I've run into this issue before, but never figured out a resolution.

I'm running SBBS 3.19, SBBSecho v3.15-win32. I received a netmail from a point in zone 2. I replied to it, and see a .cut file in what looks like the proper place - %binkdir%\outbox.002\00dd0001.pnt\0000003a.cut. The contents of the .cut file is the netmail reply I wrote. So far, so good.

If I poll the boss node, nothing gets transferred. If I poll the point, nothing happens, as expected.

Is there a setting I've missed in echocfg to properly route any point mail I receive to the boss node?

---
■ Synchronet ■ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Re: routing to points
By: poindexter FORTRAN to All on Tue Feb 14 2023 12:43 pm

I've run into this issue before, but never figured out a resolution.

I'm running SBBS 3.19, SBBSecho v3.15-win32. I received a netmail from a point in zone 2. I replied to it, and see a .cut file in what looks like the proper place - %binkdir%\outbox.002\00dd0001.pnt\0000003a.cut. The contents of the .cut file is the netmail reply I wrote. So far, so good.

If I poll the boss node, nothing gets transferred. If I poll the point, nothing happens, as expected.

Is there a setting I've missed in echocfg to properly route any point mail I receive to the boss node?

Here's the relevant logic in sbbsecho.s pack_netmail():

if(nodecfg == NULL && addr.point != 0) {
fidoaddr_t boss = addr;
boss.point = 0;
if((nodecfg = findnodecfg(&cfg, boss, /* exact: */true)) != NULL) {
addr = boss;
lprintf(LOG_INFO, "Routing NetMail (%s) to boss-node %s"
,getfname(path), smb_faddrtoa(&addr, NULL));
}
}

Which means that the boss node must be configured in EchoCfg->Linked Nodes for this boss-routing to occur. Is the boss node in question configured in EchoCfg->Linked Nodes?
--
digital man (rob)

This Is Spinal Tap quote #39:
Female Airport Security Officer: Do you have any artificial plates or limbs? Norco, CA WX: 49.0°F, 84.0% humidity, 4 mph ESE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to poindexter FORTRAN on Tue Feb 14 2023 05:06 pm

Which means that the boss node must be configured in EchoCfg->Linked Nodes for this boss-routing to occur. Is the boss node in question configured in

No. I tried configuring the boss node and that didn't work either. I'll see if I can reproduce that.

It seems cumbersome to have to configure a boss node on an individual basis. I'd need to receive mail, then create an entry for the boss node. If an end-user receives a netmail and replies, I might not even know to create the entry. It might be nice if, when packing mail for a point, you check to see if there's a points list, and if not, automatically address point-bound mail to the boss, where any default rules could handle routing mail to the boss.

---
■ Synchronet ■ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Re: routing to points
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Digital Man on Tue Feb 14 2023 09:41 pm

Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to poindexter FORTRAN on Tue Feb 14 2023 05:06 pm

Which means that the boss node must be configured in EchoCfg->Linked Nodes for this boss-routing to occur. Is the boss node in question configured in

No. I tried configuring the boss node and that didn't work either. I'll see if I can reproduce that.

It seems cumbersome to have to configure a boss node on an individual basis. I'd need to receive mail, then create an entry for the boss node. If an end-user receives a netmail and replies, I might not even know to create the entry. It might be nice if, when packing mail for a point, you check to see if there's a points list, and if not, automatically address point-bound mail to the boss, where any default rules could handle routing mail to the boss.

Apparently boss-routing feature was added to SBBSecho just for you: https://gitlab.synchro.net/main/sbbs/-/commit/45ced2a3b39d30cbb8c909e66e063ceeff05e636

I suppose it may be possible to route to netmail a non-linked node. <shrug> I don't recall the original request/discussion surrounding this change, but the commit message refers to you, specifically.
--
digital man (rob)

Breaking Bad quote #46:
If I ever get anal polyps, at least I know what to name them. - Saul Goodman Norco, CA WX: 48.6°F, 26.0% humidity, 0 mph NNW wind, 0.05 inches rain/24hrs

Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to poindexter FORTRAN on Wed Feb 15 2023 09:58 am

Apparently boss-routing feature was added to SBBSecho just for you: https://gitlab.synchro.net/main/sbbs/-/commit/45ced2a3b39d30cbb8c909e66e063 ceeff05e636

Looking at the commit, it looks like it was some time ago, in sbbsecho 3.13. My sbbsecho reports version 3.15?

---
■ Synchronet ■ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to poindexter FORTRAN on Wed Feb 15 2023 09:58 am

Apparently boss-routing feature was added to SBBSecho just for you: https://gitlab.synchro.net/main/sbbs/-/commit/45ced2a3b39d30cbb8c909e66e063 ceef f05e636

Since I typed my last response, I've upgraded to 3.20, Created an email to a point node and am seeing the following behavior:

1. Try to poll the point address - not found (as is expected)
2. Try to poll the boss (not defined in sbbsecho.cfg) - doesn't transfer point mail.
3. Try to poll the boss (defined in sbbsecho.cfg) - doesn't transfer point mail.

