FidoNet Newsletter, Volume 11, # 18
Tim Pozar
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| A newsletter of the | ISSN 1198-4589 |
| FidoNet BBS community | Published by: |
| _ | |
| / \ | "FidoNews" BBS |
| /|oo \ | +1-519-570-4176 1:1/23 |
| (_| /_) | |
| _`@/_ \ _ | Editors: |
| | | \ \\ | Sylvia Maxwell 1:221/194 |
| | (*) | \ )) | Donald Tees 1:221/192 |
| |__U__| / \// | Tim Pozar 1:125/555 |
| _//|| _\ / | |
| (_/(_|(____/ | |
| (jm) | Newspapers should have no friends. |
| | -- JOSEPH PULITZER |
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Submission address: editors 1:1/23 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Internet addresses: |
| |
| Sylvia -- m...@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca |
| Donald -- don...@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca |
| Tim -- po...@kumr.lns.com |
| Both Don & Sylvia (submission address) |
| edi...@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| For information, copyrights, article submissions, |
| obtaining copies and other boring but important details, |
| please refer to the end of this file. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
========================================================================
Table of Contents
========================================================================
1. Editorial..................................................... 2
2. Articles...................................................... 2
NII & Service to the Poor................................... 3
Stop The Insanity!.......................................... 5
The history of Fidonet A Progress Report.................... 6
Dear Emilia Erhardt......................................... 8
BGFAX echo now available.................................... 9
So Long, Thanks For All The Mail............................ 11
Cost Recovery Administration vs Echomail Coordination....... 12
Announcing the Higher Power Echo............................ 16
3. Fidonews Information.......................................... 17
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 2 02 May 1994
========================================================================
Editorial
========================================================================
It is the end of a long week. We spent the last three days
at a trade show, and the three days before that getting ready
for it. It was the international mining show ... hardware with
a vengence. Trucks that a seven footer could walk under without
stooping, and shovels that a pickup truck could park in with
little trouble. Every bit of equipment (even the dynamite)
seemed to have a micro-computer attached. Things sure are
changing fast. The show was, of course, held outside. Our booth
was in a tent of about two acres, and it was COLD. Oh well,
the joys of programming.
There are several good articles in this week's snooze, but I
would like to comment on one in particular. It is by Andrew
Guy, and titled "So Long, Thanks For All The Mail". Mr. Guy
explains that he is leaving Fidonet, and gives the technological
stagnation of the net as his reason.
Now I would say, first off, that I do not agree with his
actions. After all, things do not change unless somebody
changes them, and leaving does not remedy anything. He has a
good point, however, in regards to our complacency. While the
rest of the micro world is racing ahead, the amateur net that
started it all is still trundling along with the same software
technology that we have had for the last ten years. The
software and hardware has improved, but the methodology is the
same.
Where are the proposals for real-time messaging and chatting
accross systems? How are we going to hook into this data
highway? What are we going to do about the nodelist methodoloy
when we get to half a million nodes? That is about five years
away, based on our current growth rate of 50% per year.
We need to start planning the next step. This is our tenth
year. If we do not start evolving, we will not make twenty.
P.S. For those who notice such things, the snooze is now the
proud owner of an ISSN number.
========================================================================
Articles
========================================================================
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 3 02 May 1994
The following article is reprinted from :
Computer Uderground Digest Sun Apr 17, 1994 Volume 6 : Issue 34
NII & Service to the Poor
by Karen G. Schneider <k...@panix.com>
The Poor Will Always Be With Us...
I am a librarian in a "poor but proud" city--Newark, New Jersey.
Every day we see poor people in this library. Some people are
*obviously* poor--their personal appearance speaks for their
situations. But many, many more people are impoverished in ways at
once only subtly apparent yet highly pernicious: they are poorly
educated, poorly skilled and poorly prepared for the massive changes
in informtion-sharing behavior our world is now experiencing.
These poor are the children growing up without exposure to
computers--not at school, not at home, not even, for the most part, in
our libraries. These poor are the adults with such weak educations
and limited information-seeking skills that they passively accept the
quality, quality and media of information we provide them, regardless
of how limited or antiquated our services. These poor are the people
who have never heard of the "information superhighway," who will not
purchase computers with modems, who have never touched keyboards, who
do not know what the Internet is. Those of you who believe that
"everyone" is aware of the upcoming information revolution do not work
with the reality of poor inner-city lives.
One of the quandaries of the information revolution is that those who
are information-poor are unaware of it, so they are unable to
participate in it. So far, the information revolution has been
largely waged by highly educated and informed advocates, people who
often have tremendous resources at their disposal. These advocates
have spoken quite well on behalf of their own needs; some have
attempted to speak to the needs of the information-poor (as, in
essence, I am doing here). But the information-rich, however
well-meaning, have largely determined and prioritized the issues of
the information revolution according to their own visions and
realities.
