MSGID: 2:280/464.47 61e7188a   
   REPLY: 1:129/215 0d85d94b   
   PID: JamNNTPd/Linux 1   
   CHRS: LATIN-1 2   
   TZUTC: 0100   
   TID: CrashMail II/Linux 1.7   
   James wrote (2022-01-18):   
      
    Ol>> This is not what FTS-1026 recommends. It also doesn't work with   
    Ol>> every legacy mailer. What you don't understand is that FSP-1011   
    Ol>> specified the wrong escape method.   
      
    JC> FTS-1026 recommends it to be a per-connection configurable option as I   
    JC> have shown here, which is implemented in Mystic.  It is not an option in   
    JC> BINKD and if it were, this would not be a problem for Paul.  Those are   
    JC> the facts.   
      
   Do you really believe everyone is too stupid to recognize your discussion   
   strategy?   
      
   You are trying to make non-standard behavior (bug) of Mystic a feature and   
   explaining that every other mailer should implement a workaround for Mystic's   
   problems (or it's not your problem anymore). You also do your best to not   
   mention the fact, that some Mystic versions were not able to process filenames   
   with standard compliant escaping (\x##).   
      
   Again, look at the old source code of binkd, which was and still is the   
   reference implementation. Where is the code that sends \## escape sequences?   
      
   ftp://cvs.happy.kiev.ua/pub/fidosoft/mailer/binkd/   
      
   It always was and still is \x##.   
      
    Ol>> This option was meant for mailers that uses the incorrect escape   
    Ol>> sequence \## (like Mystic does).   
      
    JC> Again, you're literally quoting a message that says Mystic can operate in   
    JC> either way, which is the FTS recommendation.   
      
   That is not the point. Why would anyone who is using a standard compliant   
   mailer care, that Mystic can be configured to send incorrect escape codes? (or   
   has to be explicitly configured for sending the correct escape code)   
      
    JC> Grow up and stop being so disingenious all of the time.   
      
   Seriously?   
      
    Ol>> So you expect that binkd implement a feature that is not   
    Ol>> implemented in a   
      
    JC> No, as I have said in messages prior: I don't care if BINKD implements it   
    JC> as an option or not.  But the only way for Paul's problem to be solved is   
    JC> for BINKD to implement the FTS recommendation on how to handle escaping.   
    JC> I cannot help him.   
      
   And we cannot help Mystic users with their broken software.   
      
    JC> Stop trying twist everything to create confusion, and just let it go.   
      
   Me?   
      
    Ol>> I would also recommend upgrading from the Mystic mailer to some FTS   
    Ol>> compliant mailer and to one that supports the faster binkp/1.1   
    Ol>> protocol.   
      
    JC> As with every single thing you've said in this message, none of this is   
    JC> true.   
      
   No matter what you say, it is still true that I would recommend to use another   
   mailer.   
      
    JC> The difference between BINKP 1.0/NR and BINKP 1.1 has nothing to do with   
    JC> performance.  It simply sends an extra round of EOB for handling file   
    JC> requests differently.   
      
   Here I was indeed wrong, binkp/1.0 can be as fast as binkp/1.1 (for stable   
   connections). The slowness of Mystic's mailer must had some other reasons   
   (maybe it is faster nowadays, but performance was not great in 2020. I   
   switched to another uplink and Paul switched to binkd since then. So I don't   
   know if Mystic's mailer has improved).   
      
    JC> You're saying the \## was a typo and not used anywhere, which is   
    JC> absolutely false.  The FTS documentation on the subject specifically says   
    JC> mailers DO use that escaping.  In fact, older mailers either did no   
    JC> escaping at all or only use \##.   
      
    JC> There are no FTS compliance issues with Mystic's echomail, and it   
    JC> probably transmits more FTN-style mail than any other software.   
      
   What the fuck are you talking about now? This was never about echomail.   
      
    JC> If there was an actual problem then speak up.   
      
   I did speak up some time ago, when Mystic used to mangle in-transit echomail.   
   Your response was to throw a fit and react aggressively against the messenger.   
      
   I warned about that it could produce dupes. And it did. Mystic was THE   
   software that produced most of the problems with echomail in Fsxnet.   
      
    JC> And Paul has worked with   
    JC> me enough to know if there was a problem I would fix it for him quickly,   
    JC> and he wouldn't have to go through this drama-filled daycare to get help.   
      
   And now he uses binkd and hpt.   
      
    JC> It doesn't matter how many more years you go on trying to harass me and   
    JC> spew a bunch of misinformation about me or Mystic, reality will never   
    JC> agree with you.   
      
   I know Mystic is your baby, but since when is harassing a thing a thing?   
      
   I'm really not interested to harass you. But I'm not the only one who is sick   
   of your behavior. It doesn't matter how many more years you go on trying to   
   harass others and spew a bunch of misinformation, reality will never agree   
   with you.   
      
    JC> I am sure everyone here is more than tired of this, so just move on.   
      
   Yes, we are tired of your bullshit too. Fix your software and don't burden   
   everyone else with the problems your software creates. It's as simple as that.   
      
      
   Let's wrap it up:   
   - You implemented Mystic binkp mailer on base of FSP-1011 (http:   
   /ftsc.org/docs/old/fsp-1011.003), which was only a proposal and was never   
   released as a standard (right or wrong?).   
   - Now Mystic is sending incorrect escape sequences (if not configured   
   otherwise in the newest (alpha) version?).   
   - You are convinced that sending an incorrect escape (\##) is the most   
   compatible way.   
   - Binkd (and every other mailer) should do the same or implement workarounds   
   for non-compliant software.   
   - Also: not understanding the correct escape sequences is not the problem of   
   the software that doesn't understand it.   
      
   So Mystic is fighting to save the incorrect \## forever, because of some old   
   legacy software (whichever that is) or something (whatever) ...   
      
   .... meanwhile, Binkd, qico, BinkIt and others are doing just fine with \x##   
      
   ---   
    * Origin: Birds aren't real (2:280/464.47)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/123 14/0 15/0 90/1 103/705 105/81 106/201 114/705 709 120/340   
   SEEN-BY: 123/120 131 124/5016 129/305 153/250 757 7715 154/10 203/0   
   SEEN-BY: 218/840 220/70 221/0 226/17 30 227/114 229/110 200 307 317   
   SEEN-BY: 229/424 426 550 664 700 240/5832 249/206 250/5 8 266/512   
   SEEN-BY: 267/800 280/464 5003 5555 282/1038 292/854 8125 298/25 301/1   
   SEEN-BY: 305/3 310/31 317/3 320/219 322/757 341/234 342/200 396/45   
   SEEN-BY: 423/120 460/58 633/280 712/848 770/1 100 340 772/210 220   
   SEEN-BY: 772/230 2452/250   
   PATH: 280/464 770/1 317/3 229/426