Hi all

Has anyone heard from either of these systems?

Trying to reach sysops etc. before I delist them due to inactivity in fsxNet

The Virtual Terminal Joseph Werle bbs.kernelerror.com:10023
El Gato de Fuego BBS John Dovey elgato.fsxnet.nz

With thanks, Paul

... Running Windows is better than washing them!
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/09/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (3:770/100)

Hey Paul,

El Gato de Fuego BBS John Dovey elgato.fsxnet.nz

You could try at his Fidonet-listed addresses, but then again ... do you have to if he's not active .. ? It's up to him to show involvement ...

The simple fact that you have to resort to Fidonet to try to find out speaks for itself ...

\%/@rd
--- DB4 - Sep 03 2021
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Hello Alan,

On Monday October 04 2021 00:22, you wrote to Paul Hayton:

El Gato de Fuego BBS John Dovey elgato.fsxnet.nz

El Gata de Fuego BBS is up and running

It may be running, but it is not up. To be "up" a BSS requires the ability to accept incoming calls and it does not. His binkp node does not accept incoming either.

+ 10:07 [1624] call to 4:92/1@fidonet
10:07 [1624] trying f1.n92.z4.binkp.net [45.33.61.54]...
? 10:07 [1624] connection to 4:92/1@fidonet failed: {W32 API error
10061} Connection refused
10:07 [4048] the queue is empty, quitting...

and I see John in the LITRPG area from time to time. There is some
kind of issue (CGNAT I think) so he can't receive incoming calls so he
has to poll out to pick up mail.

If he is indeed on a CGNAT connection that is very unfortunate, but if that is all he has, he should not be listed the way he is. The way he is listed says that he accepts incoming calls.

The solution of course is to go IPv6. Then he can be listed with the INO4 flag.


Cheers, Michiel
--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)

Hello Alan,

On Monday October 04 2021 03:49, you wrote to me:

It is up and running and he polls periodically.

If he can not accept incoming calls he is not "up".

MvdV>> The solution of course is to go IPv6. Then he can be listed with
MvdV>> the INO4

MvdV>> flag.

IPv6 is not the best option yet, since many nodes don't have IPv6 and
he would still be unconnectable by those nodes.

Accepting incoming calls via IPv6 only is better than not accepting incoming calls at all. IPv6 is the future. The situation of IPv6 only is comparable to the situation of two decades ago when IP only nodes appeared in the nodelist. At that time many nodes were POTS only and they could not connect to those IP only nodes. We survived that ransition period. Now we face a similar transition, the one to IPv6 only.


Cheers, Michiel
--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin: http://www.vlist.eu (2:280/5555)

Alan,

His node is up and polling. His node is not connectable from the outside.

Then he is not a node but a point.

\%/@rd
--- DB4 - Sep 03 2021
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

On 04 Oct 21 05:36:07, Alan Ianson said the following to Michiel Van Der Vlist:

IPv6 is the future.

It is the future but IPv6 only is still a ways off for a lot of nodes.

LOL oh man... please don't get him going on this nonsense again.

The techno-dick - who does not live in Canada I may add - whined about this
for at least a decade, maybe longer, also likely the same time I got the same lecture with the same snide against anyone who dares to stay with IPV4.

Its like you offend his little crusade... maybe its his way of convincing himself of a reason to live. He even cops out of some disagreements with
"hows your IPV6 going?". Like he's trying to teach us simpletons with IPV4 a lesson or something as if we are not aware or incapable of our own conclusion.

In any case he's wrong about Canada especially Bell Canada, my ISP and I believe our country's largest ISP. They will not budge on IPV6 for enterprise/business/corporate customers such as myself. They own huge chunks
of IPV4 address space. I pay for a static IPV4 as part of my contract.

I can still get an IPV4 /29, /27, theres even an ISP that will give me a /25 or even a /24 if desired. I have a client downtown who has both a /24 and /25 and the ISP in question, tier 3 support had said its "no big deal" for them.

And if things do go IPV6 here? So what... then you get IPV6. Case closed...

Nick
--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)

Alan,

Then he is not a node but a point.

John is running a node. His node has technical issues and they do need to be addressed.

I can't speak for John but I suspect he will have a solution in time.

I think he's a lost cause ... has been in Fidonet for a month or 2, two decades ago, figured he improved on the invention of the fire, the wheel and the hot water, saw it didn't work and lost interest ... that's what we're noticing now ...

\%/@rd
--- DB4 - Sep 03 2021
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Alan,

That is ultimately it. When you turn on your modem you go with what you get.

I never turn on my modem ... we respect eachother the way we are and that's it. We have separate rooms as well ...

\%/@rd
--- DB4 - Sep 03 2021
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Alan,

I never turn on my modem ... we respect eachother the way we are and AI>WD> that's it. We have separate rooms as well ...

As long as you are happy together.. ;)

Only week-ends ...

\%/@rd
--- DB4 - Sep 03 2021
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Hello Alan,

On Monday October 04 2021 05:36, you wrote to me:

If he can not accept incoming calls he is not "up".

His node is up and polling. His node is not connectable from the
outside.

So are my points....

IPv6 is not the best option yet, since many nodes don't have IPv6
and he would still be unconnectable by those nodes.

Accepting incoming calls via IPv6 only is better than not
accepting incoming calls at all.

