• SBBSECHO

    From Dennis Ayala@VERT to Digital Man on Saturday, September 20, 2014 08:11:02
    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying to send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal netmail.
    In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were for an external system and sending it to the mailer for outbound delivery. When this happens, the netmail just gets lost because the mailer doesn't deliver anyting to itself.

    Is this normal for SBBSEcho or do I have something setup wrong? Everyother netmail for external users works fine. I have multiple networks configured and have had no problems except with this particular case.

    Regards,

    Dennis
    --- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
    * Origin: The Wall BBS - telnet://thewallbbs.com (1:135/372)
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Psi-Jack@VERT/DECKHVN2 to Dennis Ayala on Saturday, September 20, 2014 12:18:08
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11 am

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying to send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal netmail. In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were for an external system and sending it to the mailer for outbound
    delivery. When this happens, the netmail just gets lost because the
    mailer doesn't deliver anyting to itself.

    Is this normal for SBBSEcho or do I have something setup wrong?
    Everyother netmail for external users works fine. I have multiple
    networks configured and have had no problems except with this particular case.

    Local mail to local users shouldn't be sent as netmail, but should be sent as email. bbs.email() checks that the recipient's name/number exists and allows them to send if it does. bbs.netmail() which is sounds like is happening, would try to send via netmail or smtp email, which are totally different.

    Personally, I wrote a wrapper script around my send mail within my sub to check if the recipient is "foo" or "foo@bar", checking for the @ specifically to determine wether to try to use bbs.email() or bbs.netmail() and act accordingly.

    ---
    [Psi-Jack -//- Decker]
    þ Synchronet þ Decker's Heaven -//- bbs.deckersheaven.com
  • From Khelair@VERT/TINFOIL to Dennis Ayala on Saturday, September 20, 2014 09:27:32
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11:02

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying to send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal netmail. In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were for an extern system and sending it to the mailer for outbound delivery. When this happens the netmail just gets lost because the mailer doesn't deliver anyting to itself.

    Is that a problem with sbbsecho or a user's understanding of networks?

    Is there a 'why' that was completely unaddressed? Just curious.

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Tinfoil Tetrahedron BBS telnet or ssh -p 2222 to tinfoil.synchro.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Dennis Ayala on Saturday, September 20, 2014 13:33:05
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11 am

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying to send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal
    netmail.

    There is no such thing as "internal netmail", so that is a certainly a misuse of netmail by the user.

    In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were for
    an external system and sending it to the mailer for outbound delivery.

    SBBSecho doesn't do anything with outbound netmail messages unless you're running a FLO-style mailer, and then it just packetizes the .msg files into packets the mailer can support. And SBBSecho only does this for outbound netmail. If the destination address on the netmail message is one of the addresses configured in your SCFG->Networks->FidoNet, then it will not packetize it.

    When
    this happens, the netmail just gets lost because the mailer doesn't deliver anyting to itself.

    I would expect the .msg file to just sit in your netmail directory and then be imported (in the the mail base) when SBBSecho ran for import.

    Is this normal for SBBSEcho or do I have something setup wrong? Everyother netmail for external users works fine. I have multiple networks configured and have had no problems except with this particular case.

    Do you have some example sbbsecho log output which demonstrates what you're saying is happening?

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #29:
    The COM I/O routines for Synchronet for DOS were written in ASM by Steve Deppe. Norco, CA WX: 76.7øF, 63.0% humidity, 11 mph SE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Dennis Ayala@VERT/THEWALL to Khelair on Saturday, September 20, 2014 16:24:16
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Khelair to Dennis Ayala on Sat Sep 20 2014 09:27 am

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11:02

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal netma In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were for an ext system and sending it to the mailer for outbound delivery. When this happ the netmail just gets lost because the mailer doesn't deliver anyting to itself.

    Is that a problem with sbbsecho or a user's understanding of networks?

    Is there a 'why' that was completely unaddressed? Just curious.

    Well, users these days who are used to emailing might come tot hink that Netmail should behave as email does. For example, user A sends a message to user 2 internally on the BBS but uses netmail instead of a local message or even email.

    Technically there's nothing that prevents that userA@1:135/372 send a netmail message to user2@1:135/172. If user2 had a different netmail
    address, the message would travel normally and reach its destinantion.

    In this case, SBBSEcho does not recognizes that the sender and the recipiend have the sane FTN address and processes the mail as if it were external.

    It has nothing to do with the user's understanding of netmail. I think that if SBBSEcho analyzes the netmail address and validates that it's the same one defined in the SBBS config as a local primary or AKA, it should handle the message differently and deliver it locally instead of throwing it out.

    Dennis

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ The Wall BBS - telnet://thewallbbs.com
  • From Bill McGarrity@VERT to Dennis Ayala on Saturday, September 20, 2014 17:54:00
    On 09-20-14 09:27, Khelair wrote to Dennis Ayala <=-

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11:02

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying to send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal netmail. In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were for an extern system and sending it to the mailer for outbound delivery. When this happens the netmail just gets lost because the mailer doesn't deliver anyting to itself.

    Is that a problem with sbbsecho or a user's understanding of
    networks?

    Is there a 'why' that was completely unaddressed? Just curious.

    Dennis, which menu option are they using.. the "S" or the "N"?

    The "S" is for intraboard mail while the "N" is for routed FTN or SMTP mail.


    Bill

    Telnet: bbs.tequilamockingbirdonline.net
    Web: bbs.tequilamockingbirdonline.net
    IRC: irc.tequilamockingbirdonline.net Ports: 6661-6670 SSL: +6697
    Radio: radio.tequilamockingbirdonline.net:8010/live


    ... Look Twice, Save a Life... Motorcycles are EVERYWHERE!!
    === MultiMail/Win32 v0.50
    --- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
    * Origin: TequilaMockingbird Online - Toms River, NJ (1:266/404)
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Dennis Ayala on Saturday, September 20, 2014 19:04:34
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Khelair on Sat Sep 20 2014 04:24 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Khelair to Dennis Ayala on Sat Sep 20 2014 09:27 am

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11:02

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal netma In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were for an ext system and sending it to the mailer for outbound delivery. When this happ the netmail just gets lost because the
    mailer doesn't deliver anyting to itself.

    Is that a problem with sbbsecho or a user's understanding of networks?

    Is there a 'why' that was completely unaddressed? Just curious.