So across our nation and the world, we hear of multimedia cable
extended to private homes, but not to housing projects; we read about
public kiosks in wealthy communities, but city schools lack computers;
in academic communities, nearly everyone seems to have an Internet
account, but in the middle of a poor city, there is not so much as a
public-use computer available in the main library. Information access
as a basic public service is broached only tentatively at the national
level. There is much discussion of commercializing resources but
little discussion about ensuring access for everyone, even with
respect to basic community information. Communities with freenets can
be lauded for their efforts in public computing, but the
implementation of these projects invariably assumes a information-rich
public proactively seeking and demanding such services.
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 4 02 May 1994
Who, then, will speak for the poor? The problem is (at minimum)
two-fold. The information have-nots need advocates, guides, leaders
and visionaries to help them understand what it is they are missing
out on, and why it is important. We who wish to provide such
advocacy, on the other hand, need information from our disenfranchised
communities so we can better understand what *we* are missing out on,
and why it is important--in other words, to understand what goods and
services we need to provide; to tailor and temper our advocacy with a
real-world understanding of what people need for survival and growth
in tomorrow's culture.
Here in Newark, we have several groups attempting to do just that: to
reach out to the disenfranchised, draw them in, and empower them to
shape tomorrow's information revolution. There are grass-roots
community organizers speaking to small groups around the city, and
Newark Public Library is beginning to reach out to both city leaders
and community organizers to develop a coalition of information
advocates for Newark. We dream of a network that will ensure that
every Newark resident will have access to information--and by access
we mean not only physical availability but *awareness of resources*
and *resource relevance*--two stipulations which make our paradigm of
access unusual and, in some ways, extremely progressive. We can only
hope that other communities join us in repaving the information
highway to meet the needs of not just its present but also its
potential travellers.
Our efforts demonstrate that unless things change, the information
revolution will only aggravate the inequities underlying current
policies for providing basic services in our country. Out of
necessity, many of us now assume that the funds essential to
maintaining this network will come from local (city and county)
resources. (We are hopeful that we are eligible for a special
infusion of funds to help us initiate this project, but experience
teaches city workers that we cannot rely on federal resources for
program maintenance.) This is not new for libraries; in our country,
the vast majority of funds for public libraries are provided at the
city or county level. If it is the de facto funding standard for the
new information resources, however, it bodes poorly for our country's
future with respect to equity in information access. Jonathon Kozol,
in _Savage Inequalities_, spoke to the inherent unfairness of using
local funds to pay for education; just as we will perpetuate
information poverty if we do not provide people relevant information
in ways they can access it, so too will we perpetuate poverty in all
its forms if we persist in funding national policies with local taxes.
We must not codify inequality for the next generation.
The poor will always be with us--and, as working with the poor has
taught me, they *are* us. The most elaborate networking scheme, the
fastest computers, the most dazzling graphics are all for naught if
they are really a private service for a specially-privileged
population. It is incumbent on those in public service, particularly
the public information services, and especially librarians, that we
become aggressive participants in the information
revolution--lobbying, writing, organizing, or whatever else it takes
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 5 02 May 1994
to become equal participants in the desing of the information
superhighway and all it represents--or we, and those we represent,
will be left behind as forgotten casualties of a silent battle.
Karen G. Schneider k...@panix.com * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stop The Insanity!
by Gary Gilmore, 1:2410/400 <ga...@ack.mi.org>
Is Fido overweight?
Well, I bitched about this before, and so have many others, but since
it seems to have fallen on deaf ears, I'll have another stab at it.
About a month ago, another sysop complained about the size of, and
waste in, the Fidonet nodelist. He got blasted back. Hey, he was
right, there IS massive waste in the nodelist, and it should be stopped
now. The *C structure can stop this, no matter what the NC's submit.
Do they? Hell no. For instance:
,1,Xxxxx_Xxxxxxx,Xxxxxx_XX,Nnn_Nnnnn,1-XXX-XXX-XXXX,9600,CM,XA, [...]
H16,V32b,V42b,UVFC,V32t
Huh?!? Isn't this a little much? Is there -really- a modem that's
v.32bis and -isn't- v.42bis? I don't think so, so "V32B,V42B" pairs
should be verboten. It's a -waste-! (Names blotted out to protect
the guilty)
How about this:
,13,Xxxx_Xxx'x_BBS,Xx_Xxxxxx_CA,Nnnnn_Nnnnn,1-XXX-XXX-XXXX,9600,CM,VFC,
V22,V32,V32b,V34
Pardon? Gee, maybe we should list his home address in there too,
and the voltage his modem operates on, like "V110". C'mon guys!
Pay attention to what you put into the nodelist! I don't blame the
sysops of the nodes in question. I DO blame the *C's that allow this
crap to go up and out.
There's not even a VFC flag in the nodelist, so what the hell is it
doing in this listing? UVFC, maybe. VFC? Umm, no. Who was the guy
on quaaludes that let THIS go upstream?
And while I'm bitching and whining...<g> HOW ABOUT A VFC FLAG???
This is really stupid... someone decided that "V34" is a legitimate
flag in the nodelist. Look at the bottom of your list. See it? Ever
SEEN a V34 modem? Anywhere? No... know why? It's NOT APPROVED YET!
(Beta testing doesn't count.)
Meanwhile, there's 1000's of V.FC modems whirring away, moving mail
daily. WAKE UP! Time to PAY ATTENTION! And another thing folks...
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 6 02 May 1994
it's no longer the "CCITT". Let's get that right too. Oh, and if &
when we get a VFC flag? Let's make it redundant and off-limits to have
"VFC,V32B,V42B" etc. Just like I said about V32B... I know of NO VFC
that doesn't feature all schemes below it as well.
Ok, more... how about all this crap:
Hold,3,Xxxxxxxxx,Xxxxxx_IL,Nnnn_Nnnnn,1-XXX-XXX-XXXX,9600,CM,XA,H14,V32
Hold? Pardon me, but if you want to store old node numbers, for
whatever reason you may have, you can store them on YOUR system, NOT
mine. Look up "HOLD" in the nodelist. There's tons of them. Why?
Would be be so hard for the NC's of these nets to REM out the nodes in
THEIR segments? Why have these eating up space in the nodelists of
tens of thousands of Fidonet systems across the world?
Look folks, you may think "Ah, more whining", but start thinking about
it. YOUR storing all these stupid mistakes and oversights. The
nodelist is now OVER 2.5 megs. What about Joe Blow with a 8088 or
slower 286? You think S/HE likes spending 30 minutes compiling all
that crap? S/He -shouldn't- have to be! (Neither should I, and I have
a 486-40)
I beg those in the *C positions to stop and think about this. Stop
giving holds, V32B,V42B combos, PVT nodes to anyone who asks, multiple
listings for the same phone numbers (it's in there!), etc.
Help put Fido on a diet. We'll all benefit from it.
If you feel the need to flame me on this... well, you need help.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The history of Fidonet A Progress Report
The history of Fidonet A Progress Report
By Marge Robbins 1:283/120 or mrob...@wps.com
Things are going well if somewhat slowly with the Fidohistory
project. It seems like everytime I get up a good head of steam
the Red Cross thinks it would be a good idea to send me
somewhere for a few weeks. But progress IS being made.
We have a File Distribution Network set up for the Fidohistory
files that I am slowly accumulating.
The primary site is on the Internet, compliments of Burt Juda
ftp.fidonet.org
/pub/fidonet/history
Fidonet hubs are:
John Johnson 1:283/657
John Souvestre 1:396/1
Dallas Hinton 1:153/175
Mathew Landry 1:267/109
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 7 02 May 1994
Jason Klink 1:3639/7
Ralf Schnele 2:246/2007
and unofficially Marge Robbins 1:283/120
For now I have all the files, but a shortage of disk space may
force me to drop out at some future date.
On other fronts, my list of people to interview keeps growing.
I'm busy now transcribing the tapes I've already made. A
couple of pioneers are in the process of editing theirs so I
can release them to the general public. Mark Astarita is
doing some scanning of IFNA documents.
Several times a week I get a message from someone offering to help.
I am gratified and grateful that the net has chosen to support this
project. Thank you one and all. But folks, some things I just DON'T
need. I don't need help with the tapes. I don't need any more
archive sites <except in zones 2 -6>.
What I do need are: 1. someone to poke through the old snoozes and
come up with a "software timeline" What versions of what programs
were in use when; 2.Leads on where I can find old software and
oldtimers to talk to 3. people willing to compile at least time
lines on their nets/regions and 4. Anecdotes, old sysops' tales and
the like.
I can only write what I know about, and I can only include in our
Fidonet Electronic Library memorabilia I can locate and bring home.
So if you have something or know of a resource please share.
And finally, Fidonet is 10 years old. four years ago, on the fifth
aniversary of Fidonet's present multiple net organization Ken Kaplin
wrote a guest editorial for the snooze looking backwards. Its a
very illuminating look at our humble roots so, I've included it here
for your edification.
Fidonews 11 June 1990 Editorial
By Ken Kaplin
This week multinet FidoNet is celebrating it's fifth birthday.
