From: alterego@ALTERANT.remove-a1g-this

Howdy,

What causes this?

2019-08-25 15:34:19 Grunged message (type 2) from 618:618/1 at offset 10769 in packet: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt
2019-08-25 15:34:19 Bad packet detected: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt

I've seen this a few times from various uplinks while rescanning messages bases
(to populate my synchronet).

I know with mystic it has occurred because the last message (in a mail bundle) doesnt have the right number of terminating nulls - but Ive also seen this from
some non mystic uplinks.
...ëîå*

... Want to have some fun? Walk into an antique shop and say, What's new?

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: digital.man@vert.synchro.net.remove-8rc-this

To: Alterego
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Alterego to All on Sun Aug 25 2019 03:42 pm

Howdy,

What causes this?

2019-08-25 15:34:19 Grunged message (type 2) from 618:618/1 at offset 10769 in packet: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt
2019-08-25 15:34:19 Bad packet detected: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt

A bad packet, likely a software bug somewhere.

I've seen this a few times from various uplinks while rescanning messages bases (to populate my synchronet).

I know with mystic it has occurred because the last message (in a mail bundle) doesnt have the right number of terminating nulls - but Ive also seen this from some non mystic uplinks.

Some software authors either couldn't follow the fidonet specs or they have some bug(s) that cause this. Not much can be done except to notify the party where it came from.

digital man

This Is Spinal Tap quote #41:
Ian Faith: It say's "Memphis show cancelled due to lack of advertising funds." Norco, CA WX: 70.5øF, 75.0% humidity, 1 mph SE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: alterego@ALTERANT.remove-i75-this

To: Digital Man
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Sat Aug 24 2019 11:47 pm

2019-08-25 15:34:19 Grunged message (type 2) from 618:618/1 at offset 10769

in packet: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt

2019-08-25 15:34:19 Bad packet detected: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt

A bad packet, likely a software bug somewhere.
Some software authors either couldn't follow the fidonet specs or they

have some bug(s) that cause this. Not much can be done except to notify the party where it came from.

So I did some checking of this packet - and I think I found the culprit.

00002a10 00 02 00 01 00 01 00 6a 02 fe 01 00 00 00 00 30 |.......j.......0| 00002a20 34 20 46 65 62 20 31 31 39 20 20 32 30 3a 32 36 |4 Feb 119 20:26| 00002a30 3a 33 32 04 00 4b 75 72 74 20 57 65 69 73 6b 65 |:32..Kurt Weiske| 00002a40 00 53 65 61 6e 20 44 65 6e 6e 69 73 00 4e 6f 20 |.Sean Dennis.No |

Notice that the date is "04 Feb 119".

I'm guessing you are barfing on the Date being an incorrect date.

Could I make a suggestion? It seems this message in the packet resulted in SBBSecho throwing the packet away (well not processing any more messages in it). The messages preceeding this packet were accepted and tossed, (and it appears that subsequent
messages would be OK).

Technically this field is of the right size (20 bytes), and thus the layout of the message is correct (well, I havent checked the other fields) - but this one
message has a bad date.

Is it possible to just throw this message away, and continue processing to see if other messages are valid (and if so, toss them)?
...ëîå*

... Children are a comfort in old age, and they will even help you reach it.

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: alterego@ALTERANT.remove-i75-this

To: Nightfox
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Alterego to Digital Man on Tue Aug 27 2019 11:44 am

Hey DM/Nightfox,

Some feedback.

When posting this message, I used my UTF8 terminal (iterm on the mac and Slyedit) - and as I posted it, it visually was correct.

However, when viewing the message after it has been posted, and now replying (and quoting the relevant parts), the layout has been lost:

IE:

00002a10 00 02 00 01 00 01 00 6a 02 fe 01 00 00 00 00 30

|.......j.......0| 00002a20 34 20 46 65 62 20 31 31 39 20 20 32 30 3a 32 36 |4 Feb 119 20:26| 00002a30 3a 33 32 04 00 4b 75 72 74 20 57 65

69 73 6b 65 |:32..Kurt Weiske| 00002a40 00 53 65 61 6e 20 44 65 6e 6e

69 73 00 4e 6f 20 |.Sean Dennis.No |

When I posted this in my original message, this was a normal hex dump (pasted in).

IE:
xxxxx 0x 0x 0x |text|
xxxxx 0x 0x 0x |text|

When later viewing the message (in my UTF8 terminal), the hex dump quoting has been put into 1 long line:

IE:

xxxxx 0x 0x 0x |text| xxxxx 0x 0x 0x |text|

When I view my posted message on a CP437 terminal (80x25), it is viewed correctly. However, if I quote it on a CP437 terminal (again using SLYEDIT), the hex dump line is wrapped incorrectly.

If I need to create some images to help view this, happy to :)
...ëîå*

... Anything that keeps a politician humble is healthy for democracy.

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: digital.man@vert.synchro.net.remove-glx-this

To: Alterego
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Alterego to Digital Man on Tue Aug 27 2019 11:44 am

Re: Grunged Messages
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Sat Aug 24 2019 11:47 pm

2019-08-25 15:34:19 Grunged message (type 2) from 618:618/1 at offset 10769 in packet: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt
2019-08-25 15:34:19 Bad packet detected: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt

A bad packet, likely a software bug somewhere.
Some software authors either couldn't follow the fidonet specs or they have some bug(s) that cause this. Not much can be done except to notify the party where it came from.

So I did some checking of this packet - and I think I found the culprit.

00002a10 00 02 00 01 00 01 00 6a 02 fe 01 00 00 00 00 30 |.......j.......0| 00002a20 34 20 46 65 62 20 31 31 39 20 20 32 30 3a 32 36 |4 Feb 119 20:26| 00002a30 3a 33 32 04 00 4b 75 72 74 20 57 65 69 73 6b 65 |:32..Kurt Weiske| 00002a40 00 53 65 61 6e 20 44 65 6e 6e 69 73 00 4e 6f 20 |.Sean Dennis.No |

Notice that the date is "04 Feb 119".

