Was trying to modify phone number validation and saw this:

/* Asshole detector */
if (stristr(szNewPhone, "555-1212") || stristr(szNewPhone, "5551212"))
{
Puts(cantskip);
return TRUE;
}


--- Maximus 3.01
* Origin: Xaragmata / Adelaide SA telnet://xaragmata.mooo.com (3:800/432)

Was trying to modify phone number validation and saw this:

/* Asshole detector */
if (stristr(szNewPhone, "555-1212") || stristr(szNewPhone, "5551212"))
{
Puts(cantskip);
return TRUE;
}

Heh I guess it should match all 555- ;)

Reading other peoples code can be very entertaining..

Bo

--- DayDream/Linux 2.15a
* Origin: The Night Express, Korsoer, nightexp.no-ip.org (2:236/100)

Re: Funny code section
By: Bo Simonsen to Mvan Le on Sun Feb 28 2010 09:43 pm

/* Asshole detector */
if (stristr(szNewPhone, "555-1212") || stristr(szNewPhone, "5551212"))
{
Puts(cantskip);
return TRUE;
}

Heh I guess it should match all 555- ;)

I'm going to remove phone number validation altogether. It's no longer relevant in this day and age and/or is too restrictive for different formats eg. international convention.

/* Asshole detector */
if (stristr(szNewPhone, "555-1212") || stristr(szNewPhone,

"5551212"))

{
Puts(cantskip);
return TRUE;
}

Heh I guess it should match all 555- ;)

I'm going to remove phone number validation altogether. It's no longer ML>relevant
in this day and age and/or is too restrictive for different formats eg. ML>international convention.

Indeed, have you made any changes to maximus except for this one?

Bo

--- DayDream/Linux 2.15a
* Origin: The Night Express, Korsoer, nightexp.no-ip.org (2:236/100)

On Sun 2010-02-28 20:56, Mvan Le (3:800/432) wrote to All:

if (stristr(szNewPhone, "555-1212") || stristr(szNewPhone, "5551212"))

Apparently 555-1212 is Directory Assistance in the US and Canada.

--- timEd/Linux 1.11.b5
* Origin: Blizzard of Ozz, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia (3:633/267.1)

I'm going to remove phone number validation altogether. It's no longer ML>relevant
in this day and age and/or is too restrictive for different formats eg. ML>international convention.

Indeed, have you made any changes to maximus except for this one?

Nah not really. Still just getting familiar with the sources and making tiny patches.

I need a massive refresher of the K&R book because I've forgotten all my C. Progress is very slow.

Version: 3.02-1
Commenced: 01-Feb-2010
Released:

* Changed Maximus version to "3.02-1".
* Added 4-digit year to log messages.
* Added Node number to WFC heading.
* Enhanced S3 build scripts,
o Added "make*.bat" files.
o "max_dirs.cmd" now creates "%DEVROOT%tmp" to be used by Wlink.
o Fixed problem with "BLDROOT%\max\makefile.mk" trying to compile
"english.mad" with "maidn.exe" instead of "maid.exe" eventhough mode=r was set. (This problem occurs when max is built before
utils).
* Updated "MaximusSourceDoc.doc".
* Changes to "Max.doc":
o Added "Appendix I: The Maximus version number" to "Max.doc".
o Added "1.1.1. Why use Maximus".
o Added "1.1.2. Why Maximus is better than <competing_BBS>".

--- Maximus 3.01
* Origin: Xaragmata / Adelaide SA telnet://xaragmata.mooo.com (3:800/432)

On Sun 2010-02-28 20:56, Mvan Le (3:800/432) wrote to All:

if (stristr(szNewPhone, "555-1212") ||
stristr(szNewPhone, "5551212"))

Apparently 555-1212 is Directory Assistance in the US and Canada.

Ah I see. I suppose that should be rejected back in the day when people actually took phone numbers seriously. These days nobody cares :)

--- Maximus 3.01
* Origin: Xaragmata / Adelaide SA telnet://xaragmata.mooo.com (3:800/432)

On Thu 2010-03-04 20:29, Mvan Le (3:800/432) wrote to Andrew Clarke:

Apparently 555-1212 is Directory Assistance in the US and Canada.

Ah I see. I suppose that should be rejected back in the day when
people actually took phone numbers seriously. These days nobody
cares :)

I don't think anybody really cared much back then either :)

--- timEd/Linux 1.11.b5
* Origin: Blizzard of Ozz, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia (3:633/267.1)

Interesting remark..

On Thu 2010-03-04 20:29, Mvan Le (3:800/432) wrote to Andrew Clarke:

Apparently 555-1212 is Directory Assistance in the US and Canada.

Ah I see. I suppose that should be rejected back in the day when
people actually took phone numbers seriously. These days nobody
cares :)

I don't think anybody really cared much back then either :)

I think if you look you will find that to this day there are a series of telephone numbers here in the USA which are in the 555-#### area which are still forbidden to be used for assignment to any person! The reason is that they are 'reserved' for use in the motion picture industry for use in movies so
that people who try to call them cannot reach anything.

Actually, the entire QNODE declaraton and setup file for putting together a very carefully chosen acceptable outbound call number matrix is still quite important to me and I suspect many other people who still support phone dial line BBS operations. Yes, it is true that things have moved largely to 'unlimited' long distance and even local area charge for phone service. But not everywhere and for everyone,especially for those who must use POTS lines for BBS support. It is still important to be able to segregate operations so that only phone numbers one wants the system to be able to dial are actually dialable. That to still guard against run-away cost issues. Where you are actually still charged for every outbound call you make on a per second connection even to a number you are trying to call that doesn't even answer the
phone!

I know. For sure. The LD service I must use here actually DOES bill me for each call to a number outbound even if I don't connect for a minimum of one minute even if that number still just rings and doesn't answer. And they will not change this issue.

Sleep well; OS/2's still awake! ;)

Mike @ 1:117/3001

--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Ziplog Public Port (1:117/3001)

if (stristr(szNewPhone, "555-1212") || stristr(szNewPhone, "5551212

Apparently 555-1212 is Directory Assistance in the US and Canada.

I think it's out-of-state Directory Assistance. Standard Directory
Assistance is 1411. It's also commonly used in movies as a phone
number. Everybody's girlfriend has 555-1212.

... Bother, said Pooh, as he shot that bird in the wing.
___ Mountain Reader - 1.3
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
* Origin: Roach Guts BBS -- telnet://roachguts.com (1:396/60)

I'm going to remove phone number validation altogether. It's no

longer

relevant
in this day and age and/or is too restrictive for different formats ML>eg.
international convention.

Indeed, have you made any changes to maximus except for this one?

Nah not really. Still just getting familiar with the sources and making ML>tiny patches.

Ah that part is the part which takes the most time. Making changes are
easy afterwards.

I need a massive refresher of the K&R book because I've forgotten all my ML>C. Progress is very slow.

Ah cool.

Version: 3.02-1
Commenced: 01-Feb-2010
Released:

* Changed Maximus version to "3.02-1".
* Added 4-digit year to log messages.
* Added Node number to WFC heading.

Nice.

