[nos-bbs] JNOS mbox fbb # vs. FBB forward.sys N #

Sun Apr 3 12:49:16 EDT 2016

Thanks Gus.

Yes, the various tid bits of documentation seem to be a bit self-contradictory and hard to align.

“how can be demonstrated?”

I have a forwarding partner who is a long-time FBB user and has been very helpful in testing JNOS to FBB forwarding.  In fact, some of the extra logging of proposals in 2.0j.7v is due to him sending me information about strange JNOS behavior that didn’t appear in the JNOS log.  Also, previous attempts to use mbox fbb 1 or 2 resulted in protocol errors which were hard to understand due to no proposal logging.  I sent his FBB logs to Maiko, who has been generous with his time to add the extra logging so we can see what’s going on.

We have been run 7 JNOS machines for the last 6 years, one of which is primarily for testing.  So I can help test this stuff.  That’s a contribution I can make to the group since I haven’t written a C program in over 15 years and probably forgot more than I learned!  To do that, I need to understand more of the details.  Hence, my questions.

BTW, the observed strange behavior mentioned above is:

*       When JNOS connects to FBB (mbox fbb 0), JNOS proposes a bulletin, which FBB accepts, then JNOS disconnects without sending it.  It continues to propose the same bulletin every time it connects, until …

*       When FBB (N 0) connects to JNOS, and starts reverse forwarding, JNOS proposes the same bulletin, FBB accepts, and JNOS sends it.  After that, it doesn’t propose it any more.  But the same thing will happen with another bulletin later.

On the FBB side, the log shows the proposals.  But on the JNOS side, the proposals were not shown.  So Maiko has added the proposal logging into 2.0j.7v.  Unfortunately, the proposal logging does not occur unless both sides are using FBB forwarding (i.e. mbox fbb > 0).  So I’m going to set one machine to mbox fbb 1 and another to mbox fbb 2, both talking to the same FBB forwarding partner.  And we’ll see what we see.  More as I learn it …

Michael

N6MEF

From: nos-bbs [mailto:nos-bbs-bounces at tapr.org] On Behalf Of 'Gustavo Ponza'
Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2016 5:55 AM
To: TAPR xNOS Mailing List <nos-bbs at tapr.org>
Subject: Re: [nos-bbs] JNOS mbox fbb # vs. FBB forward.sys N #

Ah ah, briefly saying, all the items you exposed below are
incommensurable among them.

Fbb forwarding protocols can operate either in ASCII or binary compressed modes.

The three versions of FBB protocol are : 

*	Ascii basic protocol <http://www.f6fbb.org/protocole.html#Basic> 
*	Binary compressed protocol version 0 <http://www.f6fbb.org/protocole.html#version0> 
*	Binary compressed protocol version 1 <http://www.f6fbb.org/protocole.html#version1> 

Each version is backwards compatible with the previous one.

The values related to the N switch below are referred to some
features (BIN, BIN+RESUME, XForwanding) added to *FBB PBBS*,
repeat the *PBBS software*, and have nothing to do with the so
called *FBB protocol*.
So, indicating N 1, simply means to force the FBB *PBBS* to use
ONLY the standard FBB protocol.

On 04/03/2016 07:32 AM, Michael Fox - N6MEF wrote:

Gus, can you explain further your comment below about mandatory “N 1” on the FBB side compared to the following …

>From http://www.f6fbb.org/fbbdoc/fmtforwa.htm I read that the FBB forward.sys file can contain:

N (number)

Assigns the standard forward protocol (MBL/RLI) for the specified BBS.

  1 = FBB forwarding allowed

  2 = FBB+BIN forwarding

  4 = FBB+BIN+Resume

  8 = XFWD

  Ex: N 15 = Sum of all protocols (default)

My understanding is that “N 0” is actually just old-style, non-batched forwarding, like our “mbox fbb 0”.

If you are correct that “N 1” is required on the FBB side for FBB-style forwarding with JNOS, then according to the above info, “N 1” is apparently just standard, batched FBB forwarding with no compression (SID option “F”).  And that would be the equivalent of “mbox fbb 1” on the JNOS side.

Today, I understand that saying the word "FBB protocol"
it is intended the  Binary compressed protocol version 1 <http://www.f6fbb.org/protocole.html#version1> 
and then how this is related and matching to the "mbox fbb (x)"
switch, being the JNOS2 a work in progress (see my previous msg),
how can be demonstrated?

Michael

gus

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  <mailto:nos-bbs at tapr.org> <nos-bbs at tapr.org>
Subject: Re: [nos-bbs] mbox fbb setting

[clipped]

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

_______________________________________________
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/20160403/559c2f92/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 786 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/nos-bbs_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20160403/559c2f92/attachment.png>