688 lines
32 KiB
Plaintext
688 lines
32 KiB
Plaintext
F I D O N E W S -- Vol.10 No.10 (07-Mar-1992)
|
||
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------
|
||
A newsletter of the |
|
||
FidoNet BBS community | Published by:
|
||
_ |
|
||
/ \ | "FidoNews" BBS
|
||
/|oo \ | +1-519-570-4176
|
||
(_| /_) | NEW!--> 1:1/23@FidoNet
|
||
_`@/_ \ _ |
|
||
| | \ \\ | Editors:
|
||
| (*) | \ )) | Sylvia Maxwell
|
||
|__U__| / \// | Donald Tees
|
||
_//|| _\ / | Tim Pozar
|
||
(_/(_|(____/ |
|
||
(jm) | Newspapers should have no friends.
|
||
| -- JOSEPH PULITZER
|
||
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
/*********************************************************************
|
||
* IMPORTANT NOTE: The FidoNet address for FidoNews has been changed. *
|
||
* The new address is: *
|
||
* *
|
||
* FidoNews = 1:1/23 *
|
||
* *
|
||
* Internet addresses: *
|
||
* *
|
||
* Sylvia -- max@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca *
|
||
* Donald -- donald@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca *
|
||
* Tim -- pozar@kumr.lns.com *
|
||
* Both Don & Sylvia (submission address) *
|
||
* editor@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca *
|
||
* *
|
||
**********************************************************************
|
||
|
||
For information, copyrights, article submissions, obtaining copies and
|
||
other boring but important details, please refer to the end of this
|
||
file.
|
||
========================================================================
|
||
Table of Contents
|
||
========================================================================
|
||
|
||
1. Editorial..................................................... 2
|
||
2. Articles...................................................... 2
|
||
Vervans Gaming Network...................................... 2
|
||
Performance Test: Zyxel 1496E vs. USR Courier............... 4
|
||
RE: The Caller-ID Question.................................. 8
|
||
Interfacing FidoNet with the Internet....................... 9
|
||
Another reply to "The Youth of FidoNet"..................... 11
|
||
3. Fidonews Information.......................................... 12
|
||
FidoNews 10-10 Page: 2 07 Mar 1992
|
||
|
||
|
||
========================================================================
|
||
Editorial
|
||
========================================================================
|
||
Hello World.
|
||
|
||
Brand new green editors here. No editorial policy at all...
|
||
just anarchy. I used to have a dream about how network
|
||
communications would free people from visually, geographically
|
||
and aurally enforced stereotypes like age, gender, nationality,
|
||
class... but upon reflection of mail this dream seems tame and
|
||
lame. The image of "everyone in the room, more or less armed to
|
||
the teeth, and no casualties" (thank you Tom Jennings) seems
|
||
more generative and fun. Electronic word travel enables a grand
|
||
experiment in reductio ad absurdum of normal human contact that
|
||
might fly anywhere willed by any one of us.
|
||
|
||
It has been a hectic week. Getting software to generate the news
|
||
set up, arranging passwords and paths for distribution, and
|
||
setting up an internet gateway so that we can get flames from
|
||
all directions. I think that everything is ready to go, but will
|
||
apologize in advance for the inevitable teething pains. Please
|
||
note the new addresses.
|
||
|
||
Last but not least, we would like to thank Tom Jennings for his
|
||
immense contribution to this medium, and say "well done". We
|
||
hope, Tom, that we will be seeing contributions in the future
|
||
(after a well deserved rest, of course <S>).
|
||
========================================================================
|
||
Articles
|
||
========================================================================
|
||
Vervans Gaming Network
|
||
|
||
Vervans Gaming Network
|
||
by Rob "Lord" Richter, 1:292/49
|
||
|
||
I have been an avid RPG gamer for many years, a lot longer than I have
|
||
been a Sysop. When I set up my BBS, back before Fidonet even offered
|
||
echomail, I set it up as a haven for the local gamers, complete with a
|
||
fantasy atmosphere.
|
||
|
||
A local scope for gaming, especially in a medium sized city like Cedar
|
||
Rapids, Iowa, is very limiting. I did the best I could, and ran one of
|
||
the more popular boards in the area. It was not enough.
