[nos-bbs] Bulletin flood handling

Sat Aug 9 07:35:19 EDT 2014

Thanks Bob.

So, if I read what you're saying correctly, then the answers to my three
topics are:

1)  no flood - you forward anyway ("I will forward all the bulletins I
receive")

2)  topic-based vs. flood-based - you sort and forward based on the flood
only

3)  @local flood - you don't use it ("I will forward all the bulletins I
receive")

Is that right?

Michael

N6MEF

From: nos-bbs-bounces at tapr.org [mailto:nos-bbs-bounces at tapr.org] On Behalf
Of Boudewijn (Bob) Tenty
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 5:12 PM
To: TAPR xNOS Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nos-bbs] Bulletin flood handling

I just sort them based on area  @area  ww (world),  eu, vk,  etc. only  and
don't sort them based on the topic as topics change all the time.
I will forward all the bulletins I receive. 

Sorting based on topics is too much work for ax25 bulletins I think.

Bob VE3TOK

On 14-08-08 12:27 PM, Michael E Fox - N6MEF wrote:

I'd like to get some clarification from the broader group on the generally
accepted/expected way to handle bulletin floods.  I guess this is a broader
topic than just for NOS, but I'm constrained by the capabilities/limitations
of JNOS so I'd like to know what other JNOS users do.

I'm looking for feedback on a few key points:

1)  no flood

I've been told that a bulletin addressed to "topic" (no @flood) should
remain local on the machine and not be flooded to forwarding partners.  I've
even received snarky emails from other sysops when I forward a bulletin that
did not have a flood in the address.  However, the rewrite files from others
I've see routinely have rules such as:

atv*       atv

or 

wx*       wx

That is, no distinguishing between atv*@* and atv*.  Everything gets put
into the atv mailbox/area.  Then the forward.bbs files from those same
sysops forward those areas to partners.  This means that all bulletins, with
or without a flood are sent to forwarding partners.  And, if everyone does
that, then no flood is essentially the same as @ww.

Question:  Do most people separate how they handle topic* from topic*@*?  If
yes, how?  If no, then do you just flood everything?

2)  topic-based vs. flood-based rewrites

Most of the rewrite files I've seen start with a list of topics that the
sysop wants to group into areas.  This makes it easier for the reader to
find something of interest.  Example:

ibm*                      comp

linux*                    comp

mac*                     comp

Then, anything else that's not listed above gets lumped into flood-based
mailboxes.  Example:

*@noam             allnoam

*@ww                  allww

But then the whole list (comp, allnoam, allww) gets forwarded to the
forwarding partners.  Of course, a forwarding partner in Europe would not be
forwarded the allnoam mailbox.  But they would get the comp mailbox, even if
there is stuff in the comp mailbox with @noam floods.  So, in essence, if
everyone uses topic-based rewrites, then everything that goes into a topic
area ends up being flooded everywhere.

Question:  Is this what most people do?  If not, how do you handle splitting
bulletins into topics for your users while still doing the expected thing
for each different flood?

3)  @local flood

I've been told that the @local flood (i.e. topic at local) should stay on the
local machine.  In other words, it's sort of a pseudo-flood or anti-flood in
that it explicitly designates that the bulletin should not be
flooded/forwarded to others.  But I've not seen that used in the rewrite
files I've seen.

Question;  Is the @local "flood" in general use?  If so, how are you
handling it?

Michael

_______________________________________________
nos-bbs mailing list
nos-bbs at tapr.org <mailto:nos-bbs at tapr.org> 
http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/nos-bbs

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/nos-bbs_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20140809/5d9723b4/attachment.html>