I'm guessing you are barfing on the Date being an incorrect date.

Could I make a suggestion? It seems this message in the packet resulted in SBBSecho throwing the packet away (well not processing any more messages in it). The messages preceeding this packet were accepted and tossed, (and it appears that subsequent messages would be OK).

Technically this field is of the right size (20 bytes), and thus the layout of the message is correct (well, I havent checked the other fields) - but this one message has a bad date.

Yup, good find.

Is it possible to just throw this message away, and continue processing to see if other messages are valid (and if so, toss them)?

Sure. I just committed a one-line change to do that.

digital man

This Is Spinal Tap quote #20:
Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation. Norco, CA WX: 78.5øF, 48.0% humidity, 1 mph S wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: alterego@ALTERANT.remove-4o0-this

To: Digital Man
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Mon Aug 26 2019 08:48 pm

2019-08-25 15:34:19 Grunged message (type 2) from 618:618/1 at offset

10769 in packet: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt

2019-08-25 15:34:19 Bad packet detected:

/opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt

A bad packet, likely a software bug somewhere.

Is it possible to just throw this message away, and continue processing to see if other messages are valid (and if so, toss them)?

Sure. I just committed a one-line change to do that.

So, some more feedback - I updated and re-tried the packet.

2019-08-29 15:00:57 Kurt Weiske (618:618/1) To: (3:510/1) Exported to /opt/sbbs/data/netmail/1.msg
2019-08-29 15:00:57 Grunged message (type 21057) from 618:618/1 at offset 10844
in packet: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt
2019-08-29 15:00:57 Bad packet detected: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt

1) The offset for the bad packet changed (10769->10844).

2) It created a netmail out of the bad messages (it was echomail for area:MIN_HUB).

3) It didnt toss the remaining messages after this bad message :(

No big deal for me - thought you might like to know...
...ëîå*

... The body of a dead enemy always smells sweet.

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: digital.man@vert.synchro.net.remove-tio-this

To: Alterego
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Alterego to Digital Man on Thu Aug 29 2019 03:11 pm

Re: Grunged Messages
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Mon Aug 26 2019 08:48 pm

2019-08-25 15:34:19 Grunged message (type 2) from 618:618/1 at offset 10769 in packet: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt
2019-08-25 15:34:19 Bad packet detected: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt

A bad packet, likely a software bug somewhere.

Is it possible to just throw this message away, and continue processing to see if other messages are valid (and if so, toss them)?

Sure. I just committed a one-line change to do that.

So, some more feedback - I updated and re-tried the packet.

2019-08-29 15:00:57 Kurt Weiske (618:618/1) To: (3:510/1) Exported to /opt/sbbs/data/netmail/1.msg
2019-08-29 15:00:57 Grunged message (type 21057) from 618:618/1 at offset 10844 in packet: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt
2019-08-29 15:00:57 Bad packet detected: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt

1) The offset for the bad packet changed (10769->10844).

Some *other* invalid packet header data was discovered (besides the DateTime field) then.

2) It created a netmail out of the bad messages (it was echomail for area:MIN_HUB).

It created a netmail message that included multiple bad echomail messages? I don't think I understand.

3) It didnt toss the remaining messages after this bad message :(

No big deal for me - thought you might like to know...

Well it will toss a message has that particular DateTime corruption you pointed
out. Other times of packet data corruption will still cause the packet to be rejected.

digital man

This Is Spinal Tap quote #15:
Review on "Shark Sandwich", merely a two word review: "Shit Sandwich".
Norco, CA WX: 91.5øF, 44.0% humidity, 1 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: alterego@ALTERANT.remove-7h8-this

To: Digital Man
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Thu Aug 29 2019 01:31 pm

2019-08-29 15:00:57 Kurt Weiske (618:618/1) To: (3:510/1) Exported to
/opt/sbbs/data/netmail/1.msg
2019-08-29 15:00:57 Grunged message (type 21057) from 618:618/1 at
offset 10844 in packet: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt
2019-08-29 15:00:57 Bad packet detected:
/opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt
1) The offset for the bad packet changed (10769->10844).

Some *other* invalid packet header data was discovered (besides the DateTime field) then.

OK... I'm curious as to what that was, so I'll see if I can find it...

2) It created a netmail out of the bad messages (it was echomail for

area:MIN_HUB).

This mailpacket was an echomail rescan - so it only has echmail in it. I'll validate that for sure with a packet dump tool that I wrote.

This was the same message that it was barfing on previously (because of the bad
time "4 Feb 119"). So instead of discarding it (or tossing it with an invalid date, it converted it to a Netmail
(*.msg) from 618:618/1 to 3:510/1). The 3:510/1 is incorrect (no zone info on echomail for a "to" receiptient?), but the echomail was from 618:618/1 to 618:510/1.

Here is the msg in question (and the beging of the next msg)