I suppose it is better than nothing, but you will be unconnectable to
a lot of nodes.

At the moment he is unconnectable by ALL nodes. Surely being connectable by the 100+ IPv6 capable nodes in Fidonet is better than that.

My line of reasoning was triggered by you postulating CGNAT as a possible cause of the problem. Don't be fooled by stories about there being no shortage of IPv4 adresses. Yes, the incumbents in the early adopter countries still have enough on the shelve. But the Internet is bigger than Canada and the US. World wide there is a shortage and some ISPs have no choice but to resort to putting their customers behind CGNAT. It will not be much different in many other parts of the world. That John has a CGNAT problem sounds reasonable. Here in Europe mobile providers have been using CGNAT for years. They get away with it because mobile users seldom rum servers. For fixed connections however, CGNAT usually is part of a DS-Lite connection. So I figured there is a fair chance John's ISP actually offers IPv6. In that case, getting rid of the CGNAT may be next to impossible but getting at least partial connectivity may just be a matter of activating IPv6. It is better than nothing.

OTOH, we may be completely on the wrong track. Maybe Ward hit the nail on the head and he has just lost interest. It happens you know. Getting people back into Fidonet is one thing. Making them stay is another. My wet finger estimate of the half life of Fidonet returnees is less than year.

IPv6 is the future.

It is the future but IPv6 only is still a ways off for a lot of nodes.

"Way off" is too pessimistic. Presently we have 108 Fidonet nodes listed as IPv6 capable. But those nodes are all active. Last time I looked there were some 2000 nodes listed in the nodelist. But how much of that is dead wood? I would not be surprised if up to 50% of it is dead wood. Add to that that those 108 IPv6 nodes are the ones that I know about. I would not be surprised if there are a substantial number of IPv6 nodes that I do not know about. I suspect there are quit a few that at least can make outgoing IPv6 calls. Some of them may even be unaware of it themselves. To make outgoing IPv6 calls, one does not have to configure anything if the ISP offers it, the router supports it and one uses an IPv6 capable binkp mailer on an IPv6 capable OS.

Back when I first heard of IPv6 I though we would all be using IPv6 in 2021 but it hasn't happened yet. I don't know why.

I can only concur. When I started maintaining that list of IPv6 nodes some ten years ago, I hoped and expected it to grow faster. In the beginning it did grow exponentially. But then the growth tapered off. I wonder what happened to that pioneer spirit that once made Fidonet florish...


Cheers, Michiel
--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)

El Gato de Fuego BBS John Dovey elgato.fsxnet.nz

He has been posting in the LITRPG echo lately, but using telegram. I will
post a message to him there.

Mike


* SLMR 2.1a * Halloween is *not* Christmas, even though 31 oct = 25 dec
--- SBBSecho 3.12-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Hello Alan,

On Monday October 04 2021 23:30, you wrote to me:

At the moment he is unconnectable by ALL nodes. Surely being
connectable by the 100+ IPv6 capable nodes in Fidonet is better than
that.

IPv6 is not a bad idea, in fact it is a good idea but we are left with
the fact the he will still be unconnectable for a large number (the majority?) of nodes.

Something is better than nothing.

That is what I meant. ATM he is still unconnectable by all.

OTOH, we may be completely on the wrong track. Maybe Ward hit the
nail on the head and he has just lost interest. It happens you know.
Getting people back into Fidonet is one thing. Making them stay is
another. My wet finger estimate of the half life of Fidonet returnees
is less than year.

I haven't seen that. John and I are only linked for one area but he
polls periodically for mail.

That suggests to me that he is interested and doing his part.

To me it just tells us that he has a robot running that polls periodically for mail. No more, no less. That robot may be running without any supervision at all. It may go on for weeks or month without the sysop looking at it or even being aware of it.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)

On 04 Oct 2021 at 12:22a, Alan Ianson pondered and said...

El Gata de Fuego BBS is up and running and I see John in the LITRPG area from time to time. There is some kind of issue (CGNAT I think) so he
can't receive incoming calls so he has to poll out to pick up mail.

I could netmail him and ask him to poll you if stuff is not getting
picked up.

Thanks Al, appreciate the help. I can ping his domain but can't seem to get any replies from mailer etc. I also sent a netmail to him via a Zone 4 system. Hopefully he's all OK. It would be good to get mail going again, else I'll end up delisting him in the coming weeks.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/09/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (3:770/100)

On 04 Oct 2021 at 09:38a, Ward Dossche pondered and said...

You could try at his Fidonet-listed addresses, but then again ... do you have to if he's not active .. ? It's up to him to show involvement ...

The simple fact that you have to resort to Fidonet to try to find out speaks for itself ...

Hi Ward.

I've netmailed him via Fido in the hope of reaching him and also emailed him.

I'm reaching out because as his fsxNet HUB I want to avoid having nodes attached that have packets/files building up over many weeks. So I'm just be a proactive boy to ensure that this problem is resolved. :) Yay me.
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/09/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (3:770/100)

On 04 Oct 2021 at 04:09p, Mike Powell pondered and said...

El Gato de Fuego BBS John Dovey elgato.fsxnet.nz

He has been posting in the LITRPG echo lately, but using telegram. I
will post a message to him there.

Thanks Mike. Hopefully he'll get in touch with me soon. Appreciate the help.

Best, Paul
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/09/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (3:770/100)