It seems quite appropriate that current world events are
"proclaiming an end of the Cold War and calling for a joint
venture in a new world order". FidoNet is also heading into a
new age of cooperation, cooling tempers, and new democratic
selection procedures for its leaders. FidoNet is one of the
oldest public networks and yet it has only reached a maturity
level now prepared to enter kindegarden. My son Eric and FidoNet
are the same age and it has been interesting over the past five
years to watch them both grow and mature.
The FidoNet *C's have their own bit of history. In the beginning
there was a single tier network and no *C's as I was doing all
the data collection, hand editing, and publishing of the
nodelist. The nodelist was split into Networks and Regions right
after the St Louis FidoCon on June 12th 1985. Zone's came many
months later. The original RC's were located in places outside
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 8 02 May 1994
of major metropolitan areas and were there primarily to handle
SYSOP's who could not locate in a network. They had little to do
and complained quite a bit. In the meantime I still had too much
of the workload. A few months after the original Jeff Rush
echomail processor was released (Summer '86) I started a
conference called REGCON between all the RC's and that's when the
first RC's started getting organized and writing Policy. The
RC's were not really a major factor in the control of the
formation of the Nodelist until late '87 when Ben Baker released
MAKENL which allowed the RC's to create their own nodelist
segment. MAKENL was further enhanced in '88 to allow the NC's
and even HUB's to prepare their own segment and that's when the
power of the NC's came into play. The control of the FidoNet
Nodelist eventually fanned out like a funnel stating with myself
doing everything to the process of today where all of *C's
throughout the world are now involved.
I keep getting asked where is all this heading? What does future
hold for FidoNet over the next decade? Computers keep getting
faster and more efficient and FidoNet's developers must keep
ahead of the pace if the network is to survive. FidoNet has
truly brought the world a little closer together and that effort
will continue into the ninties. The next five years should be
very entertaining as well as exciting. I would send you all a
piece of FidoNet Birthday cake, but the one in our house only has
Ninja Turtles.
FidoNews 7-24 Page 2 11 Jun 1990
Ken Kaplan
FidoNet 1:1/10
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Emilia Erhardt
[this time the authoress is MISSING IN FLIGHT!]
Q: i have a friend, sort of, to whom i'm inclined to write in net
mail, but he hasn't answered my letters FOR THREE DAYS and i'm going
nuts. I've never met him real-time, so i keep imagining everyone i
see could be him. If the phone rings i hope it is that person. What
should i do? I can't stand worrying that he doesn't like me anymore
or that he never did like me and had a robot re-sending arbitrary
mail to me for a joke. What should i do?
A: Well dear, first of all, cyberspace is a big world with lots of
fishies in it not to mention doggies with diskettes. Do not put all
of your eggs in one kennel. Dear, do not be so lazy that you depend
upon mail from one system to feed your obsessions.
Secondly, you should enjoy your obsessions, even if they are
occasionally painful. Obsessions will help you become less lazy.
Pain is relative to your interpretation of perceptions, and can be
willfully convoluted by you into unusual and perhaps enjouable
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 9 02 May 1994
sensations. Anyone who would go to the trouble of inventing a robot
to confuse and confound correspondants is interesting and probably
understands this paragraph.
Thirdly, remember that as long as you friend has lots of disk space
you can continue to write letters. You can NOT expect replies,
bucause expecting anything is rude. Everyone has a <del> key, and is
free to use it.
- - - -
Q: I think i have a split personality. One of me is an extremely
kind and generous but moronic nerd who writes a lot of mail. The
other me is not very nice, but knows a LOT. Most of the time they
are not aware of each other, but when they are they do not like each
other. This is not a problem, unless they both write mail to the
same people and someone notices. What should i do?
A: Dear, there are drugs which can help you. I would suggest taking
large doses then getting the one of you who knows most to set up a
password on your mail editor and not tell it to the other one of you.
- - - -
Q: I am extremely interested in computer-related social issues but i
do not know enough yet about computers to do anything real. Is there
anything i can do?
A: Yes, dear. You can sit on your tushie forever and waste your
life, or you can work your tushie off completely until you do know
how to do something. If you chose the latter course, you must vow
never to work for the arms industry, never to work for ecologically
destructive organizations, and you must assist others in learning in
your spare time if you ever have any [you only have to do this if the
"others" exibit some initiative of their own].
- - - -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
BGFAX echo now available
Rick Lithgow (1:2601/574)
Hello All
Some of you may or may not have heard of BGFAX..,BGFAX is a piece of
Shareware that will allow FAX's to come in on a regular DATA line.
