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

Tue Aug 27 14:44:48 EDT 2013

Greetings all...
First my disclaimer: I am not terribly current with JNOS or with Winlink2000;
But I have used both and am trying to understand how the combination can
be useful and what additional considerations may be factors in the SMTP:
specification.

Both systems were originally designed around radio links, and smtp was added.
Now both systems have useful internet interfaces, but we sometimes don't
maintain a clear picture of how things can (or might) function without it.
Winlink supports both HF and VHF relay links as does JNOS, that can be
configured to support 'internet-outage' operations. I don't have experience
to answer all my questions, so I toss this out to continue the exercise.

Perhaps a local/regional internet outage is affecting the local JNOS
network, but a HF link can be established from a JNOS node to a Winlink HF
node. Possibly there is a need to differentiate what is to be relayed to
another JNOS node via Winlink, as compared to what is to be delivered to
the internet, when the Winlink network finds internet connectivity.

This can become a very wide-ranging and broad-scope of features, but
the supported interface functions have to be based upon requirements,
or common criteria of interoperability. Gosh - this sounds like some
of the meetings I attend at work. I'd hope I'm not just clouding the picture.

Again, I have not seen any recent JNOS docs to include the Winlink interface,
so I have some reading to do - as this could become very powerful.
Both systems are very powerful in my mind in an everyday world, but really
show their best in a 'worst-case' scenario, with limited 'internet transport'.

Please others, chime in and help fill in the blanks...
   Thanks  /;^)

> Michael,
>
> On Tue, 2013-08-27 at 08:59 -0700, Michael E. Fox - N6MEF wrote:
>> Gus,
>>
>> I think I understand the point you're trying to make.  But, if so, it is
>> simply false.
>>
>> 1)  Winlink has no ability to place address format "requirements" on JNOS or
>> any other SMTP MTA.  SMTP address formats are defined by IETF RFC, not the
>> Winlink organization.
>> 2)  Sending a message from an SMTP MTA addressed to "callsign at winlink.org"
>> works just fine.
>> 3)  Sending a message from an SMTP MTA addressed to
>> "smtp:callsign at winlink.org" fails because "smtp:callsign at winlink.org" is not
>> a valid SMTP address.
>
>
> Nope! the 'SMTP:' is required to send to *commercial emails* and
> NOT for 'winlink.org' addresses (read hamradio callsigns)...
>
> Perhaps I'll be not so skilled on english language but I wrote as an
> example my commercial address i.e. g.ponza at tin.it (which require the
> 'SMTP:' prefix on the 'To:' address field... and not in the 'Subject:'
> field as already read in other email).
>
> If the above isn't fully clear, I don't further insist.
>
> 73, gus i0ojj
>
>
>> So saying we "have to use it" (i.e. that JNOS has to add "smtp:" before
>> Winlink addresses) is simply false.  And because Winlink is not the IETF, it
>> will always be false.
>>
>> The "smtp:" prefix *may* be used by Winlink clients to designate that the
>> email goes out to the SMTP world.  But, again, that's is for messges from
>> Winlink *TO* SMTP, as the prefix suggests.  JNOS is the REVERSE direction:
>> from SMTP, *TO* Winlink.  So even if JNOS needs some way to initiate a
>> different set of handling rules when sending to Winlink, the prefix "smtp:"
>> would not be right.
>>
>> But even Winlink doesn't "require" the use of the "smtp:" prefix.  I sent
>> messages using Outpost connected to the CMS with telnet and they worked with
>> and without the "smtp:" prefix.  So, it's evidently not even a requirement
>> for Winlink clients!
>>
>> Winlink DOES impose a subject line restriction (must start with "//WL2K")
>> but that has nothing to do with the address.
>>
>> Perhaps to move this forward, I'll ask this question:
>> What EXACTLY does JNOS do differently if I address a message as
>> "smtp:user at domain" vs. just "user at domain"?
>>
>> Michael
>> N6MEF
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nos-bbs-bounces at tapr.org [mailto:nos-bbs-bounces at tapr.org] On Behalf
>> Of Gustavo Ponza
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 4:48 AM
>> To: TAPR xNOS Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [nos-bbs] New 2.0j.3 Winlink smtp feature
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>

-- 
  #  Alan Sieg, WB5RMG since 1976
  #  http://about.me/alansieg
  #  http://wb5rmg.wordpress.com
  #  wb5rmg(at)amsat(dot)org AMSAT#20554