Re: ????

Pablo Saratxaga (srtxg@chanae.alphanet.ch)
15 Nov 1999 16:41:16 +0100

Kaixo!
Li 14 Nov 1999 14:37:32 +0100,
Marco d'Itri <md@linux.it> scrţjheut:

>>And more important, binkp one.
Md> I don't think it's really important. We have a perfectly working stand
Md> alone binkp daemon, binkd.
Md> Follow the unix way of thinking: one program for one job.

The problem is that the binkd config file has nothing in common with the
ifcico one; it doesn't eve nrecognize the password file (which follows a
well know standard; I use the same file now that when I was on DOS with
binkley and nlist (I only deleted those ^M at the endo of each line;
and changed/added/deleted some passwords in those last 6 years).

I would be happy with a version of binkd linked against the ifmail's utlib.a
so it would use the ifmail config file, the passwords, the outbound config,
etc.

The current config file of binkd is just too unfriendly for me; and it forces
me to duplicate the work for each link. That is bad for people having tons
of up/downlinks.

Also, the binkp protocol is quite simple; I once tried to do it, but failed,
as I lack the knowledge to do proper communications programming (my version
only worked on one way; when the call was done on the other way there was
an infinite loop somewhere).
I think someone familiar with tcp programming could easily implement that.
And it would be nice, as binkp is quite popular.

-- 
└ bient˘t,
Pablo Saratxaga           PGP Key available, key ID: 0x8F0E4975

http://www.ping.be/~pin19314/