    Well, users these days who are used to emailing might come tot hink that Netmail should behave as email does. For example, user A sends a message to user 2 internally on the BBS but uses netmail instead of a local message or even email.

    Technically there's nothing that prevents that userA@1:135/372 send a netmail message to user2@1:135/172. If user2 had a different netmail address, the message would travel normally and reach its destinantion.

    In this case, SBBSEcho does not recognizes that the sender and the
    recipiend have the sane FTN address and processes the mail as if it were external.

    Can you elaborate on what you mean by "processes the mail"? SBBSecho only does 2 things with netmail (.msg files in your configured netmail directory):

    1. Import it (if the destination address is a local address), or:
    2. Packetize it (if you're using a FLO-style mailer and the destination is a foreign address).

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #48:
    Synchronet program was named 'sbbs' instead of 'sync' to avoid conflict w/Unix. Norco, CA WX: 72.3øF, 69.0% humidity, 9 mph ESE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Khelair@VERT/TINFOIL to Dennis Ayala on Saturday, September 20, 2014 16:41:18
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Khelair on Sat Sep 20 2014 16:24:16

    Well, users these days who are used to emailing might come tot hink that Netmail should behave as email does. For example, user A sends a message to user 2 internally on the BBS but uses netmail instead of a local message or even email.

    Technically there's nothing that prevents that userA@1:135/372 send a netmai
    l
    message to user2@1:135/172. If user2 had a different netmail
    address, the message would travel normally and reach its destinantion.

    In this case, SBBSEcho does not recognizes that the sender and the recipiend have the sane FTN address and processes the mail as if it were external.

    It has nothing to do with the user's understanding of netmail. I think that
    if
    SBBSEcho analyzes the netmail address and validates that it's the same one defined in the SBBS config as a local primary or AKA, it should handle the message differently and deliver it locally instead of throwing it out.

    My friend, your first and final paragraphs are diametrically opposed to each other. You blow your own point away at the end before you make it.
    Anyway, I'm not trying to throw darts, I'm just suggesting education
    as a potential solution to this problem, instead of trying to rewrite the programs that've been around, and are firmly established in the community. I wouldn't dare try to melt your individual snowflake qualities.
    If you want a solution that's going to 'fix' the software so that it
    works the way you want it to, instead of the way that it's been documented as working for many years, you're going to have to code a solution. Nobody else has got this problem, so it's going to fall on you to do that. It would be pretty trivial to implement a shell script, binary, or JavaScripted solution from within the BBS, that will handle what you want done, by sending it through the appropriate functionality, instead of redefining the functionality to
    what you and your user want it to be. You would simply run through the 'outbound' messages in your fido pile, scan for ones to be delivered to your local host, and send them back to the BBS, where it should've been handled
    in the first place (instead of being sent through FIDO), via the appropriate channel. A few API calls, a few filesystem calls, and some text parsing, is all it would take in JavaScript through a timed event in the BBS.

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Tinfoil Tetrahedron BBS telnet or ssh -p 2222 to tinfoil.synchro.net
  • From Dennis Ayala@VERT to Digital Man on Sunday, September 21, 2014 03:08:24
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Sat Sep 20 2014 01:33 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11 am

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal netmail.

    There is no such thing as "internal netmail", so that is a certainly a misus of netmail by the user.

    In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were for
    an external system and sending it to the mailer for outbound delivery.

    SBBSecho doesn't do anything with outbound netmail messages unless you're running a FLO-style mailer, and then it just packetizes the .msg files into packets the mailer can support. And SBBSecho only does this for outbound netmail. If the destination address on the netmail message is one of the addresses configured in your SCFG->Networks->FidoNet, then it will not packetize it.

    When
    this happens, the netmail just gets lost because the mailer doesn't deliv anyting to itself.

    I would expect the .msg file to just sit in your netmail directory and then imported (in the the mail base) when SBBSecho ran for import.

    Is this normal for SBBSEcho or do I have something setup wrong? Everyothe netmail for external users works fine. I have multiple networks configure and have had no problems except with this particular case.

    Do you have some example sbbsecho log output which demonstrates what you're saying is happening?

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #29:
    The COM I/O routines for Synchronet for DOS were written in ASM by Steve Dep Norco, CA WX: 76.7øF, 63.0% humidity, 11 mph SE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    Digital Man:

    I'm sorry, I was wrong. SBBS does saves the *.msg and places it in the outbound directory. When SBBSecho runs, nothing happens. The *.MSG sits there forever. SBBSecho doesn't even record a log entry.

    I know everybody jumped on me complaining about the "correct" use of netmail. I know Netmail is a realy old technology but if it is technically possible to improve it, why not do it instead of saying thats how it was 20 years ago and that's how it should stay.

    If we'd all think that way, modern BBS'ing would not exist and everybody would be in front of a pile of momdems waiting for someone to call in.

    Rob, I appreciate the work you do, I love SBBS and take my comments not as a complaint but as positive criticism from someone who wants SBBS to be the best it can be.

    I think that SBBS should not even create the *.msg if the sender ftn address and the destination's ftn address is the same and should handle it as an internal message.

    Regards,

    Dennis
    --- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
    * Origin: The Wall BBS - telnet://thewallbbs.com (1:135/372)
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Dennis Ayala@VERT to Khelair on Sunday, September 21, 2014 03:35:19
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Khelair to Dennis Ayala on Sat Sep 20 2014 04:41 pm

    Khelair:

    Although I appreciate your flaming response, I think I wasn't even talking to you. Thant being said, I want to explain something to you.

    I've always loved BBS'ing, I'm new to SynchroNet so if I say something that may sound moronic, I'm entitled to until I learn a bit more.

    The fact that FTN netmail of 20 years ago WAS NOT USED for internal correspondence doesn't mean that it couldn't be done. Hell, I don't care if anyone sends internal netmail, I'm just sending Rob some input on something I noticed that happened on my BBS and wanted to make sure it happened that way by design, not by a misconfiguration on my part.

    I did however expressed something wrong. I mentioned SBBSEcho because I thought it handled the netmail message since its conception and created the *.msg on the mailer's outbound directory, With Rob's explanation I learned that SBBS did that and SBBSEcho just packed it so the mailer could send it away.

    With this new info, it's even easier to prove my point besides whether or not is the "corrent" way of using netmail. SBBS knows all my BBS FTN addresses and AKAs, when the user goes to E->N to send a netmail and writes the destinantion address, it automatically appends the sender with its FTN address. Why not check at that point in time that both addresses are the same and handle the message as an internal one instead of creating an *.msg that will lie in the outbound directory forever because SBBSEcho will not pack it and it will just sit there forever.