So you can recieve FAX and BBS calls via your front end mailer. Or
it can be run a s a stand alone front end with no mailer required.
Frontdoor 2.1x and 2.2x allow this provided you have a ZYXEL
modem(and provided that frodo is registered). Well the BGFAX echo
has now been started and is so far being picked up by about 26
boards in region 19, 17, now 13(us) as well as australia. Please
request the BGFAX echo from B.J. Guilliot under the tag name BGFAX.
B.J.'s FIDO node number is 1:106/400. 1+713-893-9124. You can allow
your users to access this echo as it is not restricted to just
sysops. It is for technical support of BGFAX. All people are
welcome. We are trying to get this echo on the backbone, the more
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 10 02 May 1994
systems we get on it, the better. As this will get all the talk and
support of BGfax out of the BBS software and Mailer software
echoes... Thanx for you for your time, bandwith and participation.
Until the echo is on the back bone, mail runs will be made once a
week..So let's get it on the backbone!
The rules for the echo are as follows....
Purpose of the FidoNet BGfax Conference (Echo)
The BGfax Echo Conference is a techinical support conference for
BGfax. A fax software that can be run with a frontend mailer or as a
front end, or just plane fax. It is strictly for BGfax technical
support and usage. All people are welcome not just sysop's.
Rules for the BGfax Conference
1. No BBS advertisements are welcome in the Conference. A simple
"Hello, I'm new here" will do. BBS phone numbers in messages or
signatures (other than origin lines) constitutes advertising.
2. Product or commercial advertisements are not welcome.
Selling your personal modem is allowed though as long as the
following conditions are met.
a. Keep ad to 23 lines (ONE PAGE) or LESS INCLUDING tearlines and
useless data such as offline reader signature lines, etc.
b. Modem advertised must be DIRECTLY usable by, with, or for BGfax
c. Price of product may be included in advertisement.
d. Either a FidoNet node number, phone number, or U.S. Mail address
should be provided for contact.
3. NO FLAMING WILL BE TOLERATED by the Moderator on any person,
participating in this Echo. If you have a problem with any of to
he above, you're welcome to state it here ONLY AFTER you've,
1. Contacted that person by phone, US Mail, Netmail, or E-Mail, and
2. have not received either an answer in a reasonable period
of time or an unsatisfactory answer regarding your problem.
IF you decide to voice your complaint in this Echo, it must be
posted in a QUIET, CIVILIZED, and MATURE MANNER. Threads to such
complaints MUST follow the previous statement.
4. Please keep your messages ON-TOPIC. If you don't know what's
allowed, ASK first or re-read this Rules file. The Moderator
has the final decision as to what is on or off topic.
5. Excessive quoting is not permitted. When responding to a
message, please QUOTE ONLY THE TEXT YOU WISH TO RESPOND TO,
NOTHING MORE. Please do not include personal hello/goodbye/"In a
message to" lines, offline mail reader signature/tag lines, mail
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 11 02 May 1994
processor signature/origin lines, etc. in your quoted response.
Please keep your messages reasonably short and to the point.
6. Handles are not allowed in the Conference. Real names only, please.
7. ANSI and WC specific graphics and graphics codes are not permitted
in messages. Not everyone reading the Echo can translate them.
8. The BGfax Echo may not be gated outside of FidoNet by anyone to
or from any QWK or Fido Technology network without the express
permission of the Moderator.
9. Repeated offenses of the rules by any participant may result in that
node's link to this Conference being cut.
Rick Lithgow
Moderator
1:2601/574
en...@AOL.COM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So Long, Thanks For All The Mail
Andrew Guy, ag...@sheartl.hna.com.au
Fidonet hasn't changed much since I joined two years ago. There's still
those prophesying the doom of Fidonet, the same endless arguments, and
a slightly larger nodelist. The same policy, the same technology, the
same standards.
From what I've read, when Fidonet was just a pup, things changes rather
quickly. New drafts of policy, new protocols, new software. Have we
missed a turn in the road somewhere? Have we decided that we're on a
good thing, so we should stick to it? There's a word for that:
stagnation.
Oh, I know, Fidonet continues to grow, and in doing so, defies its
critics. But folks, we're stuck in the 80's, using the same technology
that propelled mail packets at the dizzying speed of 2400bps on IBM XTs
and clones. Mail processors that can't handle a fourth dimension,
nodelist processors that break when a system lists a speed above 9600,
mailers that can't handle EMSI sessions or security, and archiving
utilities that have been superseded for many years.
The argument against changing any of these things is that it may break
some ancient software on a CoCo or Apple II, thus making it difficult
for a few people to continue to communicate in Fidonet. I'm sorry, but
in an organisation topping 28,000 members, the good of the whole must
outweigh the good of the individual. Until people accept that, Fidonet
will continue to stagnate.
