• Issues with PING functionality

    From Flavio Bessa@4:80/1 to All on Wed Apr 13 19:13:54 2022
    Hello folks,

    I have been testing this new PING functionality that came with A47 release of Mystic. So far so good, but apparently the PONG responses that I am sending to John Dovey@4:920/69 are being treated as bad packets.

    Could I ask if anyone could send a PING request to my system? It's a simple netmail to PING user, my address is 4:80/1. Please let me know if the response arrives corrupted to you.

    Thanks a lot!

    Flavio.

    ... Origin of Life? Just check my refrigerator...

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: Fidonet Brasil - R80 Internet Gateway (4:80/1)
  • From Alan Ianson@1:153/757 to Flavio Bessa on Wed Apr 13 18:01:16 2022
    Could I ask if anyone could send a PING request to my system? It's a simple
    netmail to PING user, my address is 4:80/1. Please let me know if the response
    arrives corrupted to you.

    I sent a couple, one routed that is still parked in my outbound until picked up and another direct that is at your node now but may be in your unprotected inbound.

    --- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-6
    * Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)
  • From Flavio Bessa@4:80/1 to Alan Ianson on Wed Apr 13 22:21:20 2022
    On 13 Apr 2022, Alan Ianson said the following...
    I sent a couple, one routed that is still parked in my outbound until picked up and another direct that is at your node now but may be in your unprotected inbound.

    Thanks Alan, I can see from my logs here that two PING responses were sent towards 1:153/757. Please let me know if they were correctly received or ended up at your BAD echomail directory.

    ... A Meteor is an example of a rock star.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: Fidonet Brasil - R80 Internet Gateway (4:80/1)
  • From Alan Ianson@1:153/757 to Flavio Bessa on Wed Apr 13 18:52:46 2022
    I sent a couple, one routed that is still parked in my outbound until
    picked up and another direct that is at your node now but may be in your
    unprotected inbound.

    Thanks Alan, I can see from my logs here that two PING responses were sent towards 1:153/757. Please let me know if they were correctly received or ended up at your BAD echomail directory.

    I have no netmail in my netmail area or any bad packets here.

    However I see this in my logs..

    This is the netmail I sent to ping @ 4:80/1 via 4:920/1.

    220413 17:49 BMT: 1:153/757.0 -> 4:80/1.0, 139 bytes
    220413 17:49 BMT: Alan Ianson -> Ping [Ping]
    220413 17:49 Routing netmail to 4:80/1.0 via 4:920/1.0
    220413 17:49 Creating new attach 23e7a7a1.pkt to 4:920/1.0

    This packet was received from 1:320/219.

    220413 18:06 Processing packet 569d17e6.pkt from 1:320/219.0, 250 bytes.
    220413 18:06 BMT: 1:80/1.0 -> 1:153/757.0, 57 bytes
    220413 18:06 BMT: -> []
    220413 18:06 BMT: 1:80/1.0 -> 1:153/757.0, 57 bytes
    220413 18:06 BMT: -> []

    The From and subject are blank. I suspect this packet was grunged somehow but I don't have the packet to inspect.

    Can you either set your mailer to reply directly or through 4:920/1 and we'll see if we get better results?

    Let me know if you'd like me to try again.

    --- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-6
    * Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)
  • From Tommi Koivula@2:221/1.1 to Flavio Bessa on Thu Apr 14 08:55:52 2022
    Hi Flavio.

    13 Apr 22 19:13:54, you wrote to All:

    Hello folks,

    I have been testing this new PING functionality that came with A47 release of Mystic. So far so good,
    but apparently the PONG responses that I am sending to John Dovey@4:920/69 are being treated as bad
    packets.

    Could I ask if anyone could send a PING request to my system? It's a simple netmail to PING user, my
    address is 4:80/1. Please let me know if the response arrives corrupted to you.

    I sent pings few moments ago, crash and routed.

    No replies yet.

    'Tommi

    ... \\ZPO has been up for: 450 day(s), 17 hour(s), 33 minute(s), 11 second(s) ---
    * Origin: Point One (2:221/1.1)
  • From Michiel van der Vlist@2:280/5555 to Flavio Bessa on Thu Apr 14 09:29:35 2022
    Hello Flavio,

    On Wednesday April 13 2022 19:13, you wrote to All:

    Could I ask if anyone could send a PING request to my system? It's a simple netmail to PING user, my address is 4:80/1. Please let me know
    if the response arrives corrupted to you.

    Two ping requests are in the pipe. One crash, one routed.

    I will try to test the TRACE functionality later.


    Cheers, Michiel

    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
    * Origin: ZC1 certified techno-dick (2:280/5555)
  • From Michiel van der Vlist@2:280/5555 to Flavio Bessa on Thu Apr 14 10:13:28 2022
    Hello Flavio,

    Thursday April 14 2022 09:29, I wrote to you:

    Two ping requests are in the pipe. One crash, one routed.