00002a10 00 02 00 01 00 01 00 6a 02 fe 01 00 00 00 00 30 |.......j.......0| 00002a20 34 20 46 65 62 20 31 31 39 20 20 32 30 3a 32 36 |4 Feb 119 20:26| 00002a30 3a 33 32 04 00 4b 75 72 74 20 57 65 69 73 6b 65 |:32..Kurt Weiske| 00002a40 00 53 65 61 6e 20 44 65 6e 6e 69 73 00 4e 6f 20 |.Sean Dennis.No | 00002a50 62 61 64 20 70 61 63 6b 65 74 73 00 41 52 45 41 |bad packets.AREA| 00002a60 3a 4d 49 4e 5f 48 55 42 0d 01 50 49 44 3a 20 42 |:MIN_HUB..PID: B| 00002a70 57 4d 41 58 32 20 33 2e 31 31 20 5b 45 76 61 6c |WMAX2 3.11 [Eval| 00002a80 5d 0d 01 4d 53 47 49 44 3a 20 36 31 38 3a 36 31 |]..MSGID: 618:61| 00002a90 38 2f 31 2e 30 20 35 63 35 38 66 32 36 32 0d 48 |8/1.0 5c58f262.H| 00002aa0 69 20 4b 75 72 74 2c 0d 0a 0d 0a 49 20 68 61 76 |i Kurt,....I hav| 00002ab0 65 6e 27 74 20 6e 6f 74 69 63 65 64 20 61 6e 79 |en't noticed any| 00002ac0 20 62 61 64 20 70 61 63 6b 65 74 73 20 6c 61 74 | bad packets lat| 00002ad0 65 6c 79 2e 2e 2e 20 3a 29 0d 0a 0d 0a 4c 61 74 |ely... :)....Lat| 00002ae0 65 72 2c 0d 0a 53 65 61 6e 0d 0a 0d 0a 20 0d 0a |er,..Sean.... ..| 00002af0 2d 2d 2d 20 4d 75 6c 74 69 4d 61 69 6c 2f 57 69 |--- MultiMail/Wi| 00002b00 6e 20 76 30 2e 35 31 0d 0a 20 2a 20 4f 72 69 67 |n v0.51.. * Orig| 00002b10 69 6e 3a 20 4d 69 63 72 6f 6e 65 74 20 57 6f 72 |in: Micronet Wor| 00002b20 6c 64 20 48 51 20 2d 20 62 62 73 2e 6f 75 74 70 |ld HQ - bbs.outp| 00002b30 6f 73 74 62 62 73 2e 6e 65 74 20 28 36 31 38 3a |ostbbs.net (618:| 00002b40 36 31 38 2f 31 29 0d 53 45 45 4e 2d 42 59 3a 20 |618/1).SEEN-BY: | 00002b50 31 30 30 2f 31 20 32 20 32 30 30 2f 31 20 32 35 |100/1 2 200/1 25| 00002b60 30 2f 31 20 33 30 30 2f 31 20 35 30 30 2f 31 20 |0/1 300/1 500/1 | 00002b70 35 31 30 2f 31 20 36 31 38 2f 31 20 32 0d 0a 01 |510/1 618/1 2...| 00002b80 50 41 54 48 3a 20 36 31 38 2f 31 0d 00 02 00 01 |PATH: 618/1.....| 00002b90 00 01 00 6a 02 fe 01 00 00 00 00 30 37 20 46 65 |...j.......07 Fe| 00002ba0 62 20 31 39 20 20 31 37 3a 33 34 3a 34 34 00 41 |b 19 17:34:44.A| 00002bb0 6c 6c 00 53 65 61 6e 20 44 65 6e 6e 69 73 00 46 |ll.Sean Dennis.F| 00002bc0 69 6e 61 6c 6c 79 2e 2e 2e 00 41 52 45 41 3a 4d |inally....AREA:M| 00002bd0 49 4e 5f 48 55 42 0d 01 4d 53 47 49 44 3a 20 36 |IN_HUB..MSGID: 6|

3) It didnt toss the remaining messages after this bad message :(

Well it will toss a message has that particular DateTime corruption you pointed out. Other times of packet data corruption will still cause the packet to be rejected.

That bad message wasnt tossed, and as you can see from the dump there is the "next" echo message, and it wasnt tossed either (nor any of the remaining messages).

(The change I suggested was given that this one echomail message is bad in the packet, then it should stop the remaining ones from getting tossed.)
...ëîå*

... SENILE.COM found...Out of Memory...

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: digital.man@vert.synchro.net.remove-s0-this

To: Alterego
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Alterego to Digital Man on Fri Aug 30 2019 08:18 am

Re: Grunged Messages
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Thu Aug 29 2019 01:31 pm

2019-08-29 15:00:57 Kurt Weiske (618:618/1) To: (3:510/1) Exported to
/opt/sbbs/data/netmail/1.msg
2019-08-29 15:00:57 Grunged message (type 21057) from 618:618/1 at
offset 10844 in packet: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt
2019-08-29 15:00:57 Bad packet detected:
/opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt
1) The offset for the bad packet changed (10769->10844).

Some *other* invalid packet header data was discovered (besides the DateTime field) then.

OK... I'm curious as to what that was, so I'll see if I can find it...

2) It created a netmail out of the bad messages (it was echomail for

area:MIN_HUB).

This mailpacket was an echomail rescan - so it only has echmail in it. I'll validate that for sure with a packet dump tool that I wrote.

You said "netmail" there (before). Any message in packet that does not contain an AREA: line is considered netmail.

This was the same message that it was barfing on previously (because of the bad time "4 Feb 119"). So instead of discarding it (or tossing it with an invalid date, it converted it to a Netmail
(*.msg) from 618:618/1 to 3:510/1). The 3:510/1 is incorrect (no zone info on echomail for a "to" receiptient?), but the echomail was from 618:618/1 to 618:510/1.

Here is the msg in question (and the beging of the next msg)

