Good ${greeting_time}, Torsten!

25 Dec 2014 01:09:34, you wrote to Roy Witt:

 MvdV>>> The ENC user flag is documented in par 6.2 in FTS-5003.
 MvdV>>> http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5001.005
 RW>> Thanks, but that doesn't answer the question of; why isn't the
 RW>> flag implemented in an all zones nodelist?
 TB> Well, this Userflag is used for a long time now, and some systems
 TB> carry this flag over years now. As 5001.005 says, it is common for
 TB> all zones.

Yes.

 RW>> If it's good for the goose, why not the gander?
 TB> Because the sysop needs a special setup for routing encrypted netmail
 TB> and encrypted echomail.

No special setup required. The FPD-4.07 says:

==== yum ====
2.1.4  Encryption and Review of Mail
FidoNet is an amateur system. Our technology is such that the privacy of
messages cannot be guaranteed. As a sysop, you have the right to review traffic
flowing through your system, if for no other reason than to ensure that the
system is not being used for illegal or commercial purposes. Encryption
obviously makes this review impossible. Therefore, encrypted and/or commercial
traffic that is routed without the express permission of all the links in the
delivery system constitutes annoying behavior.
==== burp ====

The ${subj} means the encrypted netmail will be accepted and routed by, for
example, this system:

Hub,545,Gremlin_from_Kremlin,Moscow,Alexey_Vissarionov,-Unpublished-,300,
ICM,IBN,INA:fido.gremlin.ru,U,ENC


 TB> It's a bit like the actually TOR-System.

No. However, that could be running over the existing Fidonet infrastructure.


--
Alexey V. Vissarionov aka Gremlin from Kremlin
gremlin.ru!gremlin; +vii-cmiii-cmlxxvii-mmxlviii

... god@universe:~ # cvs up && make world
--- /bin/vi