|
||
|
||
Fidonet offered me the expansion I was looking for. It has since
|
||
offered me the AD&D echo, which provides for echomail gaming, and
|
||
RECFRP and DND for discussions. This satisfied me for quite a while,
|
||
but there were still problems.
|
||
|
||
The AD&D echo is just too crowded. There is too large of a line
|
||
waiting to play and run games and discussions in the echo get lost
|
||
amongst all the noise. RECFRP, a much more reasonable echo, doesn't
|
||
allow gaming, and neither does DND. Clearly, these were not the
|
||
answers I was looking for.
|
||
FidoNews 10-10 Page: 3 07 Mar 1992
|
||
|
||
|
||
It was about that time that I first heard about Vervans Gaming Network.
|
||
It was in its infancy and terribly disorganized but it offered a hint
|
||
at what I was looking for. V-NET had one favorable feature. It
|
||
assigned each game to its own echo, eliminating the clutter that
|
||
disgusted me with the AD&D echo. However, I was unable to join at this
|
||
time because, as a poor college student, I could not afford the long
|
||
distance charges to connect with it.
|
||
|
||
When I was finally able to get back to them, they were a going concern,
|
||
still perserving the idea of keeping the number of games per echo low
|
||
enough to prevent clutter.
|
||
|
||
I've been with V-Net for 2 years now, and I can't help but wonder if
|
||
there aren't other Sysops running RPG boards, or RPG sections, that are
|
||
looking for something a little more serious than the AD&D echo in
|
||
Fidonet. This thought has prompted me to write this article. YES!
|
||
There is life beyond the AD&D echo!
|
||
|
||
Vervans Gaming Network offers echos for playing and discussing many of
|
||
the major RPG games, including AD&D, GURPS, and more. There have been
|
||
games of Chess, Traveller, Ars Magica, Vampire, Shadow Run, Car Wars,
|
||
Hero, BattleTech, Star Trek, and Twilight: 2000. Naturally, this is
|
||
not a list of every game system that has seen V-Net, just the major
|
||
ones that I can remember of the top of my head! There are echos where
|
||
gamers can gather and discuss gaming, game masters can gather and
|
||
discuss running games, and game designers can gather and discuss rules
|
||
systems.
|
||
|
||
If you are a gamer running a BBS, or a sysop who has a gaming section
|
||
or would like to start one, this network is the network for you! You
|
||
can do exactly like I do and offer the Fidonet gaming echos as a
|
||
supplement to the V-NET echos!
|
||
|
||
For an information packet and membership kit, you can request VNETKIT
|
||
from my BBS. I'd be more than happy to answer any questions you might
|
||
have if you drop me a netmail message!
|
||
|
||
Rob Richter
|
||
V-NET Region 355 Coordinator (IL, IN, WI, IA, MN, MI, OH)
|
||
The North Castle BBS
|
||
Fidonet 1:292/49
|
||
|
||
You can also contact the following people for additional information
|
||
regarding membership or the location of the nearest V-NET node to you:
|
||
|
||
45:45/0 JOHN BOYDSTON - V-NET IC
|
||
E-SPACE BBS 1-601-226-2066 FIDONET: 1:361/302
|
||
|
||
45:45/500 TERRY MARRS - V-NET GAMING COORDINATOR
|
||
OFF-ROAD BBS 1-918-445-0454 FIDONET: 1:170/203
|
||
|
||
46:46/0 VESA PAJULA - V-NET EUROPE
|
||
PAJUBOX SUPERBBS 358-0-367462 FIDONET: 2:220/290
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 10-10 Page: 4 07 Mar 1992
|
||
|
||
|
||
Performance Test: Zyxel 1496E vs. USR Courier
|
||
Performance Test: Zyxel 1496E vs. USR Courier
|
||
|
||
by Tim Pozar
|
||
FidoNet: 1:125/555
|
||
Internet: pozar@kumr.lns.com
|
||
|
||
Tom Jennings wrote an excellent article describing modem throughput and
|
||
turnaround time for the Zyxel 1496E modem and some background on why
|
||
these tests are important for those (of us) using v.32bis/v.42bis modems
|
||
for SLIP connections. I will not go over the needs here, but I will
|
||
compare his results for the Zyxel 1496E with a USRobotics Courier v.32bis
|
||
modem.
|
||
|
||
I approached USR asking if they would like to participate in a comparison
|
||
modem evaluation test with a number of other manufactures. The Zyxel was
|
||
first modem of the series, and the USR is the second. We have a couple of
|
||
other manufactures lending us their modems, and in fact, the next one will
|
||
will look at will be the MultTech MultiModem II.
|
||
|
||
In this test of the Courier we used the same test equipment and software.
|
||
Tom has created some great modem thrashing and reporting software in
|
||
his FidoTerm terminal program.
|
||
|
||
TEST #1: direct modem-to-modem, unidirectional pure ASCII.
|
||
DTE speed locked at 57600 baud.
|
||
|
||
This is the Courier's performance for a short, repeated string of ascii
|
||
going one direction only. The serial ports were locked at 57,600Kb/s.
|
||
|
||
+MODE: Receive-only
|
||
+DURATION: 60:00
|
||
+LOG INTERVAL: 5:00
|
||
---------- Errors -----------
|
||
Time Bits Rec'd Bits Blocks Seconds Resyncs
|
||
=15:03:50 0 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=15:08:56 12,454,664 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=15:14:00 24,916,728 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=15:19:06 37,382,704 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
...
|
||
=15:54:42 124,625,000 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=15:59:46 137,087,280 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
-16:03:50 146,981,648 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
-END: 16:03:50
|
||
-RECEIVE BYTES/SEC: 5103
|
||
-BER: <1.00*10E-07
|
||
|
||
Compared to the Zyxel we were able to obtain a little more than
|
||
1KBytes better throughput with the USR.
|
||
|
||
+MODE: Receive-only
|
||
+DURATION: 60:10
|
||
+LOG INTERVAL: 5:00
|
||
---------- Errors -----------
|
||
FidoNews 10-10 Page: 5 07 Mar 1992
|
||
|
||
Time Bits Rec'd Bits Blocks Seconds Resyncs
|
||
=13:34:22 0 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=13:39:26 12,369,312 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=13:44:30 24,722,112 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=13:49:36 37,150,616 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
...
|
||
=14:25:12 123,967,184 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=14:30:16 136,319,880 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
-14:34:30 146,231,616 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
-END: 14:34:30
|
||
-RECEIVE BYTES/SEC: 4051
|
||
-BER: 1.00*10E-07
|
||
|
||
To repeat the disclaimer that Tom used in his article:
|
||
This is NOT a real-life test; you will probably not get this
|
||
downloading even a pure text file; telephone lines were not used. The
|
||
modems were connected together with an RJ-11 cord, one was commanded
|
||
"ATA" and the other "ATO". This is "flat out downhill with the wind";
|
||
you can however use it as a relative measure of telephone line
|
||
quality.
|
||
|
||
Tom noticed a drop of about 5 percent of the throughput when using
|
||
real-live phone lines.
|
||
|
||
TEST #2: BI-DIRECTIONAL PLAIN ASCII THROUGHPUT
|
||
Dialup, bi-directional pure ASCII.
|
||
DTE speed locked at 57600 baud.
|
||
|
||
Courier:
|
||
+MODE: Bi-directional
|
||
+LOG INTERVAL: 5:00
|
||
---------- Errored ----------
|
||
Time Sent Rec'd Bits Blocks Seconds Resyncs
|
||
=21:14:16 184 0 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=21:19:22 3,555,616 12,444,968 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=21:24:26 7,090,808 24,910,384 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=21:29:32 10,618,456 37,376,784 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
...
|
||
=22:00:02 31,801,456 112,168,720 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=22:05:08 35,329,840 124,633,416 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=22:10:12 38,860,064 137,095,416 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
-22:14:16 41,703,600 147,053,656 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
-END: 22:14:16
|
||
-REASON: NORMAL
|
||
-DURATION: 60:00
|
||
-SEND BYTES/SEC: 1447
|
||
-RECEIVE BYTES/SEC: 5106
|
||
-BER: <1.00*10E-07
|
||
|
||
Zyxel:
|
||
+MODE: Bi-directional
|
||
+LOG INTERVAL: 3:00
|
||
---------- Errors -----------
|
||
Time Bits Sent Bits Rec'd Bits Blocks Seconds Resyncs
|
||
=20:47:54 184 3752 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
FidoNews 10-10 Page: 6 07 Mar 1992
|
||
|
||
=20:50:56 6,326,840 5,877,464 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=20:54:00 12,512,552 12,095,040 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=20:57:04 18,850,984 17,760,856 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=21:00:10 25,479,032 22,622,432 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
...
|
||
=21:21:46 70,366,384 59,473,344 0 0 0:00 0
|
||
=21:23:58 OPERATOR INTERRUPTION START
|
||
=21:23:58 OPERATOR INTERRUPTION END
|
||
=21:25:00 76,999,584 60,747,280 23 1 0:01 1
|
||
-21:26:50 80,421,800 60,922,264 23 1 0:01 1
|
||
-END: 21:26:50
|
||
-REASON: OPERATOR ABORT
|
||
-DURATION: 38:56
|
||
-SEND BYTES/SEC: 3443
|
||
-RECEIVE BYTES/SEC: 2608
|
||
-BER: 3.77*10E-07
|
||
|
||
We ended up not having quite the horsepower on the machines we were using
|
||
to keep up with the modems. Servicing serial port interrupts can be a bit
|
||
of a task for PC clones even with 16550 UARTS. This is why the Send Bytes
|
||
per second is about 1447. The computer had such a hard time keeping up
|
||
with getting the data off of the modem that it had little time to shove
|
||
data back down the line.
|
||
|
||
I was more curious on if the flooding the opposite direction would affect
|
||
the performance of the other. I was able to get 5103 Bytes/Sec from the
|
||
Unidirectional path and with data flowing bidirectionally, about 5106. I
|
||
am assuming that this 3Bytes/Sec is showing more of the errors in the
|
||
calculations. But it does show that the performance is not degraded. In
|
||
fact, again we were able to get better performance than the Zyxel.
|
||
|
||
TEST #3: Dialup, ZMODEM file transfer.
|
||
DTE locked at 56700 baud.
|
||
|
||
direct modem to mode at 57600 pre-compressed NODELIST file
|
||
|
||
Courier:
|
||
+FidoTerm file transfer started on +21 Feb 93
|
||
+14:07:04 File #001: C:FOO.1, 641,304 bytes, Zmodem
|
||
-14:13:40 File complete (6:37, 1615 bytes/sec)
|
||
|
||
Zyxel:
|
||
+17:52:12 File #001: TESTFILE.1, 641,304 bytes, Zmodem
|
||
-17:57:40 File complete (5:34, 1920 bytes/sec)
|
||
|
||
+17:57:42 File #002: TESTFILE.1, 641,304 bytes, Zmodem
|
||
-18:03:12 File complete (11:05, 1928 bytes/sec)
|
||
|
||
Again, this was the same equipment and data. The files used for testing
|
||
was NODELIST.015, a recent FidoNet nodelist, pre-compressed with LHARC
|
||
2.12, to somewhat foil V.42bis compression.
|
||
|
||
It seems that the Courier can process and pump compressible data better
|
||
than the Zyxel, but already compressed files, the Zyxel can do about 300
|
||
bytes/sec better performance.
|
||
FidoNews 10-10 Page: 7 07 Mar 1992
|
||
|
||
|
||
TEST #4: TURNAROUND TIME TESTS
|
||
This shows off how fast the modems can turn the link around. The
|
||
test gives turnaround latency, i.e.. out and back, the latency times are
|
||
for two modems in series.
|
||
|
||
This test would be of particular interest to those that use modems in
|
||
"ACKed" protocols like xmodem and SLIP.
|
||
|
||
+14:19:04 File #001: C:FOO.1, Xmodem/CRC [641,304 bytes]
|
||
-14:36:08 File complete (17:05, 625 bytes/sec)
|
||
|
||
RESULTS:
|
||
XMODEM ZMODEM difference
|
||
bytes 641,304 641,304
|
||
secs 1025 397 628
|
||
blocks 5011 na 628 / 5011 = 125.3 mS/block TAT
|
||
|
||
Zyxel:
|
||
+17:38:58 File #001: TESTFILE.1, Xmodem/CRC [641,304 bytes]
|
||
-17:58:10 File complete (19:13, 556 bytes/sec)
|
||
|
||
+17:52:12 File #001: TESTFILE.1, 641,304 bytes, Zmodem
|
||
-17:57:40 File complete (5:34, 1920 bytes/sec)
|
||
|
||
The difference in time between these two is the turnaround latency.
