¡Hola Todos!

Internet Rex not support IP v6 or yes?

Thanks!

¡Saludos!
-=Momia=-

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20120519
* Origin: Momia BBS (4:90/1)

Hello Manuel,

On Thursday February 14 2013 17:34, you wrote to Todos:

Internet Rex not support IP v6 or yes?

No. :-(

And I am afrad it never will, because Charles has abaondoned Irex.

If I ever dump Irex for something else, the main reason will be the absence of IPv6 support.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20110320
* Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)

¡Hola Todos!

Internet Rex not support IP v6 or yes?

Doesn't guess so, but would assume you could do something on Linux
to get IPv6 support using inetd?

Bo

--- DayDream BBS/UNIX (Linux) 2.15
* Origin: The Night Express BBS, Valby, telnet nightexp.no-ip.org (2:230/100)

MvdV>Hello Manuel,
MvdV>
MvdV>On Thursday February 14 2013 17:34, you wrote to Todos:
MvdV>
MvdV> MA> Internet Rex not support IP v6 or yes?
MvdV>
MvdV>No. :-(
MvdV>
MvdV>And I am afrad it never will, because Charles has abaondoned Irex.

Could be pretty cool to have the source code, would be fairly easy to
add IPv6 support.

Anybody got a status of which fidonet software that is IPv6 compatible?

Bo

--- DayDream BBS/UNIX (Linux) 2.15
* Origin: The Night Express BBS, Valby, telnet nightexp.no-ip.org (2:230/100)

¡Hola Bo!

El Viernes 15 Febrero 2013 a las 13:02, Bo Simonsen escribió a Manuel Adorni:

Doesn't guess so, but would assume you could do something on Linux
to get IPv6 support using inetd?

Windows... any idea?

¡Saludos!
-=Momia=-

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20120519
* Origin: Momia BBS (4:90/1)

¡Hola Michiel!

El Viernes 15 Febrero 2013 a las 12:34, Michiel van der Vlist escribió a Manuel
Adorni:

If I ever dump Irex for something else, the main reason will be the absence of IPv6 support.

For now, i work fine with v4 :).

¡Saludos!
-=Momia=-

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20120519
* Origin: Momia BBS (4:90/1)

Hello Bo,

On Friday February 15 2013 23:10, you wrote to me:

MvdV>> And I am afrad it never will, because Charles has abaondoned
MvdV>> Irex.

Could be pretty cool to have the source code, would be fairly easy to
add IPv6 support.

I do not know how easy it would be, I have not seen the source code. It is unlikely I ever will, Charles is sitting on it and releasing into into the public, does not seem to be part of his plan...

Anybody got a status of which fidonet software that is IPv6
compatible?

Binkd and MBSE are the ones I know of.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20110320
* Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)

Hello Bo!

Friday February 15 2013 23:10, Bo Simonsen wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:

Could be pretty cool to have the source code, would be fairly easy to
add IPv6 support.

It appears unlikely that the source for IREX will ever be available.

Anybody got a status of which fidonet software that is IPv6
compatible?

BinkD and mbcico (the mailer from MBSE BBS) both support IPV6 in the current versions.

Andrew

---
* Origin: Bits & Bytes BBS * V.Everything! * 860/535-4284 (1:320/119)

Michiel.

16 Feb 13 13:17, you wrote to Bo Simonsen:

Anybody got a status of which fidonet software that is IPv6
compatible?

Binkd and MBSE are the ones I know of.

Qico has also been patched for it...



Jame


--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5--b20111217
* Origin: RJC eeePC (1:120/419)

MvdV> MvdV>> And I am afrad it never will, because Charles has abaondoned
MvdV> MvdV>> Irex.
MvdV>
MvdV> BS> Could be pretty cool to have the source code, would be fairly MvdV>easy to
MvdV> BS> add IPv6 support.
MvdV>
MvdV>I do not know how easy it would be, I have not seen the source code. MvdV>It is unlikely I ever will, Charles is sitting on it and releasing MvdV>into into the public, does not seem to be part of his plan...