* Enhanced S3 build scripts,
o Added "make*.bat" files.
o "max_dirs.cmd" now creates "%DEVROOT%tmp" to be used by Wlink.
o Fixed problem with "BLDROOT%\max\makefile.mk" trying to compile
"english.mad" with "maidn.exe" instead of "maid.exe" eventhough
mode=r was set. (This problem occurs when max is built before
utils).
* Updated "MaximusSourceDoc.doc".
* Changes to "Max.doc":
o Added "Appendix I: The Maximus version number" to "Max.doc".
o Added "1.1.1. Why use Maximus".
o Added "1.1.2. Why Maximus is better than <competing_BBS>".

It would be interesting to read that file.

Bo

--- DayDream/Linux 2.15a
* Origin: The Night Express, Korsoer, nightexp.no-ip.org (2:236/100)

Re: Funny code section
By: Bo Simonsen to Mvan Le on Thu Mar 04 2010 04:33 pm

* Changes to "Max.doc":
o Added "Appendix I: The Maximus version number" to "Max.doc".
o Added "1.1.1. Why use Maximus".
o Added "1.1.2. Why Maximus is better than <competing_BBS>".

It would be interesting to read that file.

Well, there's no content in those sections yet. Can't release it in that state because people would laugh. Heh.

I'm sure there're some pretty good reasons why Synchronet sucks. Maybe one would be that it takes about 4 or 5 different compilers to compile its source code. It is not cool because too many people use it.

World Group is not open source and not free.

What else.

* Changes to "Max.doc":
o Added "Appendix I: The Maximus version number" to "Max.doc".
o Added "1.1.1. Why use Maximus".
o Added "1.1.2. Why Maximus is better than <competing_BBS>".

It would be interesting to read that file.

Well, there's no content in those sections yet. Can't release it in that ML>state
because people would laugh. Heh.

Heh.. The content is currently "Maximus just rocks"? :)

I'm sure there're some pretty good reasons why Synchronet sucks. Maybe ML>one
would be that it takes about 4 or 5 different compilers to compile its ML>source
code. It is not cool because too many people use it.

I would not say that Synchronet sucks. It has its advantages and its disadvantages. What BBS you are using depends mostly on your taste..

What else.

You want to compare maximus to BBSes in development and mutliplatform?

I guess synchronet is the only one left then..

Bo

--- DayDream BBS/Linux 2.15a
* Origin: The Night Express, Korsoer, nightexp.no-ip.org (2:236/100)

Re: Funny code section
By: Bo Simonsen to Mvan Le on Fri Mar 05 2010 05:30 pm

What else.

You want to compare maximus to BBSes in development and mutliplatform?

I guess synchronet is the only one left then..

I can change that with some cheap overseas labour.

Re: Funny code section
By: Bo Simonsen to Mvan Le on Fri Mar 05 2010 05:30 pm

What else.

You want to compare maximus to BBSes in development and

mutliplatform?

I guess synchronet is the only one left then..

I can change that with some cheap overseas labour.

You mean Indian or Ukrainian labour?

Bo

--- DayDream BBS/Linux 2.15a
* Origin: The Night Express, Korsoer, nightexp.no-ip.org (2:236/100)

Re: Funny code section
By: Bo Simonsen to Mvan Le on Thu Mar 11 2010 08:01 pm

I guess synchronet is the only one left then..

I can change that with some cheap overseas labour.

You mean Indian or Ukrainian labour?

Cheaper than that. I think Indians these days are getting more money ... that's probably why things are being moved to the Phillipines.

I've been told Indian IT graduates are increasingly disenchanted due to the saturated IT market over there.

MvLe> Was trying to modify phone number validation and saw this:

MvLe> /* Asshole detector */
MvLe> if (stristr(szNewPhone, "555-1212") || stristr(szNewPhone,
MvLe> "5551212")) {

yeah, that the information operator number here in the states... it is invalid for a home or data number for anyone... also, the 555-0100 thru 555-0199 are reserved for for fictional use are are guaranteed to "not connect anywhere"... the others in the 555 exchange are and have been allocated... these numbers are
not limited to any specific areacodes, either... 919-555-1212 get the information operator for areacode 919... 800-555-1212 gets the information operator for the 800 toll-free areacode... 225-555-1212 gets the information operator for the 225 areacode... i don't think it'd be a good idea to pull that
validation out ;)

)\/(ark


* Origin: (1:3634/12)

Was trying to modify phone number validation and saw this:

/* Asshole detector */
if (stristr(szNewPhone, "555-1212") || stristr(szNewPhone, "5551212"))
{
Puts(cantskip);
return TRUE;
}

Heh I guess it should match all 555- ;)

no, it shouldn't... one should know how the phone numbers are assigned and for what purposes... especially when coding POTS capable software... consider a system that uses a call-back verifier? if someone is being, as the code says, an asshole, and they put a 555-1212 number in, it will call the information operator... however, 555-0100 thru 555-0199 are guaranteed by the telcos to not
connect anywhere... these are for fictional use like in movies and tv shows... you'd be surprised at how many folk think they can call numbers used in movies and tv shows... you're be more surprised at how many folk actually do dial them
;)

Reading other peoples code can be very entertaining..

i can definitely agree with that :)

)\/(ark


* Origin: (1:3634/12)

Heh I guess it should match all 555- ;)

MvLe> I'm going to remove phone number validation altogether. It's no
MvLe> longer relevant in this day and age and/or is too restrictive for
MvLe> different formats eg. international convention.

i beg to differ... removing it could be a huge mistake that will bite you on the ass really hard :P

)\/(ark


* Origin: (1:3634/12)

MvLe> if (stristr(szNewPhone, "555-1212") ||
MvLe> stristr(szNewPhone, "5551212"))

Apparently 555-1212 is Directory Assistance in the US and Canada.

MvLe> Ah I see. I suppose that should be rejected back in the day when
MvLe> people actually took phone numbers seriously. These days nobody
MvLe> cares :)

i beg to differ again... there are many who do care and if people can't comply with their rules for accessing their system, then they get the boot... i don't know of any /real/ sysops who don't care...

)\/(ark


* Origin: (1:3634/12)

Apparently 555-1212 is Directory Assistance in the US and Canada.

MvLe> Ah I see. I suppose that should be rejected back in the day when
MvLe> people actually took phone numbers seriously. These days nobody
MvLe> cares :)

I don't think anybody really cared much back then either :)

uh, yeah... they did too... how were/are they supposed to be able to verify a caller without one? consider a caller who forgets their password... the sysop can easily call them at their voice number if there's a large set of log entries about an incorrect password... if they haven't been calling or forgotten their password, it likely indicates someone trying to hack the account...

i've also mentioned call-back verifiers and that they pull the number to call back from the user's bbs record... since most systems do not allow for numbers to be duplicated, this is one way of being more sure that someone is who they say they are... if there are family members or roommates calling the same system from the same number, then they can contact the sysop concerning the duplicate number condition and the sysop can then decide how to handle the situation...

it hasn't been all that long ago, guys... POTS is still alive and well and active ;)

)\/(ark


* Origin: (1:3634/12)

Greetings, gentlemen,

On Sun 2038-Mar-14 09:48, mark lewis (1:3634/12) wrote to andrew clarke:

Apparently 555-1212 is Directory Assistance in the US and Canada.

