Date: Tue, 27.11.12 21:23
> 26 Nov 2012 14:44:10, you wrote to me:
> >>> >> We do not support IPv6 in the phone number field, do we?
> >>> CS> There is no inherent reason not to. The field by definition was
> >>> CS> longer to support the needs of some countries where the
> >>> international
> AV>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> AV>> This wasn't written by me!
> ml> then you need to fix your quote reflowing...
> It works, so it doesn't need fixing.
> JFYI: quote prefix must not contain spaces.
Lets kill the quoter method bashing ok? None work perfectly in tandem
anymore. Lets do what others do and learn to read around it.
> The topic (use of "phone number" field) may be of general interest.
> >>> CS> dial number is longer. Japan for example has a longer one.
> >>> Are strings like 2a01:ba80::900d:f001:dead:f001 allowed in phone
> >>> field?
> CS>> Probably not but there's a few tricks that could be used.
> AV>> Can you show some?
> CS>> tinyurl comes to mind as worth looking at.
> AV>> HTTP redirects have nothing to do with neither TCP, nor Fidonet.
> ml> they do if one is using http(s) for a FTN mail transfer method ;)
> Which FSP describes that protocol?
Possibly one not written. Lots of things are not documented but people are
doing them anyways. HTTP/s has been used in the USA quite a few times. It
was nodelist documented as a generic IP:(URL:port)
> AV>> And it seems like we're falling to offtopic here - let's move to
> AV>> FTSC_PUBLIC
> ml> why is this not on topic in the FTSC area? it is like numerous other
> ml> topics that have wandered about over the years...
> For now, the common practice is to store either "-Unpublished-" string or
> telephone number in this field. Also, some unwise people try to keep IP
> addresses in this field; this imposes a risk of misdialed numbers for some
> braindead mailers, but does anyone care?
> Obviously, this field does not allow anything except "-Unpublished-" or
> /^[0-9][0-9\-]+[0-9]$/ (being an FTSC member, you are expected to be able to
> understand regexes), so the Andre Grueneberg's joke quoted above ("We do not
> support IPv6 in the phone number field, do we? " was just a joke, and at
> least one of the readers (me) was unpleasantly surprised seeing the answer
> "There is no inherent reason not to." :-/
There is no inherent reason why it can not be changed. I do not like the
idea, but if some remain adamant that -Unpublished- must also have pvt
associated, there's going to need to be a fix for IPV6 nodes. The main fix
most use outside Z2 is 000-0-0-0-0 which any dialer can be set to ignore.
Either way, the important part is to let information flow and to format ways
to make it work among all of us.
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
* Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS telnet://shenks.synchro.net (1:275/100)