[nos-bbs] polling?

[Gustavo Ponza]

From: "George \[ham\] VerDuin" <k8rra at ameritech.net>

 > You sound frustrated Gus...

No Skip, I think not so, I'm very happy for my life 100%

 >> And what about the *continued* exclusion

 > To characterize dynamic IPs as excluded is not real accurate.
 > Static IP works nicely per the encap.txt design, dynamic IP is a real 
 > pain.

What is the difference and what great efforts are needed to manage the
encap.txt file (the old JNOS format) to be sourced on the autoexec.nos
as in the canonical form:

route addprivate 44.x.x.x/y encap <static IP number>

or as:

route addprivate 44.x.x.x/y encap <dynamic_host_address>

so, why is it very arduous to encapsulate and manage my systems as:

route addprivate 44.134.32.233/24 encap i0ojj.dyndns.org
route addprivate 44.134.33.71/24 encap i0ojj.dyndns.org

there is no need to any hard people work: so it appears a false reason.

 >There is a patch floating around to enable domain name as a substitute
 >for IP number.

I'll take a look for that...

 >It found daylight under the MI-DRG subnet here in Michigan USA out of
 >Kalamazoo.
 >But the domain name approach never gained traction, static IP number
 >remains preferred.
 >The lead guy in DRG did allow a few dynamic IPs into the subnet but the
 >vigilance was tedious.
 >Let's not even open the discussion to timeliness.

We Italians discovered the Americas several centuries ago and so here
in Europe also discovered and apply, since 1990, how to overcome the
PBBS forwarding problems via the telnet, starting from the linux/windoze
F6FBB PBBS software and so also for all the state-of-art German PBBS
software.

Then, being everywhere around the world:

'telnet i0ojj.dyndns.org 6300' connect to my xdfbb 7.05c9 PBBS,
'telnet i0ojj.dyndns.org 4719' connect to my obcm 1.07b5 PBBS,
'http://i0ojj.dyndns.org:8080' connect to my obcm 1.07b5 on HTTP,
'http://i0ojj.dyndns.org:10000' connect to my JNOS2.0j.2 on HTTP,

and so on for XNET and many others...

 >> of radio
 >> amateurs to participate to the ampr.org gateways
 >> only because they are not fortunate enough to own
 >> a static internet IP address?

 >May I suggest the static IP is simply a cost of admittance since
 >inception.
 >It is the basis of design.

Today it is not necessary as per above... and personally for me should
not be so great onerous... but think to other OM people over the world
with scarce resources...

 >I like a good wager -- I'll bet amprnet might entertain dynamic IPs if
 >you offered a development that would respond to dynamic changes in IP
 >without manual labor required for network maintenance.  JNOS is not the
 >only software used,  therefore change to the basic design touches many.
 >Have you considered the consequence of the impending(?) IP number
 >expansion on Internet?  That change removes the need for dynamic IP
 >numbers for perhaps always.  Also -- I'm not in the amprnet leadership
 >group thus I can't speak for them and my wager is merely speculation.

It is simple to reply to: since our 44.x.x.x is a *true* official
Internet Class A IP addresses: why it cannot be *fully* routed/used
worldwide since it, after all, is *mainly* managed/governed by the
USA *monsters* Campus computers?

Then, again here, in Europe, invented the 'linux' since 1991; it is
able to manage everything about any TCP/IP techniques and 'bonus' any
AX.25 programs, it is free, and no cost. The new GNU/Debian Linux
distributions arrived to 29 thousands free distributed programs :)

The JNOS2, thanks to Maiko, is one of the *free* applications under a
live development, able for many aspects to manage almost everything for
our goals, so why don't use that? Is it too difficult? Here we are... :)

 >73, Skip
73, gus