It's be great if there was a way that the logic could automatically boss-route any point mail, regardless of whether or not the boss is defined in sbbsecho.cfg.

---
■ Synchronet ■ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Re: routing to points
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Digital Man on Wed Feb 15 2023 06:08 pm

Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to poindexter FORTRAN on Wed Feb 15 2023 09:58 am

Apparently boss-routing feature was added to SBBSecho just for you: http s://gitlab.synchro.net/main/sbbs/-/commit/45ced2a3b39d30cbb8c909e66e063 ceeff05e636

Looking at the commit, it looks like it was some time ago, in sbbsecho 3.13. My sbbsecho reports version 3.15?

Yes. I'm not sure of your point.
--
digital man (rob)

Breaking Bad quote #12:
[Walt] Looks like Keith Richards with a glass a warm milk! - Hank Schrader Norco, CA WX: 44.0°F, 45.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: routing to points
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Digital Man on Wed Feb 15 2023 07:09 pm

Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to poindexter FORTRAN on Wed Feb 15 2023 09:58 am

Apparently boss-routing feature was added to SBBSecho just for you: http s://gitlab.synchro.net/main/sbbs/-/commit/45ced2a3b39d30cbb8c909e66e063 ceef f05e636

Since I typed my last response, I've upgraded to 3.20, Created an email to a point node and am seeing the following behavior:

1. Try to poll the point address - not found (as is expected)
2. Try to poll the boss (not defined in sbbsecho.cfg) - doesn't transfer point mail.
3. Try to poll the boss (defined in sbbsecho.cfg) - doesn't transfer point mail.

The point->boss routing happens in SBBSecho, so before you would do any polling.

It's be great if there was a way that the logic could automatically boss-route any point mail, regardless of whether or not the boss is defined in sbbsecho.cfg.

Hm. I'll consider doing that. I'm not sure why it wasn't done that way initially. I understand for echomail why you couldn't/wouldn't, but I suppose NetMail should be possible in that scenario. I'll give it more thought.
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #45:
IP = Internet Protocol
Norco, CA WX: 44.0°F, 45.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Digital Man wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-

It's be great if there was a way that the logic could automatically boss-route any point mail, regardless of whether or not the boss is defined in sbbsecho.cfg.

Hm. I'll consider doing that. I'm not sure why it wasn't done that way initially. I understand for echomail why you couldn't/wouldn't, but I suppose NetMail should be possible in that scenario. I'll give it more thought. --

Thanks for looking at this; point mail lingering in my inbound has been
a thing for some time, and it'd be nice to be able to have default rules
handle the mail instead of having to manually re-route it.

Does sbbsecho support a point list? I know that zone 2 has one, but I
don't understand the reasoning behind being able to crash a point. I
thought the whole idea was for a system that wasn't up 24/7 (or
available at all) would use the boss node as an endpoint on the network
and reach out to the boss node instead of being reachable.




--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)

Digital Man wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-

Looking at the commit, it looks like it was some time ago, in sbbsecho 3.13. My sbbsecho reports version 3.15?

Yes. I'm not sure of your point.

Thanks again for looking into this.

I wanted to send you my logs and notes from my experiments with point
netmail. If I understand the logic, a point that has a boss node defined
in sbbsecho.ini should have mail host-routed to the boss. I'm running
sbbsecho 3.20, recently updated from the nightly archives.

It appears that point mail isn't being host-routed, which the commit you referenced appears to suggest.

I did the following:

1. I defined the boss node, 2:221/1 in sbbsecho.ini. I created a netmail to 2:221/1:58 in SBBS. When I run SBBSECHO, I see the netmail being packed.


C:\Users\kweiske>sbbsecho

SBBSecho v3.20-Win32 (master/aa33f300f) - Synchronet FidoNet
EchoMail Tosser

Loading configuration files from c:\sbbs\ctrl\ SBBSecho
3.20-Win32 master/aa33f300f Feb 15 2023 MSC 1929 (PID 5580)
invoked with options: Configured: 6 archivers, 84 linked-nodes,
8 echolists NetMail directory: c:\sbbs\binkit\netmail\ Secure
Inbound directory: c:\sbbs\binkit\inbox\ Non-secure Inbound
directory: c:\sbbs\binkit\inbox\ Outbound (BSO root) directory:
c:\sbbs\binkit\outbox\ Reading ../data/AREAS.BBS Exporting
Outbound NetMail from c:\sbbs\data\mail to
c:\sbbs\binkit\netmail\*.msg ... NetMail msg #13487 from
poindexter FORTRAN to 1:103/1 (1:103/1): already sent NetMail
msg #29046 from Kurt Weiske to August Abolins (2:221/1.58):
Exporting NetMail message #29046 from Kurt Weiske to
August Abolins (2:221/1.58) Created NetMail (4.msg) from Kurt
Weiske (1:218/700) to August Abolins (2:221/1.58), attr: 0183,
subject: Another

