Howdy,
Is there a way to make an echo "read only" for a downstream node?
IE: They receive echomail that is posted, but any received mail from them is dropped (with an appropriate log) in sbbsecho?
How about the reverse? IE: Mail can be received from a downstream node, but mail will not be exported to them?
Is there a way to make an echo "read only" for a downstream node?Not currently. Perhaps if you described the use-case more, I could consider how difficult or simple that would be to support. Like, do you want to disallow *any* echomail posts from a specific linked-node, or only for specific areas?
Re: Read only echos for FTN nodes.
By: Digital Man to Alter Ego on Thu Jan 30 2020 09:49 pm
Is there a way to make an echo "read only" for a downstream node?Not currently. Perhaps if you described the use-case more, I could consider how difficult or simple that would be to support. Like, do you want to disallow *any* echomail posts from a specific linked-node, or only for specific areas?
The use case is to select which downstream FTN nodes cannot post to specific echoareas.
(MBSE and I think Mystic ? can do this by assigning if a node can
be sent messages or if messages could be received by that node.)
I'm using echomail to send bot messages, so for specific echomails I want to use it like "broadcasting" - ie: a message posted in specific sub gets sent to a list of subscribers (FTN nodes).
I dont want to receive any updates from those subscribers. (And I'm aware I could get a bot to trawl through the message base a delete "foreign" messages - but I thought if I could make it "read only" then I wouldnt need to. :)
There may be a case as well to allow a downstream node receive echomail but deny them from posting to it. (And if they did, the posts would be localised to that node and whoever it fed.)
For the reverse, I know I could use "netmail" instead of echomail - but like MBSE, where you can mark nodes as "Receive" nodes it achieves that goal in echomail.
Anyway just a nice idea if it was there...
It would be pretty easy to add a flag to mark a node as being
"read only" (have no posting permissions in any echoes), but
that's the end of "easy". Extending Access requirement strings
(e.g. "Posting Requirements" in SCFG) to specify lists of
fidonet nodes gets pretty ugly pretty quick. And AR strings are
of limited length, so that'd quickly limit the number of nodes
you could opt in or out. And of course, none of this is
reflected in the areas.bbs file format.
Is there a way to make an echo "read only" for a downstream node?
Not currently. Perhaps if you described the use-case more, I could consider how difficult or simple that would be to support. Like, do
you want to disallow *any* echomail posts from a specific linked-node,
or only for specific areas?
(MBSE and I think Mystic ? can do this by assigning if a node can
be sent messages or if messages could be received by that node.)
Yeah, don't have separate read and write access for a node to a msg
area. The node either has access or it doesn't and access means both
read and write.
It would be pretty easy to add a flag to mark a node as being
"read only" (have no posting permissions in any echoes), but
that's the end of "easy". Extending Access requirement strings
(e.g. "Posting Requirements" in SCFG) to specify lists of
fidonet nodes gets pretty ugly pretty quick. And AR strings are
of limited length, so that'd quickly limit the number of nodes
you could opt in or out. And of course, none of this is
reflected in the areas.bbs file format.
What about making an area read-only with write-access for one node or only a few (let's say 3 or less)?
I don't know the internals of synchronet, so maybe it's still not easy or pretty to implement.
Re: Read only echos for FTN nodes.
By: Digital Man to Alter Ego on Fri Jan 31 2020 00:01:08
(MBSE and I think Mystic ? can do this by assigning if a node can
be sent messages or if messages could be received by that node.)
Yeah, don't have separate read and write access for a node to a msg area. The node either has access or it doesn't and access means both read and write.
traditional ""advanced"" FTN tossers have this capability... i've used it numerous times in the past when i was running fastecho... i know there are numerous other FTN tossers that also offer it...
some othertraditional ""advanced"" FTN tossers have this capability... i've used it
numerous times in the past when i was running fastecho... i know there are
numerous other FTN tossers that also offer it...
And this capability is reflected in their area file (e.g. areas.bbs) or
configuration?
as a mail hub, we generally use this capability to restrict postings in specific areas where the moderator has issued a ban for a system in their echo(s) because of either the sysop or one/some of the system users being moderated...
then there's also read-only areas where postings are allowed only from certain systems... policy-wise in some networks, unauthorized posts in read-only or restricted access areas should be bounced back to the poster, preferably via netmail if FTN, private mail if QWK, or email if some other (eg: news), with an explanation for the rejection... i think i would only worry about FTN and QWK areas for now if i were to try to code up something for this...
I don't follow the parenthetical statement.
By: Oli to Digital Man on Fri Jan 31 2020 11:40 am
Right now, there is no way to attach posting requirements to fidonet nodes and no easy path to do that. Is this Alter Ego?
And this capability is reflected in their area file (e.g. areas.bbs) or some other configuration?
Re: Read only echos for FTN nodes.
