Hello All!
is it verified ?
Hello All!
is it verified ?
is it verified ?
is it verified ?is it running on CP/M ?
-+- GoldED+/EMX 1.1.4.7
is it verified ?Verified!
... File not found. Should I fake it? (Y/N)
-+- GoldED+/EMX 1.1.4.7
not latest GoldED
-+- GoldED+/EMX 1.1.4.7
not latest GoldEDany new features in the new version?
Hello Daniel!
20 Mar 2021 20:53, Daniel PATH wrote to Benny Pedersen:
-+- GoldED+/EMX 1.1.4.7
not latest GoldED
any new features in the new version?
incorrect question
(long story short: i've tried 1.1.5.1 as well, but it core dumps
me when i try to enter a message,
Re: ipv6 live testing ?
By: Daniel Path to Benny Pedersen on Sun Mar 21 2021 11:02:28
(long story short: i've tried 1.1.5.1 as well, but it core dumps
me when i try to enter a message,
what is the width of the window you're trying to run GED in? it has problems with widths wider than 132 so set that width to 132 or less
and GED should be ok...
(long story short: i've tried 1.1.5.1 as well, but it core
dumps me when i try to enter a message,
what is the width of the window you're trying to run GED in?
it has problems with widths wider than 132 so set that width
to 132 or less and GED should be ok...
i don't know, i use mostly 80x24 via telnet,
but the older version do not have this problem, so still don't
understand why to force upgrade? security? (haha)
Re: ipv6 live testing ?
By: Daniel Path to mark lewis on Sun Mar 21 2021 15:43:11
(long story short: i've tried 1.1.5.1 as well, but it core
dumps me when i try to enter a message,
what is the width of the window you're trying to run GED in?
it has problems with widths wider than 132 so set that width
to 132 or less and GED should be ok...
i don't know, i use mostly 80x24 via telnet,
i don't understand what telnet has to do with running GED... it is a
local sysop editor... not one generally run from a BBS over a telnet connection... perhaps you should explain your usage scenario a bit
more? probably over in the golded support echo would be better, too...
but the older version do not have this problem, so still don't
understand why to force upgrade? security? (haha)
i would imagine mainly for the bug fixes... see you over in the golded support area! ;)
i don't know, i use mostly 80x24 via telnet,i don't understand what telnet has to do with running GED... it is a
local sysop editor...
Hi mark!
21 Mar 2021 11:15, from mark lewis -> Daniel Path:
i don't know, i use mostly 80x24 via telnet,
i don't understand what telnet has to do with running GED... it
is a local sysop editor...
I assume that he does the same as I do.
My fido node is running on a vserver in Germany.
I am in Austria.
When I want to check/write mails I log in via SSH or Web (ShellInABox)
to my node, and start Golded. I assume he is doing something similar.
i don't know, i use mostly 80x24 via telnet,
i don't understand what telnet has to do with running GED... it is a
local sysop editor... not one generally run from a BBS over a telnet connection... perhaps you should explain your usage scenario a bit
more? probably over in the golded support echo would be better, too...
i would imagine mainly for the bug fixes... see you over in the golded support area! ;)
i have my OS/2 machine in the office, and i am using it via telnet.
not the BBS, i telnet into the OS/2 where i got a prompt -> C:\> then
i enter: cd \golded and then run gedemx.exe :) 95% i use my os2 box remotely and it works surprisingly well, i did not expect it.
i have my OS/2 machine in the office, and i am using it via
telnet. not the BBS, i telnet into the OS/2 where i got a prompt
use my os2 box remotely and it works surprisingly well, i did notthen i enter: cd \golded and then run gedemx.exe :) 95% i
expect it.
OS/2 can be available remotely via PMVNC as well. I still use this occasionally to check on my OS/2 system.
OS/2 can be available remotely via PMVNC as well. I still use
this occasionally to check on my OS/2 system.
i'm more a console-guy, than a gui one :)
i have my OS/2 machine in the office, and i am using it via telnet.
not the BBS, i telnet into the OS/2 where i got a prompt -> C:\> then
i enter: cd \golded and then run gedemx.exe :) 95% i use my os2 box remotely and it works surprisingly well, i did not expect it.
Hello Daniel,
On Sunday March 21 2021 18:28, you wrote to mark lewis:
i have my OS/2 machine in the office, and i am using it via
telnet. not the BBS, i telnet into the OS/2 where i got a prompt
use my os2 box remotely and it works surprisingly well, i did notthen i enter: cd \golded and then run gedemx.exe :) 95% i
expect it.
Hungary is #22 with 30.2% on the list of IPv6 adoption by country.
Just after The Netherlands with 30.5% at #21. Not bad.
https://www.akamai.com/us/en/resources/our-thinking/state-of-the-inter net-report/state-of -the-internet-ipv6-adoption-visualization.jsp
So maybe you have IPv6 available at your office where your system is located?
