     Volume 6, Number 28                                  10 July 1989
     +---------------------------------------------------------------+
     |                                                  _            |
     |                                                 /  \          |
     |                                                /|oo \         |
     |        - FidoNews -                           (_|  /_)        |
     |                                                _`@/_ \    _   |
     |        International                          |     | \   \\  |
     |     FidoNet Association                       | (*) |  \   )) |
     |         Newsletter               ______       |__U__| /  \//  |
     |                                 / FIDO \       _//|| _\   /   |
     |                                (________)     (_/(_|(____/    |
     |                                                     (jm)      |
     +---------------------------------------------------------------+
     Editor in Chief:                                  Vince Perriello
     Editors Emeritii:                                     Dale Lovell
                                                        Thom Henderson
     Chief Procrastinator Emeritus:                       Tom Jennings
     
     FidoNews  is  published  weekly  by  the  International   FidoNet
     Association  as  its  official newsletter.  You are encouraged to
     submit articles for publication in FidoNews.  Article  submission
     standards  are contained in the file ARTSPEC.DOC,  available from
     node 1:1/1.    1:1/1  is  a Continuous Mail system, available for
     network mail 24 hours a day.
     
     Copyright 1989 by  the  International  FidoNet  Association.  All
     rights  reserved.  Duplication  and/or distribution permitted for
     noncommercial purposes only.  For  use  in  other  circumstances,
     please contact IFNA at (314) 576-4067. IFNA may also be contacted
     at PO Box 41143, St. Louis, MO 63141.
     
     Fido  and FidoNet  are registered  trademarks of  Tom Jennings of
     Fido Software,  164 Shipley Avenue,  San Francisco, CA  94107 and
     are used with permission.
     
     We  don't necessarily agree with the contents  of  every  article
     published  here.  Most of these materials are  unsolicited.    No
     article will be rejected which is properly attributed and legally
     acceptable.    We   will  publish  every  responsible  submission
     received.


                        Table of Contents
     1. EDITORIAL  ................................................  1
     2. ARTICLES  .................................................  2
        Appeal to the IC re: the arbitrary impostion of p4  .......  2
        D'Bridge 1.21 - A  Quick Review  ..........................  7
        Fido/FidoNet Routing, Topology, History, and Recent Cha  ..  9
        Keep The Issue Clear!  .................................... 17
        Notes on Net Numbering  ................................... 19
     3. WANTED  ................................................... 24
        Ham Radio Articles Needed!  ............................... 24
     4. LATEST VERSIONS  .......................................... 25
        Latest Software Versions  ................................. 25
     And more!
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 1                   10 Jul 1989


     =================================================================
                                 EDITORIAL
     =================================================================

     Let's start this week's Editorial with a couple of questions:

     1) To those of you promoting Democracy in Fidonet:    didn't  you
     notice  we've tried this before with IFNA?

     2) To those of you thinking right now, "He's GOT  to be kidding":
     what did YOU do to help make the IFNA idea work?   What proof can
     you  offer  that YOUR idea of Democracy in Fidonet is better than
     the original  concept  of  IFNA?   That more people will flock to
     your banner?

     Frankly, what seems to be going on in this network is an epidemic
     of "screw whoever's in charge".  This seems to date back to about
     the  time  that  IFNA  was founded.  In fact, it might be  IFNA's
     fault.  Nobody seemed to care whether they had a voice in the net
     before Messrs.  Kaplan, Baker, Henderson and Jennings got on that
     stage in Colorado and told them they could HAVE one.

     Since that time, we've had nothing but mikey wars played over and
     over and over again.  Sometimes  the participants changed but the
     basic issues seemed about the same.   This Net 154 thing sounds a
     lot  like  the  Net  103  thing of a  few  years  ago,  the  only
     difference  being  WHAT  the NC refused to go along  with.    The
     result then was the same as the current one.   An  entire net was
     excommunicated (of course the ratio of private to public nodes in
     103 was a lot different, most of the nodes there had real  people
     running them).

     About two  years  into  the  mikey  wars,  the  *C's  decided  to
     extricate themselves from  the  IFNA  situation.   In my opinion,
     they drew the conclusion  that  the  only  thing  you'd  get from
     enfranchising the entire Net (as  IFNA  wanted  to  do) was utter
     chaos  (which  is  all  that  IFNA  had  accomplished),  so  they
     proceeded  to  play  the   "benevolent  dictatorship"  game  that
     persists to this day.   If  this  is indeed what happened (nobody
     has told me one way or the other) I can certainly sympathize.

     What's  happening these days?  The  "benevolent  dictators"  have
     made a few unpopular decisions.  Now  there's  more screaming for
     democracy.  Yeah, right.  Let's try the  IFNA  thing  again?    I
     can't see any reason why.  IFNA is still  here, it is a 501(c)(3)
     organization,  and  all  it  needs  is  some  guidance  from  its
     membership.   That is, when it can get some people interested  in
     democracy in Fidonet  to  become  members.  Re-connecting IFNA to
     Fidonet is a minor  thing  once  IFNA  can  be shown to have some
     coherence.

     Put up or shut up.  Join IFNA and fix it.  Or just bag the noise.
     I for one am fed up with the mikey wars. Aren't you?

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 2                   10 Jul 1989


     =================================================================
                                 ARTICLES
     =================================================================


     TO: David Dodell

     FROM: Doug Thompson

     SUBJECT: Talk to me David!

     cc: fidonews

     Hi David,

     Reading Fidonews  and  the  nodelist  is  pretty disturbing these
     days.  I  spent  half  the  day writing a program (so I'm a lousy
     programmer) to put Milwaukee  back  in  the  nodelist.   I think,
     "hmmm, isn't this the job  of  the RCs, to make sure the nodelist
     is complete and accurate?".  Seems  the  job of RC has changed to
     make  sure that the nodelist is politically  correct  instead  of
     technically correct.  What's going on here?

     The crime was the refusal to swear an  oath  of allegiance to the
     so-called policy 4.  The crime was having a  node listed that was
     outside somebody's idea of geographical limitations.  I submit to
     you that the disease interfered much less with the smooth working
     of the net  than  the  cure.   There are all kinds of reasons why
     nodes will be listed  outside their immediate geographic area and
     if you look at the nodelist you'll see it's pretty common.

     I submit to you that  policy 3 places no limits on *where* a node
     can be located.

     As for policy 4, so-called, if  that was somebody's idea of a bad
     joke it has gone too far.   By  precedent policy must be ratified
     by fidonet before it can be enforced, or  before  any  reasonable
     person can be expected to abide by it.   Policy  4  has  not been
     ratified  by  fidonet,  and  I  shall  prove that the process  of
     ratification  by  the NCs was fraudulent and invalid in execution
     as well as in design.

     Have I  not  informed  you  that it is not acceptable in net 221?
     Has not all of zone 2 informed you of the same thing?  Why are we
     not excommunicated, since "consistency",  we  are  told  by Steve
     Bonine, is so important?

     And who is Steve Bonine  and  who  gave  him  authority  to start
     shrinking   the  nodelist  according  to  his    own    political
     proclivities?

     Why  is  Milwaukee  gone from the nodelist?    Was  the  software
     incompatible?  Were calls going undialable?  Was  mail  hour  not
     being observed?  No.

     Policy  3  was adopted by fidonet, and by IFNA.    Policy  4  was
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 3                   10 Jul 1989


     ratified  by  neither.    Thus  policy  4  remains a hypothetical
     document, not  an  enforcable  policy.   Doesn't it?  Or has some
     coup d'etat suddenly transformed fidonet?


     So here are several offical policy complaints:

     I)

     I  deem  it  excessively  annoying  that  my  vote  on  policy  4
     ratification was changed by  my  RC  because he didn't approve of
     it.

     Documentation and proof available on request.  It consists of the
     message from Tom stating that he  had  altered  my vote.  I know,
     it's hard to believe, but it's true.

     I request that the ratification be declared null and void on that
     grounds, and that the RC in question be reprimanded for violation
     of basic, fundamental, democratic principles.

     I  further  request  that an ivestigation be launched to  inquire
     into the integrity of the policy 4 vote in general,  and that all
     RCs  who violated  basic  democratic  principles,  i.e.    secret
     ballot, harassment of voters,  attempts  to  get people to change
     their vote, falisfication of returns,  etc.,  be exposed and that
     appropriate disciplinary action be taken against  any  RCs guilty
     of these crimes against common decency.

     It  is recognized as policy violation to  send  a  message  under
     someone  else's  name  and  network  address.  Surely  sending  a
     falsified  vote  is just as serious.  Indeed, it  strikes  me  as
     vastly more serious!

     II)

     I  deem it excessively annoying that the ballot on policy  4  was
     not  secret and that some NCs were subjected to verbal abuse  and
     intense  pressure  to  vote  in accord with the RC's wishes.  The
     results of  the  ballot  are  clearly a sham as a result of that.
     I.E.  it  is  certain that many votes were influenced by pressure
     from RCs.  Mine wasn't influenced.  When he failed to convince me
     to vote as he wanted he just changed my vote.