Packing Outbound NetMail from c:\sbbs\binkit\netmail\*.msg ...
Node (2:221/1.58) successfully locked via:
../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.pnt\0000003a.bsy Adding NetMail
(4.msg) to new packet for 2:221/1.58:
../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.pnt\0000003a.cut Deleting
c:\sbbs\binkit\netmail\4.msg (from line 5344)

Touching outgoing semfile: ../data/binkout.now Writing 33 areas
to ../data/badareas.lst Deleting
../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.pnt\0000003a.bsy (from line 2963)
Deleting c:\sbbs\ctrl\sbbsecho.bsy (from line 2969) SBBSecho
(PID 5580) exiting with error level 0, NetMail(0 imported, 1
exported, 1 packed)

2. I try polling the boss node, configured in echocfg:

[node:2:221/1] Name = Comment = Archive = ZIP PacketType = 2+ PacketPwd
= AreaFix = false AreaFixPwd = SessionPwd = TicFilePwd = Inbox = Outbox
= Passive = false Direct = false Notify = false Keys = Status = Crash
GroupHub = BinkpHost = BinkpPort = 24554 BinkpPoll = false
BinkpPlainAuthOnly = false BinkpAllowPlainAuth = false
BinkpAllowPlainText = true BinkpTLS = false BinkpSourceAddress =

C:\Users\kweiske>binkpoll 2:221/1

JSexec v3.20a-Win32 master/aa33f300f - Execute Synchronet
JavaScript Module Compiled Feb 15 2023 05:04:19 with MSC 1929

Loading configuration files from c:\sbbs\ctrl JavaScript-C 1.8.5
2011-03-31 JavaScript: Creating runtime: 8388608 bytes

Reading script from c:\sbbs\exec\binkit.js
c:\sbbs\exec\binkit.js compiled in 0.00 seconds BinkIT/2.41
invoked with options: -l 2:221/1 Attempting poll for node
2:221/1@fidonet JSBinkP/4 callout to 2:221/1@fidonet started
Connecting to 2:221/1@fidonet at f1.n221.z2.rbb.fidonet.fi:24554
Peer version: binkd/1.1a-115/OS2 Authentication successful:
non-secure c:\sbbs\exec\binkit.js executed in 6.84 seconds

JavaScript: Destroying context JavaScript: Destroying runtime

3. I see this in my events log:

2/16 08:36:52a BINKPOLL Attempting callout for 2:221/1.58@fidonet,
file: C:\sbbs\binkit\outbox.002\00dd0001.pnt\0000003a.cut 2/16
08:36:52a BINKPOLL JSBinkP/4 callout to 2:221/1.58@fidonet started
2/16 08:36:53a BINKPOLL Connecting to 2:221/1.58@fidonet at
p58.f1.n221.z2.binkd.net:24554 2/16 08:36:53a BINKPOLL Connection to
p58.f1.n221.z2.binkd.net:24554 failed (Error: No such host is known.
).



... Change nothing and continue consistently
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 06:17 am

Does sbbsecho support a point list?

No, SBBSecho has no knowledge of nodelists or pointlists.
--
digital man (rob)

This Is Spinal Tap quote #39:
Female Airport Security Officer: Do you have any artificial plates or limbs? Norco, CA WX: 60.9°F, 16.0% humidity, 6 mph N wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 09:38 am

Digital Man wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-

Looking at the commit, it looks like it was some time ago, in sbbsecho 3.13. My sbbsecho reports version 3.15?

Yes. I'm not sure of your point.

Thanks again for looking into this.

I wanted to send you my logs and notes from my experiments with point netmail. If I understand the logic, a point that has a boss node defined
in sbbsecho.ini should have mail host-routed to the boss.

Only if the point itself is not a configured linked node (in echofg) and the point isn't one of your own configured FTN AKAs.

I'm running
sbbsecho 3.20, recently updated from the nightly archives.

It appears that point mail isn't being host-routed, which the commit you referenced appears to suggest.

I did the following:

1. I defined the boss node, 2:221/1 in sbbsecho.ini. I created a netmail to 2:221/1:58 in SBBS. When I run SBBSECHO, I see the netmail being packed.

C:\Users\kweiske>sbbsecho

SBBSecho v3.20-Win32 (master/aa33f300f) - Synchronet FidoNet
EchoMail Tosser

Loading configuration files from c:\sbbs\ctrl\ SBBSecho
3.20-Win32 master/aa33f300f Feb 15 2023 MSC 1929 (PID 5580)
invoked with options: Configured: 6 archivers, 84 linked-nodes,
8 echolists NetMail directory: c:\sbbs\binkit\netmail\ Secure
Inbound directory: c:\sbbs\binkit\inbox\ Non-secure Inbound
directory: c:\sbbs\binkit\inbox\ Outbound (BSO root) directory:
c:\sbbs\binkit\outbox\ Reading ../data/AREAS.BBS Exporting
Outbound NetMail from c:\sbbs\data\mail to
c:\sbbs\binkit\netmail\*.msg ... NetMail msg #13487 from
poindexter FORTRAN to 1:103/1 (1:103/1): already sent NetMail
msg #29046 from Kurt Weiske to August Abolins (2:221/1.58):
Exporting NetMail message #29046 from Kurt Weiske to
August Abolins (2:221/1.58) Created NetMail (4.msg) from Kurt
Weiske (1:218/700) to August Abolins (2:221/1.58), attr: 0183,
subject: Another

That's not very fun to try to read. :-) Do you mind not re-wrapping the log lines you paste here?

