01 Nov 05:00:40 [22564] send message NUL VER binkd/0.9.11/Linux
binkp/1.1
? 01 Nov 05:00:40 [22564] unexpected password digest from the remote
Are you sure the passwords you both use for the connection are identical? Case is important!
Are you sure the passwords you both use for the connection are
identical? Case is important!
Yes.. if I Poll the system it is in secure mode. See log tonight
The only difference is if I have a mail packet to send to that node, then it is not in secure mode.
17 Nov 20:20:01 [7442] BEGIN, binkd/0.9.11/Linux -p -P 1:3
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5Are you sure the passwords you both use for the connection are identical?
Case is important!
Yes.. if I Poll the system it is in secure mode. See log tonight
Allen Prunty wrote to Lindsay Zellner <=-
I don't know if you ever got this resolved. Mystic can be very
literal... have the node you are connected with set NOT to send you
their AKAs. That seemed to fix a similar issue I had with a mystic
node.
Also you need to make sure you have the same domain programmed in your binkd.cfg as they do.
Mystic is very literal and binkd needs to have in it's node entry the
full 5d domain
1:111/111.0@fidonet
The domain must match exactly case sensative.
Allen Prunty wrote to Lindsay Zellner <=-
I don't know if you ever got this resolved. Mystic can be very
literal... have the node you are connected with set NOT to send you
their AKAs. That seemed to fix a similar issue I had with a mystic
node.
I've had no issues. I used to transfer a lot of mail between my two
BBSs - one Mystic, one binkd.
Also you need to make sure you have the same domain programmed in your
binkd.cfg as they do.
Mystic is very literal and binkd needs to have in it's node entry the
full 5d domain
1:111/111.0@fidonet
I haven't found the need to put the point into my node entries (unless it's a point, of course ;) ).
The domain must match exactly case sensative.
Agree, domains must match.
... Useless Invention: Umbrella with a skylight.--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.49
* Origin: Freeway BBS - freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
The domain must match exactly case sensative.
Agree, domains must match.
Allen Prunty wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
@MSGID: <5851E2A3.1157.fido-binkd@freeway.apana.org.au>
@TZ: 412c
Bink-D assumes 0... but mystic auto fills out the .0
:-)
I've seen someone somehow put a space in that field and it messed
things up.
mark lewis wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
i can't say that i've seen binkd have a problem with case sensitivity
but it is possible, i suppose...
15 Dec 16 08:17, you wrote to Allen Prunty:
The domain must match exactly case sensative.
Agree, domains must match.
i can't say that i've seen binkd have a problem with case sensitivity
but it is possible, i suppose...
that brings another question, though... what about aliases? are they
also case sensitive if domains are??
i can't say that i've seen binkd have a problem with case sensitivity
but it is possible, i suppose...
From somewhere I recall reading that domains should be 8 characters or less,
and in lowercase.
The domain must match exactly case sensative.
Agree, domains must match.
i can't say that i've seen binkd have a problem with case sensitivity
but it is possible, i suppose...
that brings another question, though... what about aliases? are they
also case sensitive if domains are??
Yes... anything put in mystic needs to match pretty much exactly or mystic may (or may not as more likely) choose to use it. Quite frankly I think this is a good security measure.
But mystic does tend to break traditions by making them case
sensative.
One other thing that helped with connection refusal is ticking the
setting when node x:xxx/xxx polls in don't present any AKAs but the
one they are connecting to. This seemed to make it behave a bit more
too.
that option helps in some cases... i requested it be added because
stats were wrong... i was polling a system in an othernet supposedly
with my othernet address but that other system's stats were logging everything with my main address which was not in that othernet...
there was no connection or link between us with that main address so
their stats were technically wrong... by hiding the other addresses,
there was only one presented to them and their stats were now
technically correct... i think it would have been easier for mystic to present the common address first in the list of addresses and avoid
the problem in the first place but someone didn't see that or they
didn't understand the problem... there is a reason for having AKA
matching ;)
Fairly certain this was coded per spec (or proposal even). Most mailers
do not match the common AKA. They usually work in a top-down list and match the first one that matches. So if you and I both have a Fidonet address, it will try to use that first. If it fails, it will go to the next matching AKA in the list. This is how binkd, Argus/Taurus/Radius, Irex, and any other mailers I've used in the past currently operate.
I don't know of any mailers that do not do it this way (while I don't agree with the method, but whatever). This was why the "Hide AKAs" was added to Mystic in the first place.. to get past that issue if it were
to come up.
True... I agree on that... but I think Mystic kinda picks the one it
is polling and doesn't ahve any rolldown on the other nodes. It's
fido poll command line is very small in memory size which makes me
believe it's very simple in it's operation... but again it's not the
size of the dog in the fight that counts here.
It's does eliminate some overhead as there is one node that I connect
to that has a Gazillion othernets to contend with. I think Bink-D naviagates them well but when I look at the logs on that node I'm
amazed.
Ah, yes. This is why I've always tried to get people to use the
"fidopoll send" command, rather than "fidopoll forced". When using "forced", Mystic's mailer will poll every single link that was enabled, and always seemed to cause problems (with me being the other end, anyways). Using "send" would only connect to the links you actually had mail waiting to send to. Usually switching to the "send" method fixed whatever issues myself and said link were having.
At that point they're only collecting AKAs. I guarantee you they do not spend much of any time actually participating in any or all of those networks. I have seen this a few times in the past as well, and have chosen not to link with a couple certain individuals because of it.
I do tend to partaicipate in a few echos in the nets I participate with. Different nets often have different personalities :-)
AP> I do tend to partaicipate in a few echos in the nets I participatewith.
AP> Different nets often have different personalities :-)
Agreed, and the participation is always welcome. Although I was more referring to people with a ridiculous amount of AKAs. One in particular comes to mind that has almost 100 of them.
Agreed, and the participation is always welcome. Although I was more
referring to people with a ridiculous amount of AKAs. One in particular
comes to mind that has almost 100 of them.
This particuler one should also learn how to use these two in binkd conf:
hide-aka
present-aka
| Sysop: | digital man |
|---|---|
| Location: | Riverside County, California |
| Users: | 1,049 |
| Nodes: | 15 (0 / 15) |
| Uptime: | 56:11:00 |
| Calls: | 236,052 |
| Files: | 60,364 |
| D/L today: |
39 files (49,116K bytes) |
| Messages: | 289,729 |