     I request that the ratification be declared null and void on that
     grounds.


     III)

     I deem it excessivley annoying that  no  vehicle  for  debate and
     discussion  of  the proposed policy 4 preceded  the  ratification
     vote.  Yes, I was sent copies and  asked  to comment.  When I did
     comment to Tom all I got back was a stream of abusive insults and
     an  insistence that I hadn't read the document.  In  other  words
     rather than debate or discussion, the only role I was allowed was
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 4                   10 Jul 1989


     that of making comments to a person who simply denounced them and
     obviously didn't carry them further.    Discussion  requires that
     all points of view be heard  (not  necessarily  accepted,  but at
     least heard) by all parties to the process.


     I request that the ratification be declared null and void on that
     grounds.


     IV)

     I deem it excessively annoying that precedent in  the adoption of
     policy  was  completely disregarded.  Fidonet consists of sysops,
     not coordinators.    Coordinators are the administrative servants
     of, not the  masters  of  the  net.    Precedent demands that any
     ratification process be open to all sysops.

     I request that the ratification be declared null and void on that
     grounds.

     V)

     I  deem  it  excessively  annoying    that  96%  of  sysops  were
     disenfranchised  from  the  ratification  of policy  without  any
     constitutional,  moral  or  legal grounds, or precedent,  and  in
     complete  violation  of  any  recognizable  notion  of democratic
     priopriety in Western Civiliation,

     I request that the ratification be declared null and void on that
     grounds.

     VI)

     I deem it excessively annoying that I am forced to spend a lot of
     time  and  effort  correcting  the errors in the current nodelist
     (i.e.  the removal of all of Milwaukee).

     I request  that  the nodelist be corrected and that the person(s)
     responsible  for  the    errors    and   ommissions  be  suitably
     reprimanded.

     VII)

     Whereas precedent in fidonet  demonstrates that policy is adopted
     by consensus, and whereas no  device for consensus of the net has
     been employed, and whereas *C sysops  alone  have  arrogated  the
     right to adopt policy, and whereas this  represents a fundamental
     and basic violation of every principle of due  process recognized
     in  western  civilization,  and  whereas  severe  abuses  of  the
     electoral process can be demonstrated, and whereas it has already
     been used to  eliminate  substantial  numbers of fidonet-capable,
     mail-hour  honouring  nodes  from  the  nodelist,  for  political
     reasons alone,

     I deem policy 4 to be excessively annoying and request that it be
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 5                   10 Jul 1989


     officially junked, and that the process  of consideration, review
     and  ratification  be  re-started  in  a recognizably  democratic
     fashion.

     VIII)

     Whereas  the so-called "ratification process" of policy 4  was  a
     total sham and travesty of common decency, and whereas fidonet is
     going  to break asunder as sysops in general puke in  disgust  at
     this,

     I  urge  you to inhale a sweet breath of sanity and  institute  a
     democratic, reasonable and  proper  means to establish new policy
     for the net.

     I doubt that the  flagrant abuse in Region 12 was typical of what
     happened in other regions.  But no precautions whatsoever were in
     place to prevent it and the result therefore cannot possibly have
     a shred of credibility.  We were effectively told how to vote and
     reservations were dismissed out of hand.  Not  just  mine either,
     this happened to other NCs.  I have copies  of the correspondence
     which show that.

     In  the vernacular this means that policy 4 is viewed  as  having
     about as much moral and legal authority as the tanks in Tianenmen
     square.   Very many are afraid to speak out right now.   We  have
     entered a  reign  of terror and strong-arm tactics.  No one wants
     to be excommunicated,  but  it  is  clear  that  the  results  of
     exercising the right to  freedom  of  speech entail this penalty.
     It  is  a  brutal  quashing  of  the  democratic  aspirations  of
     thousands of fidonet sysops and has  already  proven itself to be
     wholly negative and counter-productive.  The nodelist  has shrunk
     .   .  .  the balloting  was  falsified,  even  Tom  Jennings  is
     staunchly  opposed.    Is  any  further argument really required?
     There are  many more arguments which can be mustered, but I think
     the facts presented here speak for themselves.  Policy 4 contains
     several highly objectionable provisions,  mostly those which give
     RCs policy-making responsibilities to the  exclusion  of  sysops.
     The  most  objectionable  thing,  however,  is    the   arbitrary
     psuedo-democratic way it was imposed on fidonet.    It  is simply
     unimaginable  that this could possibly ever be acceptable  within
     democratic societies.  It is quite unthinkable.

     IX)

     Whereas the healthy democratic functioning, growth and prospering
     of fidonet  is  of  great  concern  to  both  myself  and my net,
     anything constructive you  might  have to suggest by which we can
     help bring that about would be most sincerely appreciated.

     Working withing fidonet to  change  and  improve  policy  is  now
     virtually impossible.  The RCs  have  erected  a system which not
     only fails to encourage participation from  sysops, it positively
     excludes it.  While nearly all the  sysops  I  talk  to  find the
     current situation intolerable, few have any ideas as  to what can
     be done about it.  The RCs have effectively  insulated themselves
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 6                   10 Jul 1989


     from fidonet

     The fact that policy 3 is valid and enforcable, while policy 4 is
     neither,  and  the hopeless disarray of IFNA at the moment leaves
     all  sysops  with  but  one  hope,  and  that  hope  is  that the
     International Coordinator will recognize  the voice of reason and
     the need of the net and act to rectify the problem.


     Please do something.

     As always,

     your loyal servant,

     Doug Thompson

     coordinator 1:221



     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 7                   10 Jul 1989


     Chuck Allen, Network 8:7200/2
                  AlterNet 7:522/1 ISA:2108
                  FidoNet 1:129/41

        Standard disclaimer - I have no affiliation with the author
     of the software.

        Recently D'Bridge 1.21, by Chris Irwin,  came across the
     Software Distribution System.  By nature, I am always looking
     for new toys, and the docs for D'Bridge promised something
     different.  I set up D'Bridge and asked for my "trial key", a
     process one has to see to believe.  When I ran "install", the
     program checked the files and copied them into a working
     directory.  Running DB and answering questions led to a outbound
     call to the support system of my choice for the trial key.

        Rather than go into a detailed list of features and
     comparisons, I'm going to describe my experience setting
     D'Bridge up and operating it.  D'Bridge, in a nutshell, is an
     integrated mailer, echo handler, area fix station, terminal
     program, and message editor with many unique features seamlessly
     integrated into one package.

        Setup was as easy as I have seen it, rivaling or surpassing
     FrontDoor's renowned ease of setup.  I seldom referred to the
     documentation (more than 250 pages), there is a brief "help
     line" displayed at the bottom of the screen, usually describing
     what is expected.  In less than an hour, I had the mailer and
     echo handler set up and running.

        D'Bridge can use any of three storage types; Fido, QuickBBS,
     and TBBS.  The editor allows you to define the area as local or
     echomail, and you can pick the storage type for each area.  Thus
     you can have "normal" echoes imported into a QuickBBS message
     base and have "sysop" echoes stored in Fido (single message per
     file) format.  For echo areas, you define the distribution and
     how you want mail for each node handled (crash, normal, hold,
     etc.).  You can select autoaliasing (for echoes destined for a
     different zone or network) and specify an origin line.  You
     chose a tag and security level along with an area number.  There
     are sort options for some fields.  You can choose number of
     messages or number of days for maintenance purposes, along with
     a feature to ignore the first nnnn messages in an area.

        Using the message editor is very straight forward and
     controlled for the most part by function keys.  All the features
     one has come to expect in a modern message editor are there, and
     more.  You can search the text or headers of messages for
     selected text (very nice!).  Again, the features are too
     numerous to mention.

        The mailer portion is easily set up and quite intuitive.
     Scheduling is done by a unique visual interface.  Routing is as
     simple or complex as one chooses, there is no mucking around
     with external files.  I tested D'Bridge with Opus 1.10, Opus
     1.03, FrontDoor 1.99, Seadog 4.1 & 4.51, and Binkley 2.20.
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 8                   10 Jul 1989


     There was no problem negotiating a session with any of them.

        The built-in echohandler allows choosing several compression
     methods, specific to individual nodes, and will handle nearly
     any type of mail to come in.  Further, it has a built-in AREAFIX
     handler, and an option for automatically creating new areas for
     previously unreceived echoes (terrific for echohubs).  The
     permutations of possible options is incredible, there is
     something in the echohandler for everyone.  It is quick and
     works flawlessly in my setup, a tough test considering my 3
     network membership.

        The program uses overlays, which is nice for those running
     under DesqView or DoubleDos.  I've run D'Bridge under both, with
     no problem.  The docs warn that reducing available memory may
     slow things down, this was never apparent on a 8 mhz turbo XT
     clone.  In one case, I had not allocated enough memory to load
     the editor.  At this point, many packages would give up the
     ghost and fold up.  D'Bridge printed the message "swapping to
     disk" on the screen and carried on as though the stupid sysop
     had done nothing wrong.