As for myself, I've had enough of stagnating. I'm pulling the plug on
Fidonet, switching to a SL/IP (Serial Line/Internet Protocol)
connection to the Internet. Under SL/IP, I can have a virtually
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 12 02 May 1994
unlimited number of data channels flowing in parallel, downloading
files, chatting to others, and receiving mail, all at the same time,
all out of the one connection.
It's time to wake up Fidonet, make the hard decisions, for the good of
the whole, not the good of the individual.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost Recovery Administration vs Echomail Coordination
COST RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION vs ECHOMAIL COORDINATION
by Adrian Walker
1:153/752
REC, Region 17
One of the issues which frequently faces a Net is the inter-
relationship which often exists between a Cost Recovery Plan (CRP) and
Echomail Coordination within the Net. This article is an attempt to
shed some light on the differences between these two types of
activities. I will frequently quote comments which the Z1C has made
in recent months in answering related concerns.
----------ooo----------
FREEDOM OF CHOICE
The first principle which is involved concerns the basic freedom which
a node has to obtain an echomail feed:
"Anyone can get any feed off anyone who is willing to feed
them."
This means that no *C or *EC may direct that a node obtain its feed
from a specific source. They are there to coordinate, not to control:
"[An] NEC can't stop nodes from getting their echomail from
the satellite feed, and there should be no policy 4 action
taken against any node for doing so."
"No one will lose a node number for failure to participate in
a CRP."
If a node refuses to participate in a CRP:
"Then ... they don't get echomail via the nodes that run that
CRP."
----------ooo----------
POLICY DOCUMENTS
The second principle concerns local Net echomail, or CRP policies.
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 13 02 May 1994
These policies are quite common, and generally specify in detail the
terms under which a node may receive an echomail feed from that CRP.
It is important to realize that such policies only affect the nodes
which choose to participate in that CRP and to receive mail from it,
and that these policies may not be enforced by coordinators.
Regarding whether an NC may enforce a local policy:
"Not with regards to echomail, and not if it is more
restrictive than policy 4."
Regarding NCs dealing with Policy Complaints arising from local policy
matters:
"Tell your NEC that you won't hear the complaint because it
has nothing to do with policy 4."
In dealing with local policies which are actually the policies of a
specific CRP, the only sanction which a CRP Administrator may take
against a node which has contravened such a policy is to remove its
feed via that CRP. At that point the node may establish its own feed
from any other willing source.
A CRP may, of course, direct that any node which obtains its echomail
from the CRP may not subdistribute that mail to others, since the CRP
is free to control the distribution of mail which originates from its
sources.
By the same token, a CRP may not do anything which would specifically
contravene Policy 4. (In the following quotes, the [] items referred
originally to the Backbone, which is one of several similar
distribution systems):
"The operation of [Fidonet distribution systems] is still
affected by policy 4 in the same way it always has. They can't
do anything that is forbidden by policy 4 and anything that is
actionable under policy 4 will still be actionable under
policy 4."
"In the meantime, [a Fidonet distribution system] can define
a set of guidelines under which they choose to operate. That
does NOT make those guidelines part of policy 4.07 nor does
it take the teeth out of Policy 4.07."
----------ooo----------
MULTIPLE HATS
Because many Nets, through mutual cooperation, have established CRPs
which consist, or originally consisted, of most Net members, the Net
CRP and the Net's Echomail Coordination ended up being carried out by
the same individual, the NEC. It is important, however, to keep the
two hats entirely separate in making and applying decisions.
The NEC is a coordinator. His job is to keep track of whatever
echomail distribution, from whatever sources, he has been made aware
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 14 02 May 1994
of, and has been asked to coordinate. He assists nodes in finding
feed sources. He assists distribution systems in avoiding dupe loops
and similar technical problems. He is generally directly involved in
ensuring that Backbone echomail, Regional echomail, and routed netmail
flow smoothly to nodes in the Net.
His only sanction option is to direct that a node cease a feed if the
node has caused a technical problem which is affecting the smooth
distribution of echomail in the Net, and which can only be rectified
by a feed cut. The NEC then usually works with the node to assist him
in resolving the problem so that the feed may be resumed without
delay.
"The NEC is there to assist with echomail, not to order nodes
around ...."
The CRP administrator provides a feed source, a distribution topology,
a method of cost sharing, and an accounting mechanism. He provides
feeds of agreed-upon services to nodes which contribute to that CRP.
He has the right to remove such feeds from any participating node for
reasons which will usually be detailed in the CRP's policies. He has
no control over echomail feeds which do not originate through his CRP.
