Hi all,

I have a question about the old FidoNet structure, because I am starting to wonder whether I am simply applying rules that are no longer used today.
As I remember it, Policy 4.07 says essentially this:
- A network is a collection of nodes in a local geographic area. (1.2.3) MeatballWiki
- A region is also a well-defined geographic area containing networks and independent nodes. (1.2.4) MeatballWiki
- Each geographic location belongs to one zone, one region, and either one network or no network at all. (1.3.2) MeatballWiki
- Two networks are not supposed to cover the same geographic area. (1.3.2) MeatballWiki
- If a node is located in the area covered by a network, it should normally be listed in that network rather than somewhere else as an independent node. (1.3.2) MeatballWiki
- Network membership is supposed to be based on geographic or technical reasons, not personal or social factors. (1.3.2) MeatballWiki
- Exceptions to the geographic structure are possible, but Policy 4 describes those as exceptions requiring coordination between the relevant coordinators. MeatballWiki
So... these are still the rules, aren't they?
Or did this change sometime during the 30 years in which the Internet distracted me from Fido? ;-)
I am genuinely asking, because my understanding of Fido has always been that the address structure represents the geographic structure of the network, rather than simply attaching a node or point wherever somebody happens to offer one.

Greetings from Austria,
DATENZWERG

--- BinktermPHP v1.10.2
* Origin: myPoint System - https://mypoint.lovelybits.org (1:153/149.42)

Hi Markus,

On 2026-09-16 02:33:39, you wrote to All:

I have a question about the old FidoNet structure, because I am
starting to
wonder whether I am simply applying rules that are no longer used today. As I
remember it, Policy 4.07 says essentially this: - A network is a collection of
nodes in a local geographic area. (1.2.3) MeatballWiki - A region is also a
well-defined geographic area containing networks and independent nodes. (1.2.4) MeatballWiki - Each geographic location belongs to one zone, one region, and either one network or no network at all. (1.3.2) MeatballWiki -
Two networks are not supposed to cover the same geographic area. (1.3.2) MeatballWiki - If a node is located in the area covered by a network, it should normally be listed in that network rather than somewhere else as an independent node. (1.3.2) MeatballWiki - Network membership is supposed to be
based on geographic or technical reasons, not personal or social factors. (1.3.2) MeatballWiki - Exceptions to the geographic structure are possible,
but Policy 4 describes those as exceptions requiring coordination between the
relevant coordinators. MeatballWiki

So... these are still the rules, aren't they?

More or less they are still true for nodes.

I think the ZC's have some kind of understanding not to "allow" nodes from different geographic locations into their zones.

Or did this change sometime during the 30 years in which the Internet distracted me from Fido? ;-) I am genuinely asking, because my understanding of Fido has always been that the address structure represents the geographic structure of the network, rather than simply attaching a node or point wherever somebody happens to offer one.

It would be easy to join a different geographic Zone/Region/Net with internet connections. But this isn't done for nodes, unless there is a pressing reason. But for points nobody cares anymore. ;-)


Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.3.4.1-B20260520
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Hello Wilfred!

16 Sep 26 18:18, you wrote to Markus Wagner:

Exceptions to the geographic structure are possible, but Policy 4
describes those as exceptions requiring coordination between the
relevant coordinators. MeatballWiki
So... these are still the rules, aren't they?

More or less they are still true for nodes.

I think the ZC's have some kind of understanding not to "allow" nodes
from different geographic locations into their zones.

What does "geographic location" mean when talking about an IP node?

Yegor
--- AmberEdit/linux 0.8.7
* Origin: to err is human, but to really f.. things up you need AI (2:382/736)

Hi Yegor,

On 2026-09-16 18:37:55, you wrote to me:

Exceptions to the geographic structure are possible, but Policy 4
describes those as exceptions requiring coordination between the
relevant coordinators. MeatballWiki
So... these are still the rules, aren't they?

More or less they are still true for nodes.

I think the ZC's have some kind of understanding not to "allow" nodes
from different geographic locations into their zones.

What does "geographic location" mean when talking about an IP node?

It's the geographic location where the sysop resides. Not the "location" were the (virtual) node system may be located...


Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.3.4.1-B20260520
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Hi Markus,

So... these are still the rules, aren't they?

They are, and I can say that with a very fresh receipt: my net was
created this month, so the whole procedure happened three weeks ago and
not thirty years ago.

my understanding of Fido has always been that the address structure represents the geographic structure of the network, rather than
simply attaching a node or point wherever somebody happens to offer
one.

That is exactly how it was applied to me. I asked for a node, and the
answer was not "pick a net that has room" but "you are in Poland, so
you belong here" - and since there was no live Polish net left to join,
the RC rebuilt net 484 and made me its Host. Nobody offered me a slot
in a foreign net as a convenience, and I would have felt odd taking it.

So from the inside it looks less like a rule that survived by inertia
and more like one the coordinators still actively use to decide where
somebody goes.

I think the ZC's have some kind of understanding not to "allow"
nodes from different geographic locations into their zones.

What does "geographic location" mean when talking about an IP node?

It's the geographic location where the sysop resides. Not the
"location" were the (virtual) node system may be located...

That distinction is not academic for me, and I think it is the only one
that can survive. My system does not live in my flat - it is a rented
machine in a data centre. In my case both answers happen to agree,
because that data centre is in the same country I live in, but that is
an accident of an invoice, not a principle: I could move the machine
abroad tomorrow afternoon, from a web panel, without getting up from
this chair. If the address followed the iron, my net would follow my
hosting contract. Following the sysop, it does not move unless I do.

The part I find genuinely interesting is that this makes the address a statement about a *person*, not about a wire - which is roughly what it
always was. The modem was never in the net; the sysop was.

Greetings from Warsaw,
Grzegorz Worona (kombos)

--- ENiGMA 1/2 v0.5.1-beta (linux; x64)
* Origin: DEAD SOCKET CHURCH (2:484/101)

El 16/9/26 a las 06:33, Markus Wagner (1:153/149.42) escribió:

Hi all,

I have a question about the old FidoNet structure, because I am starting
to wonder whether I am simply applying rules that are no longer used today. As I remember it, Policy 4.07 says essentially this:
- A network is a collection of nodes in a local geographic area. (1.2.3) MeatballWiki
- A region is also a well-defined geographic area containing networks
and independent nodes. (1.2.4) MeatballWiki
- Each geographic location belongs to one zone, one region, and either
one network or no network at all. (1.3.2) MeatballWiki
- Two networks are not supposed to cover the same geographic area.

On Z4 I try to follow these rules. but I had some point from another
zone sometimes..

--- BinktermPHP v1.10.2
* Origin: myPoint System - https://mypoint.lovelybits.org (1:153/149.42)

--- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
* Origin: Dock Sud BBS - http://bbs.docksud.com.ar (4:902/26)

Hello Wilfred!

16 Sep 26 18:18, you wrote to me:

Hi Markus,

On 2026-09-16 02:33:39, you wrote to All:

So... these are still the rules, aren't they?

More or less they are still true for nodes.

I think the ZC's have some kind of understanding not to "allow" nodes
from different geographic locations into their zones.

Or did this change sometime during the 30 years in which the
Internet distracted me from Fido? ;-) I am genuinely asking,
because my understanding of Fido has always been that the address
structure represents the geographic structure of the network,
rather than simply attaching a node or point wherever somebody
happens to offer one.

It would be easy to join a different geographic Zone/Region/Net with internet connections. But this isn't done for nodes, unless there is a pressing reason. But for points nobody cares anymore. ;-)

ASISA is now into Austrialia... And where should i join? I'm living in
the Wintertimes at the Phillipines and in Sommer in Austria.

Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.3.4.1-B20260520
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Greetings, DatenZwerg


--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20260304
* Origin: Datenzwerg BBS (2:319/747)

Hi Markus,

On 2026-09-18 21:35:34, you wrote to me:

ASISA is now into Austrialia... And where should i join? I'm living in
the Wintertimes at the Phillipines and in Sommer in Austria.

Is it 50/50 or a different time ratio between the two countries?

Does the fidosystem move with you or does it stay in the same place?

And to what country are you more culturally connected?
Do you interact mostly with Z2 sysops or Z3 sysops about fido?

So with the answers to these questions you can probably answer your own question. ;-)


Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.3.4.1-B20260520
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)