        The terminal portion of the program is as good, if not
     better, than those I've seen in other mailers.  The protocols
     we've all come to expect are all present, as is a dialing
     directory, etc.  It depends on the nodelist, which is unique to
     D'Bridge and is handled by D'Bridge itself.  Whenever D'Bridge
     is started, it goes through a series of tests, one of which is
     to make sure the nodelist is current.  If it detects a
     difference file, it automatically updates the "St.  Louis"
     nodelist as well as it's own nodelist.  Simply amazing.

        As with all but the simplest package, at some point support
     becomes necessary.  I am not a registered user, yet two
     questions to my chosen support board (Optical Illusion) were
     answered swiftly and correctly by Mark Moran (thanks Mark!).
     Quite honestly, I was surprised by the support, given that I was
     on a trial key, not a registered user.

        All in all, this is one impressive package.  The seamless
     integration of so many functions is rivaled by the ease of use.
     It is tough for me to imagine a situation from echostar on down
     that D'Bridge couldn't easily handle.  It is not shareware, it
     is a commercial product (with a 20% reduction until mid-July),
     well worth what Chris is asking (I'd still be running it and buy
     it if I weren't unemployed!).


     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 9                   10 Jul 1989


     Fido/FidoNet Routing, Topology, History, and Recent Changes
     Tom Jennings, 1:125/111
     15 June 89

     Fido/FidoNet, like  all other FidoNet mailers and BBSs, generates
     messages, and puts them into packets that are later delivered to
     some appropriate destination by  the  mailer itself.  All of the
     different mailers use different approaches  as  to  just  how you
     the sysop control where, how and  when packets (and the messages
     they contain) get delivered.

     In light of all the mailer systems out there today, I don't think
     many are aware of just how Fido/FidoNet does  it's routing.  With
     a  few  recent  changes  you  might  find the design  has  become
     interesting  once  again.  (And starting July 89, Fido/FidoNet is
     once again  shareware.    File  Request  "ABOUT" and "FILES" from
     1:125/111 for complete details.)

     FIDO

     Fido was originally just a bulletin board;  the first FidoNet was
     a separate program that  was  run  from  a  batch file with a few
     small hooks into the BBS.  (The origin of the Fido version 9 - 11
     MAIL.SYS file.) Fido (the BBS) only  let users generate messages;
     FidoNet  (the  mailer)  put messages into packets  and  delivered
     them.

     At this point, four years later, Fido and FidoNet are pretty well
     integrated,    and  this  latest  revision  completes  the  weld.
     Logically, to  the user and sysop, the two remain quite separate,
     and many (non-FidoNet)  Fido  systems  are BBS only.  (Most of my
     commercial customers are BBS  only.)  It  is  just as easy to run
     FidoNet without Fido.

     Fido's packeting/mailing system works in  four  discrete  phases.
     First,  the  destination  node  addresses for  all  the  existing
     messages is determined.  This is done  by  the  "router", more on
     which follows.  Second, the messages are put  into packets by the
     "packeter" (I never was very good at names).   Third,  the  phase
     that is most obvious to sysops watching the screen, is  when  the
     packets are delivered;  Fido makes outgoing phone calls and sends
     the packets.    Packets  can also be received in between outgoing
     calls.  The  last  phase  deletes  un-sent packets, and marks the
     original messages that went  into  the  packets  as  "(SENT)"  as
     appropriate.  This ends the FidoNet session.

     Note that different from Opus  and  other  similar  mailers, Fido
     only puts a copy of the message into a packet;  during the fourth
     phase Fido again processes each message, and  marks it or deletes
     it as determined by the success of that packet delivery.

     This is a fairly large amount of processing  to do when looked at
     on a per-message basis, and is why Fido's FidoNet has always been
     slower  to packet than other systems.  In return there  are  many
     advantages, that will become more obvious later.

     FidoNews 6-28                Page 10                  10 Jul 1989


     FIDO AND FIDONET

     Originally,  as  was  stated  before,  Fido  and FidoNet were two
     separate programs.    Even  when  integrated  into  one  package,
     starting with Fido  version 9 or 10, FidoNet was only usable when
     a FidoNet scheduled event  was  actually  running;    "continuous
     mail" is (relative to Fido)  a  new  concept.    Version 12 (Aug.
     1987) could accept incoming continuous mail,  but  not  send mail
     unless a FidoNet event was running;   starting with 12M Wazoo and
     .REQ file requests are supported.

     Starting  with version 12N, the FidoNet portion of  Fido  can  be
     accessed  at  any  time;   packet creation and routing  is  under
     complete  control,  and  can  be altered, automatically using the
     routing language on a event by event basis throughout the day, or
     manually as the sysop sees fit, up to the point when the specific
     message has been delivered.    Events themselves can be turned on
     and off from within Fido,  allowing  very high-level control over
     packet routing.

     You can have Fido create packets  available  for pickup, with any
     arbitrary routing, at any time of day.  For example, you can have
     HOLD  packets  of  long-distance systems waiting for pickup  from
     9:00AM  til  6:00PM,  while enabling outgoing calls on local-dial
     systems, in between human callers, or any other construct allowed
     by the  routing  language,  without  restriction.    There  is  a
     "penalty" of 30 - 60 seconds to prepare for a new schedule;  once
     started, access is in the under 100 mS range.

     On my 8MHz "turbo"  junk-pclone, 80mS 20 meg drive, Fido takes 30
     seconds to load, create outgoing  packets  and  be  ready  for an
     incoming call (human or otherwise).   On  this  crappy  hardware,
     incoming echomail is received, unpacketed, tossed, the echo areas
     then scanned and outgoing packets made and delivered  in  30 - 60
     seconds,  in  between  human  callers,  using  DCM  and  barefoot
     Fido/FidoNet 12N.

     The largest  network Fido/FidoNet can (mathematically!) handle is
     (32767 * 32767  *  32767)  or  3.5 x 10(e13) nodes;  version 12's
     implementation 65,535.  A recompile (change a table index from 16
     to 32 bits) will make Fido handle about 4 billion nodes with some
     performance  loss  and  increased  (disk)  overhead,    about   2
     bytes/node.  Performance with 65,000 nodes would  still be better
     than Fido 12M's.

     Current  nodelist   overhead  (NODELIST.132)  is:    NODELIST.BBS
     304,532 (physical data);    NODELIST.NMP  53,920  (nodemap;   see
     below);  NODELIST.IDX 53920  (main  index);    NODELIST.NDX  2900
     (host index).  NODELIST.SYS is no longer used.

     FIDONET TOPOLOGY

     The router design mimics exactly  the  FidoNet  network topology.
     The  network went through four (so  far...)  stages:    a  "flat"
     system, ie.  point to point;   addresses were a simple number 1 -
     32767.       The  second  formalized  the  concept  of    "nets",
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 11                  10 Jul 1989


     incorporating  the routing optimization formerly done with Fido's
     primitive router.    The  third includes zones, which are similar
     mathematically to nets,  but  in real life act quite differently,
     with "zone gates" concentrating  mail  between  zones  (generally
     continents)  because  of real-life issues  of  telephone  connect
     costs  and equipment compatibility.  The  fourth  adds  "points",
     allowing for the next (or current, I  am  a  bit  slow sometimes)
     wave of BBS technology.

     OOPS BACKTRACK A LITTLE:

     A  small aside on nets and regions:   "regions"  originally  were
     only  a way for nodes not in a net  (ie.    not  inside  a  local
     calling  area) to be syntactically compatible with the "net/node"
     addressing scheme;    since  most  nodes were in the most heavily
     populated areas, cities,  where  nets  naturally  form, "regions"
     would be where nodes  not  in  cities  would  be found.  Nodes in
     regions (marked REGION in the  nodelist)  act  as any other node,
     but the mailers do not do the automatic routing to the "host" for
     the region -- mail is sent direct, or point to point.

     The function of  region  hosts as another layer of organizational
     hierarchy is a recent  addition,  and  not  part  of the topology
     itself.  Still further, there  is nothing magic about the numbers
     themselves -- regions being numbered 1  -  99, nets 100 - 999 etc
     is a totally arbitrary decision on the part of the keepers of the
     lists.  The only magic numbers are 0's -- these indicate the host
     for the entity, ie.  zone, net or region.

     ROUTER DESIGN

     Back  to  the  router  design.  While the hierarchical  model  of
     net/node  is  extremely  useful  (if not indispensable) there are
     still thousands  of  exceptions,  usually  on  a system by system
     basis;  you  forward  mail  for one system that is local but is a
     toll call for other net members.  Your net has a sugar daddy that
     can make long distance outgoing  calls.    One system calls in to
     pickup their mail.  Commonly called  systems are more efficiently
     handled in some special way.