An example of the proper handling of the responsibilities of an NEC
(or NC) who is also a CRP administrator may help to clarify this
issue:
A node which is getting a feed from the CRP refuses to pay his
CRP contribution. The NEC puts on his CRP administrator's hat,
and after suitable discussion advises the node that his
echomail feed from that CRP is being cut. The node then
writes to the NEC asking for help in getting another feed.
The NEC takes off the CRP administrator's hat, puts his NEC
hat on, and from his knowledge of available feeds within the
Net assists the node in finding an alternate feed, keeping
track of this feed so as to avoid any future dupe loops.
Clearly, if a coordinator is also a CRP administrator, he runs into
the same problem which Policy 4 refers to when speaking of various *C
positions - the wearing of multiple hats. If there are other options,
it may be wise for a *C or *EC to keep CRP administration in the hands
of separate individuals simply to avoid this type of conflict of
interest.
----------ooo----------
COMPETITION
The setting up of alternate distribution systems within a net
inevitably provides competition, and a choice for nodes wishing
echomail services.
Some Nets may not be able to sustain more than one distribution system
due to size or other factors, but in general competition can be a
healthy force. Alternate systems can keep echomail costs down
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 15 02 May 1994
depending on a CRP's chosen feed source, modem speed, and method of
accounting. It may well result in physical echomail distribution
changing hands from one person to another as particular individuals
are able to offer less expensive options for Net members.
Echomail Coordination, however, is independent of the source of
echomail for any particular distribution system, so the person who
provides the feeds is not necessarily automatically the NEC. This
appointment is usually made by the NC, to whom the NEC is responsible
for the smooth running of echomail distribution within the Net.
----------ooo----------
NODE RESPONSIBILITY
The final principle is that of node responsibility.
A node may obtain its own independent feed from a source which is
willing to feed it, and may even set up its own distribution system
for other interested nodes. There are a couple of considerations for
the node in doing this.
The first is the technical consideration. The node must be extremely
careful when setting up an alternate distribution system, whether it
is subdistributing mail to downlinks or only obtaining it for itself.
It must be completely conversant with its areas.bbs (or equivalent)
file, and with its mailer's routing file, to ensure that the echomail
is not routed through another node, or distributed to a node which is
also receiving the same mail from a different source. When changing
feeds, the node must know and understand the proper method of ensuring
that existing message bases are not rescanned into the new
distribution system. Outbound mail must be sent back to the source
from which it came, and not routed into a different distribution
system.
While there is no policy requirement to do so, the node is strongly
advised to inform its NEC of the topology being used, so that the NEC
may do his job of keeping track of who feeds what to whom in the Net.
The second consideration is the social concern. This is purely an
ethical matter, but nodes considering an alternate feed should pause
to consider the effect which their withdrawal from an existing CRP
will have on the other members of that CRP. In small Nets this can be
a major factor in whether other Net members can continue to get
echomail at an affordable cost. The node should also consider the
effect on Net member relationships which open advertising of a
competing system may have.
----------ooo----------
It is hoped that this analysis of echomail administration within a Net
will assist NCs, NECs, CRP administrators, and nodes alike, in
operating fair and enjoyable echomail distribution systems. Any
suggestions for improvement of this article are welcomed.
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 16 02 May 1994
---ooo000ooo---
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Announcing the Higher Power Echo
by Joe Shupienis, Echo Moderator, (1:129/1...@fidonet.org)
The Higher Power Echo
The HIGHER_POWER FidoNet echo was created to provide a forum
for people involved in 12-Step programs of recovery to
discuss their understanding of a "power greater than
themselves" which is the central focus of 12-Step programs.
Anyone else interested in spirituality is encouraged to
participate as well.
Participants can discuss with others what their current
understanding of their higher power is, how it relates to
their recovery and day-by-day living experience, how they
call upon that power, and how it manifests itself in their
lives. This dialog can help others to "utilize, not analyze"
that power, to help open doors of understanding and
tolerance, and to enable ideas to spread and grow.
It is NOT a place for trying to convert others to any
particular religious denomination, cult or belief. Rather it
is a place to express individual views as they exist at this
point in one's spiritual journey.
Participants are asked to demonstrate their spiritual growth
and maturity by practicing tolerance and understanding,
knowing that others must travel their own individual paths
to their spiritual awakenings.
We try to remember that people quite often have difficulty
expressing exactly what they are thinking and what appears
to be a glaring theological heresy is perhaps merely a
misstatement of the opposite, or a sarcastic exaggeration!
We find it preferable to "correct" others by discussing our
own personal experiences, rather than tearing down with
criticism what they have spent their entire lives building
up to.