MvLe> Ah I see. I suppose that should be rejected back in the day when
MvLe> people actually took phone numbers seriously. These days nobody
MvLe> cares :)

I don't think anybody really cared much back then either :)

uh, yeah... they did too... how were/are they supposed to be able to
verify a caller without one? consider a caller who forgets their password...

Which I saw happen back in my busy system days. IN fact,
had a disgruntled local sysop who we found out was using his users' passwords to log onto other local boards in their
names.
Yes we had some folks used the same password on every local
board they called, despite warnings not to do this.

it hasn't been all that long ago, guys... POTS is still alive and
well and active ;)

INdeed it is, and although I didn't ever run a cbv I did
voice verify my callers, still do, when necessary.

IN the case of disgruntled former teenage sysop I mentioned
earlier, one of the things that caught him out was that he
was hand entering log on information for one guy, where it
used to happen quite regularly when he'd log on, as he used
a log on script, iirc from Telix.

Regards,
Richard
--- timEd 1.10.y2k+
* Origin: Radio REscue net operations BBS (1:116/901)

Re: Funny code section
By: mark lewis to Mvan Le on Sun Mar 14 2010 09:47 am

i beg to differ again... there are many who do care and if people can't

comply with their rules for accessing their system, then they get the

boot... i don't know of any /real/ sysops who don't care...

I agree, Just today I got a new user validation request from someone who

couldn't leave any information to prove he was a real person. I can imagine

the code being a bit of a pain for callers who telnet in and have no pots

, cell phone, etc. Granted, how many people don't have a cell phone,

voip phone, or land-line phone?



--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
* Origin: Roach Guts BBS -- telnet://roachguts.com (1:396/60)

Re: Funny code section
By: mark lewis to Mvan Le on Sun Mar 14 2010 09:44 am

MvLe> I'm going to remove phone number validation altogether. It's no
MvLe> longer relevant in this day and age and/or is too restrictive for
MvLe> different formats eg. international convention.

i beg to differ... removing it could be a huge mistake that will bite you
on the ass really hard :P

Yeah I suppose.

Rather than hardcode it in the software, it should query a text file like "badphone.txt" or something.

But I have a hard time believing anybody takes BBS phone numbers seriously these days. Replacing it with maybe an IP or home page would make more sense.

As for call-back verifiers (CBV), that should be handled by the CBV software because Maximus has no internal CBV.

Re: Funny code section
By: mark lewis to Mvan Le on Sun Mar 14 2010 09:47 am

MvLe> Ah I see. I suppose that should be rejected back in the day when
MvLe> people actually took phone numbers seriously. These days nobody
MvLe> cares :)

i beg to differ again... there are many who do care and if people can't comply with their rules for accessing their system, then they get the boot... i don't know of any /real/ sysops who don't care...

Are you running a shady or top-secret bbs or something ?

Those /real/ sysops you referred need to get with the times.

Re: Funny code section
By: John Guillory to mark lewis on Sun Mar 14 2010 08:49 pm

I agree, Just today I got a new user validation request from someone who

couldn't leave any information to prove he was a real person. I can

A CBV doesn't prove that the caller is a real person.

imagine
the code being a bit of a pain for callers who telnet in and have no
pots
, cell phone, etc. Granted, how many people don't have a cell phone,

voip phone, or land-line phone?

That number is dwindling to nothingness. And of that nothingness, none call a BBS for any serious work.

MvLe> I'm going to remove phone number validation altogether. It's no
MvLe> longer relevant in this day and age and/or is too restrictive for
MvLe> different formats eg. international convention.

i beg to differ... removing it could be a huge mistake that will bite you
on the ass really hard :P

MvLe> Yeah I suppose.

MvLe> Rather than hardcode it in the software, it should query a text
MvLe> file like "badphone.txt" or something.

that might be a workable idea...

MvLe> But I have a hard time believing anybody takes BBS phone numbers
MvLe> seriously these days. Replacing it with maybe an IP or home page
MvLe> would make more sense.

those can maybe be two additional user data fields... remember, there's still a
lot of POTs capable BBS' out there and many have quite active local user communities... just because we don't see or hear of them in fidonet doesn't mean that they're not still out there ;)

MvLe> As for call-back verifiers (CBV), that should be handled by the CBV
MvLe> software because Maximus has no internal CBV.

the CBV takes the callback number from the user's data profile... if it asked for one, what would be the use of the CBV in the first place? that's one reason
why they are asked for their voice number and their data number... also, there's been many times that i've seen someone online on my bbs that was obviously having problems or was needing assistance while they were online... if they only list phone number, it is rather hard to call them to help if they are using that number for their connection... however, if they list two numbers, then it is a much easier task to call them and walk them thru things while they are online or trying to come online...

methinks you are simply not aware of life outside the internet and 24x7 connectivity... definitely nothing near a "local community" atmosphere :?

)\/(ark


* Origin: (1:3634/12)

MvLe> Ah I see. I suppose that should be rejected back in the day when
MvLe> people actually took phone numbers seriously. These days nobody
MvLe> cares :)

i beg to differ again... there are many who do care and if people can't comply with their rules for accessing their system, then they get the boot... i don't know of any /real/ sysops who don't care...

MvLe> Are you running a shady or top-secret bbs or something ?

no... why would you think that??

MvLe> Those /real/ sysops you referred need to get with the times.

all i'm saying is don't cripple the existing system such that the existing ways
and means no longer work... add new features and capabilities in addition to what's already there... if you want to allow for someone to give their IP number or website address, by all means do so... in another field in the user database... if there's not an existing field for that purpose, then add one... that's what upgrades and enhancements are all about...

until POTS lines are completely done away with, there's no reason to gimp software that works with them...

)\/(ark


* Origin: (1:3634/12)

Re: Funny code section
By: mark lewis to Mvan Le on Fri Mar 19 2010 05:52 pm

number... also, there's been many times that i've seen someone online on my bbs that was obviously having problems or was needing assistance while they were online... if they only list phone number, it is rather hard to call them to help if they are using that number for their connection... however, if they list two numbers, then it is a much easier task to call them and walk them thru things while they are online or trying to come online...

Are you serious ? You actually spend money to -call- people to assist their BBS use ? ...

methinks you are simply not aware of life outside the internet and 24x7 connectivity... definitely nothing near a "local community" atmosphere :?

POTS BBS is dead as far as I'm concerned. Any BBS "local community" are via TCP/IP.

I think that anybody who doesn't have access to the Internet and wants assistance should actually (1) get Internet access, and (2) get assistance from the Web.

I cannot imagine anybody seriously considering using a BBS for serious work. There are far better sources of information on the Web. All SysOps who provide BBS access should setup a bulletin saying "Please use the Internet for serious work, including but not limited to, technical support etc." specifically for all POTS callers.

Re: Funny code section
By: mark lewis to Mvan Le on Fri Mar 19 2010 05:59 pm

MvLe> Are you running a shady or top-secret bbs or something ?

no... why would you think that??