|
||
With 5011 blocks sent we can easily calculate the latency per block
|
||
(remember two turnarounds per block):
|
||
|
||
RESULTS:
|
||
XMODEM ZMODEM difference
|
||
bytes 641,304 641,304
|
||
secs 1153 334 819
|
||
blocks 5011 na 819 / 5011 = 163 mS/block TAT
|
||
|
||
19:13 - 05:34 = 13:39 time difference
|
||
5011 / 13:39 = .163 sec/block turnaround time
|
||
|
||
Another surprise. The Courier could turn around packets by a little
|
||
less than 40mS or 23 percent faster.
|
||
|
||
Looking quickly over the data, it seems that the Couriers are better at
|
||
text compression and turnaround time, but for compressed data with a
|
||
ACKless protocol, the Zyxel seems win. If you are pushing compressed
|
||
conferences around via Zmodem on FidoNet, I would look hard at the Zyxel
|
||
1496E modems. If you are installing SLIP connections and expect to be
|
||
using it for interactive sessions like Telnet or shoving lots of
|
||
uncompressed conferences via NNTP, I would plug the USR Courier in.
|
||
|
||
Next time, MultiTech's MultiModem II...
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 10-10 Page: 8 07 Mar 1992
|
||
|
||
|
||
RE: The Caller-ID Question.
|
||
|
||
From: anton@hydra.unm.edu (Stanton McCandlish)
|
||
|
||
Last FNews, an article appeared defending caller ID, and the
|
||
practice of refusing calls that do not hand over the callers'
|
||
phone numbers.
|
||
|
||
I would like to respond with some criticism. Of course you are
|
||
not obligated to accept ANY calls. No law says you have to.
|
||
However, many people, myself included, got caller ID blocking
|
||
the instant it became available, mostly because IT IS NO ONE'S
|
||
BUSINESS WHAT THE HELL OUR PHONE NUMBER IS. If you need it, and
|
||
we want to give it to you then you will get it. That is what the
|
||
login questions asking for phone numbers are for. The idea that
|
||
caller ID is necessary for a board's security is ludicrous. A
|
||
much simpler, and cheaper, solution is to install a call-back
|
||
door. If the phone number you are given is bogus, fine delete
|
||
the user. Is this so difficult?
|
||
|
||
I would also like to point out that, in my area at least, caller
|
||
ID blocking cannot be turned on and off at whim as call waiting
|
||
can. It is all or nothing. SO basically, you are demanding that
|
||
users either stay the hell away, or that they give their phone
|
||
number out to any place they happen to call, including places
|
||
that may well put the phone number on mailing lists, and
|
||
otherwise misuse it (this is the whole idea behind caller ID
|
||
blocking in the first place.) If you wish to lose users, go
|
||
right ahead. *I* certainly won't be calling your board!
|
||
|
||
One final point, there has been some discussion of the
|
||
"legality" of doing what you do, as far as Fido policy goes. If
|
||
your refusal to take calls that do not bow down to your caller
|
||
ID demand causes a mail transfer to fail, then guess what? It
|
||
seems you are in violation of policy (particularly the part
|
||
stating that you are not to incurr costs to other members; by
|
||
answering the phone, then rejecting the call when no caller ID
|
||
is forthcoming, you are wasting the caller's money). I would
|
||
suggest holding off on caller ID, until a nodelist flag for it
|
||
has been defined, and implemented by the major Fido mailers
|
||
(FD, D'Bridge and Binkley at very least.)
|
||
|
||
One other thing: You do not have a "right" to know who is
|
||
calling. At least I have seen no such thing in the Bill of
|
||
Rights, although there is that on part about the right to
|
||
PRIVACY now isn't there?
