[08:58:54 brorabbit ~]$ grep ,5858, ~/nodelist/nodelist.367 ,5858,For_Technical_Purposes,Simferopol_Crimea,Brother_Rabbit,-Unpubli shed-,300 ,MO,CM,IBN,INA:burrow.g0x.ru,INO4
[08:58:54 brorabbit ~]$ grep ,5858, ~/nodelist/nodelist.367
,5858,For_Technical_Purposes,Simferopol_Crimea,Brother_Rabbit,-Unpubli
shed-,300 ,MO,CM,IBN,INA:burrow.g0x.ru,INO4
[08:58:54 brorabbit ~]$ grep ,5858, ~/nodelist/nodelist.367
,5858,For_Technical_Purposes,Simferopol_Crimea,Brother_Rabbit,-U
npubli shed-,300 ,MO,CM,IBN,INA:burrow.g0x.ru,INO4
Real name is the name from the nodelist. ;)
[08:58:54 brorabbit ~]$ grep ,5858, ~/nodelist/nodelist.367
,5858,For_Technical_Purposes,Simferopol_Crimea,Brother_Rabbit,-U
npubli shed-,300 ,MO,CM,IBN,INA:burrow.g0x.ru,INO4
Real name is the name from the nodelist. ;)
[08:58:54 brorabbit ~]$ grep ,5858, ~/nodelist/nodelist.367
,5858,For_Technical_Purposes,Simferopol_Crimea,Brother_Rabbit,-
U npubli shed-,300 ,MO,CM,IBN,INA:burrow.g0x.ru,INO4
Real name is the name from the nodelist. ;)
Yeah, tell that to Santa Clause, he may believe it. ;-)
Could you please change:
30 2:5001/100 Dmitry Protasoff Native OVH
to
30 2:5001/100 Dmitry Protasoff Native Layer7 Networks
It's a very cheap VPS provider from Germany.
Hmmm...
+ 19:24 [1672] call to 2:5001/100@fidonet
19:24 [1672] trying f100.n5001.z2.binkp.net
[2a00:1911:1:1db:6940:47ee:732a:d826]...
19:24 [1672] connected
+ 19:24 [1672] outgoing session with f100.n5001.z2.binkp.net:24554
[2a00:1911:1:1db:6940:47ee:732a:d826]
- 19:24 [1672] SYS Postmortem
? 19:24 [1672] recv: {W32 API error 10054} An existing
connection was forcibly closed by the remote host
+ 19:24 [1672] done (to 2:5001/100@fidonet, failed, S/R: 0/0 (0/0
bytes)) 19:24 [1672] session closed, quitting...
BinkpAbstractConnector Protocol version 1.1 28-09-24 17:23:08
[00007394] BinkpAsyncConnector Frame received: [ M_ADR
2:280/5555@fidonet ] 28-09-24 17:23:08 [00007394]
BinkpAbstractConnector Invalid address 28-09-24 17:23:08 [00007394] NodelistScanner Using nodelist file nodelist 28-09-24 17:23:08 [00007394] BinkpAbstractConnector Local error: No valid address
specified
@PATH: 280/5555 5020/1042 4441 5001/100
Looks like 2:5020/1042 deserves a punishment..
And you are even not allowed no post here :)
AH, I see. You refuse connections with unlisted systems. There is a
flag for that, the LO flag. You do not carry that flag in the
nodelist. So....
Whatever, it will be fixed in a couple of hours.
@PATH: 280/5555 5020/1042 4441 5001/100
Looks like 2:5020/1042 deserves a punishment..
For what?
And you are even not allowed no post here :)
Says who?
FROM: 2:280/5555
REASON: Sender not active for this area
AREANAME: IPV6
And you are even not allowed no post here :)
Says who?
And you are even not allowed no post here :)
Says who?
You disappear for a long time, then you suddenly start posting to
echoes that you are not connected to. And from an unlisted node.
Shame on you.
AH, I see. You refuse connections with unlisted systems. There is
a flag for that, the LO flag. You do not carry that flag in the
nodelist. So....
