AI>> It would be best to report issues direcly with the author of the AI>> software causing issues (if known) or the project when possible. ml> it isn't software that is causing the main issue reported (characters ml> being stripped from message bodies)... it is the specifications in ml> use, how the wording they use is understood, and how multiple ml> specifications interact with other specifications due to the way they ml> are worded... ml> eg: does "blah is to be ignored" mean that blah is dropped from the ml> processing stream (one form of ignored) or does it mean that blah is ml> to not be acted on but must remain in the processing stream and ml> passed on to other systems (another form of ignored)...
The phrase "%s must be ignored" in technical documentation could mean only "despite of all possible special meanings, any special processing of %s is prohibited".
Examples: 1. The $shell_variable_name enclosed in 'single quotes' must be ignored. 2. The /* comments in a C/C++code */ must be ignored by compiler. etc.
ml> the secondary issue of software messing with the message bodies of ml> in-transit mail on intermediate systems in the path is well known... ml> the problem is 1) getting that software up/downgraded until a fix is ml> released and 2) getting the maintainer's attention so it can be ml> fixed... both are neigh on impossible to do these days when you have ml> operators that simply do not respond to echomail or netmail and may ml> take weeks to respond to messages written on their own boards which ml> requires that someone go set up an account there and write said ml> message...
"You should also on occasion send a message to every node in your network to ensure that they are operational. If a node turns out to be "off the air" with no prior warning, you can either mark the node down or remove it from the nodelist."
That means two weeks with "Hold" status, two weeks with "Down" status and, finally, kicking such system from the nodelist. Oh yes, there also should be some reasonable time to wait for an answer before "Hold" - a week or so.
ml> it was easier back in the day when the nodelist was required for a ml> FTN system to operate properly... *Cs could get an operators ml> attention by putting a node on HOLD status or even removing said node ml> from the nodelist... removal generally garnering the best response ml> since the node wouldn't run properly if its number didn't appear in ml> the nodelist...
Exactly same thing for now. Even if some node may explicitly put connection parameters into the mailer configuration file, all these parameters must be obtained only from nodelist.
ml> it was at that time the problem could be explained and the operator ml> could downgrade to an approved version of their software or upgrade ml> to a fixed version if one was available...
Banning people with incompatible software from echoareas works just fine.
-- Alexey V. Vissarionov aka Gremlin from Kremlin gremlin.ru!gremlin; +vii-cmiii-ccxxix-lxxix-xlii