00002a10 00 02 00 01 00 01 00 6a 02 fe 01 00 00 00 00 30 |.......j.......0| 00002a20 34 20 46 65 62 20 31 31 39 20 20 32 30 3a 32 36 |4 Feb 119 20:26| 00002a30 3a 33 32 04 00 4b 75 72 74 20 57 65 69 73 6b 65 |:32..Kurt Weiske| 00002a40 00 53 65 61 6e 20 44 65 6e 6e 69 73 00 4e 6f 20 |.Sean Dennis.No | 00002a50 62 61 64 20 70 61 63 6b 65 74 73 00 41 52 45 41 |bad packets.AREA| 00002a60 3a 4d 49 4e 5f 48 55 42 0d 01 50 49 44 3a 20 42 |:MIN_HUB..PID: B| 00002a70 57 4d 41 58 32 20 33 2e 31 31 20 5b 45 76 61 6c |WMAX2 3.11 [Eval| 00002a80 5d 0d 01 4d 53 47 49 44 3a 20 36 31 38 3a 36 31 |]..MSGID: 618:61| 00002a90 38 2f 31 2e 30 20 35 63 35 38 66 32 36 32 0d 48 |8/1.0 5c58f262.H| 00002aa0 69 20 4b 75 72 74 2c 0d 0a 0d 0a 49 20 68 61 76 |i Kurt,....I hav| 00002ab0 65 6e 27 74 20 6e 6f 74 69 63 65 64 20 61 6e 79 |en't noticed any| 00002ac0 20 62 61 64 20 70 61 63 6b 65 74 73 20 6c 61 74 | bad packets lat| 00002ad0 65 6c 79 2e 2e 2e 20 3a 29 0d 0a 0d 0a 4c 61 74 |ely... :)....Lat| 00002ae0 65 72 2c 0d 0a 53 65 61 6e 0d 0a 0d 0a 20 0d 0a |er,..Sean.... ..| 00002af0 2d 2d 2d 20 4d 75 6c 74 69 4d 61 69 6c 2f 57 69 |--- MultiMail/Wi| 00002b00 6e 20 76 30 2e 35 31 0d 0a 20 2a 20 4f 72 69 67 |n v0.51.. * Orig| 00002b10 69 6e 3a 20 4d 69 63 72 6f 6e 65 74 20 57 6f 72 |in: Micronet Wor| 00002b20 6c 64 20 48 51 20 2d 20 62 62 73 2e 6f 75 74 70 |ld HQ - bbs.outp| 00002b30 6f 73 74 62 62 73 2e 6e 65 74 20 28 36 31 38 3a |ostbbs.net (618:| 00002b40 36 31 38 2f 31 29 0d 53 45 45 4e 2d 42 59 3a 20 |618/1).SEEN-BY: | 00002b50 31 30 30 2f 31 20 32 20 32 30 30 2f 31 20 32 35 |100/1 2 200/1 25| 00002b60 30 2f 31 20 33 30 30 2f 31 20 35 30 30 2f 31 20 |0/1 300/1 500/1 | 00002b70 35 31 30 2f 31 20 36 31 38 2f 31 20 32 0d 0a 01 |510/1 618/1 2...| 00002b80 50 41 54 48 3a 20 36 31 38 2f 31 0d 00 02 00 01 |PATH: 618/1.....| 00002b90 00 01 00 6a 02 fe 01 00 00 00 00 30 37 20 46 65 |...j.......07 Fe| 00002ba0 62 20 31 39 20 20 31 37 3a 33 34 3a 34 34 00 41 |b 19 17:34:44.A| 00002bb0 6c 6c 00 53 65 61 6e 20 44 65 6e 6e 69 73 00 46 |ll.Sean Dennis.F| 00002bc0 69 6e 61 6c 6c 79 2e 2e 2e 00 41 52 45 41 3a 4d |inally....AREA:M| 00002bd0 49 4e 5f 48 55 42 0d 01 4d 53 47 49 44 3a 20 36 |IN_HUB..MSGID: 6|

3) It didnt toss the remaining messages after this bad message :(

Well it will toss a message has that particular DateTime corruption you pointed out. Other times of packet data corruption will still cause the packet to be rejected.

That bad message wasnt tossed, and as you can see from the dump there is the "next" echo message, and it wasnt tossed either (nor any of the remaining messages).

You can send me the packet, but if it's corrupted, it's corrupted. How it's corrupted isn't all that important or interesting. <shrug>

(The change I suggested was given that this one echomail message is bad in the packet, then it should stop the remaining ones from getting tossed.)

That's how it already works. Packed messages are parsed serially so usually one
bad ("grunged") packed message throws off the entire process for that packet, so we just give up and save it as ".bad". This prevents weirdness like corrupted echomail
messages being tossed as netmail. :-)

digital man

Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #46:
MODEM = Modulator/Demodulator
Norco, CA WX: 92.3øF, 41.0% humidity, 6 mph ESE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: alterego@ALTERANT.remove-w27-this

To: Digital Man
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Alterego to Digital Man on Fri Aug 30 2019 08:18 am

DM

I originally posted this message in Slyedit on a CP437 terminal.

Posting it, and displaying it afterwards, it looks ok.

But on a UTF terminal it is wrapped horribly.

It was pasted in text 78 chars wide (a hex dump). So re-displaying it on a UTF termial, your display wrapping is not happy about somthing, and the pasted in text is merged to a single long line.

Here is the msg in question (and the beging of the next msg)

00002a10 00 02 00 01 00 01 00 6a 02 fe 01 00 00 00 00 30

|.......j.......0| 00002a20 34 20 46 65 62 20 31 31 39 20 20 32 30 3a 32 36 |4 Feb 119 20:26| 00002a30 3a 33 32 04 00 4b 75 72 74 20 57 65 69

73
6b 65 |:32..Kurt Weiske| 00002a40 00 53 65 61 6e 20 44 65 6e 6e 69 73 00

4e 6f 20 |.Sean Dennis.No | 00002a50 62 61 64 20 70 61 63 6b 65 74 73 00 41 52 45 41 |bad packets.AREA| 00002a60 3a 4d 49 4e 5f

48

I've switched out SLYedit for Deuce's FSEditor to see how pasted text would go here (in case it is editor related). This is being posted on a UTF8 terminal...

00002a10 00 02 00 01 00 01 00 6a 02 fe 01 00 00 00 00 30 |.......j.......0| 00002a20 34 20 46 65 62 20 31 31 39 20 20 32 30 3a 32 36 |4 Feb 119 20:26| 00002a30 3a 33 32 04 00 4b 75 72 74 20 57 65 69 73 6b 65 |:32..Kurt Weiske| 00002a40 00 53 65 61 6e 20 44 65 6e 6e 69 73 00 4e 6f 20 |.Sean Dennis.No | 00002a50 62 61 64 20 70 61 63 6b 65 74 73 00 41 52 45 41 |bad packets.AREA| 00002a60 3a 4d 49 4e 5f 48 55 42 0d 01 50 49 44 3a 20 42 |:MIN_HUB..PID: B|

The text above it pasted in at 78 chars wide.

