Subj : Re: Is binkp/d's security model kaputt?
To   : tenser
From : Avon
Date : Fri Sep 10 2021 03:56 pm


On 09 Sep 2021 at 02:10a, tenser pondered and said...
 
 te> I think there's a natural tension here in that, for a lot of
 te> folks, the motivation is to tinker with the old stuff, while
 te> for others it's about setting up a communications mechanism.
 te> 
 te> I think there is a way in which both can be accommodated, by
 te> selectively placing translation layers on what I refer to as
 te> the "edge" of the network.  But yeah, it's a hobbyist thing,
 te> so....

I agree motivations vary subject to who is coming to the table to play etc :)

That said there are a regular group of voices that arise asking (along the
lines of) 'couldn't we do it better / more secure / in another way not
needing to be encumbered by past dogma etc.'

I think just because stuff works and some don't necessarily want to change
software and current FTN style systems (fair enough, it's their call) that
should not preclude others who want to try / experiment etc. from giving it a
go.

I'm certainly supportive at looking to do things differently. I confess at
times I may be a bit stuck in 'older ways' also but that said if I could ring
fence the current sections of FTN stuff in Z21 so that stuff does not break
but start up other instances of new stuff that could do message handling,
node management etc. differently and using better 2021 practices / tools I'd
be open to doing so.

Where I am lacking is in coding skills to do that but I enjoy working with
people who are able to create stuff digitally. Thinking back on my
collaboration with g00r00 and Mystic the fun for me was in being able to
suggest features and other iterative ideas and stuff that came about as a
progress of one idea building on another. I do miss that. But I don't miss
being called things I was not.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
 * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

.