[nos-bbs] FYI [Fwd: wl2k Re: Another paclink-unix update]

[KV9U]

Doesn't Nick have this all figured out? He was able to crack this in a 
few minutes with a problem he wrote in that amount of time. At least he 
claimed this a year or so ago. The Winlink 2000 folks had been claiming 
that the B2F made it so difficult for anyone to monitor the data that it 
was almost like being secure. They later acted like they had never said 
that after Nick figured out how to do it.

Won't he share that information on how to handle B2F?

It is very unfortunate that there is this dislike of interoperability 
with the Winlink 2000 folks, or at least some of them, because it almost 
insures that others will work on different projects rather than sharing 
the information. I have been very disappointed in the hams who do this 
kind of thing because it seems completely contrary to what amateur radio 
is all about.

By the way, how do any of you view the PSKmail program and working with 
that?

Finally, if you do have items that should be more well known, it would 
not hurt to mention it on the Winlink 2000 group which is usually pretty 
quiet.

73,

Rick, KV9U


Andre v Schayk wrote:

>wa7nwp at jnos.org schreef:
>  
>
>>>I see you are thinking the same thing I was when I saw that remark :)
>>>    
>>>      
>>>
>>yup.   Port 25/110 can be JNOS just as easily as any *nix system.  That'll
>>be the last missing major piece to let *NOS "serve" the winlink2k system.
>>
>>It'll be even more interesting if this can all be made to run under a
>>Virtual PC...
>>
>>Onward!
>>  
>>    
>>
>Like I told nick (using my friends identity) it's a shame it's not
>documented else the b2f function could be ported into jnos, although the
>mime libery might not be able to make it platform independable.
>
>Andre PE1RDW
>
>_______________________________________________
>nos-bbs mailing list
>nos-bbs at lists.tapr.org
>https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nos-bbs
>
>
>
>  
>