I think CBVs for BBSes are overkill.

In my opinion, if people don't provide a legitimate phone number in the first place; then they probably don't want you knowing their phone number, and they are reasonabliy expected to forfeit those details as a method of contact and/or authentication.

Nobody these days provides their real details on a BBS. And if they did, then they shouldn't. And SysOps who expect people to provide real information are naive.

MvLe> Those /real/ sysops you referred need to get with the times.

all i'm saying is don't cripple the existing system such that the existing ways and means no longer work... add new features and capabilities in addition to what's already there... if you want to allow for someone to
give their IP number or website address, by all means do so... in another field in the user database... if there's not an existing field for that purpose, then add one... that's what upgrades and enhancements are all about...

I have no problem with a CBV querying the user database for a phone number. That's what it should do. However, the checking of legitimate numbers should be handled by the CBV program (including configurable numbers to reject).

Because there's no guarantee that BBS details provided are genuine, the BBS should just be a place to store details rather than verify that they are true (other than logon authentication).

until POTS lines are completely done away with, there's no reason to gimp software that works with them...

Yeah I suppose.

number... also, there's been many times that i've seen someone
online on my bbs that was obviously having problems or was needing assistance while they were online... if they only list phone number,
it is rather hard to call them to help if they are using that number
for their connection... however, if they list two numbers, then it
is a much easier task to call them and walk them thru things while
they are online or trying to come online...

MvLe> Are you serious ? You actually spend money to -call- people to
MvLe> assist their BBS use ? ...

what $$$? we're talking about a local call... not something half way around the
world... local calls don't cost a thing over here...

)\/(ark


* Origin: (1:3634/12)

Chiming in here too Mark and MvLe and all!

number... also, there's been many times that i've seen someone
online on my bbs that was obviously having problems or was needing assistance while they were online... if they only list phone number,
it is rather hard to call them to help if they are using that number
for their connection... however, if they list two numbers, then it
is a much easier task to call them and walk them thru things while
they are online or trying to come online...

MvLe> Are you serious ? You actually spend money to -call- people to
MvLe> assist their BBS use ? ...

Yes and ABSOLUTELY necessary in some cases for Emergency Operations Center (EOC) mission critical military and public service reasons. Read on please.

what $$$? we're talking about a local call... not
something half way around the world... local calls
don't cost a thing over here...

And in MANY cases now in the whole USA there is no such thing as $$ long distance calls anywhere in the whole USA or even into MANY countries using POTS
call techniques. There are now many telephone services here that include *ALL*
long distance calls completely in your monthly phone bill flat rate service charge. Even as I think I am correct in stating that it may even be less than USD $20 a month for such services.

Which absolutely CAN be used in many cases for BBS message and file transfer work, particularly for BACKUP mission critical communication when what most people think is total bliss IP service ** is gone. For however long 'gone' is or is going to be. Please read on.

FidoNet 1/117 here of which I'm the NC has a lot more responsibility that just the 'normal' message stuff that we tend to think is the purpose of FidoNet. Although it has very few nodes published in the formal NodeList, it also has some 50 more PRIVATE nodes which are *NOT* published in the formal NodeList and
have *NEVER* been the subject of a problem for FidoNet as to 'improper' access.
This very special collection of nodes is TOTALLY capable of POTS phone connections for backup and emergency file data and message purposes in case the
normal IP service for an EOC or a medical facility or whatever ceases to be available for whatever reason. But a telephone connection still can be made between two facilities that are desparate to share even low level data and message service.

Don't laugh. It *CAN* and *DOES* happen. Here in the USA, for actual fact, hurricane penetration on the Gulf Coast has taken down the complete electrical power grid operations for entire major land areas for longer than a week at a time. And in certain rural areas, even though now power is there, POTS telephone line operation is still present in that the phone lines, which in many cases are buried cables,are still there, still work, and still connected to rural POTS switches which are kept operational with emergency generator services. I have actually seen East Texas small town medical service which has
POTS service but no IP service for even two weeks that *COULD* access the mission critial 1:117/3000 FidoNet node by no other than POTS phone connections. And in some cases the FidoNet Net 117 *HAS* been used for such emergency data service as was needed. By POTS long distance service work.

Which *CAN*, in the case of ZIPLOG mission critical professional support template sofware for which I am responsible and author, be used for condensed but SERIOUSLY IMPORTANT life and death support for the people that choose to use this techqnique in time of emergency. And I have a formal thank you letter
from the USA ARRL ham radio organization hanging on the wall for proof that this *CAN* be done even all across the world from FidoNet while even operating for test purposes from the ham radio Field Day operations with the fully integrated ZIPLOG managment software template matched to FidoNet. Should this ever be needed and people choose to use the technique. Yes with PRIVATE nodes in the network that DO NOT show up in the FidoNet formal NodeList for VERY good
reasons which I think most reading this can appreciate.

You also BADLY need to realize that there are a whole host of evolving IP service corruption and destruction possibilities that are part of what all of us telecommunications professional folks know is going to be a part of the telecommunications revolution. Which has only, seriously,just begun. That includes wartime and conflict deliberate issues, as well as the threat of EMP pulse destruction of virtually all copper wired technology, as well as what is even less understood, the probablity of Solar Flare massive eruption. Do not laugh. The total loss of the entire power grid operations in the whole world is also possible from solar flare eruptions. Few here know about the last major one we took here on earth in the mid 1800's at the time of the driving of
the Golden Spike when the railroad was first finished connecting the East and West coast of the USA. 1867 from memory here right now.

At that time the communications for the whole affair was by copper wired telegraph instruments and telegraph code. And yes, land line Morse Code is different in the characters than what virtually all of us today know as International Morse Code. A long dash for a number zero instead of what we know as five dashes as in '- - - - -', today. That actual Solar Flare took out
and burned up almost ALL of the telepgraph sounders in the whole USA! As well,
in some places, the electrical charge that the railroad rails picked up, from the electromagnetic pulse that hit us from the sun, actually set the wooden cross ties on fire where it arced across them to the ground from the rails!

Just one nuclear blast sets forth at least a 30,000,000 volt per METER wavefront moving out to the horizon at the speed of light, folks. The last test atomic airborne blast in the Pacific about 650 miles from Hawaii, took out
about half of all the traffic signals in the whole island area in 'sight line' with no ground mountain blockabge, from the US Navy test blast there at the Johnson Island complex. Tough luck if you have a pacemaker heart device. You die.

And true, we *CAN* defend against this type of a problem with fiber optic cable
connected devices and not metal cable connected service. And buried phone lines; not upstairs phone line service. And we *CAN* use correctly designed computer systems with power supplies that *DO* block the pulse pickup from power line and printer and phone connections of sorts. As fact I have a test relay rack server case here on site which I cooperated with the vendor on EMP pulse protection desging which can be certified for such service. But we will no be able to protect any Cell Phones or Ipods or anything like that. Life as we know it will be GONE for who knows how long if we get hit.

But at the final step backwards in providing even food, water, basic medical care and even knowing where to send the first, second, third responders; whatever, we *MUST* have communications programs which *CAN* use ----

PLAIN ORDINARY TELEPHONE NUMBERS FOR ADDRESSING.

