Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- b2f:start [2025/02/15 10:11] – [B2F] f4hof
+++ b2f:start [2026/04/16 05:32] (current) – [Winlink specifics] f4hof
@@ Line 79: / Line 79: @@
 This protocol's specifics are described in [[b2f:b2f|Open B2F]].
 ==== GZIP Experiment ====
-The GZIP Experiment is a superset of BCPv2 which adds the ''FD'' command, following the ''FC'' format
+The GZIP Experiment is a superset of BCPv2 which adds the ''FD'' proposal while following the ''FC'' proposal specifics, except for the use of GZIP instead of the LZHUF version 1 format.
 ===== Winlink specifics =====
-Apparently, clients and servers add the feature ''W'' in their SID string when establishing a WL2K connection. Some even complain if the remote peer doesn't expose it. The precise meaning and purpose of that flag is undocumented.
+From my observations, flag ''W'' is exposed by a CMS, or an RMS Relay in its SID string. Winlink clients actively check presence of this flag to confirm they're discussing with the Winlink network.
-W0RLI also ties the features ''T'' and ''U'' in their specification, but without any details on their real meaning.
+Flag ''J'' is exposed by Central Messaging Servers. TODO: analyze an offline RMS Relay transaction to confirm presence of flag ''J'' when establishing a connection, in store and forward and Hybrid network operation scenarii.
+W0RLI also documents ''T'' and ''U'' flags in their specification, but without any details on their real meaning, and those are *NOT* observed in transactions.
 ==== Forward messages ====
@@ Line 100: / Line 102: @@
 Your software is supposed to fall back in this mode when the feature ''F'' is not proposed by the remote party.
-Best recommended stance, for now, is to reject connections with an error message, given the lack of available documentation.
+F4HOF's remark: //Best recommended stance, for now, is to reject connections with an error message, given the lack of available documentation.//
 ==== ASCII Basic Protocol ====