Packing Outbound NetMail from c:\sbbs\binkit\netmail\*.msg ...
Node (2:221/1.58) successfully locked via:
../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.pnt\0000003a.bsy Adding NetMail
(4.msg) to new packet for 2:221/1.58:
../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.pnt\0000003a.cut Deleting
c:\sbbs\binkit\netmail\4.msg (from line 5344)

Touching outgoing semfile: ../data/binkout.now Writing 33 areas
to ../data/badareas.lst Deleting
../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.pnt\0000003a.bsy (from line 2963)
Deleting c:\sbbs\ctrl\sbbsecho.bsy (from line 2969) SBBSecho
(PID 5580) exiting with error level 0, NetMail(0 imported, 1
exported, 1 packed)

My guess is that you have 2:221/1.58 explicitly listed as a linked node in echofg?
--
digital man (rob)

Sling Blade quote #10:
Morris: I stand on the hill, not for thrill, but for the breath of a fresh kill Norco, CA WX: 61.4°F, 16.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:20 pm

My guess is that you have 2:221/1.58 explicitly listed as a linked node in echofg?

No, only 2:221/1.

I saved the log files and commentary to https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt, that should be easier to read.
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Win32
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:39 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:20 pm

My guess is that you have 2:221/1.58 explicitly listed as a linked node in echofg?

No, only 2:221/1.

I saved the log files and commentary to https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt, that should be easier to read.

$ wget https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt
--2023-02-16 17:34:01-- https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt
Resolving realitycheckbbs.org (realitycheckbbs.org)... failed: Name or service not known.
wget: unable to resolve host address
--
digital man (rob)

This Is Spinal Tap quote #9:
David St. Hubbins: I mean, it's not your job to be as confused as Nigel.
Norco, CA WX: 61.7°F, 16.0% humidity, 0 mph NE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 05:34 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:39 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:20 pm

My guess is that you have 2:221/1.58 explicitly listed as a linked node in echofg?

No, only 2:221/1.

I saved the log files and commentary to https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt, that should be easier to read.

$ wget https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt
--2023-02-16 17:34:01-- https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt
Resolving realitycheckbbs.org (realitycheckbbs.org)... failed: Name or service not known.
wget: unable to resolve host address

Also, the detail we're looking for would be in your sbbsecho.log file, yet you seem to be copying/pasting from the console output of sbbsecho.
--
digital man (rob)

Breaking Bad quote #17:
Your breath could knock the buzzard off a shit wagon. - Hank Schrader
Norco, CA WX: 61.7°F, 16.0% humidity, 0 mph NE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 05:34 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:39 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:20 pm

My guess is that you have 2:221/1.58 explicitly listed as a linked node in echofg?

No, only 2:221/1.

I saved the log files and commentary to https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt, that should be easier to read.

$ wget https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt
--2023-02-16 17:34:01-- https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt
Resolving realitycheckbbs.org (realitycheckbbs.org)... failed: Name or service not known.
wget: unable to resolve host address

I also tried reality.synchro.net with HTTPS, but you don't have your TLS cert set correctly:
$ wget https://reality.synchro.net/sbbsecho.txt
--2023-02-16 17:46:48-- https://reality.synchro.net/sbbsecho.txt
Resolving reality.synchro.net (reality.synchro.net)... 98.210.238.44
Connecting to reality.synchro.net (reality.synchro.net)|98.210.238.44|:443... connected.
The certificate's owner does not match hostname

I tried reality.synchro.net:8000 via HTTP, but it downloads a SHOUTcast error message file instead.
--
digital man (rob)

This Is Spinal Tap quote #36:
Bobbi Flekman: Money talks, and bullshit walks.
Norco, CA WX: 61.7°F, 16.0% humidity, 0 mph NE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 05:34 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:39 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:20 pm

My guess is that you have 2:221/1.58 explicitly listed as a linked node in echofg?

No, only 2:221/1.

Do you have points of 2:221/1 configured in echocfg->Linked Nodes?

Do you have 2:ALL or 2:221/ALL configured in echocfg->Linked Nodes with routing specified?
--
digital man (rob)

Breaking Bad quote #13:
I got twenty bucks that says he's a beaner. - Hank Schrader
Norco, CA WX: 53.0°F, 21.0% humidity, 0 mph NE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 05:44 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 05:34 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:39 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 01:20 pm

My guess is that you have 2:221/1.58 explicitly listed as a linked node in echofg?

No, only 2:221/1.

I saved the log files and commentary to https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt, that should be easier to read.

