Article View: dnet.ham
Article #229NETROM 1.16 vs 2.08
From: D. Crompton
Date: Wed, 22 May 1991 18:41
Date: Wed, 22 May 1991 18:41
23 lines
1657 bytes
1657 bytes
I recently left TheNET version 2.08 at TOMCAT. I also started to use this variation of TheNet. The previous version I had been using was 1.16, which was a release directly from DL land. The 2.xx versions apparently come from NJ7P (Bill Beech). What we are finding out is that a major bug in the earlier version (1.0 and maybe others) which allows trivial (0 quality) routes to appear in route lists, was corrected in the 1.16 DL version but not in the 2.xx versions. In some cases (maybe all) this is a rather serious bug which can cause data loops at node stacks. If someone has connection to NJ7P then maybe we could find out why this is. He must have used an earlier DL source as his base. In any event it might be a good idea to not use the 2.xx releases until this is corrected. Unfortunately the DL 1.16 release does not have a user (terminal) port. There may be another later DL release that has the problem corrected and maintains the user port. It seems like NOS there is not alot of control of the code and there are many versions floating about. Any input from others on this would be appreciated. Doug
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<9105221650.AA14056@NADC.NADC.NAVY.MIL>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!gmdzi!unido!infoac!news-mail-gatewayShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 12f11c,519b3351adecbef1,start X-Google-Attributes: gid12f11c,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1991-05-22 15:41:03 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!gmdzi!unido!infoac!news-mail-gateway From: crompton@NADC.NADC.NAVY.MIL (D. Crompton) Newsgroups: dnet.ham Subject: NETROM 1.16 vs 2.08 Message-ID: <9105221650.AA14056@NADC.NADC.NAVY.MIL> Date: 22 May 91 18:41:36 GMT Sender: daemon@infoac.rmi.de Organization: RMI Net INFO.box Systems * Aachen * Hamburg * Flensburg Lines: 23