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

[Jay Nugent]

Greetings Michael (et al),

On Tue, 27 Aug 2013, Michael E. Fox - N6MEF wrote:

> 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.
>
> *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.

    The requirement for the SMTP: in the Subject line is a requirement of 
the WL2K folks, not us.  It is *their* requirement, and it was added to 
their spec just within the last several years.  I *think* they did this 
originally to limit spam that was getting into their system (and going out 
over the air).   *Official* senders knew that without the SMTP: prefix, 
their mail would never get on the air.

    See the WL2K specification at:  http://www.winlink.org/B2F

    It sucks, I agree.  But their system is open to passing big-I Internet 
email over the air, and they have TONS of whitelisting and spam filtering 
in place in order to make this work for them.   The SMTP: prefix was just 
another way to limit the spam.


    Hope this helps to shed a little more light on the subject,

       --- Jay  WB8TKL