Darkrealms now supports Ping/Trace functionality for those of you
obsessive compulsive types that need to test Netmail routing at the
zone-level.

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)

*** Quoting Nick Andre from a message to All ***

Darkrealms now supports Ping/Trace functionality for those of you obsessive compulsive types that need to test Netmail routing at the zone-level.

Awesome, thanks! :)

Jay

... Waking up this morning was an eye-opening experience

--- Telegard v3.09.g2-sp4/mL
* Origin: Northern Realms | 289-424-5180 | bbs.nrbbs.net (1:229/664)

Nick Andre wrote to All <=-

Darkrealms now supports Ping/Trace functionality for those of you obsessive compulsive types that need to test Netmail routing at the zone-level.

LOL!

-- Sean

... A critic is one who knows the way but can't drive the car.
___ MultiMail/Win v0.52

--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Outpost BBS * bbs.outpostbbs.net:10123 (1:18/200)

Darkrealms now supports Ping/Trace functionality for those of you
obsessive compulsive types that need to test Netmail routing at the zone-level.

Nick

How is that implemented? I haven't been able to receive routed netmail
in years now (probably about since Bob passed). But don't know what
level that's breaking down. From the tests I've been able to do it seems
like my NC is still passing stuff, so not sure if it's at the RC or ZC
end that routing is failing. All my othernets work just fine, mailer
tosser etc are all working as expected.
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: bbs.undermine.ca:423 - Calgary, AB (1:342/17)

On 08 Apr 21 08:41:51, Kostie Muirhead said the following to Nick.Andre:

How is that implemented? I haven't been able to receive routed netmail
in years now (probably about since Bob passed). But don't know what

O/T-Track.

You may send a Netmail addressed to "Ping" at 1:229/426, 229/0 or 1:1/0.

When a ping request is received, a reply is generated.

It is up to the systems in-transit to also reply to the Ping chain, ala the "trace" functionality.

Netmail routing is kindof a grey-area because everyone can get feeds from anywhere. I always believed that at the bare minimum a system should maintain a connection with their NC for Netmail, the NC maintains a link with their RC for Netmail, etc.... and ZC systems are just big mass dumping-ground.

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)

How is that implemented? I haven't been able to receive routed netmail

O/T-Track.

You may send a Netmail addressed to "Ping" at 1:229/426, 229/0 or 1:1/0.

Netmail routing is kindof a grey-area because everyone can get feeds from

Nick

Gotcha... hadn't heard that name since last century.

Netmail really shouldn't be a gong show. If, like you say, the NC's and
RC's are forwarding/polling then the only real question should be how
the RC's are routing, but if they minimally route to the ZC for anything
out of region, and to the appropriate NC for within region, I would
figure things SHOULD eventually get to their destination. The fact
netmail works fine in every other net I have membership in just adds to
my frustration as I'd just really like for such an important piece of
living history to actually be working.

And I don't mean to come off like I want to point fingers or blame
anyone or any of that. I know we all do this as a hobby and have lives.
It's just that, like I say, this has been an issue for me for YEARS now,
and it's incredibly frustrating when it seems there's nobody closely
attached enough to help look at the issue who's active enough to
actually talk to. It seems from my various testing that if a message
hits my NC then I'll get it, but whether there's a break between him and
the RC, the RC doesn't forward, or stuff isn't getting to the RC I
cannot suss out without some external assistance at at least one of
those levels.
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: bbs.undermine.ca:423 - Calgary, AB (1:342/17)

On 09 Apr 21 11:43:47, Kostie Muirhead said the following to Nick.Andre:

Gotcha... hadn't heard that name since last century.

O/T Track I believe is abandonware/freeware but it works surprisingly well here, even with Othernets. Yes - I receive Netmail from Othernets destined for Fidonet... this is what I meant when I said a ZC system tends to be a dumping-ground for "whatever".

Netmail really shouldn't be a gong show. If, like you say, the NC's and RC's are forwarding/polling then the only real question should be how
the RC's are routing, but if they minimally route to the ZC for anything out of region, and to the appropriate NC for within region, I would
figure things SHOULD eventually get to their destination. The fact

Correct. And yes, you don't see gong shows in Othernets typically because
its just one Zone segment, one Region with maybe a few Nets or some sort of routine "housekeeping" by whoever the guy is that runs the Othernet. Usually every node in the Othernet gets and routes everything to that one guy.

Othernets usually don't have multiple zones, regions, nets, intertwined "meshed" topology where everything is up for grabs from anyone, Nodelist Police, Ping Patrols, obsessive-compulsive weirdo a-holes etc. that Fido has.

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)

O/T Track I believe is abandonware/freeware but it works surprisingly well

Yeah, I just looked it up and it appears it was last updated about the
year 2000. I just associated it with FD, and haven't touched that beast
since the 90s.

Netmail really shouldn't be a gong show. If, like you say, the NC's and

Othernets usually don't have multiple zones, regions, nets, intertwined "meshed" topology where everything is up for grabs from anyone, Nodelist Police, Ping Patrols, obsessive-compulsive weirdo a-holes etc. that Fido has.