    Things evolve, if you're confortable using BBS technology as it was 20 years old, fine. I guess it would be fun looking at those modem lights waiting for some users to call in, right?

    There's nothing wrong with having some traditional BBS fun while leveraging new technologies to BBS like telnet, ftp, smtp/pop3, and FTN over TCP/IP.

    Again, thanks for your input but I see no contribution in it so for me this is the end of this discussion with you.

    Regards,

    Dennis
    --- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
    * Origin: The Wall BBS - telnet://thewallbbs.com (1:135/372)
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Dennis Ayala on Sunday, September 21, 2014 08:44:59
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sun Sep 21 2014 03:08:24

    netmail. I know Netmail is a realy old technology but if it is
    technically possible to improve it, why not do it instead of saying
    thats how it was 20 years ago and that's how it should stay.

    It's called standards. If a change is made on one system, it might not interact properly with other systems that use that same mechanism. So, great care must be taken if a change is made, and sometimes it's just not worth making a change to something that has been in place and working well enough for so long.

    Nightfox

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion BBS - digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Mro@VERT/BBSESINF to Dennis Ayala on Sunday, September 21, 2014 11:11:38
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11 am

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying to send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal
    netmail. In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were for


    tell him not to do that.
    ---
    þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
  • From Khelair@VERT/TINFOIL to Dennis Ayala on Sunday, September 21, 2014 07:24:35
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Khelair on Sun Sep 21 2014 03:35:19

    There's nothing wrong with having some traditional BBS fun while leveraging technologies to BBS like telnet, ftp, smtp/pop3, and FTN over TCP/IP.

    Again, thanks for your input but I see no contribution in it so for me this the end of this discussion with you.

    If I recall my reply correctly, I agreed with you there, bro. I just mentioned that you're gonna have to do it yourself, because everybody else is used to using it the way that it's been built to use. So go at it. Make the changes that'll change the world. Add that new functionality. I already gave you a few pointers on how to do it. Oh, wait, that was just a 'flaming' response I gave.

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Tinfoil Tetrahedron BBS telnet or ssh -p 2222 to tinfoil.synchro.net
  • From Dennis Ayala@VERT/THEWALL to Nightfox on Sunday, September 21, 2014 20:30:19
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Nightfox to Dennis Ayala on Sun Sep 21 2014 08:44 am

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sun Sep 21 2014 03:08:24

    netmail. I know Netmail is a realy old technology but if it is technically possible to improve it, why not do it instead of saying thats how it was 20 years ago and that's how it should stay.

    It's called standards. If a change is made on one system, it might not interact properly with other systems that use that same mechanism. So, grea care must be taken if a change is made, and sometimes it's just not worth making a change to something that has been in place and working well enough so long.

    Nightfox

    That I uderstand perfectly. If you follow the thread, I'm not asking to change the way Netmail works. At present times if the same situation happened to anyone's BBS the netmail would get lost in the oubound folders of the mailer and the destination user will not rreceive it anyway. Only the sender would notice that his netmail didn't reach its desired destination.

    What I suggested, and it is merely a suggestion. I honestly could care less whether or not it gets implemented. If SBBS would validate the source and destination FTN addresses and it happened to be the local BBS, just deliver the correspondence internally. I can't think of any other FTN connected system that might get affected.

    On another hand, one thing is to maintain standards, other is to die of obsoletion. What you call email today is not the same email that we had 20 years ago. It has evolved, now has mime types, attachments, embedded html and so son. Things haave to eveolve in order to survive.

    Regards,

    Dennis

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ The Wall BBS - telnet://thewallbbs.com
  • From Dennis Ayala@VERT/THEWALL to Mro on Sunday, September 21, 2014 20:32:22
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Mro to Dennis Ayala on Sun Sep 21 2014 11:11 am

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11 am

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal netmail. In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were f


    tell him not to do that.
    MRo:

    I already explained to him how netmail used to work.

    Regards,

    Dennis

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ The Wall BBS - telnet://thewallbbs.com
  • From Dennis Ayala@VERT/THEWALL to Khelair on Sunday, September 21, 2014 20:34:33
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Khelair to Dennis Ayala on Sun Sep 21 2014 07:24 am

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Khelair on Sun Sep 21 2014 03:35:19

    There's nothing wrong with having some traditional BBS fun while leveragi technologies to BBS like telnet, ftp, smtp/pop3, and FTN over TCP/IP.

    Again, thanks for your input but I see no contribution in it so for me th the end of this discussion with you.

    If I recall my reply correctly, I agreed with you there, bro. I just mentioned that you're gonna have to do it yourself, because everybody else i used to using it the way that it's been built to use. So go at it. Make th changes that'll change the world. Add that new functionality. I already ga you a few pointers on how to do it. Oh, wait, that was just a 'flaming' response I gave.

    Unfortunately that's not how I understodd it. If I was mistaken, then I'm sorry and we can continue to exchange correspondence as long as it contributes to something positive. I'm not intesrested nor have time for flaming and un-useful mail.

    Again, I'm sorry if I understood wrong.

    Regards,

    Dennis

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ The Wall BBS - telnet://thewallbbs.com
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Dennis Ayala on Monday, September 22, 2014 17:19:58
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sun Sep 21 2014 03:08 am

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Sat Sep 20 2014 01:33 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11 am

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal netmail.

    There is no such thing as "internal netmail", so that is a certainly a misus of netmail by the user.

    In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were for
    an external system and sending it to the mailer for outbound
    delivery.

    SBBSecho doesn't do anything with outbound netmail messages unless
    you're running a FLO-style mailer, and then it just packetizes the .msg files into packets the mailer can support. And SBBSecho only does this for outbound netmail. If the destination address on the netmail message is one of the addresses configured in your SCFG->Networks->FidoNet, then it will not packetize it.

    When
    this happens, the netmail just gets lost because the mailer doesn't deliv anyting to itself.

    I would expect the .msg file to just sit in your netmail directory and then imported (in the the mail base) when SBBSecho ran for import.

    Is this normal for SBBSEcho or do I have something setup wrong? Everyothe netmail for external users works fine. I have multiple networks configure and have had no problems except with this particular case.

    Do you have some example sbbsecho log output which demonstrates what you're saying is happening?

    Digital Man:

    I'm sorry, I was wrong.

