Hi All,

For those using the super cool BLAM BBSlist script, and node list addition (latest combo version available that I can find,) I have a question ...


I recently changed my telnet port and have discovered a couple of things with the script:

1. When I call other BBS's and "Edit" my BBS listing, there isn't a specific selection for "port" just for "telnet address." So obviously I select www.theunderground.us:10023 ..

When I then try to telnet from that BBS to mine, to test, I notice that every BBS that has the script installed automatically tries to connect to port 23.

Is there a work around or fix this this? Mine seems to work just fine, but then again I'm basically logging on locally, and calling myself, so not a
good test. I thought the script had a feature to edit the port, but not when calling other BBS's and editng my entry. So I tried deleting my entry, and reentering my BBS info .. no port option.

Lastly, I notififed all network admins that my port change however have not necessarily had all change the port. I'm curious for those using the node
list telnet feature of this script, if the nodelist looks for a port or not? Is it necessary for an admin to change it? I had one state that their
network doesn't really look at that, yet said admin also has the mod
installed and I can't connect -- defaults to port 23.

Just trying to get my calls working again. Running into the same issue with the BBSList web site where I have to "White list" someone or something prior
to my new port address working.

I understood this to be an easier process then I'm discovering. At the
moment one would think my system is down.

If anyone knows the work around or has some clarity I'd appreciate it.


Thanks


Doug

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The Underground [@] theunderground.us:10023 <-port (21:1/165)

Re: Blam BBS List question
By: The Godfather to All on Tue May 26 2020 03:13 pm

For those using the super cool BLAM BBSlist script, and node list addition (latest combo version available that I can find,) I have a question ... not necessarily had all change the port. I'm curious for those using the node list telnet feature of this script, if the nodelist looks for a port or not? Is it necessary for an admin to change it? I had one state that their network doesn't really look at that, yet said admin also has the mod installed and I can't connect -- defaults to port 23.

Ahh, I have an idea.

If you edit your nodelist and change the INA:<hostname> to an INA:<hostname>:<port> does it fix your problem?

I dont think that should updset the IBN (binkp details), or any of the other flags (ITN,IFC)....

...δεσ∩

... Men and women are two different species, descended from different animals. --- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

Ahh, I have an idea.
If you edit your nodelist and change the INA:<hostname> to an INA:<hostname>:<port> does it fix your problem?
I dont think that should updset the IBN (binkp details), or any of the other flags (ITN,IFC)....

It's not as much a nodelist issue as it is the specific script manya re using on their BBS's for their BBSlist. The script does not appear to be
recognizing <hostname>:<port> and defaulting to port 23. While I could
likely fix it on my BBS, I can't do so on others who have my BBS listed.
This is where the nodelist, I THINK (not sure,) can come into play. I THINK, not sure, the network lead dude has to change my port within the nodelist or when others look me up, they'll be dialing into the wrong port. Well .. telnetting into the wrong port. In addition, the aforementioned script, has
a cool feature of pulling up node lists and telnettting to those on the node list. So .. I'm not sure where the issue lies, one, the other, or both, but
am hoping someone knows a fix or has one in the works?

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The Underground [@] theunderground.us:10023 <-port (21:1/165)

Re: Re: Blam BBS List question
By: The Godfather to alterego on Tue May 26 2020 09:03 pm

Ahh, I have an idea.
If you edit your nodelist and change the INA:<hostname> to an
INA:<hostname>:<port> does it fix your problem?

This is where the nodelist, I THINK (not sure,) can come into play. I THINK, not sure, the network lead dude has to change my port within the nodelist or when others look me up, they'll be dialing into the wrong port. Well .. telnetting into the wrong port. In addition, the

Right, that's why I'm suggesting you edit your nodelist to validate that if the network admin did update the nodelist that it would work. (IE: No point sending out an updated nodelist, if it doesnt help this cause :)

The only field that I think could be updated, that *may* not affect other BBS mailer operations is the INA field. (I may be wrong though...)

If updating the INA field enables your script/mod to connect to other BBSes on a non-standard telnet port, then we just need to validate that binkp still works (does it use the INA field - not sure - if the node is not defined in the node manager).

If still does work, then network admins could record "telnet access details" to BBSes in the INA field.



...δεσ∩

... Federal Employment Principle: Confusion creates jobs.
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

On 26 May 2020 at 09:03p, The Godfather pondered and said...

It's not as much a nodelist issue as it is the specific script manya re using on their BBS's for their BBSlist. The script does not appear to be recognizing <hostname>:<port> and defaulting to port 23. While I could likely fix it on my BBS, I can't do so on others who have my BBS listed. This is where the nodelist, I THINK (not sure,) can come into play. I THINK, not sure, the network lead dude has to change my port within the

I think it comes down to what the script code does and if it even looks for anything about the telnet port from a nodelist or if it just assumes 23

For my part just reading the exchange between yourself and Deon I agree with Deon that the INA may be the best place to put the telnet port info. I'm not honestly sure and will need to try and read up on this. I have been (and I think incorrectly) been using the ITN flag to note this but I think that flag is really only for use to signal a Telnet based mailer on the port stated.

Hmmm

PS - please accept this as a reply to your email also. I did get that.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/20 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

On 27 May 2020 at 02:32p, Avon pondered and said...

For my part just reading the exchange between yourself and Deon I agree with Deon that the INA may be the best place to put the telnet port
info. I'm not honestly sure and will need to try and read up on this. I have been (and I think incorrectly) been using the ITN flag to note this but I think that flag is really only for use to signal a Telnet based mailer on the port stated.