By: Digital Man to Rampage on Fri Jan 31 2020 10:39 am
And this capability is reflected in their area file (e.g. areas.bbs) or some other configuration?
I'm not sure where MBSE stores the config, but I imagine its in an internal DB like structure...
Each area has a list of nodes (much like areas.bbs, where you list the nodes that can import/export from). However, with each node, you can assign them "receive" or "send" ability - aka, import from or export to.
The result is the echo can be considered read only (send only, but receives are dropped), or receive only (dont export to it, but happily receive from it).
I think it would be a nice add to SBBS if this level of control was available as well. (And I would use it for a project I'm playing with, not necessarily to apply or enforce a policy to a downstream BBS/echomail system).
Yeah, don't have separate read and write access for a node to a msg
area. The node either has access or it doesn't and access means
both read and write.
traditional ""advanced"" FTN tossers have this capability... i've
used it numerous times in the past when i was running fastecho...
i know there are numerous other FTN tossers that also offer it...
And this capability is reflected in their area file (e.g. areas.bbs)
or some other configuration?
It seems to me to be a pretty strange scenario where you'd have an
area in which you wanted to allow a node to post messages, but not
to receive any.
or some other configuration?
there's no mechanism for denoting it in the areas.bbs file... it is only in the record for the linked node and/or the message area... basically similar to the method currently used to limit access to areas but applied on a read/write level instead of an overall level... FE did it with secutiry levels which worked but was limiting in several ways...
sorry, that's longer than i really wanted to post but after having done it now, i don't want to take a chance to edit it down for fear that fseditor will ABEND on me and show the dreaded "the impossible has happened" message...
Re: Read only echos for FTN nodes.
By: Digital Man to Alter Ego on Fri Jan 31 2020 15:37:10
It seems to me to be a pretty strange scenario where you'd have an
area in which you wanted to allow a node to post messages, but not
to receive any.
consider an information only area where only one system posts the information and all other systems are supposed to be read-only... in cases where some systems use tossers that cannot restrict read/write access, the originating system doesn't want any posts from them coming back into the information area... so those systems are set for read-only and those unwanted posts are dropped into the bitbucket... those posts can be dropped earlier if other systems downstream from the originating system also have read/write access permission capabilities...
What you're describing sounds like a read-only area, like the
"Synchronet Announcements" area in DOVE-Net. This configuration
works fine by simply denying write accesss to all the nodes (the
hub, VERT, is the only allowed "writer").
I still don't see a need for a "write-only" area.
It seems to me to be a pretty strange scenario where you'd have an area in which you wanted to allow a node to post messages, but not to receive any.
You have more flexibility/configurability for QWK networking. Have you considered using QWKnet instead?
I may use it in my use case though if it was there.
What you're describing sounds like a read-only area, like the
"Synchronet Announcements" area in DOVE-Net.
This configuration works fine by simply denying write accesss
to all the nodes (the hub, VERT, is the only allowed "writer").
I still don't see a need for a "write-only" area.
Re: Read only echos for FTN nodes.
By: Digital Man to Rampage on Fri Jan 31 2020 18:12:44
What you're describing sounds like a read-only area, like the "Synchronet Announcements" area in DOVE-Net.
correct...
This configuration works fine by simply denying write accesss
to all the nodes (the hub, VERT, is the only allowed "writer").
true, again... this makes VERT "write only" as well, doesn't it? since it writes and doesn't allow other systems posts?
Re: Read only echos for FTN nodes.
By: Alter Ego to Digital Man on Sat Feb 01 2020 04:02 pm
I may use it in my use case though if it was there.
I want to re-iterate as well - I did mention it in my first message.
For "write-only", I can achieve that functionality with netmail - which I'm happy to do. I sense you are not inclined to implement that functionality specificially (I get it) - and I was only indicating how MBSE does it in case you wanted to alter sbbsecho to function in a similar way.
The "read-only" is more desirable and I think has more valuable for the greater community. If you would consider implementing it, great, if not I'll just have my "jsxec <function>" read through messages and delete whatever it doesnt like to see.
How about a setting in SCFG->Message Areas ... Sub-board->Network Options where you could set FidoNet to be read-only, write-only, or read/write (the default)? It would be a global setting, so it would apply to all your links in SBBSecho (that are linked with that sub). Would that meet your needs?
Howz that for an idea?
Howz that for an idea?It nearly made me spew. There are more packages that read areas.bbs files
Re: Read only echos for FTN nodes.
By: Digital Man to Alter Ego on Sat Feb 01 2020 06:14 pm
How about a setting in SCFG->Message Areas ... Sub-board->Network Options where you could set FidoNet to be read-only, write-only, or read/write (the default)? It would be a global setting, so it would apply to all your links in SBBSecho (that are linked with that sub). Would that meet your needs?
