[nos-bbs] mbox fbb setting

['Gustavo Ponza']

HI Michael,

technically speaking saying BF is different than B1F as per the 
specification
and that it should be also on practice.

The fact on the JNOS2 is that: while the B2F implementation is an *original*
feature filled on to JNOS2 by Maiko, and it function very well on forwarding
between JNOS2 <> JNOS2 and between JNOS2 <> CMS, the BF SID shown
since the old DOS JNOS and living intact until a few years ago was a perhaps
false and however *incomplete* implementation of that part of FBB protocol.

So, after that discover, Maiko spent many time to understand *what* and
*how* the BF implementation was done... so it is a work in progress, and
not simple to manage... this is one of the main reasons concerned I seem
to catch from the text of the Maiko msg. Perhaps could be a good way
to fully strip all old code and re-implement a new one... :)

73, gus

On 04/03/2016 07:12 AM, Michael Fox - N6MEF wrote:
>
> Hi Gus,
>
> Thanks for the summary.
>
> A correction/clarification:
>
> When I set “mbox fbb 2”, my JNOS responds with BF in the SID, not 
> B1F.  The FBB website describes B1F as different from BF.
>
> http://www.f6fbb.org/protocole.html
>
> Michael
>
> N6MEF
>
> *From:*nos-bbs [mailto:nos-bbs-bounces at tapr.org] *On Behalf Of 
> *'Gustavo Ponza'
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 2, 2016 4:03 PM
> *To:* TAPR xNOS Mailing List <nos-bbs at tapr.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [nos-bbs] mbox fbb setting
>
>
>
>     I wish some of the 'seasoned' guys would say something about this.
>     Sorry
>     if I'm putting any of them on the spot, but I've spent hours and
>     hours on
>     this stuff and it's getting frustrating trying to nail things down :(
>
>
> I'm very sorry about this troubles, and first of all I want to TNX Maiko
> for its efforts on support the hamradio community!
>
> So, go ahead, the possible (so called) FBB flags are:
>
> The flag option may be one of the following:
>
> ·*0* > standard WA7MBL-style forwarding
>
> ·*1* > FBB batched-style forwarding
>
> ·*2* > FBB compressed and batched forwarding (B1F)
>
> ·*3* > B2F compression for WL2K [only for jnos2.0f2 or later]
>
>
> and since the B2F contains the B1F capabilities (owned by FBB and others)
> why come back to 1980s by using the MBL style? No sense!
>
> Since a few years after the progress on B1F and B2F made on the JNOS2
> I removed the old setup and so in the JNOS-2.0j.7v era they remains:
>
> #mbox fbb 0
> #mbox nob2f <callsign> # not more needed as of JNOS-2.0j.4
>
>
> in that situation the JNOS2 reply and confirm to us:
>
> "Default to Mailbox FBB Style Forwarding: 3"
>
> and the related SID shows the FLAGS "B2FHIM$".
>
> About the forwarding capabilities of the actual JNOS2, my tests
> and the daily forwarding confirm the full compatibility with the
> linux xdfbb-7.0.8b (November 2015) and some (NOT ALL) of the
> previous versions.
>
> The 'telnet' setup on the side of xfbb should be:
>
> # Linux AX.25 port
> #P A
> # Telnet port
> P B
> #
> # No compression [N 0]
> N 1
> #
> IF H 00-23
>  S connected failure busy
>  C C IR0RM-1 44.134.32.233 23
>  V i0ojj$Wxxxnnnxxx$W
> ENDIF
>
> mandatory, for now, is to setup 'N 1'.
>
> Note for Maiko: the problem seems reside on the fact that
> the FBB and some other terminal packet programs need a
> transparent TCP connection rather than the full TELNET
> protocol.
>
> On the JNOS2 side set the connection to:
>
> # for xfbb 7.05g/7.0.8 [ir0aab-1] <- telnet fwd OK (N 1)
> telnet 44.134.32.240 6300
>
> For other PBBS software, FBB or not, the only way is
> to forward via the AX.25: it function very OK; example:
>
> ax25 xnet ir0aab-1 i0ojj-3
>
> That's all!
> 1.00 AM here: good night!
>
> 73, gus
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nos-bbs mailing list
> 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/20160403/77abe553/attachment.html>