    No problem.

    SBBS does saves the *.msg and places it in the outbound directory.

    Netmail (*.msg) files should be created in the netmail directory, not the outbound directory. Can you confirm?

    When SBBSecho runs, nothing happens. The *.MSG sits
    there forever. SBBSecho doesn't even record a log entry.


    I know everybody jumped on me complaining about the "correct" use of netmail. I know Netmail is a realy old technology but if it is technically possible to improve it, why not do it instead of saying thats how it was 20 years ago and that's how it should stay.

    If we'd all think that way, modern BBS'ing would not exist and everybody would be in front of a pile of momdems waiting for someone to call in.

    Rob, I appreciate the work you do, I love SBBS and take my comments not as
    a complaint but as positive criticism from someone who wants SBBS to be the best it can be.

    I think that SBBS should not even create the *.msg if the sender ftn
    address and the destination's ftn address is the same and should handle it as an internal message.

    Regards,

    Dennis


    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #37:
    Synchornet first supported Windows NT-based operating systems w/v3.00b (2000). Norco, CA WX: 82.3øF, 48.0% humidity, 7 mph ESE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Dennis Ayala on Monday, September 22, 2014 17:25:23
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Mon Sep 22 2014 05:19 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sun Sep 21 2014 03:08 am

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Sat Sep 20 2014 01:33 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11 am

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal netmail.

    There is no such thing as "internal netmail", so that is a certainly
    a misus of netmail by the user.

    In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were for an external system and sending it to the mailer for outbound delivery.

    SBBSecho doesn't do anything with outbound netmail messages unless you're running a FLO-style mailer, and then it just packetizes the .msg files into packets the mailer can support. And SBBSecho only
    does this for outbound netmail. If the destination address on the netmail message is one of the addresses configured in your SCFG->Networks->FidoNet, then it will not packetize it.

    When
    this happens, the netmail just gets lost because the mailer
    doesn't deliv anyting to itself.

    I would expect the .msg file to just sit in your netmail directory
    and then imported (in the the mail base) when SBBSecho ran for
    import.

    Is this normal for SBBSEcho or do I have something setup wrong? Everyothe netmail for external users works fine. I have multiple networks configure and have had no problems except with this particular case.

    Do you have some example sbbsecho log output which demonstrates what you're saying is happening?

    Digital Man:

    I'm sorry, I was wrong.

    No problem.

    SBBS does saves the *.msg and places it in the outbound directory.

    Netmail (*.msg) files should be created in the netmail directory, not the outbound directory. Can you confirm?

    When SBBSecho runs, nothing happens. The *.MSG sits
    there forever. SBBSecho doesn't even record a log entry.

    I accidentally saved the previous reply prematurely. I meant to write: when SBBSecho runs for import, it normally scans for netmail *.msg files to import. If the destination address of the .msg file in your netmail directory is one of
    your BBS's FTN addresses, then the message should be imported into the mail database.

    I know everybody jumped on me complaining about the "correct" use of netmail.

    Not everybody.

    I think that SBBS should not even create the *.msg if the sender ftn address and the destination's ftn address is the same and should handle it as an internal message.

    What I think should happen is that the netmail message basically "loopsback" to
    the BBS. I believe this is how it should work and how it actually already works.

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #65:
    Synchronet was conceived of and mostly developed in southern California.
    Norco, CA WX: 82.3øF, 48.0% humidity, 7 mph ESE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Dennis Ayala on Monday, September 22, 2014 17:47:08
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Mon Sep 22 2014 05:25 pm

    I think that SBBS should not even create the *.msg if the sender ftn address and the destination's ftn address is the same and should handle it as an internal message.

    What I think should happen is that the netmail message basically
    "loopsback" to the BBS. I believe this is how it should work and how it actually already works.

    BTW, if you add the 'b' option to your SBBSecho import command-line, this will cause SBBSecho to ignore the "local" flag on the
    netmail message and import it because it has one of your addresses as the destination address, thus completing the "loop".

    SBBSecho help output:
    b: import locally created netmail too

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #49:
    JAM and Squish were considered before developing Synchronet Message Base format.
    Norco, CA WX: 81.4øF, 50.0% humidity, 11 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Dennis Ayala@VERT/THEWALL to Digital Man on Monday, September 22, 2014 23:48:55
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Mon Sep 22 2014 05:19 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sun Sep 21 2014 03:08 am

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Sat Sep 20 2014 01:33 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11 am

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal netmail.

    There is no such thing as "internal netmail", so that is a certainly a misus of netmail by the user.

    In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were for an external system and sending it to the mailer for outbound delivery.

    SBBSecho doesn't do anything with outbound netmail messages unless you're running a FLO-style mailer, and then it just packetizes the .ms files into packets the mailer can support. And SBBSecho only does this for outbound netmail. If the destination address on the netmail messag is one of the addresses configured in your SCFG->Networks->FidoNet, th it will not packetize it.

    When
    this happens, the netmail just gets lost because the mailer doesn't deliv anyting to itself.

    I would expect the .msg file to just sit in your netmail directory and then imported (in the the mail base) when SBBSecho ran for import.

    Is this normal for SBBSEcho or do I have something setup wrong? Everyothe netmail for external users works fine. I have multiple networks configure and have had no problems except with this particular case.

    Do you have some example sbbsecho log output which demonstrates what you're saying is happening?

    Digital Man:

    I'm sorry, I was wrong.

    No problem.

    SBBS does saves the *.msg and places it in the outbound directory.

    Netmail (*.msg) files should be created in the netmail directory, not the outbound directory. Can you confirm?

    When SBBSecho runs, nothing happens. The *.MSG sits
    there forever. SBBSecho doesn't even record a log entry.


    I know everybody jumped on me complaining about the "correct" use of netmail. I know Netmail is a realy old technology but if it is technicall possible to improve it, why not do it instead of saying thats how it was years ago and that's how it should stay.

    If we'd all think that way, modern BBS'ing would not exist and everybody would be in front of a pile of momdems waiting for someone to call in.

    Rob, I appreciate the work you do, I love SBBS and take my comments not a a complaint but as positive criticism from someone who wants SBBS to be t best it can be.

    I think that SBBS should not even create the *.msg if the sender ftn address and the destination's ftn address is the same and should handle i as an internal message.

