undialable

Hello Eugene! Sat 25-Mar-2000 22:46, you (500:95/468@ZXNet) wrote a letter to me: EP>>> So, after N number of non-responses from the remote side, I am set EP>>> status 'undialable'... VL>> ; Repack - if the parameter is not specified, or VL>> set EP> Well, first of all, at startup and after tossing Repack All is done, EP> And secondly, in the dock it is clearly written that the status '-U-' can EP> reset only the sysop itself. How to install (by climbing into the config). Comment this out back: ;Undial_On_CallTries 15 ; Max attempts number to call ;Undial_On_HSTries 10 ; Max handshake failures number ;Undial_On_SessionAborts 15 ; Max completed sessions number Enough of this: ;[S] Call_Tries 25 ; Default tries to call node ; ; The number of attempts to call each address in the queue. Value by ; default - 25. Based on this criterion, your system will have the undialable status (without the flag -U-, the system will be highlighted in color). And this undialable wears great repack. With best wishes, Vladimir.

Hello, Vladimir! 01 Apr 00 18:32, Vladimir Larkov -> Eugene Palenock: VL> Enough of this: VL> ;[S] Call_Tries 25 ; Default tries to call node VL> ; VL> ; The number of attempts to call each address in the queue. Value VL> Based on this criterion, your system will have an undialable status (without VL> flag -U-, the system will be highlighted in color). And this undialable is wonderful VL> is demolished by repack. This is unacceptable, because... or after each repack I washed it with a new one to burst into will be, or after tossing it is necessary to somehow do a selective repack for each system separately and not make it for the one where you don’t need to call. Best regards, Evgeniy.

Hello Eugene! Mon 03-Apr-2000 00:17, you (500:95/468@ZXNet) wrote a letter to me: VL>> ;[S] Call_Tries 25 ; Default tries to call node VL>> Based on this criterion, your system will have an undialable status (without VL>> flag -U-, the system will be highlighted in color). And this undialable is wonderful VL>> is demolished by repack. EP> This is unacceptable, because... or after each repack I washed it in a new one EP> it will break, or after tossing you need to somehow do a selective repack EP> for each system separately and do not do it for the one you cannot call EP> necessary. I have a dedicated master, so the slaves don’t care about repacks (Although I don’t understand why are they after every tossing? I have it periodically, once an hour, and then only for in order to update the traffic size. Normal soapers know how to clarify traffic before sending the message). The simplest thing for you is once a day: ───────────── Cut and save ────────────{Events.Ctl}─── Exec KeyMacro *:*/*.* 07:25 ───────────── Cut and save ────────────{Events.Ctl}─── It will blow away -U- from all those flying in. In practice, IMHO, you can limit yourself to this, although... if you want with hemop, then dance from here:───────────── Cut and save ────────────{T-Mail.Ctl}─── ;===================== Process Control ===================================== ; ; Process [Online|Imm] | ; [# ] ; [# ] ; ............. ; where : [...] ; (*) Undialable - when setting the Undialable status ; The *N macro is replaced with: ; value *N Reason ; 1 Call counter exceeded (Undial_On_CallTries) ; 2 Undial handshake counter exceeded (Undial_On_HSTries) ; 3 The counter for aborted sessions has been exceeded (Undial_On_SessionAborts) [...] ; is one of the following actions that ; will be executed: ; ; is one of the keywords defining ; action: ; [...] ; KeyMacro - simulates keyboard input of symbols ; and scan codes defined in ; (see chapter 20 of the documentation). ; [...] ; Create - create file or ; system semaphore (for OS/2 and; Windows NT). System semaphore ; must start with characters ; "SEM32", for example: ; "SEM32arcmail.t-m". ; [...] ; ; When specifying in processes (except where specifically noted ; cases) you can use macros that will be replaced by ; relevant parameters: ; ; *A - full address of the system with which it is continuing or just ; the communication session (or the current address in the queue) has ended; ; *M - current computer system time (in HH:MM format); ; *C - current system date of the computer (in DD/MM/YY format); ; ───────────── Cut and save ────────────{T-Mail.Ctl}─── You can, for example, take down the freak -U- and put him on hold instead: ───────────── Cut and save ────────────{T-Mail.Ctl}─── Process Imm Undialable KeyMacro *A*A ───────────── Cut and save ────────────{T-Mail.Ctl}─── If you want a more thorough problem, then, for example: ───────────── Cut and save ────────────{T-Mail.Ctl}─── Process Imm Undialable echo *A *M *C >>%flags%dead.shit ───────────── Cut and save ────────────{T-Mail.Ctl}─── and then do with it what you want. In general, use your imagination ;) With best wishes, Vladimir.

