Re: What would YOU do?
  By: mark lewis to Carol Shenkenberger on Mon Dec 10 2018 10:13 am

 CS>> It could be the wording is bad.

 ML> agreed...

 CS>> When it was written, the FTSC meant is there was an address on IBN,
 CS>> it would priority over the INA address. If no address on IBN, it
 CS>> would use INA.  If only a port on IBN, use INA but the port on IBN.

 ML> and if there is INA and IBN both with domains, use the IBN domain first
 ML> and then the INA one... if the IBN contains a port number, use it for
 ML> both...

I belive the intent was for 2 different domains in that scenerio (like mine).
I suspect if IBN had a port number and INA didn't then the port number should
only be used with that domain.  I need to go back and read the relevant
documents to see how that was handled and if it was clear.

   
 ML> PS: i've just sent you a direct netmail from this point. i watched it get 
 ML> delivered and am writing this just as a "head's up! please check your
 ML> netmail or unsecure inbound."... it is a message forwarded from the mystic
 ML> echo that was written back in july 2018...

Ok, will look for it.    THats just before I joined zone21 where I get most of
my mystic information.

  xxcarol  
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32