Subj : linked
To   : Bob Short
From : Jasen Betts
Date : Thu Dec 12 2002 09:19 pm

Hi Bob.

 BS> It was suggested to me that this echo would be a great place to
 BS> start discussing possible nodelist format changes, and the
 BS> software which would utilize them.

we were kicking that ball around a bit a few months back,
we came up with a few different proposals for a new (IE non-slf)
nodelist formats and little else

 BS> I just did a 30 day rescan of the echo, and was returned one
 BS> message. If this is due to a pass-thru on my uplink's system,
 BS> please let me know what has beed going on the last month or so (in
 BS> nutshells please).

very little.  I thought that possibly the echo had fallen of the backbone(s)

 BS> Some of you are aware that elections are ongoing for new standing
 BS> members of the FTSC.  Once elected, it is my hope that the new
 BS> panel will take a different approach to reaching and applying
 BS> standards that can incorporate IP listings, without compromising
 BS> current PSTN methods.

uunfortunately FTSC doesn't make the rules, the ZCC does AFAICT.

 BS> A lot has been debated regarding flags and fields in the current
 BS> NL format, but recent tests have (so far) shown promise for an
 BS> extended NL format that make use of ;E(rror) lines, which could be
 BS> used by modifying currently developing mailers, and a seg editor
 BS> to compile it.

 BS> I would ask all IP programmers to chime in here on this, and
 BS> express their collective thoughts of feasibility.  :)

it'll require programmers to think a bit more when reading the nodelist and
code their software to look-ahead a bit,  but that shouldn't be a problem
for experienced programmers.

 -=> Bye <=-

---
 * Origin: Ban the bomb. Save the world for conventional warfare (3:640/1042)

.