[HECnet] Why does MIM not list 23.1023 as a known node?

[Johnny Billquist]

On 2019-04-12 02:17, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On 2019-04-12 02:02, Paul Koning wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 11, 2019, at 7:45 PM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2019-04-12 01:28, Supratim Sanyal wrote:
>>>> Johnny - if I remember right, I have seen nodes with no names show 
>>>> up at http://mim.update.uu.se/hecnet without names in brackets, for 
>>>> my nodes when I haven’t told you to add them yet, or others too. no?
>>>
>>> "Known nodes" is a tricky thing. It might also be different for 
>>> different OSes.
>>
>> It might be but it should not be.  The DECnet architecture specifies 
>> precisely what the term means.
>>
>> Start with "active nodes": that means every node known to be reachable.
>>
>> Given that, "known nodes" is defined as the union of active nodes and 
>> named nodes.  So a nameless node is known if it is shown as reachable 
>> by routing data (or by having an active adjacency), but not otherwise.
> 
> Well, that is obviously not what RSX shows...
> And I doubt any system do. Because a node can never have any ideas what 
> nodes are reachable in other areas. Which is exactly the thing about 
> 23.1023.
> 
> But I guess you could claim that 23.1023 is not *known* to be reachable.
> 
> But RSX also show node that are known not to be reachable, and without 
> names, if they have counters associated. Just tested that with Mim.

D'oh. Sorry. I managed to confuse myself.
Known nodes does not show a node that have no name and is known to not 
be reachable.

I guess your description of known nodes does match what RSX does, Paul.

   Johnny

-- 
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                   ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol