Hello Dale,

HD>> And you think this IS/HAS connect info:

HD>> NodeList>
HD>> Pvt,1466,Owls_Anchor,Columbia_MD,Dale_Shipp,-Unpublished-,9600,XX,MO

DS> Not sure why you picked me out of the crowd of PVT nodes that exist:-}}

It was because someone wrote you had a BBS,
so I rememberd your name and looked it up.

HD>> Sorry, but such systems are only acting as a point.

DS> Nope.

Why no connect info then?,
not even your IP or E-Mail adress.

HD>> Not a crash Net reachable Node by others, no phonenumber, no IP
HD>> information, wrong baudrate, no BBS as the MO flag is listed,
HD>> and no FileRequests, as shown by the XX flag are also not possible
HD>> (anymore). So it does not proof any form of connectivity, not a single
HD>> one ;-(. At least the 9600 should be 300, and the XX removed.

DS> The entry is what my NC made when he assigned me a node many years ago.

That's the case for many systems, but onfortunately not updated tot the latest 
situation.

DS> Reading the nodelist today, I can see that you are right about the 300
DS> versus 9600 ( which was the baud rate of my modem when I had one).

That was the least mistake.

DS> I understand your point about the XX, I seem to recall that it simply
DS> indicated the type of mailer I had which has been IM and then Argus.

Yes, but it was not updated for a long time, that's the point.

DS> BUT, I do operate a BBS with users even though I do not accept incoming
DS> connects -- and never have done so.

Why not make the connect info public?

DS> I'll send a netmail to my NC and mention that the XX should be removed
DS> and baud rate changed to 300.

Thanks for your kind answers,
I hope more sysops and *C's will update their NodeList info.
It's a much better attitude then what I received from Ward and Nick.

Henri.

---