From: deon@ALTERANT.remove-yef-this

To: Digital Man
Hi DM,

A discussion in fido was started based on the PATH kludge on one of my echomails.

My system 3:632/509, exported a message and sent it directly to 1:320/259 - and from there would have been forwarded on to other systems.

Nope, I'm direct to 320/219.
P@TH: 320/219 292/854

A downstream system asked, (their view of the PATH kludge is above) why isnt my node address the first in the PATH statement?

Should it be?


...ëîåï

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.19c-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)

From: deon@ALTERANT.remove-7jt-this

To: Digital Man
Re: PATH kludge on exported echomail
By: Digital Man to deon on Wed Feb 02 2022 04:56 pm

Hey DM

Thanks...

I suspect that in your example, one of the echomail systems along the path (most likely 1:320/219) stripped the incoming PATH line(s) when the message was re-packed for a foreign zone.

So to understand if it did do that, can you confirm that you add "my" FTN address to the PATH during sbbsecho export (and thus by definition, it is the only address in the PATH, since I originated the message) ?


...ëîåï

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.19c-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)

From: deon@ALTERANT.remove-7jt-this

To: Digital Man
Re: PATH kludge on exported echomail
By: deon to Digital Man on Thu Feb 03 2022 12:33 pm

I suspect that in your example, one of the echomail systems along the path (most likely 1:320/219) stripped the incoming PATH line(s) when the message was re-packed for a foreign zone.

So to understand if it did do that, can you confirm that you add "my" FTN address to the PATH during sbbsecho export (and thus by definition, it is the only address in the PATH, since I originated the message) ?

So I caught the packet that I export - and indeed I do not have a PATH kludge on the exported mail.

root@d-11-1:/srv/docker/fidohub# hexdump -C ../sbbs/fido/outbound.001/61fb3275.pkt
00000000 fd 01 db 00 e6 07 01 00 03 00 0c 00 28 00 05 00 |............(...| 00000010 00 00 02 00 79 02 40 01 ff 03 00 00 00 00 00 00 |....y.@.........| 00000020 00 00 03 00 01 00 79 02 00 01 12 0e 01 00 03 00 |......y.........| 00000030 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 02 00 fd 01 db 00 |................| 00000040 79 02 40 01 00 01 00 00 30 33 20 46 65 62 20 32 |y.@.....03 Feb 2| 00000050 32 20 20 31 32 3a 33 39 3a 34 33 00 57 61 72 64 |2 12:39:43.Ward| ...
000004c0 2e eb ee e5 ef 0d 0a 2d 2d 2d 20 53 42 42 53 65 |.......--- SBBSe| 000004d0 63 68 6f 20 33 2e 31 34 2d 4c 69 6e 75 78 0d 20 |cho 3.14-Linux. | 000004e0 2a 20 4f 72 69 67 69 6e 3a 20 49 27 6d 20 70 6c |* Origin: I'm pl| 000004f0 61 79 69 6e 67 20 77 69 74 68 20 41 4e 53 49 2b |aying with ANSI+| 00000500 76 69 64 65 6f 74 65 78 20 2d 20 77 61 6e 6e 61 |videotex - wanna| 00000510 20 70 6c 61 79 20 74 6f 6f 3f 20 28 33 3a 36 33 | play too? (3:63| 00000520 33 2f 35 30 39 29 0d 53 45 45 4e 2d 42 59 3a 20 |3/509).SEEN-BY: | 00000530 33 32 30 2f 32 31 39 0d 00 00 00 |320/219....|

Is it a setting I have?


...ëîåï

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.19c-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)

From: digital.man@vert.synchro.net.remove-qw9-this

To: deon
Re: PATH kludge on exported echomail
By: deon to Digital Man on Thu Feb 03 2022 11:20 am

Hi DM,

A discussion in fido was started based on the PATH kludge on one of my echomails.

My system 3:632/509, exported a message and sent it directly to 1:320/259 - and from there would have been forwarded on to other systems.

Nope, I'm direct to 320/219.
P@TH: 320/219 292/854

A downstream system asked, (their view of the PATH kludge is above) why isnt my node address the first in the PATH statement?

Should it be?

It depends on what rules you're following. When zones were introduced to FidoNet and for a long time after, the norm was strip PATH and SEEN-BY lines when the message crossed a zone boundry (because there could be ambiguity between 3:632/509 and 2:632/
509, since neither the zone information is not included in the addresses on these lines).

In the more modern "FidoWeb" world, it's customary to keep the addresses in tact, even when crossing zone boundaries (within FidoNet), since the net/node numbers are now assured to be unique even among all zones (e.g. there can be no 2:103/705 since
there already is a 1:103/705).

I suspect that in your example, one of the echomail systems along the path (most likely 1:320/219) stripped the incoming PATH line(s) when the message was re-packed for a foreign zone.
--
digital man (rob)

Sling Blade quote #15:
Doyle Hargraves: What'cha doin' with that lawn mower blade Karl?
Norco, CA WX: 57.1øF, 15.0% humidity, 7 mph WNW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- Synchronet 3.19c-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)