Hello Eugene! Wed 05-Apr-2000 01:49, you (500:95/468@ZXNet) wrote a letter to me: VL>> I have a dedicated master, so the slaves don’t care about repacks VL>> (Although I don’t understand why they are after every tossing? I have VL>> periodically, once an hour, and then only to wash VL>> updated traffic size. EP> This is why I repack after each tossing. And just for this reason such troubles? It will find new files via circle, and on the fact that no one cares about traffic forecasting. Look at yours for variety soap links - how often do they give you the correct forecast? I'm sure that very sometimes. VL>> Normal soapers know how to clarify traffic before sending the message). EP> I wanted to switch to DVM... But the free version doesn’t do a lot of things, more precisely EP> there are no scripts - but I need to use RestoreIn for some points. A EP> I don’t need all the routing and soap attachments in the soaper, I just need it EP> worked with BSO, and nothing more. Bincoflus. The most honest soaper. EP> And then someone called me to Samapy because of one kettle... Yeah, we even know his name ;) EP> Now all my soap is processed by ftrack, starting EP> from unpacking pkt with password checking to forming BSO. EfTrakh, of course, is in some ways better than Netmygra (Feda clearly wrote it from Netmygra, although I’d like to look at the syntax), but, as always, it’s far from ideal. EP> In general, I’m ready to officially pay $5 for DVM, but how powerful are they? EP> scripts... ? I don’t care, this is a must-have soap, not for me. I give you a tip: 500:812/1.48 VL>> Exec KeyMacro *:*/*.* 07:25 VL>> Will blow away -U- from all those flying in. In practice, IMHO, this is possible VL>> limit yourself, although... if you want with hemop, then dance from here: EP> The fact is that this is necessary in case of autopilot for a week, for example. EP> And demolishing -U- every morning is not good here. In _practice_, it seems to me that this is enough. Do it not every morning, but every evening (most non-SM nodes are nocturnal). It will blow away at midnight, in an hour or two (depending on the load, with the default 25 attempts) dead node again will be relegated to the undialed label. Until next time days. Or until the moment when he himself will ring (this status will be cleared by incoming calls). EP> While the idea arose: EP> - if we receive a corresponding letter from the link, then we create it with FTrack EP> flag, for each uplink EP> - in the mouse config for a specific flag we make KeyMacro for EP> specific address Forget it. I would (if I suddenly imagine that I flew into undialable) nothing to anyone I wouldn't write. Because who knows (I’m not a fortune teller. How do I know who was breaking in on me? if I was down at that time?) and /break/. EP> PS. Why do you need to launch two soaps at all? Two phones. lines ? There are really two lines, but in reality there are always three lines running - one per line and dedicated master. Tmyla has a Dosov ideology - he is at work it cannot do anything else with the line in parallel. Therefore, a separate master (rescans, launching processes, etc.). With best wishes, Vladimir.

Hello Eugene! Thu 13-Apr-2000 00:16, you (500:95/468@ZXNet) wrote a letter to me: EP>>> This is why I repack after each tossing. VL>> diversity on their soap links - how often they give you VL>> correct forecast? I'm sure very sometimes. EP> I don’t want to follow their example. Two options: - change the soap; - configure this. In this case, you can separate the master from the slave. VL>> Forget it. I would (if I suddenly imagine that I flew into undialable) VL>> I wouldn’t write anything to anyone. Because I don't know (I'm not a fortune teller. Where am I from? VL>> I know who EP> Hy soaplink - under ISP, it can’t help but work, and echoes are alone EP> personally came to inform him that his station is hanging ;) You, IMHO, just don’t have enough links yet. With best wishes, Vladimir.