[nos-bbs] purpose of R: lines, do we really need them, etc ?

[(Skip) K8RRA]

Oh my Maiko, a feature decision at hand?

On Fri, 2008-03-28 at 09:16 -0500, Maiko Langelaar (ve4klm) wrote:
> What's the purpose of R: lines ?
PLEASE don't take this as impugning your experience!
Here is an extract from wiki as a conversation starter...
==========================================================
mbox fwdinfo [string] Displays or sets the string that is used in the
BBS R: header when forwarding mail to other BBSes. 

>>SNIP<<

mbox header [on | OFF] Explicitly turns the R: line in the message
header on or off. With mbox header off, regular users can forward from
JNOS to another system designated as a full-service bbs without leaving
a trace to their system. This avoids having a downstream bbs improperly
identify the originating station as a bbs. The elements of the R: header
are optional as of JNOS107. The line has this format (where undefined
elements will be dropped): 

        R:yymmdd/hhmmz @:haddress [qth] fwdinfo #:mid $:bid Z:zip

NOTE: 'mbox header off' also turns off the mbox third-party flag.


>>SNIP<<

mbox qth [location] This displays or sets the location of your system,
and uses it in the R: headers when doing bbs forwarding.

>>SNIP<<

mbox zipcode [<nnnnn>] Set or display the system's postal zipcode. This
is used in the R: line when forwarding.
================================================================

So with R: we stand a chance of finding the path a message [bulletin(?)]
took getting to us and prevent forwarding it back where it came from?

Perhaps a question is how will WL2K treat a R: header in their system?
Does it NEED to be suppressed?

> 
> If I don't process them, what are the *consequences* ...
Is this an option to suppress only for B2F?  Because WL2K is "Internet
email" at it's destination, it seems like hooking up to WL2K amounts to
a departure from AX.25 BBS technology into TCP/IP technology with a
whole new set of "practices".  If the R: header causes harm in the
Internet environment, certainly shut them off.  

If the R: header is only extra baggage in TCP/IP email, I would favor
dropping them.  If the R: header is going to be returned into AX.25 BBS
later on [the analogy is IP-IP encapsulation for TCP packets] then I
don't see it to be safe to scrub R: headers -- but this option seems
far-fetched to me...

TCP/IP mail transport agents do insert a timestamp into headers for
similar functionality to R:, but it seems like hard work to reformat R:
into a compatible format for SMTP.  I don't favor that for the benefit
at the destination mail reader.

SO -- I guess I've talked myself into favoring dropping R: on the way
into WL2K...  Adverse consequences will certainly show up in a year?

Was R: something of a surprise in putting B2F together?

73
de [George (Skip) VerDuin] K8RRA k