BTW: I'm seeing funky stuff happen with backspace (since my user config is backspace is ^H (ascii 8?)


...ëîå*

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: digital.man@vert.synchro.net.remove-gyq-this

To: Alterego
Re: Message wrapping
By: Alterego to Digital Man on Fri Aug 30 2019 09:28 am

Re: Grunged Messages
By: Alterego to Digital Man on Fri Aug 30 2019 08:18 am

DM

I originally posted this message in Slyedit on a CP437 terminal.

Posting it, and displaying it afterwards, it looks ok.

But on a UTF terminal it is wrapped horribly.

UTF-8 shouldn't effect wrapping. Perhaps you just mean on a terminal > 80 columns wide?

It was pasted in text 78 chars wide (a hex dump). So re-displaying it on a UTF termial, your display wrapping is not happy about somthing, and the pasted in text is merged to a single long line.

Here is the msg in question (and the beging of the next msg)

00002a10 00 02 00 01 00 01 00 6a 02 fe 01 00 00 00 00 30 |.......j.......0| 00002a20 34 20 46 65 62 20 31 31 39 20 20 32 30 3a 32 36 |4 Feb 119 20:26| 00002a30 3a 33 32 04 00 4b 75 72 74 20 57 65 69 73 6b 65 |:32..Kurt Weiske| 00002a40 00 53 65 61 6e 20 44 65 6e 6e 69 73 00 4e 6f 20 |.Sean Dennis.No | 00002a50 62 61 64 20 70 61 63 6b 65 74 73 00 41 52 45 41 |bad packets.AREA| 00002a60 3a 4d 49 4e 5f 48

I've switched out SLYedit for Deuce's FSEditor to see how pasted text would go here (in case it is editor related). This is being posted on a UTF8 terminal...

00002a10 00 02 00 01 00 01 00 6a 02 fe 01 00 00 00 00 30 |.......j.......0| 00002a20 34 20 46 65 62 20 31 31 39 20 20 32 30 3a 32 36 |4 Feb 119 20:26| 00002a30 3a 33 32 04 00 4b 75 72 74 20 57 65 69 73 6b 65 |:32..Kurt Weiske| 00002a40 00 53 65 61 6e 20 44 65 6e 6e 69 73 00 4e 6f 20 |.Sean Dennis.No | 00002a50 62 61 64 20 70 61 63 6b 65 74 73 00 41 52 45 41 |bad packets.AREA| 00002a60 3a 4d 49 4e 5f 48 55 42 0d 01 50 49 44 3a 20 42 |:MIN_HUB..PID: B|

The text above it pasted in at 78 chars wide.

BTW: I'm seeing funky stuff happen with backspace (since my user config is backspace is ^H (ascii 8?)

So toggle that setting in user defaults.

digital man

This Is Spinal Tap quote #5:
Nigel Tufnel: Authorities said... best leave it... unsolved.
Norco, CA WX: 88.3øF, 47.0% humidity, 12 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: alterego@ALTERANT.remove-jpg-this

To: Digital Man
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Thu Aug 29 2019 03:50 pm

You said "netmail" there (before). Any message in packet that does not

contain an AREA: line is considered netmail.

I know - but SBBSecho created a *.msg file (and the log made me conclude it was
a netmail) - but as you can see from the hex dump it is definately an echomail).

You can send me the packet, but if it's corrupted, it's corrupted. How it's

corrupted isn't all that important or interesting. <shrug>

But that's my point.

I dont think the packet is corrupt, but the message inside it is invalid - it has bad text representing a date (but its structure is still valid - it was 20 chars). I'm OK with "throw that message away away", but it would be great if it
continued on to
parse for any more valid messages and toss them (especially since it already parsed 5 or 6 before the bad one - and the structure of the message was valid).

I've since got another bad packet from FSXnet - it had a message with a subject
length of 81 characters (null terminated), and while I would agree that this message had a bad structure (and thus any additional ones are likely to be "off" by 9 chars - and
thus probably wouldnt be parsed correctly) - it might be appropriate to throw that packet because the data was bad and the structure was bad.

I know my OCD is probably kicking in here - but I thought I'd bring it up in case you werent aware of that scenario.

I'll send you the packet in case you do want to explore it. I have the bad subject line packet too if that is of any value.


...ëîå*

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: digital.man@vert.synchro.net.remove-wey-this

To: Alterego
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Alterego to Digital Man on Fri Aug 30 2019 09:52 am

Re: Grunged Messages
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Thu Aug 29 2019 03:50 pm

You said "netmail" there (before). Any message in packet that does not contain an AREA: line is considered netmail.

I know - but SBBSecho created a *.msg file (and the log made me conclude it was a netmail) - but as you can see from the hex dump it is definately an echomail).

You can send me the packet, but if it's corrupted, it's corrupted. How it's corrupted isn't all that important or interesting. <shrug>

But that's my point.

I dont think the packet is corrupt, but the message inside it is invalid - it has bad text representing a date (but its structure is still valid - it was 20 chars). I'm OK with "throw that message away away", but it would be great if it continued on to parse for any more valid messages and toss them (especially since it already parsed 5 or 6 before the bad one - and the structure of the message was valid).

I've since got another bad packet from FSXnet - it had a message with a subject length of 81 characters (null terminated), and while I would agree that this message had a bad structure (and thus any additional ones are likely to be "off" by 9 chars - and thus probably wouldnt be parsed correctly) - it might be appropriate to throw that packet because the data was bad and the structure was bad.

I know my OCD is probably kicking in here - but I thought I'd bring it up in case you werent aware of that scenario.

I'll send you the packet in case you do want to explore it. I have the bad subject line packet too if that is of any value.

I think it's of more value to the author of the software that is generating the
bad packets. Try going that route.

