• Re: Access

    From Avon@21:1/101 to apam on Mon May 28 16:33:47 2018
    On 05/28/18, apam pondered and said...

    It all sounds a bit heavy to me... and given todays climate of nodes opting for multiple feeds of the same echoarea .. the idea of locking out someone via a feed cut seems largely nonsensical.

    Perhaps, but say someone wanted an area for just them and their friends, they could whitelist only their friends nodes. Assuming they kept their area available to only a select group on the BBSes, otherwise anyone
    could post by connecting to their BBS.

    I'm only talking about an old Fido style approach that uses current FTN and with a network topology that was top down not meshed in any way... and I
    guess also at a time when POTS was far bigger and costs to obtain a feed elsewhere were much higher (toll calls etc.)

    I agree if someone wanted to just have an echomail area for a select group
    of BBSes/nodes then you would need a way to whitelist etc. But equally how private is it if anyone could logon to those select BBS/nodes to read and
    post to it anyway?

    Best, Paul

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A39 2018/04/21 (Windows/32)
    * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)
  • From apam@21:1/125 to Avon on Mon May 28 14:56:56 2018
    I agree if someone wanted to just have an echomail area for a select
    group of BBSes/nodes then you would need a way to whitelist etc. But equally how private is it if anyone could logon to those select
    BBS/nodes to read and post to it anyway?

    Sure, but that's why you would use security levels to keep only those
    users you want to see messages see them.

    Andrew

    --- MagickaBBS v0.11alpha (Linux/x86_64)
    * Origin: Exotica BBS - telnet://exoticabbs.com:2023/ (21:1/125)
  • From Avon@21:1/101 to apam on Mon May 28 19:33:15 2018
    On 05/28/18, apam pondered and said...

    Sure, but that's why you would use security levels to keep only those users you want to see messages see them.

    Yep fair enough that's true also...

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A39 2018/04/21 (Windows/32)
    * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)
  • From Static@21:2/140 to apam on Tue May 29 08:41:45 2018
    On 05/28/18, apam said the following...

    Sure, but that's why you would use security levels to keep only those users you want to see messages see them.

    This is the sort of thing a lot of the small short-lived othernets over the years were often created for.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A39 2018/04/21 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: Subcarrier BBS (21:2/140)