|
||
FidoNews 10-10 Page: 9 07 Mar 1992
|
||
|
||
|
||
Interfacing FidoNet with the Internet
|
||
|
||
by Gavin Hurlbut
|
||
Interfacing FidoNet with the Internet
|
||
|
||
As a former sysop of a FidoNet BBS, I have followed as closely as
|
||
possible the debates regarding a new nodelist format. In a recent
|
||
FidoNews (last week, or the week before, I've forgotten which), there
|
||
was a proposal to create Domain Name Servers (or DNS's) for FidoNet. I
|
||
would like to bring forward my thoughts on the matter.
|
||
|
||
1: Ease of FidoNet <==> Internet mail gating
|
||
|
||
If a DNS system were put in place, the problem of how to send mail
|
||
between FidoNet and the Internet would be somewhat solved. At the
|
||
moment, to send mail through the gateway, it requires a fair amount of
|
||
inside knowledge (freely available to all those who REALLY search). To
|
||
send mail from my account here at the University of Waterloo to my
|
||
account on a local FidoNet BBS (Plexnet Systems, 1:221/210), I would
|
||
have to send the article to Gavin.Hurlbut@f210.n221.z1.fidonet.org
|
||
This really poses no problem for me other than having to remember a
|
||
cryptic node number. However for me to send mail BACK to the WatStar
|
||
system, I would have to follow this procedure:
|
||
|
||
Send mail To: UUCP at 1:1/31 (fidonet.org) or another UFGATE site
|
||
with the first line being To: gjhurlbut@1302.watstar.uwaterloo.ca
|
||
with the message following.
|
||
|
||
Many Fido Sysops (and other users with netmail access) if not most, do
|
||
not know how to use the UFGATE system.
|
||
|
||
With a DNS system in place, as all mail would use the same address
|
||
format, for me to send mail to my WatStar account I would simply have
|
||
to send mail to gjhurlbut@1302.watstar.uwaterloo.ca and the DNS system
|
||
should take care of it for me by gating it directly to fidonet.org (or
|
||
another UFGATE site) and then through the Internet. This would take
|
||
less work (and thinking) on the part of the sender. The DNS server
|
||
would not need to be very complex to perform this as if the address
|
||
does not end with "fidonet.org", the mail should be sent to the local
|
||
UFGATE site to go to the Internet.
|
||
|
||
2: Increased access to Internet facilities
|
||
|
||
If the naming of FidoNet nodes followed the standard naming system in
|
||
the Internet, as it would after implementing a DNS system, it would
|
||
facilitate more interaction at all levels between FidoNet and the
|
||
Internet.
|
||
|
||
For instance, getting Usenet news on FidoNet news would be incredibly
|
||
easier. The gating programs would no longer have to worry about gating
|
||
between two different naming systems. The only thing that would be
|
||
necessary would be to and distribute it. Much simpler than gating it
|
||
into an echo first. This would, of course require a news gateway, but
|
||
that would not be too hard to come by as there would likely be many
|
||
FidoNews 10-10 Page: 10 07 Mar 1992
|
||
|
||
FidoNet systems that would be glad to have the honours.
|
||
|
||
Another advantage is that if there were a FTP-to-FREQ gate in FidoNet,
|
||
all FidoNet nodes could get access to all of the files available by FTP
|
||
in the Internet (FTP is an acronym for File Transfer Protocol -- used
|
||
on most IP-connected Internet sites). The server would get a request
|
||
for a file, and at the next convenient time, FTP it for the node, and
|
||
at a later time the node could repoll to get the file. The server
|
||
would necessarily have to have a fair amount of temporary file space,
|
||
and be connected directly to the Internet, but that would be all that
|
||
would be required.
|
||
|
||
3: Slight (??) increase in cost ( :[ )
|
||
|
||
The only downfall to using Internet services and news is that there
|
||
would necessarily need to be cost involved. The servers and gates
|
||
would have to be directly connected to the Internet (as are most UFGATE
|
||
sites). There is a price to getting such connections, but as many
|
||
FidoNet BBSs are large pay systems, that could be covered with ease
|
||
(assuming that it would be one of these boards that perform the
|
||
gating). As the services would be used by the FidoNet community as a
|
||
whole, the costs to the individual participating nets would rise also,
|
||
causing nodes' costs to rise (possibly - depending on net & region
|
||
policy).
|
||
|
||
We all know that cost is not something many people want to hear about,
|
||
but it is a necessary evil. Changing the naming system itself has no
|
||
appreciable costs that I can forsee, but some of the future uses of a
|
||
DNS-based nodelist structure would tend to raise the cost of use. Of
|
||
course, the services would be used only by those who want them, so if a
|
||
node does not wish to participate, there should be no appreciable cost
|
||
increase for that node (depending on net and/or region policy again).
|
||
|
||
4: Conclusion
|
||
|
||
I think that all in all, a move to a DNS based nodelist architecture is
|
||
a giant step in the right direction for FidoNet. The new available
|
||
services (after appropriate program development, of course) far
|
||
outweigh the drawbacks of changing the systems (at least as I see it).
|
||
Of course, all FidoNet compatible BBSs would have to be modified if
|
||
they are to use these nicities (more work -- ICK!)
|
||
|
||
Here's to hoping that a DNS system is adopted in the relatively near
|
||
future!
|
||
|
||
Gavin Hurlbut
|
||
Electrical Engineering Freshman, University of Waterloo (Canada)
|
||
|
||
FidoNet: Gavin Hurlbut at 1:221/210 (NOTE: I am NOT the SysOp, just
|
||
a user with Netmail access)
|
||
Internet: gjhurlbut@1302.watstar.uwaterloo.ca
|
||
(only until the end of April 93)
|
||
|
||
gjhurlbut@electrical.watstar.uwaterloo.ca
|
||
(only on academic terms after April 93 -- mail may bounce)
|
||
FidoNews 10-10 Page: 11 07 Mar 1992
|
||
|
||
|
||
UUCP: ghurlbut@lotds.uucp
|
||
|
||
SnailMail: Gavin Hurlbut (Permanent Home Address)
|
||
Hamer Bay Rd
|
||
MacTier, ON
|
||
P0C 1H0
|
||
|
||
=====================================================================
|
||
|
||
Another reply to "The Youth of FidoNet"
|
||
|
||
by Scott Miller, The Star Board BBS (1:123/416)
|
||
The Rights of Teenagers and other "Non-Adults" in FidoNet
|
||
|
||
I am a sysop in FidoNet and have been one since June of 1992. At
|
||
the time I was 12 years old. And like some of the other replies
|
||
to this very interesting topic, I was not treated as nicely as
|
||
I believe I could have been, had I been an adult.
|
||
|
||
Some SysOp's (to remain nameless) were not willing to provide help
|
||
setting my system up for recieving FidoNet mail, which at the time
|
||
I could not wait to get running simply because I was very interested
|
||
in the field of BBS operation. I had a great time with people helping
|
||
me set up the various functions, options, paths, and processors,
|
||
considering that I was talking to the fellow SysOp via Chat conference
|
||
online. Most people could not tell that I was only a 12 year old
|
||
amateur Sysop, but I seemed rather, as a completely capable
|
||
computer user that was "Mature" enough to be able to handle the
|
||
aspects of network mail. But when I called someone voice, I was
|
||
treated as if I was incapable of inserting the floppy in the A:
|
||
drive.
|
||
|
||
I am quite interested in how FidoNet has treated various young
|
||
and very eager SysOps. My experience was not quite as unpleasent
|
||
as others that I have heard of, but I too was rather unhappy that
|
||
I was encouraged not to join FidoNet, but rather get practice on
|
||
"Smaller" networks such as AlterNet and MagNet (a couple of local
|
||
networks). I have since proved that I am completely capable of
|
||
handling the aspects of mail networking, and have since started my
|
||
own mail network called StarNet. HA! I am now MORE than capable
|
||
of inserting disk 1 of 2 in drive A:, but also able to manage
|
||
netmail routing, nodelist management, echo coordination, and
|
||
file distribution!
|
||
|
||
In conclusion, I would just like to say that all the "Adults"
|
||
in FidoNet should assume that us "Kids" can handle the technical
|
||
jargon, and let us remove the doubtsay that we would like you to
|
||
explain the more difficult aspects. Besides, if we didn't
|
||
think we could handle it, why would we start it in the first place!
