25 Apr 08 00:59, Richard Webb wrote to Roger Nelson:

 RW>> Yah probably.  Amazing how many nc's rc's etc. in z1 don't have pots
 RW>> capability anymore . Makes routed netmail an interesting
 RW>> proposition sometimes. Can remember the day when routed netmail was
 RW>> quite reliable . I guess I'm showing my fidonet age
.

 RN>> With the decrease of BBS callers, it's my guess that many *Cs and
 RN>> SysOps don't even have their modems connected, although I think they
 RN>> should.  I'll have to research P4 to see if there's a rule about
 RN>> that.

 RW> RUles on zmh would cover I think.  AS the capability is advertised in
 RW> the nodelist by a phone number in the appropriate field I"d venture
 RW> to guess that during zmh a system should be reachable by it.

Since P4 is so ancient and the ZC has made policy that circumvents a lot
of it, ZMH won't help you. I once had a policy complaint filed against me
because I passworded a node from connecting here. Both the RC10 and the
ZC1 decided in my favor upon appeal by the complainant, but the ZC2, then
acting as the IC, reversed their decisions and upheld the complaint. The
case was then presented before the ZCC and they reversed the IC's decison.
This resulted in the eventual termination of that IC and policy went down
hill from there.

                R\%/itt



--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000