Case closed.

Please *DO NOT* remove this from the work on MAX, BINK; Whatever. To do so would be a horrible step in taking away what we *CAN* do for all the world, if we continue to contribute to FidoNet as some of us do still today for reasons I
have shown you above.

It is ABSOLUTELY necessary to preserve the POTS phone number access and use techniques in BBS software.

Sleep well; OS/2's still awake! ;)

Mike @ 1:117/3001

--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Ziplog Public Port (1:117/3001)

HEllo MIke,

On Tue 2038-Mar-23 11:01, Mike Luther (1:117/3001) wrote to Mark Lewis:

Chiming in here too Mark and MvLe and all!

YOur comments are right on the money. I spent a week on
hospital Island in NEw ORleans during Katrina. A building
across the street had one hard wired phone line, not
connected to hospital switching equipment etc. in the
basement which got taken out, which still worked, that one
phone line.
MOst critical comms to/from that hospital complex that week
were taking place by radio, quite a bit of it on the ham
radio we were operating.

Please *DO NOT* remove this from the work on MAX, BINK; Whatever.
To do so would be a horrible step in taking away what we *CAN* do
for all the world, if we continue to contribute to FidoNet as some
of us do still today for reasons I have shown you above.

I"m with you MIke!!!

It is ABSOLUTELY necessary to preserve the POTS phone number access
and use techniques in BBS software.

AS is often said, "preach it brother, preach it!"

Regards,
Richard
--- timEd 1.10.y2k+
* Origin: Radio REscue net operations BBS (1:116/901)

Hi Mike,

number... also, there's been many times that i've seen someone
online on my bbs that was obviously having problems or was needing
assistance while they were online... if they only list phone number,
it is rather hard to call them to help if they are using that number
for their connection... however, if they list two numbers, then it
is a much easier task to call them and walk them thru things while
they are online or trying to come online...

MvLe> Are you serious ? You actually spend money to -call- people to
MvLe> assist their BBS use ? ...

Yes and ABSOLUTELY necessary in some cases for Emergency Operations Center (EOC) mission critical military and public service reasons. Read on please.

what $$$? we're talking about a local call... not
something half way around the world... local calls
don't cost a thing over here...

And in MANY cases now in the whole USA there is no such thing as $$ long
distance calls anywhere in the whole USA or even into MANY countries using POT >call techniques. There are now many telephone services here that include *ALL
long distance calls completely in your monthly phone bill flat rate service
charge. Even as I think I am correct in stating that it may even be less than
USD $20 a month for such services.

Which absolutely CAN be used in many cases for BBS message and file transfer work, particularly for BACKUP mission critical communication when what most
people think is total bliss IP service ** is gone. For however long 'gone' is
or is going to be. Please read on.

And how many of us NOW having calling plans when our Tel. co. requires it.. It's so much easier and CHEAPER to call LD these days. It's not even a thought
any more over here. My problem with POTS these days is that not enough people take advantage of it :(

FidoNet 1/117 here of which I'm the NC has a lot more responsibility that just
the 'normal' message stuff that we tend to think is the purpose of FidoNet. Although it has very few nodes published in the formal NodeList, it also has
some 50 more PRIVATE nodes which are *NOT* published in the formal NodeList an >have *NEVER* been the subject of a problem for FidoNet as to 'improper' access
This very special collection of nodes is TOTALLY capable of POTS phone
connections for backup and emergency file data and message purposes in case th
normal IP service for an EOC or a medical facility or whatever ceases to be available for whatever reason. But a telephone connection still can be made between two facilities that are desparate to share even low level data and message service.

Don't laugh. It *CAN* and *DOES* happen. Here in the USA, for actual fact,
hurricane penetration on the Gulf Coast has taken down the complete electrical
power grid operations for entire major land areas for longer than a week at a time. And in certain rural areas, even though now power is there, POTS telephone line operation is still present in that the phone lines, which in many cases are buried cables,are still there, still work, and still connected to rural POTS switches which are kept operational with emergency generator
services. I have actually seen East Texas small town medical service which ha
POTS service but no IP service for even two weeks that *COULD* access the mission critial 1:117/3000 FidoNet node by no other than POTS phone connections. And in some cases the FidoNet Net 117 *HAS* been used for such emergency data service as was needed. By POTS long distance service work.

Which *CAN*, in the case of ZIPLOG mission critical professional support template sofware for which I am responsible and author, be used for condensed but SERIOUSLY IMPORTANT life and death support for the people that choose to
use this techqnique in time of emergency. And I have a formal thank you lette
from the USA ARRL ham radio organization hanging on the wall for proof that
this *CAN* be done even all across the world from FidoNet while even operating
for test purposes from the ham radio Field Day operations with the fully
integrated ZIPLOG managment software template matched to FidoNet. Should this >ever be needed and people choose to use the technique. Yes with PRIVATE nodes >in the network that DO NOT show up in the FidoNet formal NodeList for VERY goo
reasons which I think most reading this can appreciate.

You also BADLY need to realize that there are a whole host of evolving IP service corruption and destruction possibilities that are part of what all of us telecommunications professional folks know is going to be a part of the telecommunications revolution. Which has only, seriously,just begun. That includes wartime and conflict deliberate issues, as well as the threat of EMP
pulse destruction of virtually all copper wired technology, as well as what is
even less understood, the probablity of Solar Flare massive eruption. Do not laugh. The total loss of the entire power grid operations in the whole world is also possible from solar flare eruptions. Few here know about the last
major one we took here on earth in the mid 1800's at the time of the driving o
the Golden Spike when the railroad was first finished connecting the East and West coast of the USA. 1867 from memory here right now.

At that time the communications for the whole affair was by copper wired telegraph instruments and telegraph code. And yes, land line Morse Code is different in the characters than what virtually all of us today know as International Morse Code. A long dash for a number zero instead of what we
know as five dashes as in '- - - - -', today. That actual Solar Flare took ou >and burned up almost ALL of the telepgraph sounders in the whole USA! As well
in some places, the electrical charge that the railroad rails picked up, from the electromagnetic pulse that hit us from the sun, actually set the wooden cross ties on fire where it arced across them to the ground from the rails!

Just one nuclear blast sets forth at least a 30,000,000 volt per METER wavefront moving out to the horizon at the speed of light, folks. The last
test atomic airborne blast in the Pacific about 650 miles from Hawaii, took ou >about half of all the traffic signals in the whole island area in 'sight line'
with no ground mountain blockabge, from the US Navy test blast there at the
Johnson Island complex. Tough luck if you have a pacemaker heart device. You
die.

And true, we *CAN* defend against this type of a problem with fiber optic cabl
connected devices and not metal cable connected service. And buried phone lines; not upstairs phone line service. And we *CAN* use correctly designed computer systems with power supplies that *DO* block the pulse pickup from power line and printer and phone connections of sorts. As fact I have a test relay rack server case here on site which I cooperated with the vendor on EMP
pulse protection desging which can be certified for such service. But we will >no be able to protect any Cell Phones or Ipods or anything like that. Life as
we know it will be GONE for who knows how long if we get hit.

But at the final step backwards in providing even food, water, basic medical care and even knowing where to send the first, second, third responders; whatever, we *MUST* have communications programs which *CAN* use ----

PLAIN ORDINARY TELEPHONE NUMBERS FOR ADDRESSING.

Case closed.

Please *DO NOT* remove this from the work on MAX, BINK; Whatever. To do so
would be a horrible step in taking away what we *CAN* do for all the world, if >we continue to contribute to FidoNet as some of us do still today for reasons
have shown you above.

It is ABSOLUTELY necessary to preserve the POTS phone number access and use techniques in BBS software.

Most definitely agree here. There is no need to remove POTS access in BBS or Mailer software. It would be a big mistake to do so IMO. Forgive my 'over quoting', I just feel it can't be said enough.

Matter of fact, Mike, do you mind if I put your comments in FidoGazette? We've had some articles there by Richard and this fits right in with his and my ideas.

Take care,
Janis

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag
* Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)

Hi Richard,

To do so would be a horrible step in taking away what we *CAN* do
for all the world, if we continue to contribute to FidoNet as some
of us do still today for reasons I have shown you above.

I"m with you MIke!!!

Hear hear :)

It is ABSOLUTELY necessary to preserve the POTS phone number access
and use techniques in BBS software.

AS is often said, "preach it brother, preach it!"

Perhaps we it would be a good idea write up an operations 'guide' for using switching services on telephone lines and mailers.. you know, RingTone kind of things.. So many sysops have forgotten 'so much' about that kind of thing...

Take care,
Janis

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag
* Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)

HEllo Janis,

On Wed 2038-Mar-24 16:41, Janis Kracht (1:261/38) wrote to Richard Webb:

Hi Richard,

To do so would be a horrible step in taking away what we *CAN* do
for all the world, if we continue to contribute to FidoNet as some
of us do still today for reasons I have shown you above.

I"m with you MIke!!!

<snip>

AS is often said, "preach it brother, preach it!"

Perhaps we it would be a good idea write up an operations 'guide'
for using switching services on telephone lines and mailers.. you
know, RingTone kind of things.. So many sysops have forgotten 'so
much' about that kind of thing...

YEp, there are those using the distinctive ring thing quite
successfully. I"m working on something which spins off
Mike's comments here, but I"d like to see you go forward
with some more groundwork first in fg. THat's not for this
echo I guess <g.>

bringing it back around, wehther the back end behind
something web accessed or pots, Maximus has some good
facilities for message handling geared for tech support or
other support services which could also be quite useful in
such capacities, even with the occasional pots access.
The "ownership" and other audit trail capabilities of
Maximus messaging systems make it quite usable pretty much
out of the box in such an application.


Regards,
Richard
--- timEd 1.10.y2k+
* Origin: Radio REscue net operations BBS (1:116/901)

Hi priceless Janis!

Hi Mike,

It is ABSOLUTELY necessary to preserve the POTS
phone number access and use techniques in BBS software.

Most definitely agree here. There is no need to
remove POTS access in BBS or Mailer software. It
would be a big mistake to do so IMO. Forgive my 'over
quoting', I just feel it can't be said enough.

Matter of fact, Mike, do you mind if I put your
comments in FidoGazette? We've had some articles there
by Richard and this fits right in with his and my
ideas.

You are perfectly welcome to post it. With editorial right to correct the couple grammar errors that I accidentally got in there, chortle!

However, I also stress that in no way do I wish to offend anyone as to cause them to run away from also carrying the BBS tools forward into the future for steps up the technology ladder as well. I also know VERY well that the whole process of going up the ladder with what is really needed for the future of us all is not at all easy, nor can be done in any short period of time spent at this. I am deeply appreciative of the work that is being done to carry us all forward.

From a FidoNet member who still actually does have an original floppy diskette with the program on it in my collection.

Take care,
Janis

You too Janis. And all of us here in this treasure of a mission.

Sleep well; OS/2's still awake! ;)

Mike @ 1:117/3001

--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Ziplog Public Port (1:117/3001)

Re: Funny code section
By: mark lewis to Mvan Le on Mon Mar 22 2010 08:24 pm

what $$$? we're talking about a local call... not something half way around the world... local calls don't cost a thing over here...

How much does it cost for you to make a local call ?

what $$$? we're talking about a local call... not something half
way around the world... local calls don't cost a thing over here...

MvLe> How much does it cost for you to make a local call ?

see above... nothing... why?

)\/(ark


* Origin: (1:3634/12)

Most definitely agree here. There is no need to remove POTS access in JK>BBS or Mailer software. It would be a big mistake to do so IMO.
Forgive my 'over quoting', I just feel it can't be said enough.

The only case I can think of where it has been done is synchronet.
However with the pots<->telnet gateway software it's possible to get
POTS call. It just seems strange in some way, since we are used to
all BBS software has POTS support.

The nice thing about developing a UNIX-only BBS is that tcp/ip or
modem doesn't really matter.

Bo

--- DayDream BBS/Linux 2.15a
* Origin: The Night Express, Copenhagen, nightexp.no-ip.org (2:236/100)

For your note ..

Re: Funny code section
By: mark lewis to Mvan Le on Mon Mar 22 2010 08:24 pm

what $$$? we're talking about a local call... not
something half way around
the world... local calls don't cost a thing over here...

How much does it cost for you to make a local call ?

You can actually subscribe to a POTS phone service, which is handled by IP operations, for USD $12.95 a *YEAR* here in the USA that allows you to make unlimited POTS calls not only 'locally' but anywhere in the whole USA for any amount of time .. even solid connections for 24X7 ... for that same $12.95 US Dollars a year. A little over $1 a month!

Granted, the baud rates are of 'question' as to speed, so that web browsing and
all that are not what you would get on DSL or high speed service. However, at POTS modem rates, though I don't use this, it is told to me that you can get 'normal' POTS modem speed data service for what FidoNet has to offer for BBS use.

And on most POTS services now your standard monthly cost also permits the same kind of service.

Sleep well; OS/2's still awake! ;)

Mike @ 1:117/3001

--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Ziplog Public Port (1:117/3001)

Hi priceless Janis!

Hi Mike,

Matter of fact, Mike, do you mind if I put your
comments in FidoGazette? We've had some articles there
by Richard and this fits right in with his and my
ideas.

You are perfectly welcome to post it. With editorial right to correct the couple grammar errors that I accidentally got in there, chortle!

Great :) Thanks so much.

However, I also stress that in no way do I wish to offend anyone as to cause them to run away from also carrying the BBS tools forward into the future for steps up the technology ladder as well. I also know VERY well that the whole
process of going up the ladder with what is really needed for the future of us
all is not at all easy, nor can be done in any short period of time spent at
this. I am deeply appreciative of the work that is being done to carry us all
forward.

Agree there as well. We need to move forward in a way that makes sense. I also
feel like there are bits of our hobby that stand the chance of just being forgotten by members - which I don't think is a benefit to our network.

From a FidoNet member who still actually does have an original floppy diskette
with the program on it in my collection.

That is very cool <grin>

Take care,
Janis

You too Janis. And all of us here in this treasure of a mission.

Agreed <smile>

Take care,
Janis

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag
* Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)

Hi Richard,

I"m with you MIke!!!

<snip>

AS is often said, "preach it brother, preach it!"

Perhaps we it would be a good idea write up an operations 'guide'
for using switching services on telephone lines and mailers.. you
know, RingTone kind of things.. So many sysops have forgotten 'so
much' about that kind of thing...

YEp, there are those using the distinctive ring thing quite
successfully.

It was one of the things that carried us through the days of expenses of operating a bbs and feeding our families <vbg> People didn't have to worry (and still don't) about giving an extra dime to the phone company. Even now with our calling plan, I can make it a touch easier for nodes to stay connected
to Fidonet by calling and delivering their mail as soon as it comes in.

I"m working on something which spins off
Mike's comments here, but I"d like to see you go forward
with some more groundwork first in fg. THat's not for this
echo I guess <g.>

I dunno.. if it has to do with someone leaving what's not broke in the Maximus code, it belongs hehe

bringing it back around, wehther the back end behind
something web accessed or pots, Maximus has some good
facilities for message handling geared for tech support or
other support services which could also be quite useful in
such capacities, even with the occasional pots access.
The "ownership" and other audit trail capabilities of
Maximus messaging systems make it quite usable pretty much
out of the box in such an application.

Agree there... I played with the linux maximus code way back.. I should pick it
up again. When I switched drives here, I didn't bother copying it over
<g>.. this drive has tons of space so.. :)

Take care,
Janis

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag
* Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)

Hi Bo,

Most definitely agree here. There is no need to remove POTS access in
BBS or Mailer software. It would be a big mistake to do so IMO.
Forgive my 'over quoting', I just feel it can't be said enough.

The only case I can think of where it has been done is synchronet.

Well, yes and no. Sbbs has hooks to Argus, which can run in modem or tcpip mode.. i.e., you don't have to run Sbbs in BinkD (tcpip only) mode. It'll run in Arcmail attach or BSO mode which enables the connection via Argus Mailer which can do either modem or tcpip. I'm not sure about concurrent setups though...

However with the pots<->telnet gateway software it's possible to get
POTS call. It just seems strange in some way, since we are used to
all BBS software has POTS support.

Yes, know what you mean there. Hey, did you include anything like that in your
software? (gentle nudge <grin>)

The nice thing about developing a UNIX-only BBS is that tcp/ip or
modem doesn't really matter.

It's sure easy.. but then it seems EVERYTHING is easier on this linux box <smile>.. and to think I resisted the idea hehe.. seriously, when I was running OS/2/Bink/Max and my controller card died, and we honest-to-god didn't have a dime to spend on a new controller card, I remember racking my brain to come up with another way to stick with my setup.. then I loaded Linux, and the darn OS said, "compiling code to fix buggy controller" ... I was sold <g>.

We didn't have Max source then (Thanks for making it available, Scott <g>) for linux, and we only had a shell of a linux Binkley mailer from what I remember back then but... wouldn't it be cool to run it again <grin>..

I may do that one of these days <g>

Take care,
Janis

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag
* Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)

HI Janis,

On Thu 2038-Mar-25 12:33, Janis Kracht (1:261/38) wrote to Richard Webb:

YEp, there are those using the distinctive ring thing quite
successfully.

It was one of the things that carried us through the days of
expenses of operating a bbs and feeding our families <vbg> People
didn't have to worry (and still don't) about giving an extra dime to
the phone company. Even now with our calling plan, I can make it a
touch easier for nodes to stay connected to Fidonet by calling and delivering their mail as soon as it comes in.

I'm debating whether I should do that eventually but even
that added expense right now ...

I"m working on something which spins off
Mike's comments here, but I"d like to see you go forward
with some more groundwork first in fg. THat's not for this
echo I guess <g.>

I dunno.. if it has to do with someone leaving what's not broke in
the Maximus code, it belongs hehe

Yup, understood, more in netmail, should already be on your
system as I crashed it to you.

bringing it back around, wehther the back end behind
something web accessed or pots, Maximus has some good
facilities for message handling geared for tech support or
other support services which could also be quite useful in
such capacities, even with the occasional pots access.

<snip>

Agree there... I played with the linux maximus code way back.. I
should pick it up again. When I switched drives here, I didn't
bother copying it over <g>.. this drive has tons of space so.. :)

THere ya go.

LIke you I can drop off mail whenever thanks to my calling
plan, one reason I offered a pots only without a feed one
recently, and it's been working out well for him I think.

Regards,
Richard
--- timEd 1.10.y2k+
* Origin: Radio REscue net operations BBS (1:116/901)

Re: Funny code section
By: Mike Luther to Mvan Le on Thu Mar 25 2010 08:30 am

You can actually subscribe to a POTS phone service, which is handled by IP operations, for USD $12.95 a *YEAR* here in the USA that allows you to make unlimited POTS calls not only 'locally' but anywhere in the whole USA for an amount of time .. even solid connections for 24X7 ... for that same $12.95 U Dollars a year. A little over $1 a month!

Where is this at?

--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
* Origin: Roach Guts BBS -- telnet://roachguts.com (1:396/60)

Hi Richard,

YEp, there are those using the distinctive ring thing quite
successfully.

It was one of the things that carried us through the days of
expenses of operating a bbs and feeding our families <vbg> People
didn't have to worry (and still don't) about giving an extra dime to
the phone company. Even now with our calling plan, I can make it a
touch easier for nodes to stay connected to Fidonet by calling and
delivering their mail as soon as it comes in.

I'm debating whether I should do that eventually but even
that added expense right now ...

That's understandable - I know areas of this country are different. It's always been that way, sadly enough.

I"m working on something which spins off
Mike's comments here, but I"d like to see you go forward
with some more groundwork first in fg. THat's not for this
echo I guess <g.>

I dunno.. if it has to do with someone leaving what's not broke in
the Maximus code, it belongs hehe

Yup, understood, more in netmail, should already be on your
system as I crashed it to you.

Yep.. was busy making cookies.. decided to do that instead of making dinner <vbg> but I will reply :)

Agree there... I played with the linux maximus code way back.. I
should pick it up again. When I switched drives here, I didn't
bother copying it over <g>.. this drive has tons of space so.. :)

THere ya go.

Yep, just need the eternal "time" that seems to escape me so often <g>

LIke you I can drop off mail whenever thanks to my calling
plan, one reason I offered a pots only without a feed one
recently, and it's been working out well for him I think.

Yeah, that's good :)

Take care,
Janis

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag
* Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)

If you have an IP connection to start with,

Re: Funny code section
By: Mike Luther to Mvan Le on Thu Mar 25 2010 08:30 am

You can actually subscribe to a POTS phone service,
which is handled by IP
operations, for USD $12.95 a *YEAR* here in the USA
that allows you to make
unlimited POTS calls not only 'locally' but
anywhere in the whole USA for an
amount of time .. even solid connections for 24X7
... for that same $12.95 U
Dollars a year. A little over $1 a month!

Where is this at?

I think you'll find it is called Majic Jack.