I always believe a programmer could be descent developing closed source software, but when he/she doesn't want to maintain it anymore, the only
right choice is to let the sources go. Sounds almost like a love story,
may be in some cases.

MvdV> BS> Anybody got a status of which fidonet software that is IPv6
MvdV> BS> compatible?
MvdV>
MvdV>Binkd and MBSE are the ones I know of.

Cool.. but I will take some years before we need it..

Bo

--- DayDream BBS/UNIX (Linux) 2.15
* Origin: The Night Express BBS, Valby, telnet nightexp.no-ip.org (2:230/100)

Could be pretty cool to have the source code, would be fairly easy

to

add IPv6 support.

It appears unlikely that the source for IREX will ever be available.

I only tried the Linux version, and it didn't almost work.. so the only
big loss is for the DOS users I assume.

Bo

--- DayDream BBS/UNIX (Linux) 2.15
* Origin: The Night Express BBS, Valby, telnet nightexp.no-ip.org (2:230/100)

Anybody got a status of which fidonet software that is IPv6
compatible?

Binkd and MBSE are the ones I know of.

Qico has also been patched for it...

I use Qico here.. a fine mailer.. but unluckily unsupported :/

Bo

--- DayDream BBS/UNIX (Linux) 2.15
* Origin: The Night Express BBS, Valby, telnet nightexp.no-ip.org (2:230/100)

Bo,

21 Feb 13 22:44, you wrote to me:

Qico has also been patched for it...

I use Qico here.. a fine mailer.. but unluckily unsupported :/

I haven't been able to work on it as much as I would like but that is something I"m working on changing, being now a member of the Qico project at SourceForge. (Others are more then welecome!<g>)



Jame

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5--b20111217
* Origin: RJC eeePC (1:120/419)

Hello Bo,

On Thursday February 21 2013 22:41, you wrote to me

[ IPv6 for Irex ]

MvdV>> I do not know how easy it would be, I have not seen the source
MvdV>> code. It is unlikely I ever will, Charles is sitting on it and
MvdV>> releasing into into the public, does not seem to be part of his
MvdV>> plan...

I always believe a programmer could be descent developing closed
source software, but when he/she doesn't want to maintain it anymore,
the only right choice is to let the sources go.

My idea too, and sometimes it works. It worked for Golded and Fmail, but others
just sit on the source and take it to the grave.

MvdV>> BS> Anybody got a status of which fidonet software that is IPv6
MvdV>> BS> compatible?

MvdV>> Binkd and MBSE are the ones I know of.

Cool.. but I will take some years before we need it..

Famous last words....

Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20110320
* Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)

Re: IP v6
By: Michiel van der Vlist to Bo Simonsen on Sun Feb 24 2013 23:36:17

I always believe a programmer could be descent developing closed
source software, but when he/she doesn't want to maintain it anymore, the only right choice is to let the sources go.

My idea too, and sometimes it works. It worked for Golded and Fmail, but others just sit on the source and take it to the grave.

I thought I read someplace that Irex has some proprietory code (licensend or permission to use) that cannot be distributed as open source.
--- SBBSecho 2.20-Win32
* Origin: The Lions Den BBS, Trenton, On, CDN (1:249/303)

Qico has also been patched for it...

I use Qico here.. a fine mailer.. but unluckily unsupported :/

I haven't been able to work on it as much as I would like but that
is
something I"m working on changing, being now a member of the Qico
project at
SourceForge. (Others are more then welecome!<g>)

I have trouble getting my sourceforge account to work.. I should write them.. Qico works very great, but the quality of the code is according to my
memory not good.. Ifcico is definitely a better base or binkleyforce, the quality is very high there, from naming conventions to actual implementation.

