Codefenix wrote to Accession <=-
I've never used either, so I didn't realize the difference. Could (or is) the above even used with multiple "hubs" that can still connect to each other? Or is there still one designated hub that everyone chooses to connect to?
Do you mean for prolonged hub downtimes which might prompt a NC change?
I imagine what holds true for standard hub-node polling holds true for this, since it's just messages sent through an echo.
Some of the Fidonet wonks rave about the "fidoweb", which is another
word for having multiple network feeds, then using your BBS software's
dupe detection to weed out the duplicates. Apparently someone felt
censored once by a hub filtering messages and this became a workaround.
Back in the day, Fidonet put way too much focus on the backbone, and
the sysops running it. No one's paying to download packets via LD any
more, a distributed arrangement makes sense - and we're not limited to
single lines with busy signals for most sysops.
With multi-node software running binkp, we could re-arrange networks
quite easily. Fidonet could be one zone, I've thought. I always worry
about how many nodes are on auto-pilot and would fall off the network
if you made a "flag day" change. But, then again, were those nodes
were contributing to the network?
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
þ Synchronet þ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.