[nos-bbs] Bulletin flood handling

[Michael E Fox - N6MEF]

Thanks Gustavo.  But that doesn't really address my three topics below.  Can you be specific about what you do in each of the three cases described below?

Michael
N6MEF

> 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?
> >