$ wget https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt
--2023-02-16 17:34:01-- https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt Resolving realitycheckbbs.org (realitycheckbbs.org)... failed: Name or service not known.
wget: unable to resolve host address

Also, the detail we're looking for would be in your sbbsecho.log file, yet you seem to be copying/pasting from the console output of sbbsecho.

I looked back through the history of messages in this sub and it appers that
we had almost the exact same conversation in May of last year (Subject: "Host-routed netmail to points"). You were pasting BinkIT log output here instead of the relevant portions of sbbsecho.log and then you finally concluded the discussion with this:

-------------------------------------8<---------------------------------------

The sbbsecho.log file is the relevant log to be looking at in this
case. --

I looked in the log and saw some weird entries showing 5 digit zone numbers.
On a lark, I tried changing "Fuzzy Zone Operation" in echocfg to "no", and
now I'm seeing the routing messages in my sbbsecho.log.

If I can reproduce the error again, I'll post the log files. For now, it
seems like it's behaving as expected.

Thanks for your help! -------------------------------------8<---------------------------------------

I don't think anything changed in SBBSecho in this regard since that time.
--
digital man (rob)

Breaking Bad quote #12:
[Walt] Looks like Keith Richards with a glass a warm milk! - Hank Schrader Norco, CA WX: 52.8°F, 20.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Digital Man wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

Compiling answers to a handful of messages:

Not sure why https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt wouldn't resolve
for you - I was able to ssh into dreamhost, my web host on the outside
and see it OK using Lynx. Maybe it was a transient issue?

I was able to get through to https://reality.synchro.net and saw the
error on the cert mismatch. Is there a way to pass a secondary hostname
to letsyncrypt.js? Odd, since one of my subdomains hosted on the bbs, radio.realitycheckbbs.org works with my LE cert.

I did have an entry for 2:ALL in my sbbsecho.log, but I removed it and
still saw the same behavior.

I didn't see anything in my sbbsecho.log corresponding to that snippet
from the event log, I'll crank up the log level and see what I can see.










--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 10:30 pm

Digital Man wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

Compiling answers to a handful of messages:

Not sure why https://realitycheckbbs.org/sbbsecho.txt wouldn't resolve
for you - I was able to ssh into dreamhost, my web host on the outside
and see it OK using Lynx. Maybe it was a transient issue?

Yeah, works now.

I was able to get through to https://reality.synchro.net and saw the
error on the cert mismatch. Is there a way to pass a secondary hostname
to letsyncrypt.js?

Yes, the [domains] section of ctrl/letsencrypt.ini wiki.synchro.net/module:letsyncrypt#domains

Odd, since one of my subdomains hosted on the bbs,
radio.realitycheckbbs.org works with my LE cert.

I did have an entry for 2:ALL in my sbbsecho.log,

So there would be a different "Routing NetMail" log line in that case (if that 2:ALL linked node had a route specified).

but I removed it and still saw the same behavior.

When? What does the log report?

I didn't see anything in my sbbsecho.log corresponding to that snippet
from the event log, I'll crank up the log level and see what I can see.

The relevant log lines are "INFO" level.
--
digital man (rob)

Sling Blade quote #8:
Karl Childers: I don't reckon I got no reason to kill nobody.
Norco, CA WX: 46.5°F, 27.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 06:32 pm


I took out the 2:ALL statement in sbbsecho.ini, changed the log level to debugging, created a netmail for 2:221/1.58, and saw this in my log file:

Routing NetMail (4.msg) to boss-node 2:221/1
Node (2:221/1) successfully locked via: ../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.bsy Adding NetMail (4.msg) to new packet for 2:221/1: ../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.cut
Deleting c:\sbbs\binkit\netmail\4.msg (from line 5344)

Which looks like the expected behavior - 2:221/1 is listed in my linked nodes list.
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Win32
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)

Digital Man wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

I also tried reality.synchro.net with HTTPS, but you don't have your
TLS cert set correctly:
$ wget https://reality.synchro.net/sbbsecho.txt
--2023-02-16 17:46:48-- https://reality.synchro.net/sbbsecho.txt Resolving reality.synchro.net (reality.synchro.net)... 98.210.238.44 Connecting to reality.synchro.net (reality.synchro.net)|98.210.238.44|:443... connected.
The certificate's owner does not match hostname

I tried reality.synchro.net:8000 via HTTP, but it downloads a SHOUTcast error message file instead. --

--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 10:52 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Thu Feb 16 2023 06:32 pm

I took out the 2:ALL statement in sbbsecho.ini, changed the log level to debugging, created a netmail for 2:221/1.58, and saw this in my log file:

Routing NetMail (4.msg) to boss-node 2:221/1
Node (2:221/1) successfully locked via: ../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.bsy Adding NetMail (4.msg) to new packet for 2:221/1: ../binkit/outbox.002\00dd0001.cut
Deleting c:\sbbs\binkit\netmail\4.msg (from line 5344)

Which looks like the expected behavior - 2:221/1 is listed in my linked nodes list.