I accept connections from unlisted systems, but not from all.
If you are related somehow to 2:5001 - I'll accept connection from
your unlisted node (based on your ip address). But not from some
random Dutch Vodafone ipv6 address with non existing node address. Too suspicious.
We have a very weird guy in R50 who is sending multi-GB pkts and zip
bombs from the TOR network and public proxies to my node.
Whatever, it will be fixed in a couple of hours.
Good! Let's make this world better.
@PATH: 280/5555 5020/1042 4441 5001/100
Looks like 2:5020/1042 deserves a punishment..
For what?
For processing echomail from node that is not in nodelist.
You may not actually be "Michiel van der Vlist", but rather one of his virtual identities. According to the nodelist, the real Michiel van
der Vlist left Fidonet in June
But you accepted a connection from 2:280/464.5555...
Anyway, my fiberglas connection supports IPv6 as you can see. *1)
We have a very weird guy in R50 who is sending multi-GB pkts and
zip bombs from the TOR network and public proxies to my node.
That is annoying and if for that reason you refuse connections from unlisted systems you should fly the LO flag. You do not...
Good! Let's make this world better.
I am listed in today's daily.
For processing echomail from node that is not in nodelist.
Unlisted, but not unknown.
You may not actually be "Michiel van der Vlist", but rather one
of his virtual identities. According to the nodelist, the real
Michiel van der Vlist left Fidonet in June
Those alleged virtual identities would not have the matching
passwpords to have the connection accepted and the echomail processed. That is why passwords were invented.
Anyway, we are getting off-topic.
To get back on topic:
*1) My fiberglass connection supports IPv6 but to my annoyance there
still is a problem with incoming IPv6 connetctions. The modem/router
that they supply (Nokia XS-2426G-B) has no functioning method to
create an IPv6 pinhole in the firewall. :-(
LO flag means I'll have to refuse all connections from unlisted nodes,
but this is not what I want.
I am listed in today's daily.
The problem is that I only update the nodelist weekly. Please wait.
To get back on topic:
*1) My fiberglass connection supports IPv6 but to my annoyance
there still is a problem with incoming IPv6 connetctions. The
modem/router that they supply (Nokia XS-2426G-B) has no
functioning method to create an IPv6 pinhole in the firewall. :-(
Even setting Attack Protection to Disabled + Security level = Off
and configuring port forwarding?
LO flag means I'll have to refuse all connections from unlisted
nodes, but this is not what I want.
No LO does not mean you MUST refuse all connections from unlisted
systems. It just means you refuse unlisted connections. Some of them,
not all of them.
The problem is that I only update the nodelist weekly. Please
wait.
That is not MY problem.
Even setting Attack Protection to Disabled + Security level = Off
Yes, when I disable the IPv6 firewall, incoming IPv6 connection are possible. But of course I am not going to do that. Then ALL
unsollicited IPv6 packets are allowed. No way Jose!
and configuring port forwarding?
Port forwarding is for IPv4, Yes that works.
No LO does not mean you MUST refuse all connections from unlisted
systems. It just means you refuse unlisted connections. Some of
them, not all of them.
From current nodelist:
LO Node accepts calls Only from Listed
There is nothing about "some of them", the description is pretty
strict - "Only from Listed". Could you please cite any Fidonet
document along with your interpretation?
Even setting Attack Protection to Disabled + Security level =
Off
Yes, when I disable the IPv6 firewall, incoming IPv6 connection
are possible. But of course I am not going to do that. Then ALL
unsollicited IPv6 packets are allowed. No way Jose!
Looks like someone decided to skip proper firewall implementation :(
In theory I could fix it by getting my own fiberglass modem/router but
for XSPON they are expensive and there is little choice. Plus that it
is not easy to get it running. I just think that the burden of
providing a decent modem/router is on them.
97 2:5020/715 Alex Barinov T-6in4 he.net
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Non-authoritative answer:
Name: fido.hubahuba.su
Address: 2001:470:1f0b:879:f1d0:2:5020:715
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If you'd like, I can send you the SFP and help to setup it in
compatible router.