In the mean-time, I think that example packet you emailed me is a clear indicator that the "20th-byte-of-DateTime-field must be null" is a good check for a valid packed-message header, so I'm going to restore that check to SBBSecho.

digital man

This Is Spinal Tap quote #10:
Dozens of people spontaneously combust each year... just not widely reported. Norco, CA WX: 87.3øF, 49.0% humidity, 11 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: digital.man@vert.synchro.net.remove-112x-this

To: Alterego
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Thu Aug 29 2019 05:54 pm

Re: Grunged Messages
By: Alterego to Digital Man on Fri Aug 30 2019 09:52 am

Re: Grunged Messages
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Thu Aug 29 2019 03:50 pm

You said "netmail" there (before). Any message in packet that does not contain an AREA: line is considered netmail.

I know - but SBBSecho created a *.msg file (and the log made me conclude it was a netmail) - but as you can see from the hex dump it is definately an echomail).

You can send me the packet, but if it's corrupted, it's corrupted. How it's corrupted isn't all that important or interesting. <shrug>

But that's my point.

I dont think the packet is corrupt, but the message inside it is invalid - it has bad text representing a date (but its structure is still valid - it was 20 chars). I'm OK with "throw that message away away", but it would be great if it continued on to parse for any more valid messages and toss them (especially since it already parsed 5 or 6 before the bad one - and the structure of the message was valid).

I've since got another bad packet from FSXnet - it had a message with a subject length of 81 characters (null terminated), and while I would agree that this message had a bad structure (and thus any additional ones are likely to be "off" by 9 chars - and thus probably wouldnt be parsed correctly) - it might be appropriate to throw that packet because the data was bad and the structure was bad.

I know my OCD is probably kicking in here - but I thought I'd bring it up in case you werent aware of that scenario.

I'll send you the packet in case you do want to explore it. I have the bad subject line packet too if that is of any value.

I think it's of more value to the author of the software that is generating the bad packets. Try going that route.

In the mean-time, I think that example packet you emailed me is a clear indicator that the "20th-byte-of-DateTime-field must be null" is a good check for a valid packed-message header, so I'm going to restore that check to SBBSecho.

Here is the dump of the first corrupted message in the packet you sent me:

02A10: 00 02 00 01 00 01 00 6A - 02 FE 01 00 00 00 00 30 : .......j.......0 02A20: 34 20 46 65 62 20 31 31 - 39 20 20 32 30 3A 32 36 : 4 Feb 119 20:26 02A30: 3A 33 32 04 00 4B 75 72 - 74 20 57 65 69 73 6B 65 : :32..Kurt Weiske 02A40: 00 53 65 61 6E 20 44 65 - 6E 6E 69 73 00 4E 6F 20 : .Sean Dennis.No 02A50: 62 61 64 20 70 61 63 6B - 65 74 73 00 41 52 45 41 : bad packets.AREA 02A60: 3A 4D 49 4E 5F 48 55 42 - 0D 01 50 49 44 3A 20 42 : :MIN_HUB..PID: B 02A70: 57 4D 41 58 32 20 33 2E - 31 31 20 5B 45 76 61 6C : WMAX2 3.11 [Eval 02A80: 5D 0D 01 4D 53 47 49 44 - 3A 20 36 31 38 3A 36 31 : ]..MSGID: 618:61 02A90: 38 2F 31 2E 30 20 35 63 - 35 38 66 32 36 32 0D 48 : 8/1.0 5c58f262.H 02AA0: 69 20 4B 75 72 74 2C 0D - 0A 0D 0A 49 20 68 61 76 : i Kurt,....I hav 02AB0: 65 6E 27 74 20 6E 6F 74 - 69 63 65 64 20 61 6E 79 : en't noticed any 02AC0: 20 62 61 64 20 70 61 63 - 6B 65 74 73 20 6C 61 74 : bad packets lat 02AD0: 65 6C 79 2E 2E 2E 20 3A - 29 0D 0A 0D 0A 4C 61 74 : ely... :)....Lat 02AE0: 65 72 2C 0D 0A 53 65 61 - 6E 0D 0A 0D 0A 20 0D 0A : er,..Sean.... .. 02AF0: 2D 2D 2D 20 4D 75 6C 74 - 69 4D 61 69 6C 2F 57 69 : --- MultiMail/Wi 02B00: 6E 20 76 30 2E 35 31 0D - 0A 20 2A 20 4F 72 69 67 : n v0.51.. * Orig 02B10: 69 6E 3A 20 4D 69 63 72 - 6F 6E 65 74 20 57 6F 72 : in: Micronet Wor 02B20: 6C 64 20 48 51 20 2D 20 - 62 62 73 2E 6F 75 74 70 : ld HQ - bbs.outp 02B30: 6F 73 74 62 62 73 2E 6E - 65 74 20 28 36 31 38 3A : ostbbs.net (618: 02B40: 36 31 38 2F 31 29 0D 53 - 45 45 4E 2D 42 59 3A 20 : 618/1).SEEN-BY: 02B50: 31 30 30 2F 31 20 32 20 - 32 30 30 2F 31 20 32 35 : 100/1 2 200/1 25 02B60: 30 2F 31 20 33 30 30 2F - 31 20 35 30 30 2F 31 20 : 0/1 300/1 500/1 02B70: 35 31 30 2F 31 20 36 31 - 38 2F 31 20 32 0D 0A 01 : 510/1 618/1 2... 02B80: 50 41 54 48 3A 20 36 31 - 38 2F 31 0D 00

The first indicator that the message header is bad ("grunged") is the 20th byte
of the DateTime field is non-null.

The second indicator that the message header is bad is that the null-terminated
field at offset 0x22 (the toUserName) is "04 00" (in hex). That's clearly not a
valid string.

The next null-terminated field is supposed to be the fromUserName is "Kurt Weiske" (looks okay).

The next null-terminated field is supposed to be the subject is "Sean Dennis", okay, that's suspect (probably wrong, likely the actual fromUserName value).