Bo

--- DayDream BBS/UNIX (Linux) 2.15
* Origin: The Night Express BBS, Valby, telnet nightexp.no-ip.org (2:230/100)

Hello Joe,

On Sunday February 24 2013 22:29, you wrote to me:

My idea too, and sometimes it works. It worked for Golded and
Fmail, but others just sit on the source and take it to the grave.

I thought I read someplace that Irex has some proprietory code
(licensend or permission to use) that cannot be distributed as open source.

I'v heard that rumour too.

If it is true, it need not stop the author from releasing those parts that do not fall under that limitation, so that others can either purchase the libraries with the proprietory code or find or write replacements.

Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20110320
* Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)

Re: IP v6
By: Michiel van der Vlist to Joe Delahaye on Mon Feb 25 2013 11:14:28

I thought I read someplace that Irex has some proprietory code (licensend or permission to use) that cannot be distributed as open source.

I'v heard that rumour too.

If it is true, it need not stop the author from releasing those parts that do not fall under that limitation, so that others can either purchase the libraries with the proprietory code or find or write replacements.

I dont know, but I think Charles is still getting some paid registrations. Just
wish he would do some updates and bring it into the next century
--- SBBSecho 2.20-Win32
* Origin: The Lions Den BBS, Trenton, On, CDN (1:249/303)

I always believe a programmer could be descent developing
closed source software, but when he/she doesn't want to
maintain it anymore, the only right choice is to let the
sources go.

My idea too, and sometimes it works. It worked for Golded and Fmail,
but others just sit on the source and take it to the grave.

I thought I read someplace that Irex has some proprietory code
(licensend or permission to use) that cannot be distributed as
open source.

that's possible... in which case, those libraries can be left out and the code will fail to compile until they are replaced...

)\/(ark

---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.42)

Hello Joe,

On Monday February 25 2013 15:54, you wrote to me:

If it is true, it need not stop the author from releasing those
parts that do not fall under that limitation, so that others can
either purchase the libraries with the proprietory code or find or
write replacements.

I dont know, but I think Charles is still getting some paid
registrations.

Yes, I understand registrations are still sold. At the full price! I don't know
why anyone would still pay the full price for what effectively has been abandonware for well over a decade, but that seems to be the way it is.

Just wish he would do some updates and bring it into the next century

Same here, but I have abondoned hope. :-(

Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20110320
* Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)

Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Bo Simonsen <=-

MvdV>> BS> Anybody got a status of which fidonet software that is IPv6
MvdV>> BS> compatible?

MvdV>> Binkd and MBSE are the ones I know of.

Cool.. but I will take some years before we need it..

Famous last words....

Yeah.. but not that I like this situation but I really think something serious must happen before the ISPs are being forced to use IPv6 on wide-spread basis.

Bo


... Got my tie caught in the fax... Suddenly I was in L.A.
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.49

--- DayDream GRAB QWK Door/UNIX (Linux) 2.15
* Origin: The Night Express BBS, Valby, telnet nightexp.no-ip.org (2:230/100)

Re: IP v6
By: mark lewis to Joe Delahaye on Mon Feb 25 2013 16:04:04

I thought I read someplace that Irex has some proprietory code (licensend or permission to use) that cannot be distributed as
open source.

that's possible... in which case, those libraries can be left out and the code will fail to compile until they are replaced...

And that may be a problem.
--- SBBSecho 2.20-Win32
* Origin: The Lions Den BBS, Trenton, On, CDN (1:249/303)

I thought I read someplace that Irex has some proprietory code (licensend or permission to use) that cannot be distributed as
open source.

that's possible... in which case, those libraries can be left out
and the code will fail to compile until they are replaced...

And that may be a problem.

why? once one knows the name of the missing routines, they can either be replaced or recreated... it may even be that there's already a replacement library for the commercial one that was used...

either way, the missing routines /can/ be replaced if they are truly necessary...

)\/(ark

---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.42)

Re: IP v6
By: mark lewis to Joe Delahaye on Wed Feb 27 2013 13:34:43

And that may be a problem.

why? once one knows the name of the missing routines, they can either be replaced or recreated... it may even be that there's already a replacement library for the commercial one that was used...

either way, the missing routines /can/ be replaced if they are truly necessary...