As a global setting, it would probably be OK
- but I think the better
implementation would be granular configuration by the sysop - ie: by echoarea, defining which exported nodes can receive, and which nodes we are prepared to receive from.
As an idea, in areas.bbs, perhaps it could be implemented as simply as:
ECHO_TAG -1:1/1 +1:1/2 1:1/3
where:
* 1:1/1 will export to, but import from rejected
* 1:1/2 will not export to, but import from will be accepted
* 1:1/3 will export to, and receive from
This could be complemented with +|-ECHO_TAG, where a plus infront of it would be anybody subscribing to this area would subscribed with "+" (wont export to/import accepted), a minus in front would be subscribed with "-" (export to, but receive rejected) and nothing export to and receive from.
Howz that for an idea?
That was my first thought too. The problem is that nodes can add and remove themselves from the area file via areafix. The area manager wouldn't know to place a '+' or '-' in front of a node address when it was added via areafix.
Re: Read only echos for FTN nodes.
By: Digital Man to Alter Ego on Sun Feb 02 2020 12:10 pm
That was my first thought too. The problem is that nodes can add and remove themselves from the area file via areafix. The area manager wouldn't know to place a '+' or '-' in front of a node address when it was added via areafix.
That's why I thougth of prefixing the area name as well with + or -, which would set the defaults for nodes using areafix for that echotag. Naturally, the sysop should be able to admend it as appropriate.
My idea was this would be backward compatible with systems that using areas.bbs - they continue to use it as is today (no pluses or minuses used). But for systems running SBBS, that want finer grained control over echos, then it adds that capability with (hopefully) little re-engineering..
Howz that for an idea?
It nearly made me spew. There are more packages that read
areas.bbs files
Wow, what a reaction.
I get the point, bad idea because other systems depend on areas.bbs.
That was my first thought too. The problem is that nodes can add
and remove themselves from the area file via areafix. The area
manager wouldn't know to place a '+' or '-' in front of a node
address when it was added via areafix.
My idea was this would be backward compatible with systems that
using areas.bbs - they continue to use it as is today (no pluses
or minuses used). But for systems running SBBS, that want finer
grained control over echos, then it adds that capability with
(hopefully) little re-engineering..
I get the point, bad idea because other systems depend on areas.bbs.
Welcome to the FTSC.
There may (or may not?) be a standard for the Areas.Bbs format but
such things are fairly uniform, maybe as a result of developer "gentleman's agreement" over the last 25-30 years.
I get the point, bad idea because other systems depend on areas.bbs.
Welcome to the FTSC.it has nothing to do with the FTSC ;)
there is a psuedo standard, yes...
Re: Read only echos for FTN nodes.
By: Digital Man to Alter Ego on Sun Feb 02 2020 12:10:48
That was my first thought too. The problem is that nodes can add
and remove themselves from the area file via areafix. The area
manager wouldn't know to place a '+' or '-' in front of a node
address when it was added via areafix.
it should know that information from the sbbsecho.ini file with the group tags and security levels ;)
Re: Read only echos for FTN nodes.
By: Alter Ego to Digital Man on Mon Feb 03 2020 07:47:38
My idea was this would be backward compatible with systems that
using areas.bbs - they continue to use it as is today (no pluses
or minuses used). But for systems running SBBS, that want finer
grained control over echos, then it adds that capability with (hopefully) little re-engineering..
i'm not aware of any other tools that use sbbsecho's areas.bbs file... are you?
the format is already different enough from the standard that this enhancement might be a possibility... sbbsecho and sbbs are the only two tools that i know of that use the areas.bbs file...
maybe golded or other
sysop message readers that specifically support the sbbs message area format but...
None of that information exists in sbbsecho.ini, so yeah, but no. There is "per area" type configuration in sbbsecho.ini, currently, at least.
That was my first thought too. The problem is that nodes can add
and remove themselves from the area file via areafix. The area
manager wouldn't know to place a '+' or '-' in front of a node
address when it was added via areafix.
it should know that information from the sbbsecho.ini file with
the group tags and security levels ;)
None of that information exists in sbbsecho.ini, so yeah, but no.
There is "per area" type configuration in sbbsecho.ini, currently,
at least.
i'm not aware of any other tools that use sbbsecho's areas.bbs file... are you?
it should know that information from the sbbsecho.ini file with the group tags and security levels ;)
"changei'm not aware of any other tools that use sbbsecho's areas.bbs file... are
you?
I'm not but Paul Quinn "nearly spewed" when I suggested it though :)
So if there were, that would be OK though, because I'm not suggesting to
it", but to enhance it, and the defaults would be no change as it isimplemented
today.
Sysop: | MCMLXXIX |
---|---|
Location: | Prospect, CT |
Users: | 325 |
Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
Uptime: | 16:17:51 |
Calls: | 508 |
Messages: | 219976 |