     You need to remember that the mathematical  model used frequently
     has nothing to do with the "real" world.    This  is as it should
     be.    However, you need a good solid theoretical  base  for  the
     network otherwise the world falls apart.  The router bridges  the
     two otherwise-incompatible worlds.

     Fido's router design can handle any topology based on our address
     syntax:  zone:net/node, plus  any arbitrary number of exceptions.
     To do this, the router is very simple -- not complex.

     Logically, the router is an N x N crossbar switch, where N is the
     number of nodes in the nodelist.    You  can  imagine  a crossbar
     switch by drawing on paper a grid:

     IN
       --> 1 ----O---O---O---O---O
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 12                  10 Jul 1989


                 |   |   |   |   |
           2 ----O---O---O---O---O
                 |   |   |   |   |
           3 ----O---X---O---O---O
                 |   |   |   |   |
           4 ----O---O---O---O---O
                 |   |   |   |   |
           5 ----O---O---O---O---O
                 |   |   |   |   |
                 1   2   3   4   5
                        OUT

     Shown is a 5 x 5 crossbar  switch.  The O's represent an OFF (but
     potential)  connection;    X's  represent a ON connection.    The
     connection  (3,2)  is ON, all others closed.  If  a  signal  were
     applied  to Input 3, it would appear also on Output  2.    (ASCII
     graphics  are  terrible,  sorry!) You will notice that by placing
     X's and  O's  appropriately,  any  input  can be connected to any
     output.

     A  "real"  crossbar    switch   can  route  one  signal  to  many
     destinations;  just place  X's  along  the same horizontal row in
     the example above.  Any  node  can  route to any node;  times (N)
     nodes is (N * N) possible states.  Not pleasant to think about in
     real terms -- a 5000 node nodelist  would  mean 25,000,000 states
     to represent on your disk!  This is not a very useful side effect
     for us;  our messages have a single destination address.

     Fido's  router  places  one  limitation upon the crossbar design:
     there  can  be  only one possible destination per node.   It  can
     still be any possible node, but only one at a time.    This means
     the router can consist of (2 * N) entries -- the originating node
     and the destination node.

     You can imagine Fido's router as the crossbar switch above, or as
     I do, a simple two column table:

             ----+----
             1   |   _
             2   |   _
             3   |   2
             4   |   _
             5   |   _

     The _'s  represent  potential,  but OFF connections.  #3 has been
     routed to #2  by  merely filling in that table entry.  This table
     is called the NodeMap.

     (Fido's nodemap also contains  a  third  column, where attributes
     like HOLD, SEND-TO, PICKUP and  other  things  are stored.  These
     attributes are built into the nodemap for programming convenience
     only, they are not really part of the router per se.)

     HOW THE ROUTER WORKS

     At  FidoNet  mail  time, Fido prepares the  router  files  before
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 13                  10 Jul 1989


     making  packets  and outgoing phone calls.  The  basic  net  host
     routing is performed, then any routing specified by the  sysop in
     route language files.

     Before any routing, the table looks like this:

             ADDRESS         ROUTE-TO        ATTRIBUTES
             1:1/1           1:1/1            (none)
             1:1/2           1:1/2             ...
             ...             ...               ...
             1:125/0         1:125/0
             1:125/20        1:125/20
             1:125/111       1:125/111
             ...             ...
             2:500/0         2:500/0
             2:500/2         2:500/2
             ...             ...               ...

     Basic  default  routing is applied, which does the FidoNet-as-we-
     know-it net  and  zonegate  routing (see the Appendix A:  DEFAULT
     ROUTING section):

             ADDRESS         ROUTE-TO        ATTRIBUTES
             1:1/1           1:1/1             ...
             1:1/2           1:1/2
             ...             ...
             1:125/0         1:125/0
             1:125/20        1:125/0
             1:125/111       1:125/0
             ...             ...
             2:500/0         1:1/2
             2:500/2         1:1/2
             ...             ...

     At this point  Fido  performs any additional routing you may have
     specified, such as overriding the routing, HOLD packets, enabling
     only certain nodes or groups  of nodes per schedule, etc.  Things
     like  HOLD,  PICKUP,  SEND-TO and other  basic  concepts  are  as
     attributes within the nodemap.

     The nodemap is built on disk, and  can be saved between schedules
     so that it an be used over and  over;    this is called a "QUICK"
     FidoNet  event.    It  takes  my  Fido  system  mentioned   above
     approximately  90  seconds to completely build the nodemap (about
     100 route language statements);  subsequent "QUICK" events take a
     fraction of a second.

     PACKET CREATION

     Fido creates packets  when  a  FidoNet  schedule starts (which is
     controlled by Fido's scheduler  and  is outside this discussion).
     For every message in the  netmail message area, Fido consults the
     nodemap, in two steps:

     First, the actual destination (for example:  1:125/111) is looked
     up in the ADDRESS column of the  nodemap.    The  ROUTE-TO column
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 14                  10 Jul 1989


     determines where this message goes, ie.  into  which  packet.  If
     the  destination  node  is  not  found,  the  message  is  marked
     (ORPHAN).

     Secondly,  Fido  looks up the packet (ROUTE-TO) address (1:125/0)
     itself, in  the  ADDRESS  column.    This  is  done to locate the
     ATTRIBUTE bits for the destination node.  If the bits indicate it
     is OK to packet this message (SEND-TO set, etc) then the packeter
     creates the packet.

     This is done for all  messages in the netmail area;  once all the
     packets  are  built then FidoNet can  dial  out,  allow  incoming
     pickups, etc.

     Messages put into packets are not modified  in  any way;  packets
     contain a copy of the original message.  The post-FidoNet process
     takes care of messages that have been sent.

     FIDONET SESSION COMPLETION

     When a FidoNet schedule is over, Fido processes packets that were
     received  from  other  mailers  and cleans up any packets it  had
     created earlier.

     Packets  that  are  un-sent are merely killed;  the messages that
     these packet(s)  were  created  from  still  exist in the netmail
     area;  when  a  FidoNet  session  start  again,  Fido may put the
     messages into a packet  to  the same destination node or possibly
     another;  since packeting is  done only before actual mailing the
     routing  can be altered at any  point  up  to  actual  successful
     transmission.

     Packets  that  are  sent,  or  picked up,  are  handled  slightly
     differently.  The packets themselves are deleted, but  Fido  once
     again  refers to the router to mark the messages  that  comprised
     the  packet  as  (SENT),  or  kills  them if they were  indicated
     (KILL/SENT) by the originator.

     Appendix A: DEFAULT ROUTING

     Fido/FidoNet's routing  is  not "built-in" nor hard-coded;  if it
     were  not  told  otherwise,  Fido  would  send  messages  to  the
     destinations in the message itself.  The routing needed to make a
     practical  mailer  are added as  layers  upon  this  base;    the
     tradeoff is speed vs.  flexibility  and accuracy.  (Speed is, um,
     somewhat improved over older implementations...)

     What the real-life Fido does at FidoNet  mail time is make a pass
     through the table, and fill in the "default" routing that defines
     the FidoNet topology, which is our zone:net/node with routing  to
     HOSTs for nets, which goes like this:

            -For nodes in our own net, send direct (point to
             point)

            -For nodes in a net in our zone, outside our net,
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 15                  10 Jul 1989


             send to it's host (net/0)

            -For nodes in a region in our zone, sent direct

            -For nodes in another zone, send to it's zone
             host (zone:0/0)

     The first three make sense in the network as we  know  it;    the
     fourth requires some background.

     FidoNet's  topology is based upon a gimmick:  the address of  the
     logical host for any net or zone is composed of the number of the
     net  or  zone, with the magic zero added as the least significant
     address field.    A  net  or region host is net/0 or region/0;  a
     zone host is  zone:0/0.   FidoNet sysops use net/0 routinely;  no
     one uses zone:0/0 routinely, if at all.

     The difference is that  the addressing scheme, the topology, is a
     mathematical  construct, and has nothing  to  do  with  the  real
     world,  ie.    overseas  phone calls,  governmental  regulations,
     manufacturer incompatibilities, etc.  The addressing scheme needs
     to  be  rigorous  and  provide  a  solid  design   base  for  all
     implementations.

     If  we didn't have real-life complications like the above,  never
     mind  how  overloaded  the poor zone host computer would be,  the
     mathematical model  might  fit  the  real  world.    Obviously it
     doesn't, and never did.

     The solution in  Fido's  scheme  is  to merely modify the default
     routing.  There exists  a  keyword  in  Fido's  routing  language
     (called, not surprisingly, "ZoneGate") that  does exactly what it
     sounds like:  it routes all mail destined for another zone to any
     arbitrary node designated "zone gate".

