Re: Re: Test2
  By: Nicholas Boel to Joe Delahaye on Fri Nov 21 2014 21:42:36

 JD>> No, not a typo.  However, even though I did not have any route
 JD>> statements for Janis, it still created that.  At least I think it
 JD>> did. Could be something on the other end.  I read mark's missive and
 JD>> have made changes.  I understood that route_to incorrectly I guess. 
 JD>> It is confusing when you are used to FD style packets and routing,
 JD>> etc.

 NB> If it wasn't a typo, then you had it in your configuration wrong. So
 NB> therefore, I can see why binkd didn't know where to send it. I believe FD
 NB> style routing does it the same way, ie: ROUTE_TO 
 >.

There was not /381 anywhere in any of my configs.  I have no idea how that was
being created, but it either seems to have stopped, or with the corrected route
table, it is being sent on to Janis.  I have not yet had the chance to look
through the log file

 NB> Then you are not running binkd with the -C command line option. To reload
 NB> on config file change. With that option, it will automatically reload
 NB> binkd for you when anything is done to your configuration file --
 NB> including a BINKD.TXT change, since your config file includes it.

Ahh, but I am running it with that command.  It at first seems to reload, and
then comes up with the error that the configuration is no longer valid.  I have
marks batch file running it which gives me the option of shutting it down
completely or restarting it manually, but in my mind it should never get to
that point.  I put that batch file in there to hopefully stop the shutdown of
binkd.  It did not accomplish that.

@echo off
:execute
binkd -C binkd.cfg
choice /t 30 /d n /m "Quit binkd wrapper script?"
if errorlevel 3 goto end
if errorlevel 2 goto execute
:end

I suppose I could change it amd put goto execute below :end
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32