testing new old mailer
--- Zeus BBS 1.5
* Origin: Silent Node - silentnode.ddns.net:6400 (1:153/153.0)

testing new old mailer

Looks good here.. :)

@SEEN-BY: 153/153 757
@PATH: 153/153 757
@PID: ZeusBBS 1.5 0
@MSGID: 1:153/153 7FB50F52

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Finglonger wrote to <=-

testing new old mailer

Looks good here

Sean


... TCOB1: https://binkd.rima.ie telnet: binkd.rima.ie

--- BBBS/LiR v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: TCOB1: https/binkd/telnet binkd.rima.ie (2:263/1)

Hi Finglonger,

On 2025-04-12 23:51:40, you wrote to :

The To: and Subject: fields were empty.

@MSGID: 1:153/153 7FB50F52
@PID: ZeusBBS 1.5 0

There is no TZUTC kludged.

testing new old mailer
--- Zeus BBS 1.5
* Origin: Silent Node - silentnode.ddns.net:6400 (1:153/153.0)
SEEN-BY: 103/705 124/5016 134/100 153/135 143 148 149 151 153 757 7083 SEEN-BY: 154/10 30 203/0 221/0 6 240/1120 5832 263/1 280/464 5003 5006 SEEN-BY: 280/5555 292/854 8125 301/1 310/31 341/66 234 396/45 423/120 SEEN-BY: 460/58 467/888 633/280 712/848 770/1 3634/12 5020/400
@PATH: 153/153 757 280/464

Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

testing new old mailer
--- Zeus BBS 1.5
* Origin: Silent Node - silentnode.ddns.net:6400 (1:153/153.0)

The TO and SUBJECT fields were received empty here.

Mike
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Hello Wilfred!

** On Sunday 13.04.25 - 11:36, Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Finglonger:

Hi Finglonger,

On 2025-04-12 23:51:40, you wrote to :

The To: and Subject: fields were empty.

@MSGID: 1:153/153 7FB50F52
@PID: ZeusBBS 1.5 0

There is no TZUTC kludged.

EMP: /FIDO/FIDOTEST
ABS: Finglonger@2:221/1
BET:
ROT: 2:221/1!153/153 757 280/464 221/1
MID: 1:153/153 7FB50F52
EDA: 20250412235100W+0
LEN: 107
MAILER: ZeusBBS 1.5 0 / Zeus BBS 1.5
X_C:
X-XP-NTP: 30

A TZUTC was detected with OpenXP. That's the "EDA" above.



--
../|ug

--- OpenXP 5.0.64
* Origin: The ONLY point that matters --> . <-- (1:153/757.21)

Hi August,

On 2025-04-14 09:17:00, you wrote to me:

EDA: 20250412235100W+0

A TZUTC was detected with OpenXP. That's the "EDA" above.

I don't know how this works in OpenXP, but there wasn't a TZUTC kludge in the original message.

Is the "+0" maybe specifying UTC time, which could be identical to the absence of a TZUTC kludge?


Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Hello Wilfred!

EDA: 20250412235100W+0

A TZUTC was detected with OpenXP. That's the "EDA" above.

I don't know how this works in OpenXP, but there wasn't a TZUTC kludge
in the original message.

Is the "+0" maybe specifying UTC time, which could be identical to the absence of a TZUTC kludge?

I think you've got that right. In lieu of ZZUTC, EDT would
always be W+0 (zero offset), even if the offset is officially
UTC+0

--
../|ug

--- OpenXP 5.0.64
* Origin: The ONLY point that matters --> . <-- (1:153/757.21)

So what are we saying here? Am I not sending a field that I should be
sending? The only thing I can think of that I can change would be the
packet header type I'm using...? I would have to go to an older type 2, but I'm using the 0039 (matching my hub).

I'm not sure what else I can change... I wonder if I have a setting
disabled in my zmp.cfg file for the Zeus mailer...

