= Сообщение: 6510 из 7128 ====================================== FTSC_PUBLIC = От : Pavel Gulchouck 2:463/68 18 Sep 22 16:51:26 Кому : Oli 18 Sep 22 16:51:26 Тема : FTS-5004 FGHI : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=2:463/68+632729d2 На : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=2:280/464.47+6324ebd2 = Кодировка сообщения определена как: CP1125 ================================= ============================================================================== Hi Oli!
16 Sep 22, Oli ==> Pavel Gulchouck:
Ol>>> I'm not sure ic.ddn would count as a DDN record, because it's not Ol>>> in the f*.n*.z*.ddn namespace. TXT records are also not covered by Ol>>> FTS-5004.
PG>> FTS-5004 specifies contents of a DNS zone for being DDN. And according to PG>> this FTS no records other than generated from the nodelist should appear PG>> in the zone.
Ol> Is this how DNS is intended to work? The binkp client also does not care about anything that does not match *.f*.n*.z*.ddn-zone.
Nodelist also contains not only information required for call a node, but some additional info such as "U,REC" flag or even comments that are not used by fidonet mailers but may be convenient.
PG>> Alexey (author of this FTS) told that DNS zone which contains additional PG>> information (such as IP addresses of points) is not DDN according by PG>> FTS-5004.
Ol> Interesting. To quote FTS-5004:
Ol> P - Point Number: Ol> If the system is a point rather than a node then Ol> this is their point number at that node. Ol> Optional. If ".P" is missing then assume 0 (node itself).
Ol> What is the point in mentioning points in the FTS, when there are no points in the world nodelist and everything else is forbidden? ;)
Yes, it's interesting.
PG>> May be, we can change this paragraph to something like "DDN MUST contains PG>> all information about IP addresses from the world nodelist and MUST NOT PG>> modify this information. DDN CAN contain information from other sources PG>> (pointlists, fresh network segments etc) only in addition to information PG>> from the world nodelist".
Ol> Question is: if there were multiple DDN services, would it be okay that each one could have different additional records from other Ol> sources or should every DDN be exactly the same?
Yes. FTS-5004 specifies strict meaning: all DDN should be equal, so they should not contain any additional data. I do not see reasons for this limitation: many existing domains are using as DDN are not DDN by this definition because contain extra info.
Also, many sysops want to create a service that is better than others, this is the goal. They create new features for areamgr, extra statistics, robots and other stuff. Standards specify only minimal requirements, and sysop can extend it. Strict limitations for areafix commands (which forbid extensions) and other node features could kill enthusiasm in setup fidonet node. What reasons for setup one more node which are equal to all existing? The same is for DDN. If all DDN domains should be completely equal, what reasons for create and support one more? How can sysop apply their individuality in this? I think possibility to add some pointlist or other additional information can make each DDN unique and thereby solve the problem.