Cool. So do we now want to change the expected behavior?

While analyzing this section of sbbsecho.c, I did notice this change which struck me as potentially undesireable:
https://gitlab.synchro.net/main/sbbs/-/commit/ffe69b43623db42984a286433e62f4256

With this change (apparently as the result of a suggestion or request by Alterego), if the destination address is 1:2/3.1, but our local system has an AKA of 1:2/3.2, no routing would occur (to a boss node or based on explicit routing configured in echocfg->Linked Nodes) and that seems like a bug to me. But still unrelated to your observations.
--
digital man (rob)

Breaking Bad quote #26:
Your commercials suck ass. I've seen better acting in an epileptic whorehouse. Norco, CA WX: 59.6°F, 20.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Digital Man on Thu Feb 16 2023 10:21 pm

Digital Man wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

I also tried reality.synchro.net with HTTPS, but you don't have your TLS cert set correctly:
$ wget https://reality.synchro.net/sbbsecho.txt
--2023-02-16 17:46:48-- https://reality.synchro.net/sbbsecho.txt Resolving reality.synchro.net (reality.synchro.net)... 98.210.238.44 Connecting to reality.synchro.net (reality.synchro.net)|98.210.238.44|:443... connected.
The certificate's owner does not match hostname

I tried reality.synchro.net:8000 via HTTP, but it downloads a SHOUTcast error message file instead. --

This reply appears to have been cut off (only included quoted text). Just FYI. --
digital man (rob)

Rush quote #23:
Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose
Norco, CA WX: 59.6°F, 20.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 10:59 am

Which looks like the expected behavior - 2:221/1 is listed in my linked
nodes list.

Cool. So do we now want to change the expected behavior?

Would it be correct to assume that my 2:ALL "linked node" entry in echocfg was being applied to my point netmail, and because no routing was specified in the 2:ALL entry, that sbbsecho packet the point netmail according to the wildcard entry? It seems like when I removed the 2:ALL entry that sbbsecho packed point mail for the boss (that *was* defined in sbbsecho.ini.)

If that's the case, that would fit the behavior I was seeing.

Since Synchronet doesn't know how to route to a point, I'd think it would make to sense to first pack all point netmail for the Boss node and then let explicit linked node entries or catch-all entries handle mail routing/flavor to the boss.

Then, if you had a specific routing arrangement with a node, you could specify them in the linked node section. If not, a zone:ALL rule could route/flavor the mail to the boss however you choose.

This would simplify sending replies to point netmail, in my opinion.

Or, am I missing something?

Thanks again for your time in looking into this.

--k
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Win32
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Fri Feb 17 2023 12:01 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 10:59 am

Which looks like the expected behavior - 2:221/1 is listed in my linked >> nodes list.

Cool. So do we now want to change the expected behavior?

Would it be correct to assume that my 2:ALL "linked node" entry in echocfg was being applied to my point netmail, and because no routing was specified in the 2:ALL entry, that sbbsecho packet the point netmail according to the wildcard entry? It seems like when I removed the 2:ALL entry that sbbsecho packed point mail for the boss (that *was* defined in sbbsecho.ini.)

The 2:ALL linked node entry would have only played a role *if* it had a route specified. And in that case, yes, the NetMail would be routed, but to the specified 2:ALL route, not the point's boss node.

If that's the case, that would fit the behavior I was seeing.

The sbbsecho.log file would include an INFO-level "Routing NetMail" line (withOUT "boss-node") in this case. If the log doesn't include that, then this is not happening.

Since Synchronet doesn't know how to route to a point, I'd think it would make to sense to first pack all point netmail for the Boss node and then let explicit linked node entries or catch-all entries handle mail routing/flavor to the boss.

Then, if you had a specific routing arrangement with a node, you could specify them in the linked node section. If not, a zone:ALL rule could route/flavor the mail to the boss however you choose.

This would simplify sending replies to point netmail, in my opinion.

Or, am I missing something?

I think an explicit linked node configuration should always take precedence. No?

I'm not sure what you mean by "Synchronet doesn't konw how to route to a point". You can tell SBBSecho (not Synchronet) how to route to points both explicity and with wildcards and there's the boss-node fall-back if the boss-node is explicity configured.
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #32:
FREQ = File Request
Norco, CA WX: 63.6°F, 19.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 12:58 pm

I'm not sure what you mean by "Synchronet doesn't konw how to route to a point". You can tell SBBSecho (not Synchronet) how to route to points both explicity and with wildcards and there's the boss-node fall-back if the boss-node is explicity configured.

I'm mis-using some of the terminology.

SBBSecho, unless told otherwise by specifying the boss node in sbbsecho.ini, will create an outbound packet for the full point address, and binkit is unable to deliver the mail.

If you define the boss node, SBBSecho will create a packet containing the point's netmail for the boss node, which makes sense.

Since points are not in the network's nodelist and are dependent on the boss node to receive and deliver files on its behalf, why not automatically route all point mail to their respective boss nodes by default?



--- SBBSecho 3.20-Win32
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to Digital Man on Fri Feb 17 2023 02:39 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 12:58 pm

I'm not sure what you mean by "Synchronet doesn't konw how to route to a point". You can tell SBBSecho (not Synchronet) how to route to points both explicity and with wildcards and there's the boss-node fall-back if the boss-node is explicity configured.

I'm mis-using some of the terminology.

SBBSecho, unless told otherwise by specifying the boss node in sbbsecho.ini, will create an outbound packet for the full point address, and binkit is unable to deliver the mail.

If you define the boss node, SBBSecho will create a packet containing the point's netmail for the boss node, which makes sense.

Since points are not in the network's nodelist and are dependent on the boss node to receive and deliver files on its behalf, why not automatically route all point mail to their respective boss nodes by default?

I think SBBSecho changed to do that. Do you mind creating a feature request at https://gitlab.synchro.net/main/sbbs/-/issues and providing this detail?

The code we're discussing now was added 3 years ago (at your request) and a request for test results was made by me at the time (in the commit message), but I don't think ever got those results/feedback. I'd like to better track the
change request/rationale and the results this time. Thanks,
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #89:
XJS = External JavaScript (SSJS embedded within HTML/CSS)
Norco, CA WX: 66.0°F, 17.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 02:59 pm

I think SBBSecho changed to do that. Do you mind creating a feature request at https://gitlab.synchro.net/main/sbbs/-/issues and providing this detail?

Will do.

The code we're discussing now was added 3 years ago (at your request) and a request for test results was made by me at the time (in the commit message), but I don't think ever got those results/feedback. I'd like to better track the change request/rationale and the results this time.

I think there were two issues going on at the time, happy to help this time. --- SBBSecho 3.20-Win32
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 10:59 am

With this change (apparently as the result of a suggestion or request by Alterego), if the destination address is 1:2/3.1, but our local system has an AKA of 1:2/3.2, no routing would occur (to a boss node or based on explicit routing configured in echocfg->Linked Nodes) and that seems like a bug to me. But still unrelated to your observations.

Why does that seem to be a bug?


...δεσ∩

---
■ Synchronet ■ AnsiTEX bringing back videotex but with ANSI

Re: Re: routing to points
By: deon to Digital Man on Sat Feb 18 2023 10:30 am

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to Kurt Weiske on Fri Feb 17 2023 10:59 am

With this change (apparently as the result of a suggestion or request by Alterego), if the destination address is 1:2/3.1, but our local system has an AKA of 1:2/3.2, no routing would occur (to a boss node or based on explicit routing configured in echocfg->Linked Nodes) and that seems like a bug to me. But still unrelated to your observations.

Why does that seem to be a bug?

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet "Real Fact" #39:
Synchronet first supported Windows NT v6.x (a.k.a. Vista/Win7) w/v3.14a (2006) Norco, CA WX: 64.1°F, 17.0% humidity, 5 mph N wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to deon on Fri Feb 17 2023 04:18 pm

Why does that seem to be a bug?

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?

So you cant have a direct link to 1:2/3.1?


...δεσ∩

---
■ Synchronet ■ AnsiTEX bringing back videotex but with ANSI

So you cant have a direct link to 1:2/3.1?

not unless you have a point list with 1:2/3.1fni noitcennoc s'
connection info in it.

John H. Guillory
call sign KF5QEO
URL: kf5qeo.servebbs.net
KF5QEO's Shack BBS

... Tech support is just a busy signal away

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
* Origin: KF5QEO's Shack -- kf5qeo.servebbs.net

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmai
to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by defau
. No?

I would certainly think so.


* SLMR 2.1a * Are you pulling my leg! ...nahh, that's just the dog!

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

deon wrote to Digital Man <=-

So you cant have a direct link to 1:2/3.1?

You can, if you specify 1:2/3.1 in echocfg and provide a source address.

There seems to have been some definition drift with points. When I
started out, the whole idea behind a point was to have a mail-only or
private system that wasn't accessible during ZMH, or wasn't up 24/7. The
point initiated contact with the boss, and the point was, by design, unreachable by systems using a nodelist.

The point would connect to the boss, not vice versa. Everything that was
to go to the point was routed through the boss first. No one, even the
boss, would need a direct route to the point.



... Powered By Celeron (Tualatin). Engineered for the future.
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)

Re: Re: routing to points
By: deon to Digital Man on Sat Feb 18 2023 10:05 pm

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to deon on Fri Feb 17 2023 04:18 pm

Why does that seem to be a bug?

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?

So you cant have a direct link to 1:2/3.1?

Sure, but I also might not. The way this requested-enhancement was implemented, it wouldn't make any difference: the mail would not be routed to the boss.
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet "Real Fact" #27:
Rob Swindell (digital man) was born approximately 4 hours before the Unix epoch Norco, CA WX: 66.2°F, 20.0% humidity, 0 mph NE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: John Guillory to deon on Sat Feb 18 2023 08:33 am

not unless you have a point list with 1:2/3.1fni noitcennoc s'
connection info in it.