I'd agree with that, though I recall some othernets back in the late
90s/early aughts that did have some pretty complex routing happening.
But that was back when active user counts were a couple of orders of
magnitude larger. And they tended to have pretty specific rules about
who was hosting who. And as to weirdo a-holes... yeah, back in my home
town there was at times some weird politics and rumours surrounding fido
just at the LOCAL level.

Anyways, can you at least help me track from the top? If you send a
netmail to me (1:342/17) what is the next hop? I've determined from
manually sending from a basic mailer setup that if mail destined for me
from an arbitrary address hits my NC that I get it, but not at any *C
above that, nor any external net that host routes. And it doesn't seem
to be those systems not accepting non nodelist connections as I can get netmail to my accounts on boards on other nets with those same
connections. I've had a long standing suspicion that it's a connection
issue between NC and RC that's just going unnoticed.
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: bbs.undermine.ca:423 - Calgary, AB (1:342/17)

On 09 Apr 21 13:26:37, Kostie Muirhead said the following to Nick.Andre:

who was hosting who. And as to weirdo a-holes... yeah, back in my home town there was at times some weird politics and rumours surrounding fido just at the LOCAL level.

The NC of Net 252 many years ago was an "odd duck". You had to answer a voice call from him to go over your application. You were tested on P4. God FORBID your mailer was down for one night. And he was always cranky. One sentence sarcasm replies. Just terrible... think Billy Bob Thorton from Mr. Woodcock.

Anyways, can you at least help me track from the top? If you send a
netmail to me (1:342/17) what is the next hop? I've determined from manually sending from a basic mailer setup that if mail destined for me from an arbitrary address hits my NC that I get it, but not at any *C above that, nor any external net that host routes. And it doesn't seem

The route I have is from 229/426 (1:1/0) to Region 17 which is where your
Net falls under. I follow ZC-RC-NC topology unless a Sysop is a downlink of mine; there would be no need to route Netmail so any "catch all" is bypassed.

I sent one now to 1;342/17. So it went from 1:229/426 to 1:153/7715 (1:17/0) just now. I assume to Net 342 NC. From there onward I cannot troubleshoot any further.

You can't realy rely on Ping to troubleshoot this because again its totally up to each system in-transit (in the path) between the Ping request to "ack" the Ping back to you. I do not see any Ping flags in Region 17 at all.

Then again... I don't have my glasses on.

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)

Hi, Kostie -- on Apr 09 2021 at 13:26, you wrote:

connections as I can get netmail to my accounts on boards on other
nets with those same connections. I've had a long standing
suspicion that it's a connection issue between NC and RC that's
just going unnoticed.

As far as I know my system is forwarding to (and from) all my NCs. If it's not, I'd like to know so I can find the responsible electron and shock it!

Cheers... Dallas
RC17

--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
* Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, CANADA (1:153/7715)

Hi, Nick -- on Apr 09 2021 at 17:16, you wrote:

I sent one now to 1;342/17. So it went from 1:229/426 to 1:153/7715 (1:17/0) just now. I assume to Net 342 NC. From there onward I
cannot troubleshoot any further.

And I see it came in here, and was sent to 342/11 at 14:14 PDT so it looks like it worked!




Cheers... Dallas

--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
* Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, CANADA (1:153/7715)

The NC of Net 252 many years ago was an "odd duck". You had to answer a voice call from him to go over your application. You were tested on P4. God FORBID your mailer was down for one night. And he was always cranky. One sentence sarcasm replies. Just terrible... think Billy Bob Thorton from Mr. Woodcock.

Good times. There was one fellow back home who felt he should be the
only fidonet access in town and caused some significant stirs to that
end. Most of that comes from rumour and second hand story though, so I
don't know if there were any legitimizing reasons for his stance. But I
have my doubts that it was "everyone else" that was the issue.

I sent one now to 1;342/17. So it went from 1:229/426 to 1:153/7715 (1:17/0) just now. I assume to Net 342 NC. From there onward I cannot troubleshoot any further.

You can't realy rely on Ping to troubleshoot this because again its totally up
to each system in-transit (in the path) between the Ping request to "ack" the Ping back to you. I do not see any Ping flags in Region 17 at all.

Thank you, Nick. That significantly reduces the number of points to be
looking and calling.
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: bbs.undermine.ca:423 - Calgary, AB (1:342/17)

NA> I sent one now to 1;342/17. So it went from 1:229/426 to 1:153/7715
NA> (1:17/0) just now. I assume to Net 342 NC. From there onward I
NA> cannot troubleshoot any further.

And I see it came in here, and was sent to 342/11 at 14:14 PDT so it looks like it worked!

Hey Dallas, is there a way to contact you other than netmail? You can
hit me by email at underminer@undermine.ca if that works for you and you
don't want to share any contact info in the echo. I have a feeling given Nick's ping and what I've found in my sleuthing that if it's possible/acceptable to get connected with your system that my issue may
be finally resolvable.
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: bbs.undermine.ca:423 - Calgary, AB (1:342/17)

Hi, Kostie -- on Apr 10 2021 at 03:36, you wrote:

Hey Dallas, is there a way to contact you other than netmail? You
can hit me by email at underminer@undermine.ca if that works for

Sure, I'll drop you an email.



Cheers... Dallas

--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
* Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, CANADA (1:153/7715)