

[on DHCP problems]

 DG>> But I think places like ml.org can take care of that
 DG>> problem, yes?

 ml> YES!!! the ml.org site i listed above is my bbs. my web
 ml> server is on www.wplace..... 

I don't even pretend to understand how it all works, but if it does.. I
suppose the domain with the dynamic IP has to let these places know when
its IP changes? 

(Could I register my system with them too, even if it is only up for a
short time every 2 hours? If I could, then I could fire up an ftp server
instead of just an ftp client, and systems with mail to send to this net
could send it when I pick up my regular mail runs.. this could add a brand
new dimension to the meaning of "host-routed netmail" :))

--- FleetStreet 1.22 NR