John H. Guillory
call sign KF5QEO
URL: kf5qeo.servebbs.net
KF5QEO's Shack BBS

oh, now i see. your url is wrong. that is why you are not connectable.
you are using a free bbs server the person setup for you on synchronetbbs.org sad
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to deon on Sat Feb 18 2023 11:38 am

Why does that seem to be a bug?

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?

So you cant have a direct link to 1:2/3.1?

Sure, but I also might not. The way this requested-enhancement was implemented, it wouldn't make any difference: the mail would not be routed to the boss.

Oh, in that case I agree it might be a bug.

I would have thought, if I'm a point, all mail would go to my boss (for final delivery), unless I had a specific relationship (and thus a configuration) directly to another system (including other points, either with a same boss as me, or a different boss).


...δεσ∩

---
■ Synchronet ■ AnsiTEX bringing back videotex but with ANSI

Re: Re: routing to points
By: deon to Digital Man on Sun Feb 19 2023 09:28 am

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to deon on Sat Feb 18 2023 11:38 am

Why does that seem to be a bug?

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?

So you cant have a direct link to 1:2/3.1?

Sure, but I also might not. The way this requested-enhancement was implemented, it wouldn't make any difference: the mail would not be routed to the boss.

Oh, in that case I agree it might be a bug.

I would have thought, if I'm a point, all mail would go to my boss (for final delivery), unless I had a specific relationship (and thus a configuration) directly to another system (including other points, either with a same boss as me, or a different boss).

The logic was changed/fixed in a commit today. Try it out. Are you also Alterego?
--
digital man (rob)

Rush quote #84:
Looming low & ominous, twilight premature t-heads rumbling a distance overture Norco, CA WX: 66.9°F, 21.0% humidity, 0 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Kurt Weiske to deon on Sat Feb 18 2023 08:11 am

The point would connect to the boss, not vice versa. Everything that was
to go to the point was routed through the boss first. No one, even the
boss, would need a direct route to the point.

And it could still be that way "by default", right?

My point (no pun intended), is if the point defines some direct links, then they should be honoured, as well as the ability to receive direct connections from other systems (if the sysop desired).


...δεσ∩

---
■ Synchronet ■ AnsiTEX bringing back videotex but with ANSI

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to deon on Sat Feb 18 2023 02:57 pm

The logic was changed/fixed in a commit today. Try it out. Are you also Alterego?

Cool.

I'm not actually using any points at the moment, but I probably will down the track. So I'll let you know if something is not up.

I used the alias Alterego at some point, but dont anymore.

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?

Following on with this example, if I'm 1:2/3.2 and I want to send a Netmail to 1:2/4.2, *and* I have a configuration with 1:2/4.0 will sbbsecho package up my netmail for 1:2/4 or 1:2/3?

If it uses 1:2/3, I assume I can overrite it with a route 1:2/4.ALL to 1:2/4.0?


...δεσ∩

---
■ Synchronet ■ AnsiTEX bringing back videotex but with ANSI

Re: Re: routing to points
By: deon to Digital Man on Sun Feb 19 2023 10:59 am

Re: Re: routing to points
By: Digital Man to deon on Sat Feb 18 2023 02:57 pm

The logic was changed/fixed in a commit today. Try it out. Are you also Alterego?

Cool.

I'm not actually using any points at the moment, but I probably will down the track. So I'll let you know if something is not up.

I used the alias Alterego at some point, but dont anymore.

I would think if my system had an AKA of 1:2/3.2 and I wanted to send a netmail to 1:2/3.1, it should still be auto-routed to the boss note (1:2/3.0) by default. No?

Following on with this example, if I'm 1:2/3.2 and I want to send a Netmail to 1:2/4.2, *and* I have a configuration with 1:2/4.0 will sbbsecho package up my netmail for 1:2/4 or 1:2/3?

The netmail would be routed to 1:2/4.0.

If it uses 1:2/3, I assume I can overrite it with a route 1:2/4.ALL to 1:2/4.0?

SBBSecho doesn't do any routing based on the originating-address, only the destination address.
--
digital man (rob)

This Is Spinal Tap quote #40:
Morty the Mime: Come on, don't talk back, mime is money, come on, move it. Norco, CA WX: 57.5°F, 32.0% humidity, 6 mph SE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

deon wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

My point (no pun intended), is if the point defines some direct links, then they should be honoured, as well as the ability to receive direct connections from other systems (if the sysop desired).

That flies against the notion that defined a point - a private system
that doesn't connect directly to the rest of the world, because it's not
up 24/7 or isn't able to honor ZMH.

That being said, Z2 may see things differently; they distribute a
point list publicly - in the traditional sense a point list is just used
by the boss node.

If a point is accessible and makes arrangements to share their contact
info with an upstream node, that node can enter the information needed
to connect in the linked nodes section of sbbsecho, and the upstream
node can connect directly. That would override the default rule.




... Onward, to meatspace!
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)