PE>> Rod Speed, Brenton Vettoretti and Frank Malcolm, you are sending
 PE>> me a 00000000.PKT, when you could instead be sending me a
 PE>> 00000000.MO0 which is compressed.  In the name of not being
 PE>> inconsiderate arsewipes, why don't you add a

 FM> Now back when I first became a point, *you* suggested that this was not
 FM> going to be a problem because the up message packets are so small.
 FM> Cripes, the whole upload only takes a few seconds.

I don't remember saying that.  I certainly doubt that I said it
voice, so it had to be a message here.  Care to give me a clue
as to what was in the message?

Perhaps I overemphasised the "inconsiderate arsewipes"?  :-)
I was just thinking that now that things are starting to settle
down, we should start trying to rev it up a few notches.

 PE>> "zip -9k 00000000.MO0 00000000.PKT" to your batch files?  You
 PE>> can change the 9k to 9km if you want to automatically delete
 PE>> the PKT file after compression is successful.

 FM> And what's this "zip", and "-9k" stuff? I use
PKZIP which doesn't know
 FM> about those options. If -9k means max compression, I should be using -ex
 FM> - is that what you meant?

Why don't you use "zip"?  It's freeware instead of shareware, it's
available on practically every environment you care to name, it
comes with complete source code.  The "-9" is maximal compression,
the "-k" is make it PKZIP compatible (which I think just means
uppercase all file names), as it's normally pkzip compatible 
anyway as far as I can tell.

 PE>> Now that things are back to normal, I have taken the liberty
 PE>> of removing that 3 second delay again.  I have also taken a
 PE>> look at the tinypoint script, and it appears that it has a
 PE>> 1-second delay in it before sending out the yoohoo.  Why don't
 PE>> you try seeing what happens if you drop the 1 second delay?

 FM> Done, we'll see how it goes. There's another delay after the ACK, and
 FM> another after everything's done - remove them too?

Yeah, can't hurt.  I checked your call this morning, and 
unfortunately it is taking a long time for you to send the
YOOHOO in the first place.  After my modem returns a CONNECT,
it takes 5 seconds before I receive your Yoohoo.  Compared
with Brenton, who is taking about 2 seconds.  Bob is taking
6 seconds, and I thought he had the same modem as Brenton.
Dieter is 5 seconds.  Brenton is connecting with MNP5, if that
has anything to do with it (hey Brenton, it's a dumb idea to
connect with MNP5, why not try MNP4 instead?).

BTW, I recall you asked about ITUG or something, I didn't get
around to replying.  All nodes are equal (more or less).  ie
I don't know any more about why ITUG started flowing than you
do.  If a message in ITUG is being sent from 5 systems upstream
of me, it just gets passed from him to the next guy to the next
guy to the next guy to the next guy to the next guy to the
next guy, where you are the last "next guy", and I am the second
last "next guy".  There's no special facility I have here that
you don't.  How would you solve the problem from your end, and
I'll tell you whether I can do the same thing from my end, and
then I will probably ask you to do it your end to save me from
having to do it my end.  Unless you know something I don't, e.g.
what price we ended up getting Email at.  BFN.  Paul.
@EOT:

--- Mksmsg