= Сообщение: 1680 из 7125 ====================================== FTSC_PUBLIC = От : Alexey Vissarionov 2:5020/545 25 Dec 14 11:00:00 Кому : Torsten Bamberg 25 Dec 14 11:00:00 Тема : ENC user flag FGHI : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=2:5020/545+549bc402 На : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=2:240/5832+549b5ba4 = Кодировка сообщения определена как: CP866 ================================== ============================================================================== Good ${greeting_time}, Torsten!
25 Dec 2014 01:09:34, you wrote to Roy Witt:
MvdV>>> The ENC user flag is documented in par 6.2 in FTS-5003. MvdV>>> http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-5001.005 RW>> Thanks, but that doesn't answer the question of; why isn't the RW>> flag implemented in an all zones nodelist? TB> Well, this Userflag is used for a long time now, and some systems TB> carry this flag over years now. As 5001.005 says, it is common for TB> all zones.
Yes.
RW>> If it's good for the goose, why not the gander? TB> Because the sysop needs a special setup for routing encrypted netmail TB> and encrypted echomail.
No special setup required. The FPD-4.07 says:
==== yum ==== 2.1.4 Encryption and Review of Mail FidoNet is an amateur system. Our technology is such that the privacy of messages cannot be guaranteed. As a sysop, you have the right to review traffic flowing through your system, if for no other reason than to ensure that the system is not being used for illegal or commercial purposes. Encryption obviously makes this review impossible. Therefore, encrypted and/or commercial traffic that is routed without the express permission of all the links in the delivery system constitutes annoying behavior. ==== burp ====
The ${subj} means the encrypted netmail will be accepted and routed by, for example, this system:
