In-Reply-To: IP ers revenge...

["Jack Spitznagel" <kd4iz@kd4iz.ampr.org>]

> Hi,  Having been a BBS op, with all those left over caught-in-the-middle
> masonry, coniving tendencies, I don t understand why the IP programming
> community is so leary of putting in the hooks to have BBS s talk thru
> NOS nodes.

Simple, volume of traffic (and nature, ax.25>>tcp/ip)
actually abrogrates (sic) the agreements that allow us to
set up a gateway. For instance... I am doing this gateway
with the tacit approval of our network management... so
long as there is no AXIP, no chance for cross over in
either direction (44. <> any other net), and volume of
traffic does not become excessive. The problem I see with
ax.25 bbs services is that they have saturated both
standard and net/rom paths nationally and made packet
operation unpleasant for those of us who don't like to play
with BBS's.

> Here in the Chicago area, the IP system could gobble up the BBS
> system as a sub-part, thanks to the PacketTEN sites around. We have 3 now.
> 2 of the 4 original 220/9.6 KB sites using NETROM, are now PacketTEN s.

Most parts of the country are not chicago, limited to
1200/2400 baud ops with vanilla TNC's... one active HS
route into our "backward" areas would gridlock us!

> Whatever system is out there, its going to need a buletin server.

NNTP blows BBS's doors off for bulletins (and could use LZW or
VJ type of compression depending on NOS flavor... the ONLY
BBS that can do this well is the FBB system!) and the
forthcoming release of the VIEW mailer will include an NNTP
reader.

> I could just as easily put a for sale add in the TCP-GROUP, as a person
> on a RLI system could addess a for sale add to ALL. THere are even im-
> plimentations of the RLI style BBS that do not permit sending messages to
> ALL, if they are bulletins.

Sure... if you want to face the flames... but at the NOS
server end, a node would have to support a "broadcast"
alias for a 4sale@kd4iz.ampr.org to get to other users...
NNTP would spool out just this sort of stuff and the
end-users would receive it and read-it "off air" rather
than having it endlessly scrolled over the air by every
browser that checks in (and consuming too much bandwidth).

I don't think it is a matter of revenge or conspiracy, it
just is a "preference" of the majority of individuals
attracted to tcp-ip... They are like public tv and radio
patrons (as an example)... they don't want to be besieged
by what they perceive to be the trivial noise of
advertizing or uninteresting "factoid".

I don't want to seem to flame at you about this, it is just
a real touchy issue among many.... please try to understand
why telco-style BBS's are irrelevant in the internet world,
they may even eventually be a "paradigm" that needs to be
re-examined in amateur radio!

| jack spitznagel
| Internet:   jks@giskard.uthscsa.edu
|             spitznagel@thorin.uthscsa.edu
| Bitnet:     spitznagel@uthscsa
| AmprNet:    kd4iz@sat.ampr.org
| CIS:        76044,476