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.
þ Synchronet þ Decker's Heaven -//- bbs.deckersheaven.com[Psi-Jack -//- Decker]
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.l
Technically there's nothing that prevents that userA@1:135/372 send a netmai
message to user2@1:135/172. If user2 had a different netmailif
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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:
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.
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.
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
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 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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
This is where SBBSEcho packs it.
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.
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:Confirmed but the Netmail Directory in SBBS is the mailer's outbound directory. This is where SBBSEcho packs it.
Synchornet first supported Windows NT-based operating systems w/v3.00b
Dennis
Confirmed but the Netmail Directory in SBBS is the mailer's outbound directory. This is where SBBSEcho packs it.
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".
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
but the Netmail Directory in SBBS is the mailer's outbound
directory. This is where SBBSEcho packs it.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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'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.
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.
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
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?
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
Sysop: | MCMLXXIX |
---|---|
Location: | Prospect, CT |
Users: | 324 |
Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
Uptime: | 117:55:41 |
Calls: | 499 |
Messages: | 218380 |