[nos-bbs] New 2.0j.3 Winlink smtp feature

Tue Aug 27 07:47:57 EDT 2013

Michael,

> Gus,
> 
> You are incorrect (and also rude).  We don't know each other and you have no idea what I know or don't know.

my intention was far to be offending or for any other odd purposes.

However, the 'SMTP:' prefix *is not* an invention for JNOS2 but it
is a strict *requirement* of the WinLink 2000 project, so, since
(thanks to Maiko) the JNOS2 become, with version 2.0j.3, *fully
compliant* to WL2K we *have to use it* with no exception.

To summarize: the actual JNOS2 features on the WL2K environment are:

sending and receiving emails (inbound and outbound) 'to' and 'from'
<callsign at winlink.org>  (i.e. i0ojj at winlink.org)

or 

sending and receiving emails (inbound and outbound) 'to' and 'from'
any commercial email addresses; i.e. to send an email to me, just
type on the address:

SMTP:g.ponza at tin.it

on the the contrary: if you send an email from your commercial
address to my WL2K address just type on your mailer:

i0ojj at winlink.org

and, on the subject put the prefix '//WL2K' as:

//WL2K this is my email subject...

that's all

73, gus i0ojj

------------------
> *IF* we were on Winlink and wanted to send to the SMTP world, a prefix of "smtp:" might make sense.  (Well, actually, one would think the CMS would be smart enough to look at the address format and figure that out.  And, in fact, from the telnet interface on CMS, Winlink does send to Internet addresses with or without the smtp: prefix.)
> 
> But we are NOT on Winlink.  We're on JNOS.  The message flow is the opposite direction.  And JNOS is already SMTP.  So I stand by my statement.  It makes no sense to specify "smtp:" at all.  But it is especially wrong to prefix an address with "smtp:" in order to send to a non-SMTP system.  That's just wrong.  To go from SMTP to Winlink, if a prefix is really needed, then the prefix could be "winlink:" or "wl2k:" or something like that. 
> 
> But I argue that a prefix is not necessary at all.  Specifically:
> 1)  The user shouldn't be required to change the destination address to overcome some interoperability problem that only occurs in certain circumstances which the user is unaware of.  Do we have the user enter "fbb:" when sending to an FBB BBS?  No, that would be silly.  The user should only be required to put in the proper destination address and the system (or sysop) should figure it out from there.  
> 2)  If the JNOS system has an SMTP gateway configured, then a JNOS message addressed to callsign at winlink.org will go out immediately via SMTP to the Winlink MXs, just like it would for any other Internet email user.  There is no need to configure or wait on a forwarding session.  There is no need for a prefix.  I just tested this and it works just fine, both directions.
> 3)  If JNOS system does NOT have an SMTP gateway and needs to use the BBS forwarding function to connect to the CMS via telnet, then the rewrite file could have a single rule: 
> 	*@winlink.org  wl2k
> That gets everything into a mailbox that can be forwarded.  But, Winlink has this 3rd party issue.  So we need a mechanism to kick in the extra "magic" that the "smtp:" prefix currently causes (whatever that is).  But that should be a directive in the forward.bbs file because it is something that pertains only to that specific forwarding connection.  It should not be something the user has to enter.  For example, we have "!" = "eschew FBB compression" which can be applied to an individual forwarding definition.  So maybe a "/" could be used to denote "use special winlink secret sauce".
> 
> Bottom line, there's no reason to add confusion or complexity to the user experience on JNOS just because Winlink does it.  The destination address is the destination address.  Let's not make it more complicated than it needs to be.
> 
> I hope this can be revisited.
> 
> Michael
> N6MEF
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nos-bbs-bounces at tapr.org [mailto:nos-bbs-bounces at tapr.org] On Behalf Of Gustavo Ponza
> Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 11:04 PM
> To: TAPR xNOS Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [nos-bbs] New 2.0j.3 Winlink smtp feature
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> your following bla, bla, bla, denote that the WL2K CMS world is completely unknown to you since, among the its help instructions, may be read:
> 
> ------------
> SP <Destination(s)>  Send a personal text message to the destination(s) indicated. Destinations may be a radio callsign or "SMTP:<email_address>" 
> 
>    (NOTE! be sure to include the colon after the SMTP!)  
> 
>    Multiple destinations should be seperated by ";" or ","
> 
>    Example:
>    SPW4ABC;SMTP:Johndoe at aol.com;W1AW;SMTP:president at whitehouse.gov
> 
> You will be prompted for a subject of the new message and then prompted for the message body.
> 
> For the message body enter any text. End with /EX on a separate line.
> ------------
> 
> So, you may refer to both Maiko papers and (perhaps) some group msgs, together with the massive docs found on winlink.org site (in english
> language) for a comprehensive understanding :)
> 
> gus i0ojj
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2013-08-26 at 21:22 -0700, Michael E. Fox - N6MEF wrote:
> > Ugg.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > I just read the release notes for 2.0j.3.  I was particularly happy to 
> > see progress on Winlink connectivity.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > BUT, the “smtp:” prefix is a real problem.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > The release notes say to use “smtp:” as a prefix to addresses that 
> > will be sent to Winlink.  Huh?
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Common sense would say to use a prefix like “smtp:” when you want to 
> > send an SMTP message.  But, since JNOS uses SMTP anyway, that’s not 
> > necessary and is actually undesirable.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Common sense would say to use a prefix like “wl2k:” or “winlink:” to
> > send to Winlink.    So why would the prefix be called “smtp:”?  If the
> > prefix signals JNOS to do something specific for Winlink, then why 
> > wouldn’t the prefix be “winlink:” or “wl2k:”?
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Put another way, the explanation to users will be something goofy
> > like:
> > 
> > If you are sending to Winlink and NOT a regular Internet SMTP address, 
> > then add a prefix of “smtp:” to the destination address.
> > 
> > If you are sending to a regular Internet SMTP address, do NOT use the 
> > “smtp:” prefix.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > With all due respect, (truly!), unless I’m missing something, that’s 
> > really messed up.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Michael
> > 
> > N6MEF
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > nos-bbs mailing list
> > nos-bbs at tapr.org
> > http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/nos-bbs
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nos-bbs mailing list
> nos-bbs at tapr.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/nos-bbs
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nos-bbs mailing list
> nos-bbs at tapr.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/nos-bbs