| TIP: Click on subject to list as thread! | ANSI |
| echo: | |
|---|---|
| to: | |
| from: | |
| date: | |
| subject: | human-readable nodelist format |
[ 05 Nov 02 10:31, andrew clarke wrote to Scott Little ]
ac> The hierachy is only important when it comes down to default mail
ac> routing, and politics. Parsing software should be able to handle
Thing is, this format requires at least two scans of the nodelist to find a
node and it's uplink. The only shortcut is to assume an uplink of /0 for
normal nodes.
ac> Probably a good idea. I think nodelist segments (and diffs) should
ac> probably be the subject of another document though
St Louis segments are the same as the complete nodelist, only smaller, but
they rely on static filenames to figure out who it's from and what it's
for, which bothers me. If the nodelist contains it's origin, basic
security, and any necessary dummy hierarchial information, that is no
longer necessary.
ac> and Password keywords can be described in terms of segment processing
ac> software and not in terms of the entire nodelist, because it would
It still needs to be standardised otherwise everyone will come up with
their own method :)
ac> goes on now to propose what should happen in future. I do think a
ac> diff format that is standard (like GNU diff/patch) should be used
ac> rather than the obscure format used with nodediffs now.
"diff" has a mode that is more or less identical to the current
nodediff format
ac> I'll add the proper addressing convention in. I'm not sure about the
ac> "may change" part though. It will never change until people stop
ac> using FTS-5 nodelists outright for a start.
You never know. Insufficient separation between Policy and Technical lead
us to the Pvt,-unpublished- issue, for example.
ac> FTSC_PUBLIC also) about listing non-default/ideal routing is fine
ac> technically but it may be difficult to get a consensus as to whether
ac> it's achievable if/when it comes to implementing it
It's no more difficult than back tracing "uplink" keywords until
you bump into a node that I'm able to connect to.
ac> And I should add to the current spec that "keywords in the nodelist
ac> that are not recognised should be ignored"
That will limit future developments, as old software will strip out new
lines. The equivalent of all IP flags getting removed because an old
processor was written before they exists. Best to pass on unknown
keywords, the ZC's can determine what's valid in their zones and filter out
the rest intelligently.
-- Scott Little [fidonet#3:712/848 / sysgod{at}sysgod.org]
--- FMail/Win32 1.60+
* Origin: Cyberia: All your msgbase are belong to us! (3:712/848)SEEN-BY: 106/2000 201/100 148 209 329 505 204/450 206/0 490/21 633/267 270 @PATH: 712/848 633/260 774/605 123/500 106/2000 201/505 633/267 |
|
| SOURCE: echomail via fidonet.ozzmosis.com | |
Email questions or comments to sysop@ipingthereforeiam.com
All parts of this website painstakingly hand-crafted in the U.S.A.!
IPTIA BBS/MUD/Terminal/Game Server List, © 2025 IPTIA Consulting™.