133 lines
3.9 KiB
Plaintext
133 lines
3.9 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Jim Ryan
|
|||
|
02 May 84
|
|||
|
MCI Mail : JRYAN
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Notes on the FidoNet System
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Tom Jennings has outlined, in his article dated 30 Apr 84, a
|
|||
|
proposal for FidoNet-- a communications network for Fido and
|
|||
|
other message systems.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
I have some comments and suggestions for improvement of the
|
|||
|
FidoNet system.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If FidoNet were to use a structure similar to DecNet, the
|
|||
|
networking system for Digital computers, a person could send a
|
|||
|
message using the syntax :
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
To : -F01 Tom Jennings
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
meaning "Send this message to FidoNet Node 1, addressed to Tom
|
|||
|
Jennings". A message to all could be coded as :
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
To : -F01 All
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
and a message going to all systems could be coded as :
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
To : -F All
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The originating Fido system could keep a log of all messages
|
|||
|
in all areas that are flagged to other FidoNet nodes, and send
|
|||
|
them with a record indicating there originating node, and area
|
|||
|
description :
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Message : 25
|
|||
|
From : -F01 Tom Jennings
|
|||
|
To : All
|
|||
|
Subject : FidoNet List
|
|||
|
(Area : General )
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In my opinion, the major drawback to the FidoNet system is
|
|||
|
the reliance on the SysOp to foot the bill for the long distance
|
|||
|
charges to all the FidoNet nodes he needs to send mail to. This
|
|||
|
may make the system prohibitive to smaller users.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
An alternate idea would be to send the FidoNet mail through
|
|||
|
an alternate system such as MCI Mail or Compuserve. In this
|
|||
|
manner each sysop would only be paying the charges of the various
|
|||
|
host systems instead of the long distance charges to each FidoNet
|
|||
|
node.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
For example : If Tom (or some other willing volunteer) would
|
|||
|
write a FidoNet mail system on Compuserve, a sample session might
|
|||
|
run like this (with the FidoNet computer handling the
|
|||
|
input/output) :
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
host : Welcome to Compuserve
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
User Id : XXXXX,XXX
|
|||
|
Password : ____________
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Compuserve Information Service
|
|||
|
XX-XXX-XX at XX:XX:XX
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNet Host System
|
|||
|
Login : FIDO-01
|
|||
|
Pass : XXXXXXX
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Welcome FIDO-01
|
|||
|
Checking for mail
|
|||
|
Ready to send mail
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(CIS sends mail to FidoNet node)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Ready to recieve mail
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(FidoNet node sends mail to CIS)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Thank you for using FidoNet
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(logoff)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The disadvantages of this system (especially on CIS or the
|
|||
|
Source) would be transmission speed. Unless you want to spend the
|
|||
|
extra $12.00 per hour for 1200 baud service, your stuck with 300
|
|||
|
baud.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
But the advantages would be a central point for all FidoNet
|
|||
|
messages, and probably much greater efficiency.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Well, those are my comments. I think the idea of a national
|
|||
|
BBS network is fabulous, but it's up to us to figure out the nit-
|
|||
|
picking details!!!!!
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Jim Ryan
|
|||
|
Delta MicroSystems, Inc.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|