I'm not a programmer, however, if there is not such a replacement, or permission can no longer be obtained to use the old ones, I would think thst should you attempt to write such a library, you better be careful that you do not use similar code. Enough of that copyright crap going o n already
--- SBBSecho 2.20-Win32
* Origin: The Lions Den BBS, Trenton, On, CDN (1:249/303)

And that may be a problem.

why? once one knows the name of the missing routines, they can
either be replaced or recreated... it may even be that there's
already a replacement library for the commercial one that was
used...

either way, the missing routines /can/ be replaced if they are
truly necessary...

I'm not a programmer, however, if there is not such a replacement,
or permission can no longer be obtained to use the old ones, I
would think thst should you attempt to write such a library, you
better be careful that you do not use similar code. Enough of that copyright crap going on already

similar code is OK... exact results are definitely OK... exact code may not be OK unless it is common and there's no other way...

)\/(ark

---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.42)

Re: IP v6
By: mark lewis to Joe Delahaye on Thu Feb 28 2013 09:02:05

similar code is OK... exact results are definitely OK... exact code may not be OK unless it is common and there's no other way...

How many copyright suits have been filed because of similar code? Way too many, and its all up to the interpetation of some judge, who, hopefully, has some technical knowledge <G>
--- SBBSecho 2.20-Win32
* Origin: The Lions Den BBS, Trenton, On, CDN (1:249/303)

similar code is OK... exact results are definitely OK... exact code
may not be OK unless it is common and there's no other way...

How many copyright suits have been filed because of similar code?
Way too many,

incorrect... SIMILAR code is not the problem... /exact/ code is...

an example: Free Pascal is Delphi (7) compatible... when a feature that is in Delphi is implemented in FPC or Lazarus (a FPC RAD [rapid application development] environment), one can ask questions about the Delphi implementation of the function... others who are answering the questions can look at the actual Delphi library sources to provide those answers... the coder
asking the answers then creates his implementation of the feature based on those answers... in this way, the coder is not tainted by having seen the Delphi sources for that feature and they can work out their own method of implementing the feature...

and its all up to the interpetation of some judge, who, hopefully,
has some technical knowledge <G>

agreed...

)\/(ark

---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.42)

Bo Simonsen wrote to Michiel van der Vlist <=-

Yeah.. but not that I like this situation but I really think something serious must happen before the ISPs are being forced to use IPv6 on wide-spread basis.

I'm waiting for home routers to build in IPV6/IPV4 gateways - the network
can go IPV6, people will still have a NAT-ed private class C address on the inside. It doesn't get the user any of the perks of a full IPV6 network,
(like getting rid of NAT) but it's cheap and easy to implement. I can
imagine the ISPs pushing something like this instead of opening up the network.

kurt weiske | kweiske at realitycheckbbs dot org
| http://realitycheckbbs.org


... "Proximity alert. Must be coming up on something."
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.49
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
* Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | information is power. (1:218/700)

Yeah.. but not that I like this situation but I really think
something serious must happen before the ISPs are being forced to
use IPv6 on wide-spread basis.

I'm waiting for home routers to build in IPV6/IPV4 gateways - the
network can go IPV6, people will still have a NAT-ed private class
C address on the inside. It doesn't get the user any of the perks
of a full IPV6 network, (like getting rid of NAT)

that's not a perk... that's a business plan... they do not want you to have NAT
in the first place... they want to charge for each device connected to the network and then rate plan them...

but it's cheap and easy to implement. I can imagine the ISPs
pushing something like this instead of opening up the network.

i don't see that happening... i see IPv6 taking a bit longer to be implemented but it is coming... they want more $$$ and IPv6 will give that to them if they are allowed to bill for each device connected... most folks aren't aware of how
much they are being ripped off every day in so many ways...

)\/(ark

---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.42)