Meanwhile, everyone else could standardize on zone 0, net 0,
region 0, with just the node number being significant. All
the relevant software could be modified to accept zeros in
the appropriate positions. Or, if that were impractical, then
pick an arbitrary zone number: 1, 4, or 6 (the latter two
being isomorphic to IP version numbers).

Your zero zone/region/net proposal will not further the future of Fidonet at
all. Yes, if we could take our DeLorean back 30 years we could make a lot of things better. But who could see the birth of the WWW and subsequent demise of the Fidonet ten years before it happened?

And your future vision seems to miss the fact that IP numbers soon will be as archaic as the technology that you so obviously despise.

Maybe you haven't read the magazine that this echo is all about? ATM there are e.g. 77 systems connected via IPv6, 31 of them has a ::f1d0:<zone>:<net>:<node> style host address. So we are not all as ignorant as
you think.

I think you owe all the Fidonet programmers a little more respect. Especially those who came after the WWW. Binkp, binkd, Argus and JamNNTPd springs to mind.


..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)

Re: Are all fidonetters ignorant?
By: Bj”rn Felten to Dan Cross on Thu Mar 21 2019 07:49 pm

Meanwhile, everyone else could standardize on zone 0, net 0,
region 0, with just the node number being significant. All
the relevant software could be modified to accept zeros in
the appropriate positions. Or, if that were impractical, then
pick an arbitrary zone number: 1, 4, or 6 (the latter two
being isomorphic to IP version numbers).

Your zero zone/region/net proposal will not further the future of Fidonet at all.

It would make getting a node number trivial and clear out the
dead wood.

Yes, if we could take our DeLorean back 30 years we could make a lot of things better. But who could see the birth of the WWW and subsequent demise of the Fidonet ten years before it happened?

It was obvious if you were part of the technical community that
did it. I hate to burst your bubble, but Fidonet was never more
than a hobbyist footnote. Now hobbyists would like to advance
it because hey, that's what hobbyists do, but any energy around
doing so is squashed by people who can't let go of the status
quo. Poppycock. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

And your future vision seems to miss the fact that IP numbers soon will be as archaic as the technology that you so obviously despise.

I'm pretty sure you must be confused about something.

Maybe you haven't read the magazine that this echo is all about? ATM there are e.g. 77 systems connected via IPv6, 31 of them has a ::f1d0:<zone>:<net>:<node> style host address. So we are not all as ignorant as you think.

Weren't you the guy talking about the WWW on the ARPANET the
other day?

I think you owe all the Fidonet programmers a little more respect. Especially those who came after the WWW. Binkp, binkd, Argus and JamNNTPd springs to mind.

Perhaps you should give the Internet some more respect. All
of those things were built on the technology that basically
killed Fidonet as you knew it. UUCP was far more technically
advanced and predated Fidonet.

There's a reason Fidonet did not attract the professional and
research crowds; perhaps you wondered at one point what it was?
--- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

There's a reason Fidonet did not attract the professional and
research crowds; perhaps you wondered at one point what it was?
--- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Main one I can think of is, no more market therefore no money to made. We are all very lucky for the few developers still around.

Terry

... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
* Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)