    Regards,

    Dennis


    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #37:
    Synchornet first supported Windows NT-based operating systems w/v3.00b (2000 Norco, CA WX: 82.3øF, 48.0% humidity, 7 mph ESE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    Confirmed but the Netmail Directory in SBBS is the mailer's outbound directory. This is where SBBSEcho packs it.

    Dennis

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ The Wall BBS - telnet://thewallbbs.com
  • From Dennis Ayala@VERT/THEWALL to Digital Man on Monday, September 22, 2014 23:54:43
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Mon Sep 22 2014 05:47 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Mon Sep 22 2014 05:25 pm

    I think that SBBS should not even create the *.msg if the sender ft address and the destination's ftn address is the same and should handle it as an internal message.

    What I think should happen is that the netmail message basically "loopsback" to the BBS. I believe this is how it should work and how it actually already works.

    BTW, if you add the 'b' option to your SBBSecho import command-line, this wi netmail message and import it because it has one of your addresses as the de

    SBBSecho help output:
    b: import locally created netmail too

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #49:
    JAM and Squish were considered before developing Synchronet Message Base for Norco, CA WX: 81.4øF, 50.0% humidity, 11 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hr

    It should if the *.msg files reside in the Inbound or Inbound Secure directories but the *.msg are on the mailer's outbound directories so it
    packs any *.msg that goes beyond my network addresses but does noting with the *.MSG that have my networks addresses as destination.

    Dennis

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ The Wall BBS - telnet://thewallbbs.com
  • From Bill McGarrity@VERT/TEQUILAM to Dennis Ayala on Tuesday, September 23, 2014 01:01:00
    On 09-22-14 23:48, Dennis Ayala wrote to Digital Man <=-


    SBBS does saves the *.msg and places it in the outbound directory.

    Netmail (*.msg) files should be created in the netmail directory, not the outbound directory. Can you confirm?

    When SBBSecho runs, nothing happens. The *.MSG sits
    there forever. SBBSecho doesn't even record a log entry.


    I know everybody jumped on me complaining about the "correct" use of netmail. I know Netmail is a realy old technology but if it is technicall possible to improve it, why not do it instead of saying thats how it was years ago and that's how it should stay.

    If we'd all think that way, modern BBS'ing would not exist and everybody would be in front of a pile of momdems waiting for someone to call in.

    Rob, I appreciate the work you do, I love SBBS and take my comments not a a complaint but as positive criticism from someone who wants SBBS to be t best it can be.

    I think that SBBS should not even create the *.msg if the sender ftn address and the destination's ftn address is the same and should handle i as an internal message.

    Regards,

    Dennis


    digital man

    Confirmed but the Netmail Directory in SBBS is the mailer's outbound directory. This is where SBBSEcho packs it.

    Dennis, in echocfg, what do you have as mailer type? if it's Frontdoor/attach then you need to create a "netmail" folder. To let SBBSECHO know that, in SCFG under Networks/Fidonet EchoMail and Netmail you'll see an area that says: Netmail directory. That should be different than your outbound. You must also tell your mailer where to look as well for the *.msg. Try setting that up and see if you have any luck.




    Bill

    Telnet: bbs.tequilamockingbirdonline.net
    Web: bbs.tequilamockingbirdonline.net
    IRC: irc.tequilamockingbirdonline.net Ports: 6661-6670 SSL: +6697
    Radio: radio.tequilamockingbirdonline.net:8010/live


    ... Look TWICE... Save a LIFE... Motorcycles are everywhere!!!
    --- MultiMail/Win32 v0.50
    þ Synchronet þ TequilaMockingbird Online - TELNET: tequilamockingbirdonline.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Dennis Ayala on Tuesday, September 23, 2014 17:52:44
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Mon Sep 22 2014 11:48 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Mon Sep 22 2014 05:19 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sun Sep 21 2014 03:08 am

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Sat Sep 20 2014 01:33 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11 am

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal netmail.

    There is no such thing as "internal netmail", so that is a certainly a misus of netmail by the user.

    In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it were for an external system and sending it to the mailer for
    outbound delivery.

    SBBSecho doesn't do anything with outbound netmail messages unless you're running a FLO-style mailer, and then it just packetizes the .ms files into packets the mailer can support. And SBBSecho only does this for outbound netmail. If the destination address on the netmail messag is one of the addresses configured in your SCFG->Networks->FidoNet, th it will not packetize it.

    When
    this happens, the netmail just gets lost because the mailer doesn't deliv anyting to itself.

    I would expect the .msg file to just sit in your netmail directory and then imported (in the the mail base) when SBBSecho ran for import.

    Is this normal for SBBSEcho or do I have something setup wrong? Everyothe netmail for external users works fine. I have
    multiple networks configure and have had no problems except
    with this particular case.

    Do you have some example sbbsecho log output which demonstrates what you're saying is happening?

    Digital Man:

    I'm sorry, I was wrong.

    No problem.

    SBBS does saves the *.msg and places it in the outbound directory.

    Netmail (*.msg) files should be created in the netmail directory, not
    the outbound directory. Can you confirm?

    When SBBSecho runs, nothing happens. The *.MSG sits
    there forever. SBBSecho doesn't even record a log entry.


    I know everybody jumped on me complaining about the "correct" use of netmail. I know Netmail is a realy old technology but if it is technicall possible to improve it, why not do it instead of saying thats how it was years ago and that's how it should stay.

    If we'd all think that way, modern BBS'ing would not exist and everybody would be in front of a pile of momdems waiting for someone to call in.

    Rob, I appreciate the work you do, I love SBBS and take my comments not a a complaint but as positive criticism from someone who wants SBBS to be t best it can be.

    I think that SBBS should not even create the *.msg if the sender ftn address and the destination's ftn address is the same and should handle i as an internal message.

    Regards,

    Dennis

    Confirmed but the Netmail Directory in SBBS is the mailer's outbound directory.


    The netmail directory is where *.msg files are stored. This should *not* be the same as your mailer's outbound directory.

    This is where SBBSEcho packs it.

    That sentence makes no sense to me.

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #2:
    Synchronet version 2 was written in C and 8086 assembly programming languages. Norco, CA WX: 85.3øF, 37.0% humidity, 9 mph SSE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to Dennis Ayala on Tuesday, September 23, 2014 17:54:21
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Mon Sep 22 2014 11:54 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Mon Sep 22 2014 05:47 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Mon Sep 22 2014 05:25 pm

    I think that SBBS should not even create the *.msg if the
    sender ft address and the destination's ftn address is the same and should handle it as an internal message.

