Hello wkitty42,

On 06 Sep 14 22:04, wkitty42 wrote to Access Denied:

 AD>> My suggestion would be to only toss netmail, and leave the rest
 AD>> untouched in the unsecure directory. All a sysop would need to do
 AD>> if they wished to process that tic and file and/or echomail,
 AD>> would be to move them to the secure inbound directory.

 wk> exactly... that's what we do now...

Cool. That was just out of my own experience's opinion.. obviously. I don't 
want netmail to sit in an unsecure directory if I forget to look at it on a 
daily basis (which I definitely would forget to do so). Echomail and .tic files
 
from an unsecure link? No thanks. I hook up to certain people for those things 
for a reason. I can look at it when I have the time, and decide on my own to 
put it in or delete it. :)

 wk> also, don't worry about trying to rebuild the PKTs after tossing any
 wk> netmails they may contain... i mean, sure, it would be OK to exactly
 wk> duplicate the PKT right down to the name and timestamps but without
 wk> the netmail but it shouldn't be necessary as that netmail, when tossed
 wk> a second time, should appear as a dupe... this might also be a reason
 wk> why so many other systems pack netmail and echomail into separate
 wk> PKTs...

Good point!

 wk> speaking of dupes, it would also be nice for messages in the BADMAIL
 wk> area to have an additional couple of hidden control lines added to
 wk> them stating what echotag they were destined for, what system they
 wk> arrived from and what dupe checking method was used to catch them...
 wk> this way we can move them to the proper area if we determine that they
 wk> are false positives or we can let the sending system know of a
 wk> possible problem...

I'm also good with anything that can help track problems with incoming mail as 
well. So I won't get in the way of this one, either. :)

Regards,
Nick

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20130910
 þ Synchronet þ thePharcyde_ >> telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin)