[nos-bbs] TELpac nodes and JNOS (based on a much earlier post)

[Andre v Schayk]

sv1uy schreef:

>On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 14:29:52 -0500 (CDT), maiko wrote
>  
>
>>This is slightly old, but some recent reading about TELpac nodes
>>reminded me of this thread, and I felt maybe some clarifications
>>should be made. In essence, JNOS *is* a Telpac node already !
>>
>>On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, Bill Vodall wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>All this chat and some of my local on the air activity has me curious
>>>to try JNOS to Winlink by the TelPack client interface. Since it uses
>>>the simple SP/LM/RM commands it should be close to working.
>>>      
>>>
>>xNOS *is* a TelPac server in a sense. The packet user out in the
>>field connects to xNOS directly, and can easily and reliably send
>>email to anyone in the world from the prompt - provided the NOS
>>system is configured to do that, like mine is here in Winnipeg.
>>
>>This was possible YEARS AGO already, before Telpac came out.
>>
>>What is a bit mind boggling to me is this - Telpac nodes apparently have
>>the ability to connect to an FBB or JNOS server over the internet 
>>and deliver the mail that way. BUT wait, the NOS servers already 
>>have the ability (for years) to accept DIRECT packet connections 
>>from packet users out in the field, and deliver the mail themselves. 
>>In which case Telpac becomes an extra step in between, one that is 
>>not required for those cases.
>>
>>To be fair, many out there want nothing to do with NOS or linux for that
>>matter, so they go the Windows route. To each their own, no big deal,
>> no war needs to be waged about it. But I think it's only fair to 
>>make the above clarification, so that there are no misunderstandings 
>>in what each of the packages are capable of.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>The only trick part that might take some tweaking of the code is the
>>>sending of regular Email via Winlink.  That requires the format:
>>>
>>>  sp smtp:wa7nwp at jnos.org
>>>      
>>>
>>Most xNOS have built in SMTP services. Again, NOS is fully capable of
>>sending email on it's own. What's the point of forwarding it over a Telpac
>>client interface over the internet to a WinLink system for delivery 
>>to it's destination ? I can connect to my JNOS from out in the field,
>> type in my email message, and JNOS itself will deliver it to the destination.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>There are two potential interfaces to Winlink here.
>>>      
>>>
>>>AX25 to a Telpac(_node on linux) or
>>>      
>>>
>>For those running JNOS systems, there is no need to run a Telpac
>>node if all they want to do is deliver email.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Telnet to their servers at port 12001.
>>>      
>>>
>>I don't plan on it. I don't see the point.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Source code is available so we might be able to put
>>>telpack_node right in to NOS.
>>>      
>>>
>>Doesn't need it. It's there already.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>telpac_node/LinuX offers no GUI or other nice features,
>>>it is just a small tool used like the well known ax25-tools
>>>together with ax25d.
>>>      
>>>
>>Again it comes down to choice. You can go the ax25 tools/utils
>>route, you can go the NOS route, or you can go the Windows route
>>with the Telpac node software.
>>
>>Maiko Langelaar / VE4KLM
>>
>>    
>>
>
>Maiko,
>
>These guys although they have "reinvented" the wheel, they have reinvented it
>the wrong way by violating the RFCs.
>
>You see they managed to promote their system and many think now that WINLINK
>2000 is something new when the same system has existed in AMPRnet years ago.
>Well I have been actively involved at least since 1993 but it seems that I was
>not a good salesman! hi hi hi!!!
>
>Of course to people that do not know any better these terms such as TELPAC,
>PACLINK, WINLINK 2000 ssound fantastic but really they are just a bad copy or
>just a cut down implementation of AMPRnet with a touch of broken FBB BBS
>forwarding especially where B2F is concerned!
>
>---
>73 de Demetre SV1UY
>e-mail: sv1uy at ham.depa.gr
>AX25 PBBS: SV1UY at SV1UY.ATH.GRC.EU
>http://sv1uy.ampr.org/~sv1uy
>http://www.athnet.ampr.org/~sv1uy
>  
>
Demetre, Maiko and others,

With KLMproxy I think xNOS has removed the last hurdle in atracting the 
non technical packet users, it is those users that think winlink2000 is 
the best thing ever and even believe it is the only option to send 
emails with attachments over packet radio, a lie often told by 
winlink2000 suporters.

I wonder if there is a posebilty to incorperate ssh type compresion 
without the encrypting over the proxy link.

It´s about time I turn on ip forwarding between eth0 and tun0 and open 
up smtp from internet.
The next step is setting up a domain with mx records pointing to a 
number of regional jnos systems all capable of distributing the email 
amongs themselfs.

The users that want to offer an access route to the regional email 
system without having to learn networking can go the lazy way and setup 
a telpac node to the regional jnos systems, aftreall telpac is the only 
program the winlink2000 team made that can connect to other systems then 
winlink 2000.

73 de Andre PE1RDW