Did some reading on ftsc.org and looked at FTSC 5001.006

[snip]

Default
Flag port Description
--------------------------


IBN 24554 Binkp (FTS-1026 - FTS-1030)
IFC 60179 RAW ifcico (FTS-1024)
IFT 21 FTP (RFC-0959); Note there is currently no widely
accepted authentication scheme for FTP transfers by
Fidonet mailers.
ITN 23 Telnet connection using FTS-1 or any other protocol
designed for classic POTS and modem.
IVM 3141 Vmodem connection using FTS-1 or any other protocol
designed for classic POTS and modem.
IP none Mostly used during the introduction of IP capable
systems to the nodelist. Denotes an unspecified
protocol. (Deprecated)


.2 Server Address Flags
-------------------------

Server address flags use the syntax:

<flag>:<server address>

Where <server address> is the same as for protocol flags.
These flags are used to specify a server address for Internet
Protocol Flags that do not specify an address themselves.

Flag Description
-------------------------

INA This flag sets a default server address used
for any Internet Protocol Flag that does not
specify its own.

[snip]

So on the face of the above my take is the INA is just used to point to the desired domain name for a mailer to use and the ITN flag could be used to spotlight the Telnet port to connect to the system on. It's not that clear
that ITN is there for just talking about mailer telnet connections but rather just to show the port the system accepts Telnet connections on. Deon/Doug
would you agree?

If yes, I'll certainly add the ITN flag of 10023 to Doug's entry so the nodelist is correct. Weather that does anything to fix the issue Doug is
having with the BBS listing mod is another story :)

Let me know your thoughts guys.

Best, Paul

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/20 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

Re: Re: Blam BBS List question
By: Avon to The Godfather on Wed May 27 2020 02:32 pm

I'm not honestly sure and will need to try and read up on this. I have been (and I think incorrectly) been using the ITN flag to note this but I think that flag is really only for use to signal a Telnet based mailer on the port stated.

That actually may also be the right place for this.

Would somebody have a telnet mailer and BBS on different ports? Most telnet mailers (that I am aware of anyway), use a "press ESC to go to the BBS" type function (and said BBS probably cant handle direct telnet anyway). And anybody who didnt have a mailer, would connect that port to the telnetable BBS anyway.

The only problem that may arise is somebody using a telnet mailer, who was trying to crash somebody else, and that mailer may attempt to connect to it if it saw the ITN flag for that node. I'm thinking the chance of this happening is low - and in theory not a problem if all netmail is routed. Doesnt help for scenarios with file requests though - but then isnt their a flag to indicate file requests are possible....

(I'm thinking it might be useful to use the nodelist as a "database" of how to telnet to anybody's BBS - which then things like Spectre's webring could use it in addition to what TG is trying to do... :)

Hmm... :)

...δεσ∩

... A fool must now and then be right by chance.
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

On 27 May 2020 at 01:15p, alterego pondered and said...

(I'm thinking it might be useful to use the nodelist as a "database" of how to telnet to anybody's BBS - which then things like Spectre's

By using ITN right? and only for non standard ports i.e. other than port 23

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/20 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

Ha! Thanks, I actually wasn't referring to you LOL! But I'm glad you're looking into it. There are several BBS's that pull node lists and allow
users to telnet to the board of their choice. So I would imagine, if the net owner had the port wrong in the nodelist, then the user would not establish a connection. But I know NOTHING about what you do. So ... It's only a guess. I've had a couple of networks state it's not relevant, however, it is when
the aforementioned is in play. In addition, users find me more through
simply me posting (or curious sysops). So .. they go to the node list to
find my info (or had to at one point as I had ZERO origin line witin my
message areas (editor)). Witht hat said .. until I'm grand opening, I only
get calls via posts, BBSlists, etc.... which many appear to be via the node lists.

As for the script. I did call about 10 more BBS's since typing this, and
would say 5 were using the BLAM Mod (forget the name but think its a Phenom
mod ...) I finally found ONE that acknowledged the port change and
connected. So it may be a version .. there are 3 versions to my knowledge.
Or, two, but the third adding the nodelist display and telnet. So .. I'm
going to upgrade that tomorrow on my end.

However, I have trouble seeing how Deons suggestion solves the problem on any BBS other then those already on mine? I don't see editing any file on my BBS impacting how a user calling from, as example yours or Deons, trying to call mine via the BBSlist telnet feature. That seems to have to originate within the nodelist or script.

Just curious which it is, as neither the nodelist nor manual entry worked on many BBS's with the excetion of Dan's (Castlerock BBS)

Thanks for looking into this ... fortunately, the telnet port change will be
a one time thing (crossing fingers).

=doug

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The Underground [@] theunderground.us:10023 <-port (21:1/165)

Re: Re: Blam BBS List question
By: Avon to alterego on Wed May 27 2020 04:04 pm

By using ITN right? and only for non standard ports i.e. other than port 23

Yeah, I think so...

...δεσ∩

... Answers: $1, Short: $5, Correct: $25, dumb looks are still free.
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

Would somebody have a telnet mailer and BBS on different ports? Most telnet mailers (that I am aware of anyway), use a "press ESC to go to
the BBS" type function (and said BBS probably cant handle direct telnet anyway). And anybody who didnt have a mailer, would connect that port to the telnetable BBS anyway.

I'm not aware of any. However, if you HOST a network (forgive my niativity) and someone changes their BinkP port, how does a network admin change it on their end? Is it a flag, or something else? Being ignorant to running a network, I'm unfamiliar with how that side functions from an admin
prospective. But the simplicity would seem you go into a menu, or node list, and change the telnet port where the telnet address is listed.

However if its flag related, I'm afraid I'd have to read Pauls prior email
when more awake, and research that side of the softare.

To your point, and not just for me, but a lot of new BBS's that seem to be ressurecting, the nodelist is an excellent place to discover new BBS's and is used by scripts to allow users to call BBS's. Script aside, as any flaw
within a script can obviously restrict a port to 23, if the nodelists via
flag or telnet address reflected accurate telnet ports; then I would agree
that it would be incredibly beneficial to the web ring.

Lastly, this is not an FSXnet only issue, mystic issue, script issue. Even
the National BBS list doesn't seem to like ports that exceed 4 digits. I'm stuck in a waiting room for the owner of the site to approve a white list to allow traffic to telnet to me via that site. So lesson learned, keep the
port at 4 digits or less, not 5. However that is not the problem here, as there are a few BBS's with 5 digit ports, that work via BBS script Telnet features. However, I can only attest to my BBS as I'm making my rounds
editing the port on other BBS listings, that indeed it's possible for a BBS
to telnet into mine using the same script as others; however most that are
not using port 23, appear to fail to connect, on most BBS's.

While I realize this is a minor "issue" comparatively to other projects on peoples plates ... If the webring is an attempt to connect FSXnet BBS's to users discoverd on the web; it might be a good idea to be sure our BBS's can connect one another via node lists and BBS scripts as well. Just my 2 cents.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The Underground [@] theunderground.us:10023 <-port (21:1/165)

Re: Re: Blam BBS List question
By: The Godfather to alterego on Wed May 27 2020 12:47 am

I'm not aware of any. However, if you HOST a network (forgive my niativity) and someone changes their BinkP port, how does a network admin change it on their end? Is it a flag, or something else? Being ignorant to running a network, I'm unfamiliar with how that side functions from an admin prospective. But the simplicity would seem you go into a menu, or

So the nodelist is for "mailers" to connect to each other. Not for people to connect to BBSes... It tells one mailer, how to connect to another mailer to transfer mail and files.

When you change your binkp on your side, you need to tell the nodelist admin to update the nodelist, so another mailer knows how to connect to you - if it has mail to send to you "directly". (IE: Not routed through a hub).

You probably also need to tell you mail hub (where you collect mail from) - technically the nodelist should be sufficient, but mailer software sometimes cannot read it properly and mail hubs configure a specific address/port to connect to you, using their mailer config.

(The nodelist was created for mailers using telephones and modems - not for BBSes using IP. Some software doesnt know how to read the nodelist for IP information - some does though...)

...δεσ∩

... This was a reminder of an unforgettable voice -- wossisname! you know?
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

So the nodelist is for "mailers" to connect to each other. Not for
people to connect to BBSes... It tells one mailer, how to connect to another mailer to transfer mail and files.

When you change your binkp on your side, you need to tell the nodelist admin to update the nodelist, so another mailer knows how to connect to you - if it has mail to send to you "directly". (IE: Not routed through
a hub).

You probably also need to tell you mail hub (where you collect mail
from) - technically the nodelist should be sufficient, but mailer
software sometimes cannot read it properly and mail hubs configure a specific address/port to connect to you, using their mailer config.

(The nodelist was created for mailers using telephones and modems - not for BBSes using IP. Some software doesnt know how to read the nodelist
for IP information - some does though...)

...δεσ∩

Deon,

Thank you. That makes sense. However it appears many coders have begun
using the nodelist to script it into a BBSlist, that allow users to browse
all BBS's connected to a specific and or ALL networks, and then select and telnet out to one while online. However, if the nodelist does not contain the telnet port, would the telnet script not then have to auto default to 23 regarless of sript? I'm assuming the obvious answer is correct, but i
could be wrong. At that point, then using the nodelist for the Webring
would not be beneficial to any BBS who have abandoned port 23. So from what
I understand is that unless a flag exists as Paul is pondering, then a script using the nodelist as a tool for users to call BBS's, would only be beneficial if their port was set to 23 and or if the script was capable of the SysOp maually changing the ports to each BBS listed.

Either way, Paul or Deon, I'd be happy to be a test for the flag you're pondering as long as it won't set my computer or house on fire :)

-Doug

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The Underground [@] theunderground.us:10023 <-port (21:1/165)

Re: Re: Blam BBS List question
By: The Godfather to alterego on Wed May 27 2020 01:29 am

Thank you. That makes sense. However it appears many coders have begun using the nodelist to script it into a BBSlist, that allow users to browse all BBS's connected to a specific and or ALL networks, and then select and telnet out to one while online.

So I'm not sure if "many" is correct - but yes, "some" may have. Remember, the nodelist was not intended for people consumption - but I think that it "could" be used for people consumption as well. (If and only if, it doesnt affect mailers, which is what it was designed for.)

However, if the nodelist does not contain
the telnet port, would the telnet script not then have to auto default to 23 regarless of sript?

That would be up to the app doing the "telneting" - and yes I think its reasonsble to assume that if it is not told to connect to a specific port, it would use 23 as the IANA assigned default.

could be wrong. At that point, then using the nodelist for the Webring would not be beneficial to any BBS who have abandoned port 23.

It would - if we could "extend" its usage that doesnt affect mailers. Hence the discussion around the INA flag and ITN flags.

The ITN flag is for mailers that "speak" telnet - and my point earlier is that folks using a "telnet" mailer, would probably also use that mailer as a frontend to get into their BBS. So making that value correct for the mailer, would make it correct to access the BBS.

Those not using a telnet mailer, that flag could be used to indicate what port the BBS is on - as long as "somebodies" telnet mailer doesnt try and use it too (since it would not work - BBSes cant talk to mailers). I dont think there is a scenario that that would happen. (Happy for a second opinion though...)

So, if setting INA or ITN works for the "script" you are using (I think the ITN flag would be better), then we can adopt that as a way to extend the nodelist for people consumption too (indicating what telnet port their BBS is on)...

Hence why I was suggesting you make a change to your local nodelist, see if it works, and report back that it does or doesnt :) If it works for you, then the "master" nodelist can be updated before it is sent to everybody...

Make sense?

...δεσ∩

... I must follow them. I am their leader.
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

Just gonna jump in here, because I've had too many beers.

Wouldn't it be better for a BBS list mod to use a BBS list as a source
of data rather than a nodelist?

I mean a nodelist might have entries for mailing nodes that aren't
bbses.

I guess I'm bias because of my BBS list door, but using something like
the syncterm listing (which is just an INI file) from the telnet bbs
guide would be a far better method of input than a nodelist.

Though I guess it's a phenom mod, the telnet bbs guide may have too many
non elite members than say an araknet nodelist...... I should really
delete that sentence, but I suspect it's actually the case.

Andrew

--- MagickaBBS v0.15alpha (Linux/x86_64)
* Origin: HappyLand - telnet://magickabbs.com:2023/ (21:1/126)

Re: Re: Blam BBS List question
By: apam to alterego on Wed May 27 2020 04:34 pm

Wouldn't it be better for a BBS list mod to use a BBS list as a source
of data rather than a nodelist?

I mean a nodelist might have entries for mailing nodes that aren't
bbses.

Well, IMHO, I think a nodelist is a good source - but it doesnt need to be the exclusive source I guess.

Mail only nodes can be handled with the MO flag - thus any "telnet door" could (should?) ignore those entries...

Then the only group you are missing out on are those, that are not a member of a nodelist (or "the" nodelist that is your source - given many BBSes are in many networks).

Just gonna jump in here, because I've had too many beers.

Mmmm... beer... Sounds like a grand idea and it's beer o'clock...

...δεσ∩

... Hope is a good breakfast, but a bad supper.
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

Just gonna jump in here, because I've had too many beers.

Mmmm... beer... Sounds like a grand idea and it's beer o'clock...

Yep, it was a great idea. I had a six pack of little creatures from my
father in law that we picked up today that was for my birthday (last
week).

Sadly, they're gone now.

Andrew

--- MagickaBBS v0.15alpha (Linux/x86_64)
* Origin: HappyLand - telnet://magickabbs.com:2023/ (21:1/126)

Hey TG!

Lastly, this is not an FSXnet only issue, mystic issue, script issue. Even the National BBS list doesn't seem to like ports that exceed 4 digits. I'm stuck in a waiting room for the owner of the site to
approve a white list to allow traffic to telnet to me via that site. So lesson learned, keep the port at 4 digits or less, not 5. However that
is not the problem here, as there are a few BBS's with 5 digit ports,
that work via BBS script Telnet features. However, I can only attest to my BBS as I'm making my rounds editing the port on other BBS listings, that indeed it's possible for a BBS to telnet into mine using the same script as others; however most that are not using port 23, appear to
fail to connect, on most BBS's.

We must be very careful when deciding upon a port and understand the difference between well-known, registered, dynamic, private and ephemeral ports. The reasons we use non-standard ports with 5 digits is to stay well away from ports that are used by other applications. It would not be best practice to use 4-digit ports. What problem is addressed by doing so?

If the waiting room you are referring to is fTelnet proxy then everyone has
to wait to be added. Nothing to do with which port you run on.

At the end of the day the decision to run a bbs on a non-standard telnet port is to minimize garbage traffic. Those of us who do this understand that the key to getting traffic on our boards is advertising (something Im not particularly good at). The ideas discussed here regarding the inclusion of telnet ports in nodelists will do no good unless the software used to connect to the bbs knows about them and uses them. Otherwise, its just another way to advertise. Something that I personally welcome but do not see happening anytime soon.

.\\ichael Batts
a.k.a. stizzed (because, why not?)
SysOp, The ROCK BBS III

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The ROCK BBS III - therockbbs.net - TELNET:10023 (21:4/156)

read up on this. I have been (and I think incorrectly) been using
the ITN flag to note this but I think that flag is really only for
use to signal a Telnet based mailer on the port stated.

ITN means a mailer connection that is via Telnet, EMSI over telnet.
It's not a user access port.




\/orlon
VK3HEG


--- MagickaBBS v0.15alpha (Linux/armv6l)
* Origin: \/orlon Empire: Sector 550 (21:1/195.1)

ITN means a mailer connection that is via Telnet, EMSI over telnet.
It's not a user access port.

+1

.\\ichael Batts
a.k.a. stizzed (because, why not?)
SysOp, The ROCK BBS III

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The ROCK BBS III - therockbbs.net - TELNET:10023 (21:4/156)

We must be very careful when deciding upon a port and understand the difference between well-known, registered, dynamic, private and
ephemeral ports. The reasons we use non-standard ports with 5 digits is to stay well away from ports that are used by other applications. It would not be best practice to use 4-digit ports. What problem is addressed by doing so?

The port you helped me set up is working just fine. The only issue, to your point, is the National BBS List. Or whatever its called online ... I forget
at the moment, I have a 3 year old talking in my ear :) When I was port 23, they must have scanned me, took a screen shot of my login screen, and threw
it up on the listing. I emailed them to have them change the port and got an instant reply stating it had been updated, and I was given ADMIN rights to
the Undergrounds page. I went to test their embedded telnet client, and it spit an error stating I needed to be white listed(?) In any case, I emailed the person again, and was told he'd have to send it off to the owner to have
it fixed, and that he was not used to seeing telnet ports with that high of numbers. I left it at that and to your point, am waiting.

Im not particularly good at). The ideas discussed here regarding the inclusion of telnet ports in nodelists will do no good unless the
software used to connect to the bbs knows about them and uses them. Otherwise, its just another way to advertise. Something that I
personally welcome but do not see happening anytime soon.

So the mod GY-BLAM .. latest version, includes a nodelist.mpl that pulls from your nodelist and adds those BBS's to a list. GY-BLAM allows you to create
as many categories as you like: "Godfathers Favorite BBS's," "FSXnet BBS's," etc.... you can then telnet to those BBS's. Now ... I don't know how it's doing it .... like I said, 90% of the time I'm finding that if the telnet
port is not 23, the nodelist feature does not appear to work via telneting, and then at that point it's advertising. However I found a few that it does seem to work on. I don't know how they are doing so.. so posted the
question.

I get that the nodelist is used for mailing and not human traffic now .. however the downside I see to using a script to pull nodelists into a BBSlist Script is that if the selected BBS a user calls to telnet out to does not connect ... the user may be inclined to believe the BBS is down, negating the benefit of advertising.

Anyway, the rest is over my head at this point as to the flags used, etc... within the rest of the conversation. For that, i'm sipping coffee or beers
and absorbing the learning. If it gets figured out, awesome!

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The Underground [@] theunderground.us:10023 <-port (21:1/165)

AvonHere is the text file installati
on instructions to the script .. maybe thiswill h
elp you and Deon see if the nodelist flags would be helpful .fsxnetnode2bbi.....
......Gryphon (Darryl Perry) wrote gy-blam21 & nod
e2bbi for Mystic BBS, that can now give us a telnet enabled
nodelist for any Mystic nodelist.Tiny (Shawn Highfield) was
looking for a nodelist setup as a bbslist for gy-blam, and
we were discussing it on FSX_GEN when Gryphon said he did
that. He put up a related program at first, then the node2bbi one we were
looking for. I downloaded it and cleaned it up after the r
un through the message base and up came a nodelist.bbi in t
he Mystic data directory. Thought about it for a while and
redid my BBSList and Telnet (B from main menu) to let you u
se the two lists (or any number of lists you want) and I st
arted connecting to BBS like Tiny's BBS testing and playing with it.
This zip archive has all the stuff needed except the nodeli
st which is already in FSX_INFO on most FSXNET subscribed B
BS.Gryphon's gy-blam21 is setup to use multiple .ini
files to have as manylists as you want so it's easiest to se
tup two .ini in the scripts directory with the MPL program:
The default gy-blam.ini and gy-blam1.ini.gy-blam1.ini defer
s from gy-blam.ini in the line:; The BBS file to use. The <
filename>.BBI file should exist in the data dirBBIFILE=nodel
istSo it reads nodelist and the other reads bbslist.
You also need node2bbi MPL in your scripts directory, so it
's easiest to unzip this archive in your scripts directory
(it has the two .ini in it) with:cd /mystic/scripts #or wher
e ever you scripts isunzip -e Path/to/node2bbi.zip
#for Windows: /mystic/unzip -e Path/to/node2bbi.zip#Compile them
with./mplc node2bbi #for Windows it's just 'mplc node2bbi'
./mplc gy-blam #for Windows 'mplc gy-blam'That gets you ever
ything you need in scripts, so your ready to start mystic u
sed the SysOp Menu /* then # for Menu Editor edit (type sysop passwor
d)hit Enter on default, go down to bbslist and hit Enter, th
en delete /d A, V, E, D, Q and make 4 new entries with /i e
dit the top one to:Display Text | (B
) BBS List LightBar Low | BBS List
LightBar High | BBS ListHot Key| B Access
|Up | 0 Escape | 0Display Type | AccessDown
| 0 Tab | 0X Y| 0 0Left | 0 PageUp | 0
Timer| 0Right | 0 PageDn | 0Timer Type | IntervalR
edraw | YesHome | 0 End | 0Command ---------------
-- Access ----- Data -----------------------------(GX) E
xecute MPL programgy-blam scripts/gy-blam.iniESC,
The next to:Display Text | (N)
Node List LightBar Low | Node List
LightBar High | Node List Hot Key| N Acc
ess|Up | 0 Escape | 0Display Type | Access
Down | 0 Tab | 0X Y| 0 0Left | 0 Pa
geUp | 0Timer| 0Right | 0 PageDn | 0Timer
Type | IntervalRedraw | YesHome | 0 End | 0
Command ------------------ Access ----- Data ----------------------------
(GX) Execute MPL programgy-blam scripts/gy-blam1.iniESC,
The next to:Display Text | (U)
Update nodelist LightBar Low | Update nodelist
LightBar High | Update nodelist Hot Key| U
Access|Up | 0 Escape | 0Display
Type | AccessDown | 0 Tab | 0X Y| 0 0L
eft | 0 PageUp | 0Timer| 0Right | 0 PageDn | 0
Timer Type | IntervalRedraw | YesHome | 0 End | 0Co
mmand ------------------ Access ----- Data --------------------------
--(GX) Execute MPL programnode2bbi ESC,
Leave the last one as the default (Q) Quit to Main Menu.ESC,
Save changes to bbslist? YESGo down to main and hit Enter
Down to (B) BBS Listing hit Enter and change to: Display Tex
t | (B) BBS List & TelnetLightBar Low
| BBS List & TelnetLightBar High | BBS List & Teln
etHot Key| BAccess|Up | 0 Escape |
0Display Type | AccessDown | 0 Tab | 0X
Y| 0 0Left | 0 PageUp | 0Timer| 0Righ
t | 0 PageDn | 0Timer Type | IntervalRedraw | Yes
Home | 0 End | 0Command ------------------ Access
----- Data ----------------------------(GO) Go to new menu
bbslistESC, ESC, Save changes, ESC back to SysOp
menu, Q and you should see the new entries and be all setu
p to use them, so hit B, then U to update thenodelist (will
show the list above) then N and you can see your new setup
for telneting out via the nodelist.- bcw142 telnet://bcw14
2.zapto.org Mystic Pi BBS FSXNET 21:1/145Comments/proble
m/etc to bcw142 on FSX_GEN
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The Underground [@] theunderground.us:10023 <-port (21:1/165)

On 27 May 2020 at 10:17p, vorlon pondered and said...

ITN means a mailer connection that is via Telnet, EMSI over telnet.
It's not a user access port.

Thanks for confirming, this is what I thought / realised some time ago and after I had started to use it for BBS wanting to showcase non-standard telnet ports for users :(

I really should scrub those from the nodelist but keep them in systems.txt

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/20 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

1. When I call other BBS's and "Edit" my BBS listing, there isn't a specific selection for "port" just for "telnet address." So obviously I select www.theunderground.us:10023 ..

<snip>

You have the power to fix it :) It would just be some change to the code of
the mod and a recompile. Fixing existing code is a great way to learn, so
fear not!

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/05/22 (Linux/64)
* Origin: monterey bbs (21:1/168)

Re: Re: Blam BBS List question
By: Avon to vorlon on Thu May 28 2020 09:23 am

I really should scrub those from the nodelist but keep them in systems.txt

But is there any harm in using it for a record of telnet addresses for people to connect to?

As I mentioned earlier, I think it "may" only be problematic, if a telnet mailer used it to talk to a node that didnt have a telnet mailer, and the BBS would be confused (if that mailer was sending crash mail).

Vorlon, that might affect you right? Since MBSE is also a telnet mailer. Would it choose binkp over telnet if there was an IBN flag as well?

...δεσ∩

... I want to be what I was when I started to be what I am now.
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

(I'm thinking it might be useful to use the nodelist as a "database" of how to telnet to anybody's BBS - which then things like Spectre's
webring could use it in addition to what TG is trying to do... :)

This would be super helpful. I'm also working on converting the nodelist via python to JSON in order to automate fTelnet embedding as well, and provide an API to search/sort/filter the nodelist. I was just reading FTN specs to
see if there was a field (like ITN) that could be utilized...


|14▐ |07Alpha
|14▄▌ |13Card & Claw BBS
|06▐ |05cardandclaw.com:8888

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Card & Claw BBS (21:4/158)

Just gonna jump in here, because I've had too many beers.

Wouldn't it be better for a BBS list mod to use a BBS list as a source
of data rather than a nodelist?

I mean a nodelist might have entries for mailing nodes that aren't
bbses.

You may be correct here. Today I wrote a script to convert the fsxnet
nodelist into a web-usable format (JSON) and I had to do a lot of fiddling to hide ZONE, HOST, PVT, DOWN, etc. read the flags and translate them, but
I *was* able to do it.

http://167.172.194.72:1234/fsxnet

My observations:

- Nodelists are naturally maintained by a network, so while they are
rich in content related to network details, and a source of truth, they don't often have the capability to hold other meta-data types that could be useful for callers in a BBS list...

- Updates to an official nodelist may take longer than necessary, vs a BBS owner who could just pop in and edit the details of his/her BBS

- A BBS list would benefit from some sort of maint. automation (e.g. marking BBSs as down if they don't response)

- A BBS list would benefit from centralization--as in, a single source of truth--but still allowing people to "own" their connection details

Which leads me to believe that a BBS list mod like the ones that exist may be the best solution!

I'd still love to see such a list in JSON so we could do web stuff with it,
tho :)


|14▐ |07Alpha
|14▄▌ |13Card & Claw BBS
|06▐ |05cardandclaw.com:8888

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Card & Claw BBS (21:4/158)

You may be correct here. Today I wrote a script to convert the fsxnet nodelist into a web-usable format (JSON) and I had to do a lot of
fiddling to hide ZONE, HOST, PVT, DOWN, etc. read the flags and
translate them, but I *was* able to do it.

http://167.172.194.72:1234/fsxnet

The only challenge I've seen with any script that pulls from the nodelist to
a BBSlist is that the telnet ports are not usually listed within a nodelist. So ... this takes, what, 50% of the BBS's and makes them not able to be connected to via the displayed list if only the URl is listed to the user. With my limited knowledge, I can't imagine an easy way to do this for the Net Admin, or the person writing the script. Wouldn't either the admin have to
go in and add flags and port numbers to each node and/or wouldn't the script have to search a range of ports for the listed URL to discover the correct
one, and then populate said telnet port into the BBS list? I may be wrong
but from a "fresh set of newbie eyes," to me a nodelist used as a BBS list to display to users is currently useless to 50% of the BBS's who have abandoned port 23 and/or a lot of work for the network admin (unless a script can
acheive this goal automatically with simply a URL or IP address...)

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The Underground [@] theunderground.us:10023 <-port (21:1/165)

Hello Avon!

28 May 20 09:23, you wrote to me:

ITN means a mailer connection that is via Telnet, EMSI over
telnet. It's not a user access port.

Thanks for confirming, this is what I thought / realised some time ago
and after I had started to use it for BBS wanting to showcase
non-standard telnet ports for users :(

I should also add that ITN connections are run over port 60177.

This system support ITN connections, but 99.9999% are binkd....

I really should scrub those from the nodelist but keep them in
systems.txt

Yes.



Vorlon


--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Dragon's Lair ---:- dragon.vk3heg.net -:--- (21:1/195)

Hello alterego!

28 May 20 11:38, you wrote to Avon:

Vorlon, that might affect you right? Since MBSE is also a telnet
mailer. Would it choose binkp over telnet if there was an IBN flag as well?

Mbse defaults to using binkp, so it shouldn't be a issue (Famous last words #-] )



Vorlon


--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Dragon's Lair ---:- dragon.vk3heg.net -:--- (21:1/195)

On 28 May 2020 at 11:38a, alterego pondered and said...

I really should scrub those from the nodelist but keep them in system

But is there any harm in using it for a record of telnet addresses for people to connect to?

Lordy I'm a conflicted mess now :) I think I need a lie down :)

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/20 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

The only challenge I've seen with any script that pulls from the
nodelist to a BBSlist is that the telnet ports are not usually listed within a nodelist. So ... this takes, what, 50% of the BBS's and makes them not able to be connected to via the displayed list if only the URl
is listed to the user. With my limited knowledge, I can't imagine an
easy way to do this for the Net Admin, or the person writing the script. Wouldn't either the admin have to go in and add flags and port numbers
to each node and/or wouldn't the script have to search a range of ports for the listed URL to discover the correct one, and then populate said telnet port into the BBS list? I may be wrong but from a "fresh set of newbie eyes," to me a nodelist used as a BBS list to display to users is currently useless to 50% of the BBS's who have abandoned port 23 and/or
a lot of work for the network admin (unless a script can acheive this
goal automatically with simply a URL or IP address...)

You're right. and I don't think the ftn spec is going to change for this use case.

If we were going to build a "source of truth" for what's needed for a BBSList app, whether it's for someone creating a webring, embedded telnet browser app, or even a BBS List script//door -- what minimum fields would it need to contain? E.g. how would we expect users to search/sort/filter? And how can
the list be automated: creation, management, etc.

Stuff like:

- BBS Name
- Short description
- Physical location
- web URI
- telnet port
- ssh port
- sysop name
- Member networks
- date added
- active/inactive flag
- thumbnail image
- BBS Software Name

AAAAAND as I sit here writing this, I realize that this probably already
exists in principle in other places: web-based Telnet Guides, BBS List mods, etc. LOL


|14▐ |07Alpha
|14▄▌ |13Card & Claw BBS
|06▐ |05cardandclaw.com:8888

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Card & Claw BBS (21:4/158)

AAAAAND as I sit here writing this, I realize that this probably already exists in principle in other places: web-based Telnet Guides, BBS List mods, etc. LOL

Well.. there lies the problem and why I brought this up. The purpose of
having a BBSLIST is, to my understanding, to allow SysOps who log onto your
BBS to promote their BBS, a sharing of users of sorts. Especially those
BBS's who you personally enjoy calling -- I add those myself. So here is
what I'm noticing as I make my rounds, updating my listed BBS on various boards, to my new port number.

1. Some boards are using a script that reads the nodes list within their BBSlist. The problem is, the URL to write down, cut and paste, telnet,
however they have it set up to get ahold of a board of interest, does NOT
have the PORT address as nodelists typically do not. So .. what does that exclude? 50% of the BBS's out there? It creates a negative impression when
a user tries to telnet a BBS, and it doesn't connect -- assumption --- BBS no longer exists. So .. I don't see what the purpose of usiing a nodelist
within a BBSlist is, unless someone has figured out the script to incorporate the Port. IF SO, I'd like the BBS telnet so I can call and see it in action. 2. Some boards are using scripts for their bbslist that do not have a "port" option and ignore "www.url.com:port" the "port" portion of the text, and also do not have a seperate entry for the PORT. In most cases, the BBS is just using an older version of the script and needs to upgrade. But .. not my
call ....

So ... I guess my point is .. it impacts ALL of us when a BBS list is not
set up to display and function correctly if telnet features are incorporated.


The one that DOES work just fine is the GY-BLAM22 (I Believe,) or whichever
the latest version is. I've tried it on several BBS's and it recognizes the port the SySop displays, connects perfectly. I'm not sure the older version does. As you know, a sysop can take a script and customize the ANSI to the point where who knows what script their using or if it was made by the SysOp themselves. So ....

Anyway, if a BBS is using a nodelist within their BBSlist .. it's kind of useless in my opinion ... I took mine down and have not found a script that scans the URL for all ports from 1-? to find the port number. I'm not
that good at scripting. So, I think this would have to be a network Admin
with a desire to use the nodescript to highlight their signed up BBS's, adjusting the nodelist in a way that the nodelist could be used for display purposes other than for netmail.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The Underground [@] theunderground.us:10023 <-port (21:1/165)

On 27 May 2020 at 10:17p, vorlon pondered and said...

ITN means a mailer connection that is via Telnet, EMSI over
telnet. It's not a user access port.

Thanks for confirming, this is what I thought / realised some time
ago and after I had started to use it for BBS wanting to showcase non-standard telnet ports for users :(

I really should scrub those from the nodelist but keep them in
systems.txt

Yes, and the talk about adding extra junk to the nodelist that is built
for mailers is just going to put more junk into the nodelist.

User access information should be done via another mediam.




\/orlon
VK3HEG


--- MagickaBBS v0.15alpha (Linux/armv6l)
* Origin: \/orlon Empire: Sector 550 (21:1/195.1)

On 30 May 2020 at 06:36p, vorlon pondered and said...

I really should scrub those from the nodelist but keep them in systems.txt

Yes, and the talk about adding extra junk to the nodelist that is built for mailers is just going to put more junk into the nodelist.

User access information should be done via another mediam.

I confess I flip and flop between using the nodelist and setting the course your suggesting. We've moved the thread over to FSX_NET if you want to chip
in your thoughts. You'd be most welcome to.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/20 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

On 05-30-20 18:36, vorlon wrote to Avon <=-

Yes, and the talk about adding extra junk to the nodelist that is built for mailers is just going to put more junk into the nodelist.

User access information should be done via another mediam.

I've been lurking and I'm inclined to agree. Leave the nodelist for mailers.


... A man's incomplete until married; then he's finished!
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (21:1/109)

Yes, and the talk about adding extra junk to the nodelist that is built for mailers is just going to put more junk into the nodelist.

Ooooh, it would be so nice if we could get rid of the junk in the nodelist.

User access information should be done via another mediam.

If much of it were not already there I would agree. Im 50/50 between using whats there and starting over. There are a few attempts at lists out there already, the ibbslist comes to mind. We could hi-jack one of these existing lists or create our own. In any case, much of the information already contained in the already implemented nodelists is already there. (that
sentence made my head hurt) ;)

C'mon over to FSX_NET and join in!

.\\ichael Batts
a.k.a. stizzed (because, why not?)
SysOp, The ROCK BBS III

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The ROCK BBS III - therockbbs.net - TELNET:10023 (21:4/156)

I've been lurking and I'm inclined to agree. Leave the nodelist for mailers.

Then come on over to FSX_NET and help us build a new one...

.\\ichael Batts
a.k.a. stizzed (because, why not?)
SysOp, The ROCK BBS III

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Windows/32)
* Origin: The ROCK BBS III - therockbbs.net - TELNET:10023 (21:4/156)

Re: Re: Blam BBS List question
By: vorlon to Avon on Sat May 30 2020 06:36 pm

User access information should be done via another mediam.

Why?

...δεσ∩

... Conscience is what hurts when everything else feels so good.
--- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

Hello alterego,

User access information should be done via another mediam.

Why?

Because the nodelist does what it set out to do, and does it well. There are many nodelist utilities that we could break by changing the format.

A BBS list and a nodelist are two different things. A BBS list is what we need here. The Telnet BBS Guide is one such list that would be well suited for this purpose.

It would be convenient if the nodelist had the details we need for this. It has a start but not all the details we need.

If the nodelist supported these details I would add my own if and when I have a BBS online. I often have the urge to add my BBS telnet details to the nodelist but I don't because it is wrong and would confuse telnet capable mailers like BBBS and MBSE.

Actually it wouldn't confuse BBBS since it answers both mailer and user calls on the telnet port but in most cases it would cause errors.

Ttyl :-),
Al

--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (21:4/106)

On 05-30-20 08:11, stizzed wrote to Vk3jed <=-

I've been lurking and I'm inclined to agree. Leave the nodelist for mailers.

Then come on over to FSX_NET and help us build a new one...

I have been following the discussion, let's continue there. :)


... BBS Tip #5: Login as ALL and receive more e-mail.
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (21:1/109)

On 30 May 2020 at 06:36p, vorlon pondered and said...

I really should scrub those from the nodelist but keep

them in Av> systems.txt

Yes, and the talk about adding extra junk to the nodelist that
is built for mailers is just going to put more junk into the
nodelist.
User access information should be done via another mediam.

I confess I flip and flop between using the nodelist and setting
the course your suggesting. We've moved the thread over to FSX_NET
if you want to chip in your thoughts. You'd be most welcome to.

The hammer has been thrown your way, make sure it doesn't hit you in the
face. $->)




\/orlon
VK3HEG


--- MagickaBBS v0.15alpha (Linux/armv6l)
* Origin: \/orlon Empire: Sector 550 (21:1/195.1)

On 05-30-20 18:36, vorlon wrote to Avon <=-

Yes, and the talk about adding extra junk to the nodelist that
is built for mailers is just going to put more junk into the
nodelist.

User access information should be done via another mediam.

I've been lurking and I'm inclined to agree. Leave the nodelist
for mailers.

+1




\/orlon
VK3HEG


--- MagickaBBS v0.15alpha (Linux/armv6l)
* Origin: \/orlon Empire: Sector 550 (21:1/195.1)

Yes, and the talk about adding extra junk to the nodelist that
is built for mailers is just going to put more junk into the
nodelist.

Ooooh, it would be so nice if we could get rid of the junk in the nodelist.

For othetr net's that's not a big issue as only one person normally looks
after it. For fido, join the line. #0)

I know my sectioon of the list for fido is as clean as it can be, and I
poke sysop's if I see issues via 3rd party out of band comms.

User access information should be done via another mediam.

If much of it were not already there I would agree. Im 50/50
between using whats there and starting over. There are a few
attempts at lists out there already, the ibbslist comes to mind.
We could hi-jack one of these existing lists or create our own. In
any case, much of the information already contained in the already implemented nodelists is already there. (that sentence made my head
hurt) ;)

The start of the list can be collected via a nodelist(s), but the ending information shouldn't be in the nodelist..




\/orlon
VK3HEG


--- MagickaBBS v0.15alpha (Linux/armv6l)
* Origin: \/orlon Empire: Sector 550 (21:1/195.1)

Re: Re: Blam BBS List question
By: vorlon to Avon on Sat May 30 2020 06:36 pm

User access information should be done via another mediam.

Why?

How many nortmal users would even

1. KNow what the nodelist is
2. Be even able to read it.
3. It's a list for *mailers*, not users.




\/orlon
VK3HEG


--- MagickaBBS v0.15alpha (Linux/armv6l)
* Origin: \/orlon Empire: Sector 550 (21:1/195.1)

On 01 Jun 2020 at 12:39p, vorlon pondered and said...

The hammer has been thrown your way, make sure it doesn't hit you in the face. $->)

:) It's all good in the hood.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/04/20 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

On 01 Jun 2020 at 12:39p, vorlon pondered and said...

The hammer has been thrown your way, make sure it doesn't hit
you in the face. $->)

:) It's all good in the hood.

Just make sure that the hood is nice and peacfull. %->




\/orlon
VK3HEG


--- MagickaBBS v0.15alpha (Linux/armv6l)
* Origin: \/orlon Empire: Sector 550 (21:1/195.1)