    What I think should happen is that the netmail message basically "loopsback" to the BBS. I believe this is how it should work and how it actually already works.

    BTW, if you add the 'b' option to your SBBSecho import command-line,
    this wi netmail message and import it because it has one of your addresses as the de

    SBBSecho help output:
    b: import locally created netmail too

    It should if the *.msg files reside in the Inbound or Inbound Secure directories but the *.msg are on the mailer's outbound directories so it packs any *.msg that goes beyond my network addresses but does noting with the *.MSG that have my networks addresses as destination.

    It sounds like you have something misconfigured. *.msg files should not be in your inbound, inbound secure, *or* outbound
    directories. *.msg files go in your netmail directory. Period.

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #55:
    Synchronet Terminal Server introduced SecureShell (SSH) support w/v3.14a (2006).
    Norco, CA WX: 85.3øF, 37.0% humidity, 9 mph SSE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Mro@VERT/BBSESINF to Dennis Ayala on Tuesday, September 23, 2014 19:43:09
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Mon Sep 22 2014 11:48 pm

    SBBS to be t best it can be.

    I think that SBBS should not even create the *.msg if the sender ftn address and the destination's ftn address is the same and should handle i as an internal message.

    Regards,

    Dennis


    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #37:
    Synchornet first supported Windows NT-based operating systems w/v3.00b
    Confirmed but the Netmail Directory in SBBS is the mailer's outbound directory. This is where SBBSEcho packs it.

    Dennis


    hey you might want to trim your quoting, or switch to a msg editor that supports better quoting. you dont need to quote 3 pages in the thread.
    with synchronet we have command keys that take us back in the thread based on subject and author.
    ---
    þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
  • From Access Denied@VERT/PHARCYDE to Dennis Ayala on Tuesday, September 23, 2014 17:06:30
    Hello Dennis,

    On 22 Sep 14 23:48, Dennis Ayala wrote to Digital Man:

    Confirmed but the Netmail Directory in SBBS is the mailer's outbound directory. This is where SBBSEcho packs it.

    You've definitely misconfigured something if you're using your netmail directory as your mailer's outbound directory!

    Regards,
    Nick

    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20130910
    * Origin: thePharcyde_ telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (723:1/701)
    þ Synchronet þ thePharcyde_ telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin)
  • From mark lewis@VERT to Digital Man on Wednesday, September 24, 2014 13:01:06
    On Mon, 22 Sep 2014, Digital Man wrote to Dennis Ayala:

    What I think should happen is that the netmail message basically "loopsback" to the BBS. I believe this is how it should work and how
    it actually already works.

    BTW, if you add the 'b' option to your SBBSecho import
    command-line, this will cause SBBSecho to ignore the "local" flag
    on the netmail message and import it because it has one of your
    addresses as the destination address, thus completing the "loop".

    so are you saying that common usage so as to ensure that locally written netmail is imported would be the following?

    sbbsecho -belrsy!

    vs:

    sbbsecho -elrsy!

    [ they're not a curse words, are they? O:) :lol: ]

    )\/(ark


    * Origin: (1:3634/12)

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From mark lewis@VERT to Dennis Ayala on Wednesday, September 24, 2014 13:05:02
    On Mon, 22 Sep 2014, Dennis Ayala wrote to Digital Man:

    I'm sorry, I was wrong.

    No problem.

    SBBS does saves the *.msg and places it in the outbound directory.

    Netmail (*.msg) files should be created in the netmail directory,
    not the outbound directory. Can you confirm?

    Confirmed

    doesn't seem to be confirmed...

    but the Netmail Directory in SBBS is the mailer's outbound
    directory. This is where SBBSEcho packs it.

    that's why it isn't confirmed... sounds like the directory paths are not configured correctly...

    what do you have in /sbbs/ctrl/sbbsecho.cfg for OUTBOUND?

    eg: /binkd/mail/outbound

    what do you have in scfg->networks->fidonet->netmail_directory

    eg: /sbbs/netmail

    they should not be the same... netmail is like email... it is private messages... netmail is not "short" for "network mail" ;)

    )\/(ark


    * Origin: (1:3634/12)

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From mark lewis@VERT to Dennis Ayala on Wednesday, September 24, 2014 13:13:32
    On Mon, 22 Sep 2014, Dennis Ayala wrote to Digital Man:

    It should if the *.msg files reside in the Inbound or Inbound
    Secure directories but the *.msg are on the mailer's outbound
    directories so it packs any *.msg that goes beyond my network
    addresses but does noting with the *.MSG that have my networks
    addresses as destination.

    no, FTN MSG files are never transmitted in the raw... they are packed into PKT files which may be archived into zip (or arc or arj or lzh) files...

    )\/(ark


    * Origin: (1:3634/12)

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to mark lewis on Wednesday, September 24, 2014 14:02:55
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: mark lewis to Digital Man on Wed Sep 24 2014 01:01 pm


    On Mon, 22 Sep 2014, Digital Man wrote to Dennis Ayala:

    What I think should happen is that the netmail message basically "loopsback" to the BBS. I believe this is how it should work and how
    it actually already works.

    BTW, if you add the 'b' option to your SBBSecho import
    command-line, this will cause SBBSecho to ignore the "local" flag
    on the netmail message and import it because it has one of your addresses as the destination address, thus completing the "loop".

    so are you saying that common usage so as to ensure that locally written netmail is imported would be the following?

    sbbsecho -belrsy!

    vs:

    sbbsecho -elrsy!

    Correct.

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #22:
    The third ever Synchronet BBS was The Beast's Domain (sysop: King Drafus). Norco, CA WX: 93.6øF, 24.0% humidity, 9 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From mark lewis@VERT to Digital Man on Wednesday, September 24, 2014 23:54:12
    On Wed, 24 Sep 2014, Digital Man wrote to mark lewis:

    BTW, if you add the 'b' option to your SBBSecho import
    command-line, this will cause SBBSecho to ignore the "local"
    flag on the netmail message and import it because it has one of
    your addresses as the destination address, thus completing the
    "loop".

    so are you saying that common usage so as to ensure that locally
    written netmail is imported would be the following?

    sbbsecho -belrsy!

    vs:

    sbbsecho -elrsy!

    Correct.

    thank you sir :)

    )\/(ark

    If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.