     Zone  Gates were thunk up at the  now  notorious  "New  Hampshire
     meeting" in '86 or so.  The idea  was to make it so that net/node
     mailers,  ie.  not zone-aware, could route messages destined  for
     other  zones.    The  thing  was  called  the "IFNA Kludge",  and
     consists  of  two  parts:  (1) an addressing kludge to trick  the
     mailer to route the interzone message to a node in it's own zone,
     and  (2)  to  have    the   full  zone:net/node  origination  and
     destination addresses buried in the  message  body itself, hidden
     behind a line that began with  Control-A, so that message editors
     could learn to ignore it.  (For  your  curiosity:    full address
     consists of the very first line in the  message, that looks like:
     "^AINTL z:n/f z:n/f", where the first address is the  destination
     node address, the second the originator.)

     The  addressing trick is:  "Address the message for zone  (N)  to
     node 1/(N) in my zone".  Node 1/(N) is designated the  zone gate;
     for  example,  the  zonegate for Europe, Zone 2, node 1/2, in the
     North American zone 1.  And so on.

     Fido is a registered trademark of Tom Jennings
     FidoNet is a registered trademark of Tom Jennings
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 16                  10 Jul 1989


     (Sorry, I gotta say this!)



                             NEW SOFTWARE POLICY

     This is  the new (June 1989) software policy for the Fido/FidoNet
     package.  Please read it carefully.

     First, some important definitions:

     Hobbyists run BBSs  for their own personal reasons.  Their BBS is
     not associated with their employer or any business.  How they run
     their  BBS  is  none  of  my  business,  ie.    private,  public,
     subscription, collective or chattel slavery.

     Commercial users are companies, corporations, proprietorships  or
     any other business entities that run a  BBS,  either  publicly or
     privately, associated with their business.  "Non-profit" and "not
     for profit" organizations are included in this category.

     And here's the deal:

     HOBBYISTS  AND  INDIVIDUALS:  Fido/FidoNet is shareware;  you can
     download the  software itself, minus documentation, from the Fido
     Software BBS.   There  is no machine-readable documentation.  (If
     you thought the version  11 docs were unwieldy ...  besides I pay
     royalties to the author).   I  will  provide  no  direct support.
     Hobbyists can receive the latest version on diskette plus printed
     and bound documentation for $50.  If you later desire updates via
     diskette  instead  of download, updates (including printed errata
     sheet)  cost  $20 plus the original Fido Software diskette.    $5
     discount on either for US ca$h payment.

     COMMERCIAL USERS:    Fido/FidoNet  is a usual licensable product;
     the license fee  is $175, as it has been for two years.  You will
     receive the latest software  version, complete documentation, and
     support via the Fido Software BBS and voice telephone.  (This has
     proved to be more than adequate for over two years.)

     Deals, exceptions and special arrangements can  be made on a case
     by case basis.  In all cases,  bugs  are  fixed promptly, as they
     have been for five years.  This is  basically the policy that was
     in force through 1987.  It worked pretty well,  there  were  very
     few problems, and most of those were caused by my ambiguity.

     SHAREWARE  DISTRIBUTORS:    I  do  not  wish  Fido/FidoNet  to be
     distributed by  "shareware  distributors",  "libraries"  or other
     similar organization.   The  problems  are too numerous to count:
     shipping ancient, incomplete versions;    missing critical files;
     giving out incorrect information regarding  support;   giving bad
     operating advice, etc.  Never mind  the  fact that they are using
     the software for profit, regardless of claims  to  the  otherwise
     and suggesting that their customers pay instead.

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 17                  10 Jul 1989


     Bernard Levine, Box 2404, Eugene OR 97402
     Not copyrighted -- please circulate

     Most of the arguments for and against gun bans address such
     marginal issues as the protection of hunting and target shooting
     versus the prevention of crime. They avoid the central issue,
     which is the protection of liberty against the inroads of
     tyranny. In fact the Constitution is equally silent on sport
     shooting and on crime prevention. The Constitution's Second
     Amendment guarantees our right to keep and bear arms strictly as
     the means of last resort by which a free people can and ought to
     resist tyranny, whether the threat of tyranny be foreign or
     domestic, military conquest or political subversion.

     Certainly guns are dangerous. So are cars. Certainly guns, like
     cars, should be kept from the hands of the irresponsible and the
     deranged. Nonetheless guns, like cars, are an essential
     ingredient of our freedom. When the Bill of Rights states, "the
     right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
     infringed", it does not mention "sporting" arms or any chimerical
     "right" to hunt. If you are "pro-gun" but think that hunting and
     target shooting are the real issues, then you, like President
     Bush, have naively surrendered the moral high ground to the foes
     of liberty in a pusillanimous and futile attempt to appease them.

     Whatever high-sounding or devious excuses they might offer, gun
     ban advocates really want to support tyranny. This is true of the
     press and broadcast moguls, who profit most from a frightened,
     passive, helpless audience. It is true of the radical
     legislators, who rightly view an armed public as the ultimate
     deterrent to their revolutionary agenda of redistributive "social
     justice". It is most especially true of police chiefs and senior
     police officials, the very men who always assume absolute power
     in the police-states that spring up whenever radical revolutions
     succeed.

     The news publishers, the radical legislators, and the police
     bureaucrats are natural allies in promoting gun bans. The advance
     of the states monopoly on power (which is what tyranny means)
     enhances their individual influence, strengthens the power of
     their organizations, and advances their shared dogma, that an
     "enlightened" police-state (namely one with them in charge) is
     more "just" to the "poor and downtrodden" than is a government
     based on individual liberty.

     By themselves the publishers, the legislators, and the police
     chiefs could not subvert the Constitution and enact gun bans.
     Therefore they drum up the support of the most readily swayed
     part of the public, all the tremulous dewy-eyed naifs who are
     ignorant of history and mystified by our political and economic
     system. These frightened followers are unable to grasp the nature
     of cause and effect, so the media have taught them that guns
     cause crime. They are unable to tell right from wrong, so they
     have been led to believe that self-defense is an "injustice to
     the poor". They cannot distinguish statesmanship from psychosis,
     so they glorify violent criminals as "free spirits" and the
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 18                  10 Jul 1989


     "shock troops of the movement". These innocents form a powerful
     team with the would-be tyrants and their journalistic apologists,
     for without an ignorant, foolish and self-destructive public that
     is intoxicated by wishful thinking and seduced by government
     programs (remember Weimar Germany?) there can be no tyranny --
     and no tyrannical gun bans.

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 19                  10 Jul 1989


                        Notes on Net Numbering
                           by Daniel Tobias
                                1:380/7

     I'll keep it short this week, since I've said about all I care to
     about the present policy debates and  squabbles,  and  the editor
     has decreed that such talk is not  desirable for FidoNews anyway.
     (I  disagree;   the future of FidoNet will  be  decided  by  what
     happens regarding its policy documents and internal politics, and
     as the official journal of the net, FidoNews is the best place to
     discuss such things.  And, even local squabbles could be relevant
     to the  global  discussion  if  basic  principles  of  policy get
     adjudicated therein.   I  do, however, agree with the editor that
     such discussion can get  tiresome  if it continues on one subject
     long after all viewpoints have  been  aired repeatedly.[ I didn't
     decree anything, I just asked for  people  to try to observe some
     kind of self-limits, specifically to keep interesting topics from
     being over-aired past the limits of boredom -- ed.] )

     Just one thing I'd like to comment on:   Jack Decker's (otherwise
     good) article makes some strong attacks on FidoNet for failing to
     respect  AlterNet's  assignments  of  zone  and  net numbers, and
     criticizes zones,  points,  and  the proposed domain addresses as
     "kludges" which shouldn't be necessary.

     I disagree.   FidoNet was the entity which created the concept of
     zone, region, net, and  node numbers in the first place, and they
     were  created  to  represent  geographical    areas  rather  than
     political  groupings;  they're not some  "public  resource"  that
     must be parceled out to all network  entities  which  wish to use
     similar addressing systems.  FidoNet has the right to use its own
     numbering  system  in whatever way it wishes, in accordance  with
     its  POLICY document, and without reference to whatever numbering
     scheme non-FidoNet systems may use.

     Other networks  (AlterNet, EggNet, LCRNet, FamilyNet, et al) have
     similar sovereignty with regard to their own numbering;  they may
     use zones, regions, nets,  and  nodes  in  whatever  manner  THEY
     choose.

     In  the  absence  of  some  agreement  between  the  networks  in
     question,  no  network  has the right  to  compel  any  other  to
     circumscribe its numbering in order to prevent  conflicts between
     nodes of the two networks.  After all,  most  of  the alternative
     nets   broke  off  from  FidoNet  because  they  wished  autonomy
     regarding  network  policies,  so  it  is presumptuous of them to
     expect any  of  the  separate  network  entities to automatically
     bring their policy regarding number utilization into harmony with
     any other in the absence of diplomatic negotiations of some sort.