I was looking at this for OS/2 use against my IP, but it is a Windows application, I think they are working to port that to Linux, but .. sigh .. OS/2 ain't so familiar to whatever.

However, if you wanted to use VMWare for a Windows application under OS/2 or somehow Linux when that gets to whatever, I'd guess you could do it that way. Virtually all of the DSL & Cable service stuff here at College Station, Texas, is around USD $29 a month for totally unlimited POTS calls where ever you want to go.

Sleep well; OS/2's still awake! ;)

Mike @ 1:117/3001

--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Ziplog Public Port (1:117/3001)

Re: Funny code section
By: mark lewis to Mvan Le on Thu Mar 25 2010 06:42 am

MvLe> How much does it cost for you to make a local call ?

see above... nothing... why?

It costs 25 cents per local call in Australia.

can understand why it doesn't bother you to make the call.

Re: Funny code section
By: Mike Luther to John Guillory on Thu Mar 25 2010 11:01 pm

I think you'll find it is called Majic Jack.

Oh, $19.99/yr, I have 2 actually... I was also thinking it was a POTS that
allowed one to hook up a modem to it and dial-out.... ;-) I'm actually
giving skype a try, the quality sounds better than magic jack.... But for
Magic Jack, you can buy a thin-client off ebay that allows you to plug the
magic jack in and you don't have to worry about the magic jack software running on your computer....

--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
* Origin: Roach Guts BBS -- telnet://roachguts.com (1:396/60)

MvLe> How much does it cost for you to make a local call ?

see above... nothing... why?

MvLe> It costs 25 cents per local call in Australia.

it costs at least that much at the pay phone booth in town if you can locate one...

MvLe> can understand why it doesn't bother you to make the call.

exactly... it has been that way for well over 40 years over here... long distance was the one that cost and "in state" long distance was more expensive than "out of state"... meaning that if i called somewhere in the western mountains of north carolina, that call would cost me more than a call to texas or california... so, in fidonet, it was cheaper for me to go out-of-state for my mail feed since my net and coordinator were in-state but long distance to me...

and that's not the only fun in the game, either... we're on the boundary line between two phone companies... some 15-20 years ago, they were long distance to
each other... we have a phone line from each of those phone companies and back then, it was long distance to call from one end of the house to the other... in
fidonet, i was able to use this to our advantage... folks on the one side would
call me with mail destined for someone on the other side... drop it off on my machine for a local call and then another of my nodes would take that same mail
and make it available for the others on the otherside when they called in... the folk using that capability of my service really enjoyed it ;)

)\/(ark


* Origin: (1:3634/12)

Mmmmmmmm John .....

Re: Funny code section
By: Mike Luther to John Guillory on Thu Mar 25 2010 11:01 pm

I think you'll find it is called Majic Jack.

Oh, $19.99/yr, I have 2 actually... I was also
thinking it was a POTS that allowed one to hook up
a modem to it and dial-out .... ;-) I'm actually
giving skype a try, the quality sounds better than
magic jack.... But for Majic Jack, you can buy a
thin-client off ebay that allows you to plug the
magic jack in and you don't have to worry about the
magic jack software running on your computer....

Interesting!

I gotta investigate this. One of my good technifriends from the 1970-80's went
to Majic Jack for linking he and his grownup gone away children. It has been a
while since we talked about this. We are in the USA 979 area code here. His Majic Jack 'area code' is in the 512 area code here. Which in that calling anywhere makes no technical difference.

But that COULD make a BBS difference unless you know how to do discrete number setup for QNODE in your Nodelist configuration, chuckle. And, of course could be an issue if your NC was in 979 and your BBS was in 512 even though it might be one block away in town.

At the time we talked about this a while back, this gentleman, Byron Young, a really good tech fellow with computers who is totally oriented toward MAC equipment, was the one who told me that Majic Jack was moving toward a defined MAC interface and that, of course, no work on OS/2 was even on the radar. Byron suggested that I get a simple WIN box to just interface Majic Jack alone and for no other Internet use. However, I've not even thought about that madness and don't intend to hobble up ANY itme which used NETBIOS over TCP/IP on my systems here.

IN talking about this with someone else, they alerted me that there is a big hoopla going on in Congress now, filed by what I think I recall was Verizon initially, about how Majic Jack and this stuff is cratering the whole 'normal' POTS area code 'definitions' about what a POTS number is supposed to be and how
to respectfully handle the entire 'normal' POTS telephone frame operations for their switches.

High Ho, High Ho, it's up the laddie we go, chortle!

Sleep well; OS/2's still awake! ;)

Mike @ 1:117/3001

--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: Ziplog Public Port (1:117/3001)

If you look at my Origin line, you will notice that my bbs is both POTS and TCP/IP! it has been since I returned to Fidonet.

--- Maximus/UNIX 3.03b
* Origin: Planet Maca's Opus (860)738-7176 (1:142/7176)

The only case I can think of where it has been done is synchronet. However with the pots<->telnet gateway software it's possible to get
POTS call. It just seems strange in some way, since we are used to
all BBS software has POTS support.

That is one of the reasons I left Synchronet and returned to Max. that use of shims under Linux gave me problems. I mean really, a agetty to a telnet connection is a real touchy thing. Never mind how Bob Swindell felt that maintaining a old school bbs interface was too old. We are talking about this same topic on the 2012forum.com. Rob Bast wants to consider upgrading from PhpBB to Vbulletin. No one wants to do that as people like the older ways of doing things. No one wanted the Adobe Shockwave flash. We want to be able to communicate.

Now as for dialup support. Keep it in! I NEED IT! as my bbs is both dialup and telnet.


--- Maximus/UNIX 3.03b
* Origin: Planet Maca's Opus (860)738-7176 (1:142/7176)

Actually, it doesn't mention the IP URL (oops. just as good as it is hardly reliable sometimes as my DSL has fits of Narcolepsy. ;) but for those who really want my URL it is
telnet://pinkrose.dhis.org

Michele Marie Dalene


--- Maximus/UNIX 3.03b
* Origin: Planet Maca's Opus (860)738-7176 (1:142/7176)

However with the pots<->telnet gateway software it's possible to

get

POTS call. It just seems strange in some way, since we are used to
all BBS software has POTS support.

That is one of the reasons I left Synchronet and returned to Max. that MMD>use of shims under Linux gave me problems. I mean really, a agetty to a MMD>telnet connection is a real touchy thing. Never mind how Bob Swindell MMD>felt that maintaining a old school bbs interface was too old. We are MMD>talking about this same topic on the 2012forum.com. Rob Bast wants to MMD>consider upgrading from PhpBB to Vbulletin. No one wants to do that as MMD>people like the older ways of doing things. No one wanted the Adobe MMD>Shockwave flash. We want to be able to communicate.

I also think it's a bad solution..

Now as for dialup support. Keep it in! I NEED IT! as my bbs is both MMD>dialup and telnet.

Amazing that my POTS implementation works.. I just tested it once or so..

Bo

--- DayDream BBS/UNIX (Linux) 2.15a
* Origin: The Night Express BBS, Copenhagen, nightexp.no-ip.org (2:236/100)