    --- FMail/Win32 1.60
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.71)
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From Dennis Ayala@VERT/THEWALL to Digital Man on Thursday, September 25, 2014 06:03:41
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Tue Sep 23 2014 05:52 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Mon Sep 22 2014 11:48 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Mon Sep 22 2014 05:19 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sun Sep 21 2014 03:08 am

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Digital Man to Dennis Ayala on Sat Sep 20 2014 01:33 pm

    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Sat Sep 20 2014 08:11 am

    My system's fido address is 1:135/372 and I have a user in my BBS trying send netmail to another user in my BBS, in other words, an internal netmail.

    There is no such thing as "internal netmail", so that is a certainly a misus of netmail by the user.

    In this case, SBBSEcho is processing the netmail as it it wer for an external system and sending it to the mailer for outbound delivery.

    SBBSecho doesn't do anything with outbound netmail messages unle you're running a FLO-style mailer, and then it just packetizes t .ms files into packets the mailer can support. And SBBSecho only does this for outbound netmail. If the destination address on th netmail messag is one of the addresses configured in your SCFG->Networks->FidoNet, th it will not packetize it.

    When
    this happens, the netmail just gets lost because the mailer doesn't deliv anyting to itself.

    I would expect the .msg file to just sit in your netmail directo and then imported (in the the mail base) when SBBSecho ran for import.

    Is this normal for SBBSEcho or do I have something setup wron Everyothe netmail for external users works fine. I have multiple networks configure and have had no problems except with this particular case.

    Do you have some example sbbsecho log output which demonstrates what you're saying is happening?

    Digital Man:

    I'm sorry, I was wrong.

    No problem.

    SBBS does saves the *.msg and places it in the outbound directory.

    Netmail (*.msg) files should be created in the netmail directory, not the outbound directory. Can you confirm?

    When SBBSecho runs, nothing happens. The *.MSG sits
    there forever. SBBSecho doesn't even record a log entry.


    I know everybody jumped on me complaining about the "correct" use o netmail. I know Netmail is a realy old technology but if it is technicall possible to improve it, why not do it instead of saying thats how it was years ago and that's how it should stay.

    If we'd all think that way, modern BBS'ing would not exist and everybody would be in front of a pile of momdems waiting for someon to call in.

    Rob, I appreciate the work you do, I love SBBS and take my comments not a a complaint but as positive criticism from someone who wants SBBS to be t best it can be.

    I think that SBBS should not even create the *.msg if the sender ft address and the destination's ftn address is the same and should handle i as an internal message.

    Regards,

    Dennis

    Confirmed but the Netmail Directory in SBBS is the mailer's outbound directory.


    The netmail directory is where *.msg files are stored. This should *not* be

    This is where SBBSEcho packs it.

    That sentence makes no sense to me.

    digital man


    Rob:

    I'm sorry I haven't been able to respond. Its been a tough week. I'll take a look at this and get back to you. I don't rule-out that there could be a wrong path setup on my end. As I said, I'm new to SBBS and I'm still fine-tuning things.

    Regards,

    Dennis

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ The Wall BBS - telnet://thewallbbs.com
  • From Mro@VERT/BBSESINF to Dennis Ayala on Thursday, September 25, 2014 16:38:55
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Dennis Ayala to Digital Man on Thu Sep 25 2014 06:03 am

    Rob:

    I'm sorry I haven't been able to respond. Its been a tough week. I'll take
    a look at this and get back to you. I don't rule-out that there could be a wrong path setup on my end. As I said, I'm new to SBBS and I'm still fine-tuning things.



    look at lord time's ftn setup faqs. make sure 'the other end' is setup correctly too.

    the way synchronet handles netmail is correct and that is the
    way it should stay.
    ---
    þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
  • From Dennis Ayala@VERT to Mro on Friday, September 26, 2014 14:48:07
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: Mro to Dennis Ayala on Thu Sep 25 2014 04:38 pm

    look at lord time's ftn setup faqs. make sure 'the other end' is setup correctly too.

    the way synchronet handles netmail is correct and that is the
    way it should stay.

    I'll do.

    thanks

    Dennis
    --- SBBSecho 2.27-Linux
    * Origin: The Wall BBS - telnet://thewallbbs.com (1:135/372)
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From mark lewis@VERT to Dennis Ayala on Saturday, September 27, 2014 03:18:41
    On Thu, 25 Sep 2014, Dennis Ayala wrote to Digital Man:

    [trim 125 lines]

    I'm sorry I haven't been able to respond. Its been a tough week.
    I'll take a look at this and get back to you. I don't rule-out that
    there could be a wrong path setup on my end. As I said, I'm new to
    SBBS and I'm still fine-tuning things.

    please trim old quote lines that have nothing to do with your responses... as noted above, i deleted 125 lines just to reach your four... thanks! ;)

    )\/(ark

    If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.

    --- FMail/Win32 1.60
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.71)
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ telnet://vert.synchro.net
  • From The Millionaire@VERT to Digital Man on Saturday, October 05, 2019 12:53:55
    Is it possible for Sbbsecho to notify the same person they have email when they login with their own name because it happened to me today for some reason. It was weird. I was on another BBS at the time.

    SBBSECHO: The Millionaire sent you mail on Vert.

    I've never seen this before in my life.

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to The Millionaire on Saturday, October 05, 2019 13:04:11
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Oct 05 2019 12:53 pm

    Is it possible for Sbbsecho to notify the same person they have email when they login with their own name because it happened to me today for some reason. It was weird. I was on another BBS at the time.

    SBBSECHO: The Millionaire sent you mail on Vert.

    I've never seen this before in my life.

    I already answered this question in the personal email you sent me:

    First, I think you're misremembering/quoting the message. It more likely
    said "The Millionaire sent you EchoMail on <group> <sub-board>". And this is possible because you have posted messages on networked message areas (echoes/conferences) to yourself:

    7050 The Millionaire The Millionaire û Music in 2020
    7110 The Millionaire The Millionaire Re: Music in 2020


    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #103:
    The official Synchronet YouTube channel went live on May 6, 2019
    Norco, CA WX: 82.3øF, 30.0% humidity, 7 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From The Millionaire@VERT to Digital Man on Saturday, October 05, 2019 13:18:24
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Oct 05 2019 12:53 pm

    I already answered this question in the personal email you sent me:

    First, I think you're misremembering/quoting the message. It more likely
    said "The Millionaire sent you EchoMail on <group> <sub-board>". And this is possible because you have posted messages on networked message areas (echoes/conferences) to yourself:

    7050 The Millionaire The Millionaire û Music in 2020
    7110 The Millionaire The Millionaire Re: Music in 2020

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #103:
    The official Synchronet YouTube channel went live on May 6, 2019
    Norco, CA WX: 82.3øF, 30.0% humidity, 7 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    Oh I forgot about that.