Thanks guys, getting close to having this stuff all work.

--- Zeus BBS 1.5
* Origin: Silent Node - silentnode.ddns.net:6400 (1:153/153.0)

Hi John,

On 2025-04-14 09:33:53, you wrote to August Abolins:

So what are we saying here? Am I not sending a field that I should be sending?

The TZUTC is nice to have, but not mandatory.

The only thing I can think of that I can change would be the packet
header type I'm using...? I would have to go to an older type 2, but
I'm using the 0039 (matching my hub).

It's not the pkt type. It's your message editor that should add it.

I'm not sure what else I can change... I wonder if I have a setting disabled in my zmp.cfg file for the Zeus mailer...

I'm not sure, but Zeus probably can't produce a TZUTC kludge. We should check in an AmigaNet area, where the experts are. ;-)


Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Hey Wilfred!

On Mon, Apr 14 2025 12:30:22 -0500, you wrote:

The TZUTC is nice to have, but not mandatory.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Then why make it a point to tell people they don't have it?

I'm not sure, but Zeus probably can't produce a TZUTC kludge. We should check in an AmigaNet area, where the experts are. ;-)

So what if he can't? Maybe his system is using UTC and internet RFC capable clients like OpenXP, as well as my client are correct?

Here is what his message date looked like here, which agrees with August's:

Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 09:33:53 +0000

.. and here's the date of your message that I'm replying to:

Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 19:30:22 +0200

I didn't need a TZUTC kludge for either of those..

Regards,
Nick

... Sarcasm: because beating people up is illegal.
--- SBBSecho 3.24-Linux
* Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/700)

Hey Wilfred!

On Mon, Apr 14 2025 17:29:00 -0500, you wrote:

Here is what his message date looked like here, which agrees with August's: Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 09:33:53 +0000

Sigh, copy and pasted that off the wrong message, here is the right one that matches the one August posted:

Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2025 23:51:40 +0000

;)
Regards,
Nick

... Sarcasm: because beating people up is illegal.
--- SBBSecho 3.24-Linux
* Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/700)

Hi Nick,

On 2025-04-14 17:29:00, you wrote to me:

The TZUTC is nice to have, but not mandatory.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Then why make it a point to tell people they don't have it?

Because it's a standard, most messages in fido have it, and it contains useful information.

I'm not sure, but Zeus probably can't produce a TZUTC kludge. We should
check in an AmigaNet area, where the experts are. ;-)

So what if he can't?

Then we are done investigating...

Maybe his system is using UTC

Then the kludge would be: TZUTC: 0000

and internet RFC capable clients like OpenXP, as well as my client are correct?

Your message contains: @TZUTC: -0500 ?

Here is what his message date looked like here, which agrees with August's:

Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 09:33:53 +0000

.. and here's the date of your message that I'm replying to:

Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 19:30:22 +0200

I didn't need a TZUTC kludge for either of those..

The +0200 comes from the TZUTC kludge! Without the kludge you can't know if the message date is my local time, or UTC.


Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

On 14 Apr 25 17:29:00, Nick Boel said the following to Wilfred Van Velzen:

The TZUTC is nice to have, but not mandatory.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Then why make it a point to tell people they don't have it?

Because he's a techno-dick?

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)

Hey Wilfred!

On Tue, Apr 15 2025 06:10:34 -0500, you wrote:

Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 19:30:22 +0200

I didn't need a TZUTC kludge for either of those..

The +0200 comes from the TZUTC kludge! Without the kludge you can't
know if the message date is my local time, or UTC.

Then, maybe it's possible Synchronet removes the kludge, puts the proper information in the "Date" field for viewing, and then separates and re-adds it to exported messages. With this newsreader, I see no TZUTC kludge, even on your messages. Yet I know you use one. *shrug*

Regards,
Nick

... Sarcasm: because beating people up is illegal.
--- SBBSecho 3.24-Linux
* Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/700)