The next null-terminated field is supposed to be the message text, is "No bad packets". Hrm. That looks like it's probably supposed to be the message *subject*. Uh oh, now we're out-of-sync. Notice there's no "AREA:" line, so that would be interpretted
as a netmail message if one were to continue to treat this as a valid message (a "bad idea" {tm}).

So the next 2 bytes should be "02 00", the start of a new packed-message header, but they're not - it's the actual message text of the corrupted message. So this is not really recoverable. You can't just keep parsing until you come across a "02 00"
pattern as that could be all kinds of other valid values or just garbage.

This packet is corrupt.

digital man

Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #5:
BBS = Bulletin Board System
Norco, CA WX: 85.5øF, 53.0% humidity, 18 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: alterego@ALTERANT.remove-fyq-this

To: Digital Man
Re: Message wrapping
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Thu Aug 29 2019 05:31 pm

But on a UTF terminal it is wrapped horribly.

UTF-8 shouldn't effect wrapping. Perhaps you just mean on a terminal > 80 columns wide?

OK, you are right, I probably should have said on "my" UTF terminal which is > 80 chars wide. I guess it might be happening on a CP437 terminal too.

Anyway, I dont think it should, since it is not posted that way...

BTW: I'm seeing funky stuff happen with backspace (since my user config is backspace is ^H (ascii 8?)

So toggle that setting in user defaults.

Well, I know I can do that. I thougth you were building Synchronet so that it could work well with both modes. I was just reporting that it doesnt in that scenario. :)

I guess I should just stick to using one terminal ...



...ëîå*

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: digital.man@vert.synchro.net.remove-763-this

To: Alterego
Re: Message wrapping
By: Alterego to Digital Man on Fri Aug 30 2019 10:45 am

Re: Message wrapping
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Thu Aug 29 2019 05:31 pm

But on a UTF terminal it is wrapped horribly.

UTF-8 shouldn't effect wrapping. Perhaps you just mean on a terminal > 80 columns wide?

OK, you are right, I probably should have said on "my" UTF terminal which is

80 chars wide. I guess it might be happening on a CP437 terminal too.

Yeah, if you run SyncTERM in a "wide" screen mode, you should see the same behavior.

Anyway, I dont think it should, since it is not posted that way...

Word/line-wrapping (re-flowing) message text is a tough thing to get right in all scenarios.

BTW: I'm seeing funky stuff happen with backspace (since my user config is backspace is ^H (ascii 8?)

So toggle that setting in user defaults.

Well, I know I can do that. I thougth you were building Synchronet so that it could work well with both modes. I was just reporting that it doesnt in that scenario. :)

I haven't thought of any method to auto-detect a backspace (08) vs. delete (7F)
keyboard/terminal. At least for now, it's a manual toggle option.

I guess I should just stick to using one terminal ...

It is a hassle to switch back and forth. One "auto" method would be have the user hit their backspace/left-delete key every time they login. Many Commodore BBSes do that (PETSCII backspace is Ctrl-T).

digital man

Synchronet "Real Fact" #25:
The Digital Dynamics company ceased day-to-day opperations in late 1995.
Norco, CA WX: 84.8øF, 53.0% humidity, 13 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: alterego@ALTERANT.remove-vie-this

To: Digital Man
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Thu Aug 29 2019 05:49 pm

The first bytes following the 20-byte DateTime field are supposed to be

the "toUserName", but in this message header first bytes are "04 00", clearly this message is totally messed up and the first

indication (that the 20th byte of the DateTime was non-null) was a good

indicator of that. Trying to parse further is just making things worse as demonstrated by my pktdump utility:

Hmm, the 20th byte should be null? I know you've bought this up a similiar discussion like this in the FTSC echo - but for the date field I didnt think it
needed to be.

+-----------------------+-----------------------+
14 E | |
~ DateTime ~
| 20 bytes |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+
34 22 | toUserName |
~ max 36 bytes ~
| null terminated |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+

From FTSC-0001.16 "to" should be null terminated but date isnt shown that way.

I do see earlier in that document this though:

DateTime = (* a character string 20 characters long *)
(* 01 Jan 86 02:34:56 *)
DayOfMonth " " Month " " Year " "
" " HH ":" MM ":" SS
Null

So, I assumed it wasnt null terminated. (But I didnt think that that didnt make
sense, because if the date is stored as per the example it is 19 chars).

<humble>

Can I change my argument - the structure is not valid, so I agree it should be thrown away ;)
...ëîå*

... This BBS has achieved Air superiority.

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: alterego@ALTERANT.remove-8jz-this

To: Digital Man
Re: Message wrapping
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Thu Aug 29 2019 06:42 pm

Word/line-wrapping (re-flowing) message text is a tough thing to get right

in all scenarios.

I know that it would be - but there is something "different" between that hexdump past and normal typing.

There is also something different about the message I posted, where I pasted in
from FTSC-0001. It's not being horribly wrapped on my wide UTF terminal.

I guess
I can test
To see if this sentence
Is a single sentence or over 4 lines.

The above sentice, was posted over 4 lines, using normal typing and "return" at
the end of the line. Each line starts with a capital.

If it is wrapped, then I guess this IS a difficult problem to solve - can the auto wrapping be "turned off"?

If it isnt wrapped, then I will ask, why the pasted in content was.
...ëîå*

... Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes right to the bone.

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: digital.man@vert.synchro.net.remove-hrn-this

To: Alterego
Re: Grunged Messages
By: Alterego to Digital Man on Fri Aug 30 2019 11:50 am

Re: Grunged Messages
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Thu Aug 29 2019 05:49 pm

The first bytes following the 20-byte DateTime field are supposed to be the "toUserName", but in this message header first bytes are "04 00", clearly this message is totally messed up and the first
indication (that the 20th byte of the DateTime was non-null) was a good indicator of that. Trying to parse further is just making things worse as demonstrated by my pktdump utility:

Hmm, the 20th byte should be null? I know you've bought this up a similiar discussion like this in the FTSC echo - but for the date field I didnt think it needed to be.