     I could declare myself  to  be the leader of "FishNet", and claim
     to encompass Zones 11 through 32 inclusive (for instance, Zone 17
     will cover all FishNet nodes in the western half of the Andromeda
     Galaxy), but I wouldn't expect FidoNet, AlterNet,  or AnyOtherNet
     to instantly relinquish all plans to use any  of these numbers in
     deference to my wishes.
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 20                  10 Jul 1989


     Sure, I'd like to see harmony between the different networks, and
     a  well-established  gatewaying  system.  For this to come about,
     somebody needs  to  get  representatives  of the nets together to
     negotiate something.   I  hear  such  a  thing  was tried at last
     year's  FidoCon, which resulted  in  a  FidoNet/AlterNet  gateway
     officially in place;  however,  it  was  later  removed  for some
     political reason of which I have  no  knowledge.  That's too bad,
     and I hope talks can be established towards reinstating a gateway
     of some sort.  If such gateway is determined by all parties to be
     best  done  through zone numbering, then numbers can be  reserved
     for all participating networks by common consent.

     However, it may be best in the long run to go to a domain system,
     despite  Decker's  distaste for it;  this best preserves the full
     autonomy of  different networks, as well as (if domain addressing
     is implemented in  a  sufficiently  flexible manner) enabling the
     possibility of future links  to  non-FidoNet-compatible networks.
     (UUCP gateways already exist, but  they're  very kludgey;  I hope
     future    FidoNet    software  allows  smoother  addressing    of
     inter-network mail using domains.) With each independent  network
     represented by its domain name, there would be  no need to parcel
     out   numbers  to  each  network  in  a  non-conflicting  manner;
     assignment  of  zones,  regions,  and nets could be done by  each
     network  on whatever internal basis it wishes.  It would then  be
     clear  that  Zones  1 through 4 (and any other FidoNet zones that
     may be  added  later)  are  part  of the single network (domain),
     FidoNet;  AlterNet  would  have  its own domain rather than being
     confusingly referred to as  "Zone 7" as if it were simply another
     geographical  zone  of  FidoNet;   and  the  profusion  of  other
     networks existing or likely to sprout up in the future (a healthy
     trend, in my opinion, since it promotes  experimentation  in both
     technical and policy areas, and gives new sysops a wide choice of
     possible affiliations) will be able to join the "greater FidoNet"
     gatewaying  complex  by  picking  an  unused  domain  identifier,
     without cutting the  address  space  of any pre-existing network,
     since each network needs only one domain.  "Domain-aware" mailers
     could be written which allow  multiple nodelists to be present on
     one system, each keyed to a  particular  domain.  If a message is
     addressed to a domain that you have the nodelist for, it would be
     sent  directly;   otherwise, it would go through  a  pre-arranged
     gateway.

     Admittedly, domains, zones, and points ARE kludgey, and not fully
     supported  by  present  software.    I hope, however, that future
     software will  be  more  understanding  of  these concepts.  In a
     rapidly-changing field like  computers,  it  is  not  possible to
     preserve standards forever;   they  must  change  with the times.
     The  old  NET/NODE addressing is  insufficient  for  the  present
     conglomeration  of  intercommunicating  systems,  and  must    be
     supplemented  even  if  it  produces  some  confusion    in   the
     changeover, just as the original change from single  node numbers
     to  NET/NODE  combinations  was  both  necessary  and temporarily
     confusing.

     I'll be  interested to see what develops.  (It would be boring if
     it always stayed the same, wouldn't it?)
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 21                  10 Jul 1989


     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 22                  10 Jul 1989


     To  : All
     From: Count 0 (listed as Doc Taylor), 1:363/28
     Re  : Proposed POLICY 5


                        POLICY 5
     =================================================================

     1:  Complete dissolution of current Fido-Net doctrine.

         Everything goes.

     2:  Installation of new officers.

         I, _your_name_goes_here_,  am  the  Chief.   Big Cheese.  Top
         Dog.   Head  honcho.    UC  (Universal  Coordinator).    GOD.
         Buddha.  Mohammed.  Rambo.

     3:  Appeals process.

         If you don't do what I say, quit or I'll kick you out.

     4:  Topology.

         From midnight until noon,  you  can  only  call someone who's
         geographically  south  and  east of  you.    From  noon  'til
         midnight the reverse is true.  Anyone south and west or north
         and east of you is off limits.   Except during ZMH...  no-one
         calls ANYBODY for ANY REASON.  You may not exchange mail with
         anyone farther than thiry miles from you;  if  you are thirty
         miles  away  from  the  nearest node you must remove yourself
         from  the  nodelist;    if  you have friends more than thirty
         miles from you...  tough.  See 3:.  On groundhog day, though,
         anyone can call  anyone,  anywhere.    But only if the sun is
         out.  Or was  out  the previous Tuesday.  Any questions?  See
         3:.

     5:  New Policy.

         There will never again be a new policy.

     6:  Ratification.

         By unarcing this FidoNews you accept this policy as ratified.

     7:  The Future.

         Nobody likes a dictator.   In time you will be killed or will
         be responsible for killing somebody else.    Do the right and
         honourable  thing:    abdicate  immediately  and  name  as  a
         successor somebody without a modem.

     8:  Afterwards.

         You  have a responsibility to any BBS networks forming  after
         this dissolution.    That  responsibility is to make entirely
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 23                  10 Jul 1989


         certain that it never becomes civilized or organized past the
         point of (roughly) Policy 2.

         And that it never has policies.

         Never ever.

     9:  Miscellaneous.

         See 3:.



     =================================================================

      >> In 'Oh, Jesus! Not again!' we say,
      >>    Ammnen.

      > Amen.

     Whichever.


     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 24                  10 Jul 1989


     =================================================================
                                  WANTED
     =================================================================

     Ham Radio Articles Needed!

     By Brian Murrey <KB9BVN> of 1:231/30

     Over the  last  two  months  I  have  compiled  an  Amateur Radio
     newsletter called the  Fidonet  HAM/PACKET  digest.   It has been
     widely acclaimed from Zone  1  to  Zone 3 and I appreciate all of
     the comments that I have  received.    I would also like to thank
     Tom Jennings for allowing me to  use  the  Fidonet moniker in the
     main file header.  These files are  mainly a compilation of radio
     related  bulletins,  messages,  and  stories  found  in the  HAM,
     PACKET,  and  SHORTWAVE  echo  areas.  If you are  interested  in
     seeing them they can be file requested at 9600HST from 231/30 and
     they  are  named  as  follows.    HAM0101.ARC,  HAM0102.ARC,  and
     HAM0103.ARC will get you  the first three issues and at this time
     issues 4 and 5 are  due  out but I have run into a snag of sorts,
     that being little or no information  coming  to  me to put in the
     issues.  If this newsletter is to  continue,  I  must have input,
     there is a lot going on right now  in  the amateur community, the
     FCC  is  giving  our  bandwidth  away,  the  No-Code  controversy
     continues here in the United States, and field day is upon us.  I
     know from talking to other amateurs in Australia, Europe, and the
     US  that we do not have a problem with finding something to  talk
     about  (hi hi).  So, if you have anything that you would like  to
     contribute, and  I  will  print  anything  as long as it is radio
     related, send it  to  me.    I  know  a  lot of you have articles
     printed in the various  magazines,  well I don't want to infringe
     on your income, so send me those articles that no one else wants,
     I  know that my stack of  reject  letters  will  end  up  in  the
     Smithsonian Institute in the "Most Frustrated Author of All Time"
     display.  I'll leave the future of this newsletter up to you, the
     worldwide    amateur   community.    BTW,  if  you  are  a    PEP
     system...these issues can still be had via FREQ from 231/161, our
     local PEP node.

     Thank you.

     Brian Murrey  - <KB9BVN>  1:231/30  HST

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 25                  10 Jul 1989


     =================================================================
                              LATEST VERSIONS
     =================================================================

                          Latest Software Versions

                           Bulletin Board Software
     Name        Version    Name        Version    Name       Version

     Fido            12n+*  Phoenix         1.3    TBBS           2.1
     Lynx           1.30    QuickBBS       2.03    TComm/TCommNet 3.4
     Opus          1.03b+   RBBS          17.2A    TPBoard        5.2

     + Netmail capable (does not require additional mailer software)


     Network                Node List              Other
     Mailers     Version    Utilities   Version    Utilities  Version

     BinkleyTerm    2.20    EditNL         4.00    ARC           6.02
     D'Bridge       1.21*   MakeNL         2.12    ARCmail        2.0
     Dutchie       2.90C    ParseList      1.30    ConfMail      4.00
     FrontDoor       2.0    Prune          1.40    EMM           2.02
     PRENM          1.47    XlatList       2.90    GROUP         2.10
     SEAdog         4.51    XlaxDiff       2.32    MSG            3.3
                            XlaxNode       2.32    MSGED         1.99
                                                   QM             1.0*
                                                   TCOMMail       2.2
                                                   TMail         1.11
                                                   TPBNetEd       3.2
                                                   UFGATE        1.03
                                                   XRS            2.2
     * Recently changed

     Utility authors:  Please help  keep  this  list  up  to  date  by
     reporting  new  versions  to 1:1/1.  It is not our intent to list
     all utilities here, only those which verge on necessity.