|
||
FidoNews 10-10 Page: 12 07 Mar 1992
|
||
|
||
|
||
========================================================================
|
||
Fidonews Information
|
||
========================================================================
|
||
|
||
------- FIDONEWS MASTHEAD AND CONTACT INFORMATION ----------------
|
||
|
||
Editors: Sylvia Maxwell, Donald Tees, Tim Pozar
|
||
Editors Emeritii: Thom Henderson, Dale Lovell, Vince Perriello,
|
||
Tom Jennings
|
||
|
||
IMPORTANT NOTE: The FidoNet address of the FidoNews BBS has been
|
||
changed!!! Please make a note of this.
|
||
|
||
"FidoNews" BBS
|
||
FidoNet 1:1/23 <---- NEW ADDRESS!!!!
|
||
BBS +1-519-570-4176, 300/1200/2400/14200/V.32bis/HST(DS)
|
||
Internet addresses:
|
||
Don & Sylvia (submission address)
|
||
editor@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca
|
||
|
||
Sylvia -- max@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca
|
||
Donald -- donald@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca
|
||
Tim -- pozar@kumr.lns.com
|
||
|
||
(Postal Service mailing address) (have extreme patience)
|
||
FidoNews
|
||
172 Duke St. E.
|
||
Kitchener, Ontario
|
||
Canada
|
||
N2H 1A7
|
||
|
||
Published weekly by and for the members of the FidoNet international
|
||
amateur electronic mail system. It is a compilation of individual
|
||
articles contributed by their authors or their authorized agents. The
|
||
contribution of articles to this compilation does not diminish the
|
||
rights of the authors. Opinions expressed in these articles are those
|
||
of the authors and not necessarily those of FidoNews.
|
||
|
||
Authors retain copyright on individual works; otherwise FidoNews is
|
||
copyright 1993 Sylvia Maxwell. All rights reserved. Duplication and/or
|
||
distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only. For use in
|
||
other circumstances, please contact the original authors, or FidoNews
|
||
(we're easy).
|
||
|
||
|
||
OBTAINING COPIES: The-most-recent-issue-ONLY of FidoNews in electronic
|
||
form may be obtained from the FidoNews BBS via manual download or
|
||
Wazoo FileRequest, or from various sites in the FidoNet and Internet.
|
||
PRINTED COPIES may be obtained from Fido Software for $10.00US each
|
||
PostPaid First Class within North America, or $13.00US elsewhere,
|
||
mailed Air Mail. (US funds drawn upon a US bank only.)
|
||
|
||
BACK ISSUES: Available from FidoNet nodes 1:102/138, 1:216/21,
|
||
1:125/1212, (and probably others), via filerequest or download
|
||
FidoNews 10-10 Page: 13 07 Mar 1992
|
||
|
||
(consult a recent nodelist for phone numbers).
|
||
|
||
A very nice index to the Tables of Contents to all FidoNews volumes
|
||
can be filerequested from 1:396/1 or 1:216/21. The name(s) to request
|
||
are FNEWSxTC.ZIP, where 'x' is the volume number; 1=1984, 2=1985...
|
||
through 8=1991.
|
||
|
||
INTERNET USERS: FidoNews is available via FTP from ftp.ieee.org, in
|
||
directory ~ftp/pub/fidonet/fidonews. If you have questions regarding
|
||
FidoNet, please direct them to deitch@gisatl.fidonet.org, not the
|
||
FidoNews BBS. (Be kind and patient; David Deitch is generously
|
||
volunteering to handle FidoNet/Internet questions.)
|
||
|
||
SUBMISSIONS: You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in
|
||
FidoNews. Article submission requirements are contained in the file
|
||
ARTSPEC.DOC, available from the FidoNews BBS, or Wazoo filerequestable
|
||
from 1:1/23 as file "ARTSPEC.DOC". Please read it.
|
||
|
||
"Fido", "FidoNet" and the dog-with-diskette are U.S. registered
|
||
trademarks of Tom Jennings, Box 77731, San Francisco CA 94107, USA and
|
||
are used with permission.
|
||
|
||
Asked what he thought of Western civilization,
|
||
M.K. Gandhi said, "I think it would be an excellent idea".
|
||
-- END
|
||
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|