[App_rpt-users] FW: Quick question on usability

[Jim Duuuude]

I have made good attempt at re-creating this problem, to no avail.

I have 2 nodes on a development server. 2007 and 2008. I can do a *22008 on 2007 and then do a *80 on 2007
and it only goes out on 2007. Is that the scenario that you were referring to?

JIM

Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 13:31:22 -0400
From: jrorke at cogeco.ca
CC: app_rpt-users at ohnosec.org
Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] Quick question on usability


  
    
  
  
    I have also observed that some ids in monitoring mode do get passed
    on as if I was connected in transceive mode. 

    

    I seem to remember that this has been like this for some time. I
    guess nobody posted it to the bugs page.

    

    Jon VE3RQ

    

    On 5/29/2012 1:13 PM, Jim Duuuude wrote:
    
      
      
        No, normally (non-command) initiated ID's are always local.

        

        The problem you are (most likely) seeing is that the command
        (the *80) in this case is getting

        re-distributed to all connected nodes in the normal manner, even
        though the link(s)

        is(are) connected in monitor-only mode.

        

        Darn you for finding a design flaw!! :-)

        

        I will attempt to verify that locally-initiated commands on a
        monitor-connected link

        get distributed. If they do, they wont for long.. :-)

        

        JIM

        

        

        
          From: adamson_alan at hotmail.com

          To: App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org

          Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 13:06:25 -0400

          Subject: [App_rpt-users] Quick question on usability

          

          Quick question on usability
          I don't
                want to be a bad operator at the moment… As I go about
                checking bandwidth and jitter, etc on my setup… I'd like to connect to
                an active Hub, but just in eavesdrop mode.
          But I've
                noticed that if I connect with the *2 command, that if I
                inadvertently then do a *80, that the ID goes out on the
                link that was connected with the *2.
          
          Is this
                true anytime my node decides to ID?
          Alan
          

          _______________________________________________
          App_rpt-users mailing list
          App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org
          http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
      
      

      
      

      _______________________________________________
App_rpt-users mailing list
App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org
http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users

    
  


_______________________________________________
App_rpt-users mailing list
App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org
http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.keekles.org/pipermail/app_rpt-users/attachments/20120605/eda822c7/attachment.html>