We hope that all participants will find here a safe place to
discuss their spiritual growth and development; a place to
share where they are at on their spiritual journey, and a
place to see where others have gone and are going.
The HIGHER_POWER echo is available from the following
FidoNet Nodes, and may be freely requested from them. We are
in the process of requesting Backbone status for the echo.
1:102/402 1:102/525 1:102/541 1:102/749
1:129/123 1:129/229 1:129/248 1:130/307
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 17 02 May 1994
1:147/27 1:157/2 1:278/3000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
========================================================================
Fidonews Information
========================================================================
------- FIDONEWS MASTHEAD AND CONTACT INFORMATION ----------------
Editors: Sylvia Maxwell, Donald Tees
Editors Emeritii: Thom Henderson, Dale Lovell,
Vince Perriello, Tim Pozar
Tom Jennings
"FidoNews" BBS
FidoNet 1:1/23
BBS +1-519-570-4176, 300/1200/2400/14400/V.32bis/HST(DS)
Internet addresses:
Don & Sylvia (submission address)
edi...@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca
Sylvia -- m...@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca
Donald -- don...@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca
Tim -- po...@kumr.lns.com
(Postal Service mailing address)
FidoNews
128 Church St.
Kitchener, Ontario
Canada
N2H 2S4
Published weekly by and for the members of the FidoNet international
amateur electronic mail system. It is a compilation of individual
articles contributed by their authors or their authorized agents. The
contribution of articles to this compilation does not diminish the
rights of the authors. Opinions expressed in these articles are those
of the authors and not necessarily those of FidoNews.
Authors retain copyright on individual works; otherwise FidoNews is
Copyright 1994 Sylvia Maxwell. All rights reserved. Duplication and/or
distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only. For use in
other circumstances, please contact the original authors, or FidoNews
(we're easy).
OBTAINING COPIES: The-most-recent-issue-ONLY of FidoNews in electronic
form may be obtained from the FidoNews BBS via manual download or
Wazoo FileRequest, or from various sites in the FidoNet and Internet.
PRINTED COPIES may be obtained from Fido Software for $10.00US each
PostPaid First Class within North America, or $13.00US elsewhere,
mailed Air Mail. (US funds drawn upon a US bank only.)
INTERNET USERS: FidoNews is available via FTP from ftp.fidonet.org,
in directory ~ftp/pub/fidonet/fidonews. If you would like a FAQ, or
have questions regarding FidoNet, or UUCP<==>FidoNet gateways, please
FidoNews 11-18 Page: 18 02 May 1994
direct them to David Deitch (1:133/411@fidonet) at
dei...@gisatl.fidonet.org.
SUBMISSIONS: You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in
FidoNews. Article submission requirements are contained in the file
ARTSPEC.DOC, available from the FidoNews BBS, or Wazoo filerequestable
from 1:1/23 as file "ARTSPEC.DOC". Please read it.
"Fido", "FidoNet" and the dog-with-diskette are U.S. registered
trademarks of Tom Jennings, and are used with permission.
Asked what he thought of Western civilization,
M.K. Gandhi said, "I think it would be an excellent idea".
-- END
----------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Remember Campers!!!
To send mail from an Internet site or smart UUCP Site TO a user
that calls a Fido-Net system.
You need to know the name of the person and node number of the
Fido-Net system that the person uses.
The address of a FidoNode looks like this: 1:105/302.0. Usually
the 1: and .0 are left off, but they are there by default. (In
Europe it is 2: and in the Pacific Basin it is 3:.) That
address can be translated as "Zone 1, Net 105, FidoNode 302,
Point 0." or p0.f302.n105.z1. Add the FidoNet domain of
.fidonet.org to the end of that, chop off the p0 (it is again,
a default) and you have f302.n105.z1.fidonet.org - the "Fully
Qualified Domain Name" of a FidoNode. Another example is
1:105/4.3 which would be written as p3.f4.n105.z1.fidonet.org
(since there is a point number other than 0, we have to specify
it). Note also that we are only using zone 1. This will also
work for zones 2 and 3, just use z2 or z3 as appropriate.
FidoNet uses full names of the callers. Multi-part name folks
(eg. First Last, ie. "Dale Weber") will have a period '.'
seperating their names. So, lets say you wanted to send mail
to Dale Weber at 1:105/55.0, you would address your letter to:
Dale....@f55.n105.z1.fidonet.org.
************************************************************************
Submissions to comp.org.fidonet should be addressed to
po...@kumr.lns.com
************************************************************************
--
Internet: po...@kumr.lns.com
Snail: Tim Pozar / KKSF / 77 Maiden Lane / San Francisco CA 94108 / USA
POTS: +1 415 788 2022 Radio: KC6GNJ / KAE6247