Yeah, the DateTime field has to be null-terminated too. It's a poorly written spec.

+-----------------------+-----------------------+
14 E | |
~ DateTime ~
| 20 bytes |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+
34 22 | toUserName |
~ max 36 bytes ~
| null terminated |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+

From FTSC-0001.16 "to" should be null terminated but date isnt shown that way.

I do see earlier in that document this though:

DateTime = (* a character string 20 characters long *)
(* 01 Jan 86 02:34:56 *)
DayOfMonth " " Month " " Year " "
" " HH ":" MM ":" SS
Null

That "Null" there is the indicator that it's null-terminated.

So, I assumed it wasnt null terminated. (But I didnt think that that didnt make sense, because if the date is stored as per the example it is 19 chars).

<humble>

Can I change my argument - the structure is not valid, so I agree it should be thrown away ;)

And if possible, let the originating system know that they're sending back packets.

digital man

Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #24:
DTE = Data Terminal Equipment
Norco, CA WX: 78.4øF, 63.0% humidity, 6 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: alterego@ALTERANT.remove-8jz-this

To: Digital Man
Re: Message wrapping
By: Alterego to Digital Man on Fri Aug 30 2019 12:44 pm

I guess
I can test
To see if this sentence
Is a single sentence or over 4 lines.

If it isnt wrapped, then I will ask, why the pasted in content was.

And for the record, it wasnt :)
...ëîå*

... No one can feel as helpless as the owner of a sick goldfish.

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: digital.man@vert.synchro.net.remove-78r-this

To: Alterego
Re: Message wrapping
By: Alterego to Digital Man on Fri Aug 30 2019 12:44 pm

Re: Message wrapping
By: Digital Man to Alterego on Thu Aug 29 2019 06:42 pm

Word/line-wrapping (re-flowing) message text is a tough thing to get right in all scenarios.

I know that it would be - but there is something "different" between that hexdump past and normal typing.

There is also something different about the message I posted, where I pasted in from FTSC-0001. It's not being horribly wrapped on my wide UTF terminal.

"UTF" is not a factor here. It might depend on what editor you used to post the
message or how you're viewing or possible the content that was posted (e.g. line-lengths).

I guess
I can test
To see if this sentence
Is a single sentence or over 4 lines.

The above sentice, was posted over 4 lines, using normal typing and "return" at the end of the line. Each line starts with a capital.

If it is wrapped, then I guess this IS a difficult problem to solve - can the auto wrapping be "turned off"?

When viewing messages via the internal message reading logic in Synchronet, word-wrapping is disabled while in Raw I/O mode. Raw I/O mode is toggled with the Ctrl-Z key.

If it isnt wrapped, then I will ask, why the pasted in content was.

You might have to ask the of SlyEdit. A detailed comparison of the original message text versus the message text saved to the message base (e.g. viewable with smbutil) versus the message text as displayed on the BBS. Also, there's an
optional message
editor field (COLS/columns) which is used to indicate the width of the original
terminal used to write the message and offer help to any software that may need
to re-wrap the message for display. Double-check that COLS header field value.

digital man

Synchronet "Real Fact" #76:
Michael Swindell still has the "Synchronet Blimp" in his possession.
Norco, CA WX: 78.0øF, 63.0% humidity, 5 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: poindexter.fortran@REALITY.remove-3hs-this

To: Alterego

Alterego wrote to Digital Man <=-

So, some more feedback - I updated and re-tried the packet.

2019-08-29 15:00:57 Kurt Weiske (618:618/1) To: (3:510/1) Exported to /opt/sbbs/data/netmail/1.msg 2019-08-29 15:00:57 Grunged message (type 21057) from 618:618/1 at offset 10844 in packet: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt 2019-08-29 15:00:57 Bad packet detected: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt

Weird - I'm 618:300/1 and don't recall sending netmail to fido zone 3, especially not from my Micronet address?



... What do you think of the guests?
--- MultiMail/XT v0.52
þ Synchronet þ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: mark.lewis@1:3634/12.73.remove-mci-this

To: Alterego

On 2019 Aug 30 08:18:20, you wrote to Digital Man:

This was the same message that it was barfing on previously (because of

the

bad time "4 Feb 119").

this date problem looks like one of the QWK y2k bugs that some software ran into... they subtract 1900 from the year value retrieved so they can get the last two digits mathematically... they do that instead of converting to a string and lopping off the first two characters... many QWK programs that have this problem also corrupt the the TO: name (IIRC) so that it has some random looking alphanumeric character prepended to it...

on initial glance, i want to suspect a (maximus) BBS side problem since the message was written in multimail which does not have the y2k problems like bluewave and others have... it could be an unpatched squish tosser which is used a lot with maximus systems... the sources are available and i assume that sean has them at hand... he just needs to know about the problems... he routes some mail through here, too, but i've not seen anything bad from his system in a while...

)\/(ark

Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
... Butter hardness is proportional to the softness of the bread.
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
--- Synchronet 3.17b-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: alterego@ALTERANT.remove-5y7-this

To: poindexter FORTRAN
Re: Re: Grunged Messages
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Alterego on Thu Aug 29 2019 06:07 am

2019-08-29 15:00:57 Kurt Weiske (618:618/1) To: (3:510/1) Exported to /opt/sbbs/data/netmail/1.msg 2019-08-29 15:00:57 Grunged message (type 21057) from 618:618/1 at offset 10844 in packet:
/opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt 2019-08-29 15:00:57 Bad packet detected: /opt/sbbs/fido/inbound/d622a770.pkt

Weird - I'm 618:300/1 and don't recall sending netmail to fido zone 3,

especially not from my Micronet address?

You didnt.

I got a bad packet...
...ëîå*

... It's so true to life it's hardly true.

---
þ Synchronet þ Alterant | an SBBS in Docker on Pi!
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
* Vertrauen - Riverside County, California - telnet://vert.synchro.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)