MSGID: 2:221/1.58@fidonet e01919af
REPLY: 2:221/360.0 5e1049a2
PID: OpenXP/5.0.42 (Win32)
CHRS: ASCII 1
TZUTC: -0500
Hello Tommi!

** 04.01.20 - 10:15, Tommi Koivula wrote to August Abolins:

 TK>There is no nodelist flag that tells NOT to accept encrypted mail.

 TK>So my node will accept encrypted mail and will forward it but you
 TK>cannot know how the next hop treats it.

 TK>Please test. :D

To me, if the original concensus was "no enrypted mail in fidonet" then  
the nodelist U,ENC only covers the exceptions.  ?

In that setting U,ENC only makes sense for netmail exchanges between users  
of that same host.  (If only the documentations could say it as simple as  
that!)

Further, since there is no way for a user to know in advance how one U,ENC  
system routes their mail, and since there is no guarante what happens if a  
packet reaches a non-U,ENC system, there is no point in taking chances and  
causing annoyance.  :(

Pooh.

But kudos to those systems that accomidate U,ENC without flinching!

Meanhile, email is probably a more reliable option for really private  
messaging anyway.



  ../|ug

--- OpenXP 5.0.42
 * Origin: /|ug's Point, Ont. CANADA (2:221/1.58)
SEEN-BY: 1/123 90/1 154/10 203/0 221/1 6 360 227/114 229/426 1014
SEEN-BY: 240/5832 249/206 317 400 280/464 5003 292/854 310/31 317/3
SEEN-BY: 322/757 342/200 396/45 423/81 120 712/848 770/1 2452/250
PATH: 221/1 280/464 229/426