RM>ON> addresses?   
       
   RM> If you can have multiple addresses, then use both. (eg. backup address,   
   RM> if first is unreachable).   
       
   Thanks - that makes sense (to all have pointed out multi-homed).   
       
   RM>ON> There are a couple lines that have for example ITN:domain.address,   
   RM>ON> no IBN, no INA, and phone is -Unpublished-, however, it is not   
   RM>ON> marked as Pvt or Down. What rule of thumb should be applied?   
       
   RM> I would assume that you can somehow reach that node via telnet on the   
   RM> address from the ITN flag.   
   RM> If you do not support that protocol you have to treat that node as   
   RM> unrechable.   
       
   * My interpretation:   
   INA - is reserved to be the address of the destination machine w/o PORT   
   INB - says BinkP   
   ITN - says Telnet (does that mean Wazoo/YooHoo over TCP?)   
       
   If I understood the above, then the INA should have had the address, w/o a INB   
   and does have ITN as a flag, as port 23 is assumed.    
       
   RM> It would be nice if you could post your findings here.   
       
   I will be posting my finding (who was up, who was not), binkp extentions and   
   versions, along with software and what networks everyone is sharing.   
       
   I held off on sharing my last results, as I found a bug in my M_ADR parser,   
   only reporting the first 255 bytes (oops). That has been fixed... now I am   
   going to run again this week and I will collect into a DB so I can make some   
   useful reports... thanks for the interest!   
       
   Ozz    
      
   --- dBridge & Rhenium   
    * Origin: RVA Fido Support - ExchangeBBS.com, ModernPascal.com (1:275/362)