Hello Steven.

01 Nov 02 23:09, you wrote to me:

 SH> Rick, please re-read Policy 4.07.  The only way one can identify a
 SH> node's status in the nodelist is through flags and if my RIN node is
 SH> listed as "Pvt,-Unpublished-", people who do not note my
IP address or
 SH> overlook it will conclude I'm a private node and that my listing is in
 SH> breach of policy.

Incorrect, you need to re-read P4. You will note that P4 states flag
references are current with FTS-1000 (which was current at the time of
writing P4) but the current FTSC standard document will apply.

In this day and age the closest thing to that is FTS-5000 FTS-5001

 SH> The difficulty with the FTSC "advice" is that it forces a
large number
 SH> of nodes that are not and never were private to adopt  the PVT
 SH> workaround to deal with deficiencies in existing compilers.  The result
 SH> is that more and more nodes get stuck with this while P4 continues to
 SH> state that PVT node listings are to be avoided like the plague.

P4 states "private" nodes should be avoided.

I tell you what, do a text search of P4  for "Pvt". I will bet you that you
don't find the 3 letter flag/word "Pvt" listed anywhere within
the document.

 SH> Instead, why not work on a solution that will give IONs a workable
 SH> nodelist listing.  My node was first listed in the fall of 1991 and has
 SH> never been a private node.  I see no reason why it should be
 SH> characterized as that now because I am an ION.

Why not follow the standards as issued by the FTSC so that the node is
contactable by other mailers?

No-one is asking you to become a private node.

Cheers,
                Rick

... This tagline is password protected. To view type Ctrl-Alt-Del.

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5 - Debian/GNU