From tomj Fri Oct  1 18:04:22 1993
Received: by fido.wps.com (5.67/wps.com-hackery)
	id AA02545; Fri, 1 Oct 93 18:04:02 -0700
From: tomj (Tom Jennings)
Message-Id: <9310020104.AA02545@wps.com>
Subject: nine...
To: randy@psg.com (Randy Bush)
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1993 18:04:02 +0000 (WET DST)
Cc: tomj (Tom Jennings)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 2298      
Status: OR

I agree with you basically. It's stupid. 

I admit I was doing a lot of blathering in there too. I finally
realized, I hadn't done enough thinking on what the problem was. I have
notes I won't bore you with. Basically, we're trying to d DNS without a
NIC -- we have a NIC, but it's corrupt.

I think i have a solution to the frag vs. diff problem. It still
requires only pure ASCII text manipulation; it will allow delivery via
any method; it lends itself to PGP style authentication; and finally, it
solves the I-missed-a-DIFF-now-I'm-fucked problem without resortinf to
tossing glacier-sized frags around.

Ignoring the authentication issue for the moment, as it can be added --

Assume an echo as delivery. Unlike the internet, where if you arent
registered (eg. in the nodelist) no one can talk to you, in FidoNet, you
can talk to everyone (eg. local hookup to echo) and publish your own
frag (own == a net not individual node, let's not get ridiculuous,
though... :-)

-- NCs issue incremental change orders: "Net 100: add node N <data>";
"Net 100: delete node N" etc.

-- With every update issued, NC issues the last N days worth of edits --
ie. really a differential. Redundant updates (successive "Net 100: Add
node N"s two weeks in a row) can be ignored by smart FOO programs, or
happily just executed (by deleteing N before adding N).

-- If NCs keep their whole frag avail. for filerequest, download, email
transmission, etc. if someone get sotu of sync, they can "manually" get
a new copy, just as we do now with nodelists.

-- It is open-ended in that the ZnnnLIST echo can serve as a
back-channel for requests for missing/outdated data, or for future
features.

-- DNS-style data management can fit all on one line and transmitted
redundantly in an update record:

	record start
		net = N; expire=n ttl=n ...
		add node <data>
		delete node
		...
		PGP authentication (signature, plaintext data)
	record end

-- Trivial extentions to the keyword functions such as "* means all
nodes" would allow arbitrary functions, such as publishing an entire
frag (such as initially, or new nets, etc) "delete *" "add node N..."

-- Finally, authentication is a Big Deal, and we haven't even gotten to
it yet :-)

-- 
  Tom Jennings -- tomj@wps.com -- World Power Systems -- San Francisco, Calif.