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 26                  10 Jul 1989


     =================================================================
                                  NOTICES
     =================================================================

                          The Interrupt Stack


     14 Jul 1989
        200th anniversary of the storming of the Bastille

     15 Jul 1989
        Start of the  SAPMFC&LP  (Second Annual Poor Man's FidoCon and
        Lake Party) to be  held  at Silver Lake Park on Grapevine Lake
        in Arlington, Texas.  This  started  as an R19-only thing last
        year, but we had so much  fun, we decided to invite everybody!
        We'll  have  beer, food, beer, waterskiing, beer,  horseshoes,
        beer, volleyball, and of course beer.  It's an overnighter, so
        bring your sleeping bag and plan to camp out.   Contact one of
        the  Furriers  (Ron  Bemis  at 1:124/1113 or Dewey Thiessen at
        1:130/24) for details and a fantastic ASCII map.

     20 Jul 1989
        Twentieth anniversary of Neil Armstrong's first moonwalk.

      2 Aug 1989
        Start of Galactic Hacker Party in Amsterdam, Holland.  Contact
        Rop Gonggrijp at 2:280/1 for details.

     24 Aug 1989
        Voyager 2 passes Neptune.

     24 Aug 1989
        FidoCon '89 starts at the Holiday Inn in San Jose, California.
        Trade show, seminars, etc.  Contact 1:1/89 for info.

      5 Oct 1989
        20th Anniversary of "Monty Python's Flying Circus"

     11 Oct 1989
        First International Modula-2 Conference  at  Bled,  Yugoslavia
        hosting Niklaus Wirth and the  British  Standards Institution.
        Contact 1:106/8422 for more information.

     11 Nov 1989
        A  new  area code forms in  northern  Illinois  at  12:01  am.
        Chicago  proper  will remain area code 312;    suburban  areas
        formerly served with that code will become area code 708.


     -----------------------------------------------------------------

     FidoNews 6-28                Page 27                  10 Jul 1989


     =================================================================
                                  REPORTS
     =================================================================

     Nominations and Elections Committee
     1:107/210 or 1:107/233

                        IFNA ANNUAL ELECTION BALLOT

     RULES FOR THE ELECTION

     Only members  of  IFNA in good standing may vote.  This ballot is
     being mailed (via  Air  Mail  outside  North America) to all such
     members as of the  cut-off  date of July 4, 1989.  Those who were
     not members in good-standing as of that date but whose membership
     status changes between then and the  ballot  due  date  are  also
     entitled  to  vote.  Ballots may be  printed  from  the  FidoNews
     article and utilized for this purpose or in  the  event  that the
     official mailed ballot becomes lost.

     Ballots  may be submitted in one of two methods:    They  may  be
     mailed  to  the address given below or they may be  submitted  by
     hand  at FidoCon '89 in San Jose, California.  The due  date  for
     mailed ballots is Noon, Thursday, August 24, 1989.  Ballots to be
     handed in  at  FidoCon  are  to  be done so prior to Noon, Friday
     August 25, 1989.

     Any ballot received after the above cut-off dates is subject to
     invalidation.

     Mailed ballots are to be sent to:

         IFNA BALLOT
         c/o Robert C. Halvorsen, CPA
         Regency Center Suite 309
         100 Smith Ranch Road
         San Rafael, CA 94904 USA


     The ballot is  divided  into  two  sections, one for Directors of
     IFNA and one for  Bylaws  Amendments.    In the Directors of IFNA
     section, you may vote for  six  at-large directors.  In addition,
     if you reside in one of  the  Divisions  listed, you may cast one
     vote for Divisional Director for that Division only.  Do not cast
     a  vote for any Divisional Director position if  you  are  not  a
     resident  of  that  Division.    As  no one has  been  officially
     nominated  in accordance with the Bylaws, all votes will have  to
     be in the form of write-ins of the names of the  individuals  you
     choose.

     In determining  whether an individual has been elected, the total
     votes casts for  the  individual  in both At-large and Divisional
     categories will be combined  and  analyzed,  with  the individual
     with  the  largest  number of  valid  votes  being  declared  the
     Divisional Director.  Divisional votes cast for an individual not
     elected  as  Divisional  Director  will still count  towards  the
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 28                  10 Jul 1989


     position of at-large director.  Therefore, DO NOT  VOTE  FOR  THE
     SAME  INDIVIDUAL  IN  BOTH DIVISIONAL AND AT-LARGE CATEGORIES, as
     this  may  nullify  your  ballot.   Note that, if they  were  two
     individuals you  felt  qualified to be your Divisional Divisional
     Director, it would  make  no  difference if you placed one in the
     Divisional  category  and  one   in  the  at-large  category,  or
     vice-versa.

     For the Bylaws Amendments Section,  simply vote either YAY or NAY
     to accept or reject the amendment, respectively.

     Voting results will remain confidential, but  you must enter your
     name and address for verification purposes.

     It is not necessary to answer every question.


                             DIRECTORS OF IFNA

       Divisional Directors  VOTE ONLY FOR YOUR DIVISION!


       Division 11                    _______________________________
       IL, IN, KY, MI, OH,
       WI, Ont, Que, PEI,
       NovaS, NBrun, Newf.

       Division 13                    _______________________________
       NY, NJ, DE, MD, VA,
       PA, WV

       Division 15                    _______________________________
       AZ, CO, NM, UT, WY


       Division 17                    _Kathi Crockett (Elected)______
       AK, ID, MT, OR, WA,
       Alb, BC, Sask, Man,
       Yuk, NWT

       Division 19                    _______________________________
       AR, LA, OK, TX,
       Latin Amer.

       Division  3                    _______________________________
       Australia, New Zealand



       At-Large Directors  [Vote for no more than six (6)]:

               (1) ______________________________

               (2) ______________________________

               (3) ______________________________
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 29                  10 Jul 1989


               (4) ______________________________

               (5) ______________________________

               (6) ______________________________



                         BYLAWS AMENDMENTS BALLOT

     As no proposed amendments were submitted by the membership in the
     manner as stipulated in the Bylaws, the only bylaws amendments to
     be voted are three that were implmented by the Board of Directors
     in St.  Louis in February of this year.  According to Bylaw 41-f,
     the "By-Laws may be changed by a two-thirds majority vote of  the
     Board of  Directors.    Such  changes implemented by the Board of
     Directors must appear  on the next Ballot for confirmation by the
     membership, but shall be in effect during the interim period."

     As indicated above, these  three bylaws have been in effect since
     February;  you are to vote for or against ratification.

     46. Official  communications  of  the    Board  of  Directors  or
         Executive Commitee may be presented, in lieu of  written form
         as  called for within these bylaws, through electronic means,
         providing  such  means  are  secure  and  their  authenticity
         verifiable.

                 YEA _________                 NAY _________


     47. Any elected or  appointed official may be removed for failure
         to adequately perform the assigned  duties  as defined by the
         Board of Directors.

         (a) The Chairman of the Board  of Directors may recommend the
         removal of an appointed official to the  Board  of Directors.
         The removal will be effective upon a majority  vote  of those
         voting  at  a  properly convened meeting of the Board  or  by
         electronic mail or by postal mail.

         (b)  The  Executive  Committee may recommend the removal of a
         Director  or elected official to the Board of Directors.  The
         removal will  be  effective  upon  a  majority  vote of those
         voting at a  properly  convened  meeting  of  the Board or by
         electronic mail or by postal mail.

                 YEA _________                 NAY _________


     48. An Alternate replacing  a Director temporarily or permanently
         assumes the seat on the  Board  of  Directors  but  no  other
         elected or appointed position.

                  YEA _________                 NAY _________

     FidoNews 6-28                Page 30                  10 Jul 1989


         IMPORTANT!  The following section must be completed for
                     verification purposes!

     Name: __________________________   Division of Residence ______

     City: __________________________   Zone/Net/Node ______________

     State/Country ________________________


     =================================================================


     From:  Nominations and Elections Committee
     To:    All IFNA Members
     Date:  July 8, 1989
     Subj:  Additional Info on 1989 Annual Election

     As you will notice by reading  the  1989  Annual Ballot material,
     with  one  exception,  there have been no  candidates  officially
     nominated by the membership.  The one exception is Kathi Crockett
     who,  being the only official nominee for Division 17,  has  been
     declared elected in accordance with provisions in the bylaws.

     In  order to assist you in the election process, the  Nominations
     and Elections Committee  solicited  volunteers  via  FidoNews and
     other mediums.  Those  listed  below  have  expressed interest in
     serving FidoNet as a Director  of  IFNA.    The Committee has, in
     some cases, listed known qualifications.   However,  it should be
     noted  that  those  without qualifications listed should  not  be
     considered as lesser candidates;  we suggest that you investigate
     through various forums to determine those who may best  represent
     your interests.

     To  this  end, the committee will solicit a short statement  from
     each volunteer which we expect to publish in an upcoming issue of
     FidoNews.

