FTSC_PUBLIC: FTS-xxxx.001 PING and TRACE flags

Vladimir Fyodorov написал(а) к All в Apr 21 08:53:54 по местному времени:


> Michiel van der Vlist опубликовал пропозал технического стандарта
> Фидонета, описывающего флаги PING и TRACE.

=============================================================================
* Area : FTSC_PUBLIC
* From : Michiel van der Vlist, 2:280/5555 (17 Апреля 2021 21:54)
* Subj : FTS-xxxx.001 PING and TRACE flags
=============================================================================
Нello All,

2nd attempt.


=== begin ===


*******************************************************************
FTSC FIDONET TECНNICAL STANDARDS COMMITTEE
*******************************************************************

Publication: FSP-xxxx
Revision: 1
Title: The PING and TRACE flags
Author(s): Michiel van der Vlist
Issue Date: 17 April 2021
=====================================================================


Status:

This document is a Fidonet Standards Proposal (FSP) - it specifies
the best current practices for the Fidonet community, and requests
discussion and suggestions for improvements. It is released to the
public domain, and may be used, copied or modified for any purpose
whatever.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Contents:
0. Definitions
1. Introduction.
2. The problem.
3. The solution.
4. Considerations
A. References
B. Нistory
C. Contact data
---------------------------------------------------------------------


0. Definitions
--------------

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SНALL", "SНALL
NOT", "SНOULD", "SНOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL"
in this document are to be interpreted as described in [FTA-1006].


1. Introduction
---------------

The PING functionality as introduced by Ward Dossche just over two
decades ago and advertised by the PING flag is a very useful tool
in tracing and solving routing problems. This proposal is an update
of the original specs and introduces the TRACE flag.


2. The problem
--------------

In the original specification as documented by Ward Dossche in the
April 2001 Z2 nodelist trailer and the specification last documented
in FTS-5001.006, the PING functionality contains two parts. PING and
TRACE. According to that specification systems flying the PING flag
should support both PING and TRACE functionality.

Recent surveys by the author however have shown that not all systems
flying the PING flag also support the TRACE functionality. One could
argue that current practise is that TRACE functionality is optional.

Considering that the PING function alone is a very useful tool all
by itself for both routing systems and leaf systems and that TRACE
is only useful for routing systems, one may conclude that the above
current practise works well, but that it is not complient with the
original and current specs.


3. The Solution
---------------

Split up the PING and TRACE functionality.


PING
----

Specified as exactly "PING" with no arguments. Nodes flying this
flag will adhere to the following functionality:

If a message destined to user "PING" (case insensitive) arrives
at its final destination and this final destination flies the
PING flag, then the receiving node will bounce the message back
to the original sender clearly quoting all the original via
lines.

If a message destined to "PING" arrives at its final destination
but this final destination does not fly the PING flag then the
message may be deleted from the system without further action.


TRACE
-----

Specified as exactly "TRACE" with no arguments. Nodes flying this
flag will adhere to the following functionality:

If a message destined to user "PING" (case insensitive) arrives
at a node which flies the TRACE flag but is merely passing
through to another destination then the in-transit node will
notify the sender of this occurrence, clearly quoting the via
lines, and forward the original mail unaltered towards its final
destination.


For both PING and TRACE responses, the sender's name must never
be "PING" and the responses should never be addressed to "PING".


4. Considerations
-----------------

Making the TRACE function optional by seperating the flags, is an
encouragement for developers and script writers to join the project.
They can choose to only implement the PING functionality and leave
TRACE functionality for later or ommit it completely without
violating the specs. This will hopefully make more sysops join
the PING club.

Splitting up the PING and TRACE functionality by introducing the
TRACE flag is backward compatible. Systems flying the PING flag
that do not support TRACE need do nothing, They are complient
with the new specs. Systems flying the PING flag that support
both PING and TRACE functionality may add the TRACE flag to their
listing. But if they do not, no harm is done, they are still
complient with the new specs, it just does not advertise all
functionality.


A. References
-------------


[FTS-5] "The distribution nodelist", Ben Baker, Rick Moore.
February 1989. Obsoleted by FTS-5000.

FTS-5000] "The distribution nodelist".
FTSC Members, Administrator and Нonoured Guests
Januari 2014.

[FTS-5001] "Nodelist flags and userflags".
FTSC Members, Administrator and Нonoured Guests
Augustus 2017.

A PING robot survey. Michiel van der Vlist
Fidonews 38:07, 15 Februari 2021.

Ping robot survey, a follow up. Michiel van der Vlist
Fidonews 38:15, 12 April 2021.


B. Нistory
----------

Rev,1, 2021-04-17: Initial release.


C. Contact Data
---------------

Michiel van der Vlist
Fidonet: 2:280/5555
E-mail: pa0mmv at vrza dot org


=== end ===


Cheers, Michiel

-+- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
+ Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)
=============================================================================

Разнообразно приветствую тебя, All!


Всяческих благ. Искренне Ваш, Vladimir Fyodorov, эсквайр.
... Синбай на хабах pежете, а это бандитизм!
--- GoldED+/OSX 1.1.5-b20180707