While Hungary and The Netherlands perform about the same regarding
IPv6 in general, this does not show in the Fidonet Nodelist. The Netherlands is at the top with 7 out 0f 9 systems (78%) that are connectable via IPv6, Hungary is at the bottom with 0%.
I tested your binkp server. It does not support IPv6. No surprise considering that you run OS/2. OS/2 does not support IPv6 and most
likely never will...
Hello Daniel,
On Sunday March 21 2021 18:28, you wrote to mark lewis:
i have my OS/2 machine in the office, and i am using it via
telnet. not the BBS, i telnet into the OS/2 where i got a prompt
use my os2 box remotely and it works surprisingly well, i did notthen i enter: cd \golded and then run gedemx.exe :) 95% i
expect it.
Hungary is #22 with 30.2% on the list of IPv6 adoption by country.
Just after The Netherlands with 30.5% at #21. Not bad.
https://www.akamai.com/us/en/resources/our-thinking/state-of-the-inter net-report/state-of -the-internet-ipv6-adoption-visualization.jsp
So maybe you have IPv6 available at your office where your system is located?
While Hungary and The Netherlands perform about the same regarding
IPv6 in general, this does not show in the Fidonet Nodelist. The Netherlands is at the top with 7 out 0f 9 systems (78%) that are connectable via IPv6, Hungary is at the bottom with 0%.
I tested your binkp server. It does not support IPv6. No surprise considering that you run OS/2. OS/2 does not support IPv6 and most
likely never will...
hmmm, maybe its easier to implement ipv6 on os/2 than i tought, if
anyone interested:
https://serverfault.com/questions/276515/use-iptables-to-forward-ipv6-to-ipv4
now i just need some time for this.
I tested your binkp server. It does not support IPv6. No surprise
considering that you run OS/2. OS/2 does not support IPv6 and
most likely never will...
hmmm, maybe its easier to implement ipv6 on os/2 than i tought, if
anyone interested:
https://serverfault.com/questions/276515/use-iptables-to-forward-ipv6- to-ipv4
now i just need some time for this.
Tommi Koivula runs binkd OS/2 in combination with a proxy. Perhaps
you should ask him for details. Benny Pedersen has run XinetD as a
6to4 proxy on linux.
All that is for incoming. Outgoing is a bit more difficult...
now i just need some time for this.
We wait (im)patiently. ;-)
All that is for incoming. Outgoing is a bit more difficult...
A bit but not much. Binkd only must use hostname to dial out via
proxy.
13:15 [32276] BEGIN, binkd/1.1a-112/OS2 -p -P 280/5555 binkd.cfg
13:15 [32276] creating a poll for 2:280/5555@fidonet (`d' flavour)
13:15 [32276] clientmgr started
+ 13:15 [32278] call to 2:280/5555@fidonet
13:15 [32278] trying fido.vlist.eu via proxy 192.168.1.24:8118...
13:15 [32278] connected
13:15 [32278] connected to proxy privoxy.localnet:8118
+ 13:15 [32278] outgoing session with fido.vlist.eu:24554
13:15 [32276] BEGIN, binkd/1.1a-112/OS2 -p -P 280/5555 binkd.cfg
13:15 [32276] creating a poll for 2:280/5555@fidonet (`d' flavour)
13:15 [32276] clientmgr started
+ 13:15 [32278] call to 2:280/5555@fidonet
13:15 [32278] trying fido.vlist.eu via proxy 192.168.1.24:8118...
But contrary to incoming, you have to make a rule for each node to be called by the proxy.
13:15 [32278] trying fido.vlist.eu via proxy192.168.1.24:8118...
= =============
That information is from the nodelist. That is the address where the
proxy connects. By default linux uses ipv6 address.
But contrary to incoming, you have to make a rule for each node to
be called by the proxy.
No. Nothing more to be done as your binkd does. Use .binkp.net domain
or nl2binkd or nodelist.pl.
^^^^^^13:15 [32278] trying fido.vlist.eu via proxy
MvdV> Where does that port 8118 come from?192.168.1.24:8118...
That information is from the nodelist. That is the address where the
proxy connects. By default linux uses ipv6 address.
MvdV> Then obviously your XinetD? Linux proxy works different then theBut contrary to incoming, you have to make a rule for each node to
be called by the proxy.
No. Nothing more to be done as your binkd does. Use .binkp.net
domain or nl2binkd or nodelist.pl.
13:15 [32278] trying fido.vlist.eu via proxy192.168.1.24:8118...
Where does that port 8118 come from?
Where does that port 8118 come from?
From the binkd configuration, of course. :)
Port 8118 is the default port of privoxy.
===
proxy privoxy.localnet:8118
===
===
proxy privoxy.localnet:8118
===
Ah, now I get it. You use the http proxy feature of binkd! I never thought about that. I always skipped that section in the docs, thinking "I will most
likely never need that". I never realised it could be used for a 4to6 proxy as
well. And the reason for that in turn is because I do not need a 4to6 proxy for
my binkd. It handles IPv6 natively...
Of course this trick only works for binkd. We see two "IO" flags in
the list of
IPv6 nodes. It is my understanding that they use a 6to4 relay for incoming.
They have no outgoing IPv6 for their binkd client. They both run Radius. Your
trick won't work for them...
Radius can use http proxy as well. I have tested it. The only problem with it is that it tries
to resolve the address and it does not understand IPv6 address. I can poll you with Radius
later when I get back home. :)
25 Mar 21 15:38, Tommi Koivula wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:
Radius can use http proxy as well. I have tested it. The only
problem with it is that it tries to resolve the address and it
does not understand IPv6 address. I can poll you with Radius
later when I get back home. :)
Please check your log. :)
=== Cut ===^^^^^
25-Mar-2021 19:47:08 Begin v4.011/24.10.2013,17:38(Bzdeta)
25-Mar-2021 19:47:08 Running under: Windows NT 6.1 (build: 7601,
Service Pack 1) ^
25-Mar-2021 19:47:08 Connect To 192.168.67.1 #24554
25-Mar-2021 19:47:08 Establishing BinkP transfer protocol
25-Mar-2021 19:47:08 M_NUL : OPT CRAM-MD5-3eb1f21cb9d67a34c0129e90809a88ee =
25-Mar-2021 19:47:08 Station : Nieuw Schnoord =
25-Mar-2021 19:47:08 Address : 2:280/5555 2:28/0 :
25-Mar-2021 19:47:08 SysOp : Michiel van der Vlist from
Driebergen, NL
: 25-Mar-2021 19:47:08 Number : "fido6.vlist.eu"
25 Mar 21 15:38, Tommi Koivula wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:
Radius can use http proxy as well. I have tested it. The only
problem with it is that it tries to resolve the address and it
does not understand IPv6 address. I can poll you with Radius
later when I get back home. :)
Please check your log. :)
- 25 Mar 18:47:13 [208] incoming from 2a01:4f9:c011:1ec5::1 (52356)
+ 25 Mar 18:47:13 [1844] incoming session with mxo.tkk.iki.fi [2a01:4f9:c011:1ec5::1]
- 25 Mar 18:44:52 [208] incoming from 135.181.90.166 (36544)
+ 25 Mar 18:44:52 [2648] incoming session with mxo.tkk.iki.fi [135.181.90.166]
So you first made an IPv4 connect and then manually entered an override to use fido6.vlist.eu
instead of fido.vlist.eu?
So you first made an IPv4 connect and then manually entered an
override to use fido6.vlist.eu instead of fido.vlist.eu?
Exactly.
That happens because Radius resolves the hostname and uses the ipv4 address, even when connecting via proxy.
Binkd works 'better' in this case, it just passes the hostname to the proxy and then proxy does the resolving job.
So you first made an IPv4 connect and then manually entered an
override to use fido6.vlist.eu instead of fido.vlist.eu?
Exactly.
Two questions:
1) Where does the fido6.vlist.eu come from? It exists in the DNS but it is only for local use
and not advertised in the nodelist. It is not advertised anywhere AFAIK. Maybe I mentioned it
somewhere and forgot? Or maybe you just happened to make the right guess?
That happens because Radius resolves the hostname and uses the ipv4
address, even when connecting via proxy.
2) So this manual override works only for my node and to connect to another node you have to
make another override? IOW manually enter a new line in the config for each node that is to be
connected via IPv6?
From my memory... Or imagination... I think you have announced it once
in some testings in the past? If not, a good guess. :D
That happens because Radius resolves the hostname and uses the
ipv4 address, even when connecting via proxy.
2) So this manual override works only for my node and to connect
to another node you have to make another override? IOW manually
enter a new line in the config for each node that is to be
connected via IPv6?
Pretty much so when the node has also IPv4 address. But using an ipv6-capable proxy with Radius makes it possible to connect IPv6-only nodes too. :)
Port 8118 is the default port of privoxy.
===
proxy privoxy.localnet:8118
===
And that hostname resolves:
===
tommi@pin:~$ host privoxy.localnet
privoxy.localnet has address 192.168.1.24
privoxy.localnet has address 192.168.1.15
===
So there is also some fault tolerancy and load balancing between my
two ISP's. ;D
Sysop: | Nelgin |
---|---|
Location: | Plano, TX |
Users: | 510 |
Nodes: | 10 (2 / 8) |
Uptime: | 114:27:25 |
Calls: | 8,197 |
Calls today: | 4 |
Files: | 15,442 |
Messages: | 913,339 |
Posted today: | 8 |