    Is there a way to write a message without writing to myself without starting a new topic?

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to The Millionaire on Saturday, October 05, 2019 13:20:52
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Oct 05 2019 01:18 pm


    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Oct 05 2019 12:53 pm

    I already answered this question in the personal email you sent me:

    First, I think you're misremembering/quoting the message. It more likely said "The Millionaire sent you EchoMail on <group> <sub-board>". And this is possible because you have posted messages on networked message areas (echoes/conferences) to yourself:

    7050 The Millionaire The Millionaire û Music in 2020
    7110 The Millionaire The Millionaire Re: Music in 2020

    Oh I forgot about that.

    Is there a way to write a message without writing to myself without starting a new topic?

    Normally, you can put any name you want in the "To" field, including 'All'. I'm not sure if ecWeb4 has some limitation or problem with that. Perhaps if you were more descriptive in the steps that you took and the issue you encountered, we'd have some clue about how to solve it.

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #33:
    The Synchronet web user interface was contributed by Robert Couture, Runemaster.
    Norco, CA WX: 83.4øF, 28.0% humidity, 0 mph NW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From The Millionaire@VERT to Digital Man on Saturday, October 05, 2019 13:25:48
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Oct 05 2019 01:18 pm

    Normally, you can put any name you want in the "To" field, including 'All'. I'm not sure if ecWeb4 has some limitation or problem with that. Perhaps if you were more descriptive in the steps that you took and the issue you encountered, we'd have some clue about how to solve it.

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #33:
    The Synchronet web user interface was contributed by Robert Couture, Runemaster.
    Norco, CA WX: 83.4øF, 28.0% humidity, 0 mph NW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs



    When I quote with ECWeb4 there's no way to make it "All". It takes the
    original poster's name.

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to The Millionaire on Saturday, October 05, 2019 13:40:31
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Oct 05 2019 01:25 pm

    When I quote with ECWeb4 there's no way to make it "All". It takes the original poster's name.

    Okay, that should be fixed now.

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #62:
    Name of Synchronet PCMS compiler/language "Baja" was coined by Michael Swindell.
    Norco, CA WX: 84.2øF, 25.0% humidity, 6 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From The Millionaire@VERT to Digital Man on Saturday, October 05, 2019 14:16:49
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Oct 05 2019 01:25 pm

    Okay, that should be fixed now.

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #62:
    Name of Synchronet PCMS compiler/language "Baja" was coined by Michael Swindell.
    Norco, CA WX: 84.2øF, 25.0% humidity, 6 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs



    Ok thanks so very much. People here were making fun of me because of it.

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Digital Man@VERT to The Millionaire on Saturday, October 05, 2019 15:04:55
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Oct 05 2019 02:16 pm


    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Oct 05 2019 01:25 pm

    Ok thanks so very much. People here were making fun of me because of it.

    Most people here are using non-web methods of posting, so they didn't know of the issue. The likely assumed you were doing that on purpose.


    digital man

    Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #45:
    LF = Line Feed (ASCII 10, Ctrl-J)
    Norco, CA WX: 86.6øF, 27.0% humidity, 4 mph NNW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From The Millionaire@VERT to Digital Man on Saturday, October 05, 2019 16:37:57
    Re: SBBSECHO
    By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Oct 05 2019 02:16 pm

    Most people here are using non-web methods of posting, so they didn't know of the issue. The likely assumed you were doing that on purpose.

    digital man

    Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #45:
    LF = Line Feed (ASCII 10, Ctrl-J)
    Norco, CA WX: 86.6øF, 27.0% humidity, 4 mph NNW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs



    No I wasn't. I'm not used to posting this way but find it more convenient though for my own needs.

    $ The Millionaire $

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Vk3jed@VERT/FREEWAY to Digital Man on Sunday, October 06, 2019 16:51:00
    On 10-05-19 15:04, Digital Man wrote to The Millionaire <=-

    Most people here are using non-web methods of posting, so they didn't
    know of the issue. The likely assumed you were doing that on purpose.

    That would explain a lot. TM's posting habits make sense in the light of this information.


    ... A fail-safe circuit will destroy others.
    --- MultiMail/Win v0.51
    þ Synchronet þ Freeway BBS, Bendigo Australia. freeway.apana.org.au
  • From Vk3jed@VERT/FREEWAY to The Millionaire on Sunday, October 06, 2019 16:52:00
    On 10-05-19 16:37, The Millionaire wrote to Digital Man <=-


    No I wasn't. I'm not used to posting this way but find it more
    convenient though for my own needs.


    Web would certainly be easier for an iPad user.


    ... Some call me the gangster of love.
    --- MultiMail/Win v0.51
    þ Synchronet þ Freeway BBS, Bendigo Australia. freeway.apana.org.au
  • From The Millionaire@VERT to Vk3jed on Sunday, October 06, 2019 09:22:10
    Web would certainly be easier for an iPad user.

    ... Some call me the gangster of love.
    --- MultiMail/Win v0.51
    þ Synchronet þ Freeway BBS, Bendigo Australia. freeway.apana.org.au



    That's why I use it. It's easier to post messages. I can see the messages
    all at once instead of going from one message to the next one all the time on the BBS.

    $ The Millionaire $

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Tony Langdon@VERT to The Millionaire on Monday, October 07, 2019 08:26:00
    On 10-06-19 09:22, The Millionaire wrote to Vk3jed <=-

    That's why I use it. It's easier to post messages. I can see the
    messages all at once instead of going from one message to the next one
    all the time on the BBS.

    Yes, there are advantages to the web interface. Use what works for you. :)


    ... Love is like war: easy to begin, but very hard to stop.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
    þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to The Millionaire on Sunday, October 06, 2019 21:49:55
    Re: Re: SBBSECHO
    By: The Millionaire to Vk3jed on Sun Oct 06 2019 09:22 am

    That's why I use it. It's easier to post messages. I can see the messages all at once instead of going from one message to the next one all the time on the BBS.

    That's one reason I wrote my message reader. One of its features is to list messages - The message list is basically a list of the messages that are posted and shows the from/to users, subject, and date & time posted, and then you can select which ones to read. It also has a more traditional reader mode (which also includes scrolling ability for ANSI users).

    Nightfox

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com