= Сообщение: 477 из 12518 ======================================= ENET.SYSOP = От : Kees van Eeten 2:280/5003.4 23 Jan 14 13:31:38 Кому : Pavel Gulchouck 23 Jan 14 13:31:38 Тема : Notice to RCs FGHI : area://ENET.SYSOP?msgid=2:280/5003.4+52e11012 На : area://ENET.SYSOP?msgid=2:463/68+52e0e8c1 = Кодировка сообщения определена как: LATIN-1 ================================ ============================================================================== Hello Pavel!
23 Jan 14 11:21, you wrote to Benny Pedersen:
PG> Yes, but hitherto we use fake phone '00-00-000000' in such cases to PG> satisfy standard requirements and possibly software compatibility.
PG> In my oppinion it will be graceful to allow something like "[hostname]" in PG> that field and rename it in FTS-5000, but I'm not sure about currently PG> using software.
I think the discussion has been held many times, but for short.
A mailer with a telephone line could dial a all zero's number. We have been told that that could lead to unwanted connections. Anyway it will make a connection to the telephone exchange and dialing a nonexisting number is charged in some countries.
The software knows what to do with -Unpublished- There is software that knows that when a phone number starts with 000- it should be read as an IP address, but that use has the same drawbacks as the all zero's number.
Existing software will not know what to do with a hostname in the phonenumber field and may not be ready to accept alphanumercs there.
There are already to many places where a hostname can be present. The system name field, the INA: tag and in some cases the protocol tag.
Uniformity in where a hostname can be found simplifies the software that has to look for it. Overloading data fields always requires that the data has to be analysed to decide what it represents.
Kees
--- FPD v2.9.040207 GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5 * Origin: As for me, all I know is that, I know nothing. (2:280/5003.4)
