Hello Maurice,

On 14 Nov 16 01:14, Maurice Kinal wrote to Nicholas Boel:

 NB>> CapabilityWord error in following pkt!

 MK> I'll have to look that up to see what field(s) it is supposed to
 MK> match.  Also due to the lack of suitable documentation, I will reverse
 MK> engineer your pkt headers and see what I can match up to my 2+ pkt
 MK> generator and see what gives there.

Let me know what you figure out. Information is a wonderful thing. :)

 MK> If you are aware of any PROPER documentation where a thingy like the
 MK> perl oneliner I posted can be formed from, now would be an excellent
 MK> time to bring it up and possibly save much grief.  I doubt such
 MK> documentation truly exists but maybe.  I am unaware of any and
 MK> originally built that one from using the hit and miss method.

Unfortunately, that's exactly what I've been doing with the 80+ FSC documents,
and narrowing the search on the site by looking for keyword "Type". There's a
lot of proposals, but that's basically where I got the information on the
"capability word" hpt is speaking of. Looks to be an old implementation so zone
numbers could be added to packets or something.

 NB>> is why is there two "fidonet" entries in the above routine?

 MK> Those match with domain names for 5d addressing such as
 MK> 1:153/7001.0@fidonet.  They can easily be changed to variables if and
 MK> when it ever matters.  At the moment it doesn't ... does it?

The only thing that matters is that somehow those seem to be using the 2
"Capability Word" fields that hpt is complaining about.

 MK> BTW the reason I prefer type 2.2, not that I really care, is that it
 MK> contains no datetime stamps which might help out systems that cannot
 MK> generate datetime stamps, especially obsolete ones.  Just a thought.

Mark has said he's almost certain that he has passed proper 2.2 packets through
hpt, although I haven't seen anything in the documentation on it). So if it is
at all possible, I say do whatever makes you happy. :)

However even your type-2+ netmails arriving here are causing hpt to yell at me.
So something is definitely awry, and I'm guessing my old software (Synchronet
BBS software) was still allowing some very old backwards compatibility, which
is probably why it never mentioned any issues with your netmails prior to me
switching to hpt. Seems as though BBBS may do the same thing in this regard.

Regards,
Nick

... "Не знаю. Я здесь только работаю."
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20160827