    I will try to test the TRACE functionality later.

    No response from your PING robot yet. But I noticed something odd in the via lines of a ping to 464 routed through your system:

    @Via 2:280/5555 @20220414.073614.608.UTC FMail-W32(Pack) 2.1.3.7-B20170919
    @Via 0:0/0 @20220414.043431.UTC Mystic 1.12 A47
    @Via 4:90/1 @20220414.043743 FMail/Win32 1.60+
    @Via 1:229/426 @20220414.033728 D'Bridge 4
    @Via 1:229/426@fidonet @20220414.073729.UTC O/T-Track+ 2.85
    @Via 2:280/464 @20220414.074202.227.UTC FMail-lnx64(Toss) 2.1.0.18-B20170815

    Note the 0:0/0 in the via line generated by your system. The UTC time stamp is also wrong.


    Cheers, Michiel

    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
    * Origin: ZC1 certified techno-dick (2:280/5555)
  • From John Dovey@4:920/69.1 to Michiel van der Vlist on Thu Apr 14 09:03:29 2022

    Hello Flavio,

    Thursday April 14 2022 09:29, I wrote to you:

    Two ping requests are in the pipe. One crash, one routed.

    I will try to test the TRACE functionality later.

    No response from your PING robot yet. But I noticed something odd in the via lines of a ping to 464 routed through your system:

    @Via 2:280/5555 @20220414.073614.608.UTC FMail-W32(Pack) 2.1.3.7-B20170919 @Via 0:0/0 @20220414.043431.UTC Mystic 1.12 A47
    @Via 4:90/1 @20220414.043743 FMail/Win32 1.60+
    @Via 1:229/426 @20220414.033728 D'Bridge 4
    @Via 1:229/426@fidonet @20220414.073729.UTC O/T-Track+ 2.85
    @Via 2:280/464 @20220414.074202.227.UTC FMail-lnx64(Toss) 2.1.0.18-B20170815

    Note the 0:0/0 in the via line generated by your system. The UTC time stamp is also wrong.


    Flavio,
    this might be a hint. The message I get with grunged packets has to do with an invalid DateTime...

    JD

    --- AfterShock/Android 1.6.8
    * Origin: Firecat Mobile (4:920/69.1)
  • From Tommi Koivula@2:221/1.1 to Michiel van der Vlist on Thu Apr 14 17:54:22 2022
    Hi Michiel.

    14 Apr 22 10:13:28, you wrote to Flavio Bessa:

    No response from your PING robot yet. But I noticed something odd in the via lines of a ping to 464
    routed through your system:

    ..

    @Via 4:90/1 @20220414.043743 FMail/Win32 1.60+
    @Via 1:229/426 @20220414.033728 D'Bridge 4
    @Via 1:229/426@fidonet @20220414.073729.UTC O/T-Track+ 2.85
    @Via 2:280/464 @20220414.074202.227.UTC FMail-lnx64(Toss) 2.1.0.18-B20170815

    Strange routing from zone 4 to zone 2.

    * Origin: ZC1 certified techno-dick (2:280/5555)

    'Tommi

    ---
    * Origin: Point One (2:221/1.1)
  • From John Dovey@4:920/69.1 to Flavio Bessa on Thu Apr 14 10:16:02 2022

    Hello folks,

    I have been testing this new PING functionality that came with A47 release of Mystic. So far so good, but apparently the PONG responses that I am sending to John Dovey@4:920/69 are being treated as bad packets.

    Could I ask if anyone could send a PING request to my system? It's a simple netmail to PING user, my address is 4:80/1. Please let me know if the response arrives corrupted to you.

    Thanks a lot!

    Flavio.

    Flavio,
    The commit to sbbsecho.c looks as if it could be the fix. I'll give it a try later and let you know.

    All the best
    John


    --- AfterShock/Android 1.6.8
    * Origin: Firecat Mobile (4:920/69.1)
  • From Michiel van der Vlist@2:280/5555 to Tommi Koivula on Thu Apr 14 21:40:19 2022
    Hello Tommi,

    On Thursday April 14 2022 17:54, you wrote to me:

    @Via 4:90/1 @20220414.043743 FMail/Win32 1.60+
    @Via 1:229/426 @20220414.033728 D'Bridge 4
    @Via 1:229/426@fidonet @20220414.073729.UTC O/T-Track+ 2.85
    @Via 2:280/464 @20220414.074202.227.UTC FMail-lnx64(Toss)
    2.1.0.18-B20170815

    Strange routing from zone 4 to zone 2.

    Indeed. AFAIK, ZC4 and ZC2 have direct links, so why not use that instead of routing via Z1?


    Cheers, Michiel

    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
    * Origin: ZC1 certified techno-dick (2:280/5555)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Flavio Bessa on Fri Apr 15 09:42:47 2022
    Flavio,

    Could I ask if anyone could send a PING request to my system?

    I did and nothing came back.

    Remember, you and I entertain a direct link ...

    \%/@rd

    --- DB4 - 20220222
    * Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)
  • From Rob Swindell@1:103/705 to John Dovey on Fri Apr 15 11:01:10 2022
    Re: Issues with PING functionality
    By: John Dovey to Flavio Bessa on Thu Apr 14 2022 10:16 am

    The commit to sbbsecho.c looks as if it could be the fix. I'll give it a try later and let you know.

    The SBBSecho commit you're referring to had nothing to do with the corrupted PING-response packet problem you're encountering. I know we already discussed this in a Synchronet-specific echo, but just for everyone else's understanding.
    --
    digital man (rob)

    Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #69:
    SEXYZ = Synchronet External X/Y/ZMODEM file transfer protocol driver
    Norco, CA WX: 63.3øF, 49.0% humidity, 2 mph ESE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.15-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)
  • From John Dovey@4:920/69.1 to Ward Dossche on Fri Apr 15 12:47:42 2022

    Flavio,

    Could I ask if anyone could send a PING request to my system?

    I did and nothing came back.

    Remember, you and I entertain a direct link ...

    Ward,
    even with a direct link, the ping responder should reply correctly. Flavio and I have pretty much figured out that the problem lies with the Mystic implimentation of ping and he's reported it as such to the developer.

    all the best
    John
    --- AfterShock/Android 1.6.8
    * Origin: Firecat Mobile (4:920/69.1)
  • From John Dovey@4:920/69.1 to Rob Swindell on Fri Apr 15 13:19:47 2022

    Re: Issues with PING functionality
    By: John Dovey to Flavio Bessa on Thu Apr 14 2022 10:16 am

    The commit to sbbsecho.c looks as if it could be the fix. I'll give it a
    try later and let you know.

    The SBBSecho commit you're referring to had nothing to do with the corrupted PING-response packet problem you're encountering. I know we already discussed this in a Synchronet-specific echo, but just for everyone else's understanding. --
    digital man (rob)

    Thanks Rob. I've tested the fix and seen it works. The packet problem has been reported to the Mystic dev.

    All the best
    John

    --- AfterShock/Android 1.6.8
    * Origin: Firecat Mobile (4:920/69.1)
  • From Michiel van der Vlist@2:280/5555 to Flavio Bessa on Sun Apr 17 10:30:32 2022
    Hello Flavio,

    Thursday April 14 2022 10:13, I wrote to you:

    No response from your PING robot yet.

    I tried again. One ping crash, one routed.

    No response after more than 24 hours.

    It just doesn't seem to work. :(


    Cheers, Michiel

    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
    * Origin: ZC1 certified techno-dick (2:280/5555)
  • From Tommi Koivula@2:221/360 to Michiel van der Vlist on Sun Apr 17 19:07:58 2022
    * Originally in FIDOTEST
    * Crossposted in MYSTIC

    Thursday April 14 2022 10:13, Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Flavio Bessa:

    No response from your PING robot yet. But I noticed something odd in the via
    lines of a ping to 464 routed through your system:

    @Via 2:280/5555 @20220414.073614.608.UTC FMail-W32(Pack) 2.1.3.7-B20170919 @Via 0:0/0 @20220414.043431.UTC Mystic 1.12 A47
    @Via 4:90/1 @20220414.043743 FMail/Win32 1.60+
    @Via 1:229/426 @20220414.033728 D'Bridge 4
    @Via 1:229/426@fidonet @20220414.073729.UTC O/T-Track+ 2.85
    @Via 2:280/464 @20220414.074202.227.UTC FMail-lnx64(Toss) 2.1.0.18-B20170815

    Note the 0:0/0 in the via line generated by your system. The UTC time stamp is
    also wrong.

    I noticed the same thing happening in another Mystic. This one is running A48.

    ===
    Via 2:221/6.6 @20220417.155028.UTC hpt/w32-wc 1.9 2022-04-14
    Via 0:0/0 @20220417.114640.UTC Mystic 1.12 A48
    Via 2:221/6 @20220417.155056.UTC hpt/lnx 1.9 2022-02-13
    Via 2:221/1 @20220417.155144.UTC O/T-Track+ 2.85
    ===

    'Tommi

    ---
    * Origin: * RBB * Lake Ylo * Finland * (2:221/360)
  • From Michiel van der Vlist@2:280/5555 to Tommi Koivula on Sun Apr 17 22:19:14 2022
    Hello Tommi,

    On Sunday April 17 2022 19:07, you wrote to me:

    Note the 0:0/0 in the via line generated by your system. The UTC
    time stamp is also wrong.

    I noticed the same thing happening in another Mystic. This one is
    running A48.

    Via 0:0/0 @20220417.114640.UTC Mystic 1.12 A48

    A48 indeed. So the bugs have not bneen fixed yet. Now why am I not surprised... :(


    Cheers, Michiel

    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
    * Origin: ZC1 certified techno-dick (2:280/5555)