     The  Committee  has not verified the qualifications of all of the
     following and  it  is understood that the memberships of some are
     "in process".   Only  those  individuals  marked with an asterisk
     appear in the current IFNA membership list.



            Name        Zone/Net/Node  Division  Comments

       Jerry Ablan        1:115/876      11
      *Steven Barnes      1:138/49       17     Incumbent
       Tom Hendricks      1:261/66       13     Present Alternate
       Bor-Long Lin, MD   3:56/1         12     R56 EC
       Carl Linden        1:10/1         10
       John Rafuse        1:12/700       11     R12 EC
      *John Roberts       1:147/14       19
      *Kris Veitch        1:147/30       19     Treasurer, Incumbent

     FidoNews 6-28                Page 31                  10 Jul 1989


     Our apologies to anyone  who may have been inadvertantly left out
     of  this  list.  Please  contact  the  Committee  immediately  at
     1:107/210 if you are an IFNA member who wishes to be a candidate.

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 32                  10 Jul 1989


            OFFICERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL FIDONET ASSOCIATION

     Mort Sternheim 1:321/109  Chairman of the Board
     Bob Rudolph    1:261/628  President
     Matt Whelan    3:3/1      Vice President
     Bill Bolton    3:711/403  Vice President-Technical Coordinator
     Linda Grennan  1:147/1    Secretary
     Kris Veitch    1:147/30   Treasurer


            IFNA COMMITTEE AND BOARD CHAIRS

     Administration and Finance     Mark Grennan    1:147/1
     Board of Directors             Mort Sternheim  1:321/109
     Bylaws                         Don Daniels     1:107/210
     Ethics                         Vic Hill        1:147/4
     Executive Committee            Bob Rudolph     1:261/628
     International Affairs          Rob Gonsalves   2:500/1
     Membership Services            David Drexler   1:147/47
     Nominations & Elections        David Melnick   1:107/233
     Public Affairs                 David Drexler   1:147/47
     Publications                   Rick Siegel     1:107/27
     Security & Individual Rights   Jim Cannell     1:143/21
     Technical Standards            Rick Moore      1:115/333


                      IFNA BOARD OF DIRECTORS

         DIVISION                               AT-LARGE

     10  Courtney Harris   1:102/732    Don Daniels     1:107/210
     11  Bill Allbritten   1:11/301     Mort Sternheim  1:321/109
     12  Bill Bolton       3:711/403    Mark Grennan    1:147/1
     13  Irene Henderson   1:107/9       (vacant)
     14  Ken Kaplan        1:100/22     Ted Polczyinski 1:154/5
     15  Scott Miller      1:128/12     Matt Whelan     3:3/1
     16  Ivan Schaffel     1:141/390    Robert Rudolph  1:261/628
     17  Neal Curtin       1:343/1      Steve Jordan    1:206/2871
     18  Andrew Adler      1:135/47     Kris Veitch     1:147/30
     19  David Drexler     1:147/47      (vacant)
      2  Henk Wevers       2:500/1      David Melnik    1:107/233

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 33                  10 Jul 1989


                                                        __
                                   The World's First   /  \
                                      BBS Network     /|oo \
                                      * FidoNet *    (_|  /_)
     FidoCon '89 in San Jose, California              _`@/_ \    _
       at The Holiday Inn Park Plaza                 |     | \   \\
            August 24-27, 1989                       | (*) |  \   ))
                                        ______       |__U__| /  \//
                                       / Fido \       _//|| _\   /
                                      (________)     (_/(_|(____/ (tm)


                     R E G I S T R A T I O N   F O R M


     Name:    _______________________________________________________

     Address:    ____________________________________________________

     City:    _______________________ State: ____ Zip: ______________

     Country:    ____________________________________________________


     Phone Numbers:

     Day:    ________________________________________________________

     Evening:    ____________________________________________________

     Data:    _______________________________________________________


     Zone:Net/
     Node.Point:  ___________________________________________________

     Your BBS Name:  ________________________________________________


     BBS Software:  _____________________ Mailer: ___________________

     Modem Brand:  _____________________ Speed:  ____________________

     At what hotel will you be staying:  ____________________________

     Do you want an in room point?  (Holiday Inn only) ______________

     Are you a Sysop?  _____________

     Are you an IFNA Member?  ______

     Additional Guests:  __________
     (not attending conferences)

     Do you have any special requirements? (Sign Language translation,
     handicapped, etc.)
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 34                  10 Jul 1989


               ______________________________________________________


     Comments: ______________________________________________________

               ______________________________________________________

               ______________________________________________________


     Costs                                   How Many?   Cost
     ---------------------------             --------    -------

     Conference fee $60 .................... ________    _______
        ($75.00 after July 15)

     Friday Banquet  $30.00 ................ ________    _______

                                             ========    =======

     Totals ................................ ________    _______

     You may pay by Check,  Money Order,  or Credit Card.  Please send
     no  cash.   All monies must be in U.S.  Funds.   Checks should be
     made out to: "FidoCon '89"


     This form should be completed and mailed to:

                         Silicon Valley FidoCon '89
                         PO Box 390770
                         Mountain View, CA 94039


     You may register by Netmailing this completed form to 1:1/89  for
     processing.   Rename  it  to  ZNNNXXXX.REG where Z is  your  Zone
     number, N is your Net number, and X is your Node number.  US Mail
     confirmation  is  required  within  72  hours  to  confirm   your
     registration.

     If  you are paying by credit card,  please include the  following
     information.   For  your own security,  do not route any  message
     with your credit card number on it.  Crash it directly to 1:1/89.


     Master Card _______     Visa ________


     Credit Card Number _____________________________________________


     Expiration Date ________________________________________________

     Signature ______________________________________________________

     No  credit  card registrations will be accepted without  a  valid
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 35                  10 Jul 1989


     signature.


     Rooms  at the Holiday Inn may be reserved by calling the Hotel at
     408-998-0400,  and mentioning that you are with  FidoCon.   Rooms
     are $60.00 per night double occupancy.   Additional rollaways are
     available  for $10.00 per night.   To obtain these rates you must
     register before July 15.

     The official FidoCon '89 airline is American Airlines.   You  can
     receive  either  a  5%  reduction in supersaver fares  or  a  40%
     reduction in the regular day coach fare.  San Jose is an American
     Airlines  hub  with direct flights to most  major  cities.   When
     making reservations, you must call American's reservation number,
     800-433-1790, and reference Star number S0289VM.

     The official FidoCon '89 automobile rental agency is Alamo Rent a
     Car.  Rates are as described below. All rates  include  automatic
     transmission, air conditioning, radio, and unlimited mileage.

     Economy car (example: Geo Metro)  $32 day/$109 week.
     Compact car (example: Chevy Cavalier) $34 day/$120 week.
     Midsize car (example: Pontiac Grand Am) $36 day/$135 week.
     Standard car (example: Buick Regal) $38 day/$165 week.
     Luxury car (example: Buick LeSabre) $40 day/$239 week.

     To take advantage of this rate, call Alamo at 1-800-327-9633  and
     request  the convention rate. Mention FidoCon '89,  the  location
     and dates.


     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-28                Page 36                  10 Jul 1989


                                      __
                 The World's First   /  \
                    BBS Network     /|oo \
                    * FidoNet *    (_|  /_)
                                    _`@/_ \    _
                                   |     | \   \\
                                   | (*) |  \   ))
                      ______       |__U__| /  \//
                     / Fido \       _//|| _\   /
                    (________)     (_/(_|(____/ (tm)

            Membership for the International FidoNet Association

     Membership in IFNA is open to any individual or organization that
     pays  a  specified  annual   membership  fee.   IFNA  serves  the
     international  FidoNet-compatible  electronic  mail  community to
     increase worldwide communications.

     Member Name _______________________________  Date _______________
     Address _________________________________________________________
     City ____________________________________________________________
     State ________________________________  Zip _____________________
     Country _________________________________________________________
     Home Phone (Voice) ______________________________________________
     Work Phone (Voice) ______________________________________________

     Zone:Net/Node Number ____________________________________________
     BBS Name ________________________________________________________
     BBS Phone Number ________________________________________________
     Baud Rates Supported ____________________________________________
     Board Restrictions ______________________________________________

     Your Special Interests __________________________________________
     _________________________________________________________________
     _________________________________________________________________
     In what areas would you be willing to help in FidoNet? __________
     _________________________________________________________________
     _________________________________________________________________
     Send this membership form and a check or money order for $25 in
     US Funds to:
                   International FidoNet Association
                   PO Box 41143
                   St Louis, Missouri 63141
                   USA

     Thank you for your membership!  Your participation will help to
     insure the future of FidoNet.

     Please NOTE that IFNA is a general not-for-profit organization
     and Articles of Association and By-Laws were adopted by the
     membership in January 1987.  The second elected Board of Directors
     was filled in August 1988.  The IFNA Echomail Conference has been
     established on FidoNet to assist the Board.  We welcome your
     input to this Conference.

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