Alternatively, you could try configuring your router as a bridge. Is
that possible?
You could then connect it to another intelligent router. I had this
setup in Moscow for a while, but, once again, I can't teleport there
to resolve any issues. However, this might not be a concern in your
case.
Thanks for the offer but I do not have an SFP comatible router at hand
and this is not a good time to start such a major project.I am still
in the process of tuning my Fidonet system after six month of absence
and that takes a lot of time. Not to mention other time concuming
projects in and around the house.
Thanks for the offer but I do not have an SFP comatible router at
hand and this is not a good time to start such a major project.I
am still in the process of tuning my Fidonet system after six
month of absence and that takes a lot of time. Not to mention
other time concuming projects in and around the house.
Another option is a dumb GPON-to-Ethernet bridge as separate device,
but I've never tried them myself. The main issue with these 3rd-party devices is to obtain all required parameters from provider's router,
which is sometimes not possible without the provider's support :(
Re: List of IPv6 nodes
By: Michiel van der Vlist to All on Sun Oct 19 2025 22:00:01
You may not have the answer, but I used to have this set up some time
ago, but I cannot remember nor figure out how I did it. How does one
set up in Linux (Debian variant) the f1d0 address?
f Has a ::f1d0:<zone>:<net>:<node> style host address.
Example: ::f1d0:2:280:5555 (for node 2:280/5555)
In my case ::f1d0:1:214:22.
Thanks.
You may not have the answer, but I used to have this set up some time
ago, but I cannot remember nor figure out how I did it. How does one set up in Linux (Debian variant) the f1d0 address?
f Has a ::f1d0:<zone>:<net>:<node> style host address.
Example: ::f1d0:2:280:5555 (for node 2:280/5555)
In my case ::f1d0:1:214:22.
You'll generally need a domain name for your BBS or some way to refer
to your BBS by a domain name and then configure DNS with an AAAA
record.
That is a response to the question on how to set it up in DNS. But as I read it that is not what Ray asked. He wanted to know how to set up such an address in Linux.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to All <=-
*List of IPv6 nodes
List of IPv6 nodes
By Michiel van der Vlist, 2:280/5555
Updated 2 Nov 2025
No one cares about this non-useful "information".
Now you know.
No one cares about this non-useful "information".
Now you know.
Fake news again. I care.
Donald, is it you?
List of IPv6 nodes
By Michiel van der Vlist, 2:280/5555
Updated 2 Nov 2025
<SNIP>
No one cares about this non-useful "information".
Now you know.
*List of IPv6 nodes
List of IPv6 nodes
By Michiel van der Vlist, 2:280/5555
Updated 2 Nov 2025
<SNIP>
No one cares about this non-useful "information".
Now you know.
It is a classic example of the US exceptionalism that especially
the MAGA morons demonstrate over and over again.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to All <=-
*List of IPv6 nodes
List of IPv6 nodes
By Michiel van der Vlist, 2:280/5555
Updated 2 Nov 2025
<SNIP>
No one cares about this non-useful "information".
Now you know.
MvdV> 40 2:460/58 Stas Mishchenkov Native
MvdV> KCT f 6DWN
MvdV> 61 2:460/5858 Stas Mishchenkov Native KCT
MvdV> HOLD f INO4
MvdV> 40 2:460/58 Stas Mishchenkov Native
MvdV> KCT f 6DWN
2025-12-07 09:50:16.979 callip.pl v.0.9.6.0. -c callip.conf -b -f 2:460/58 2025-12-07 09:50:16.980 Finding last nodelist file from /bbs/nodelist/NODELIST.NDL. 2025-12-07 09:50:16.980 Last nodelist found at 0.000 seconds. 2025-12-07 09:50:16.996 Nodelist for Sunday, December 7, 2025 -- Day number 341 parsed, 940 IP-nodes processed (0.016 sec) 2025-12-07
09:50:17.448 Calling 2:460/58 2025-12-07 09:50:17.448 brorabbit.g0x.ru:24554 2025-12-07 09:50:17.448 2a0b:db80:8c:9246:f1d0:2:460:58 - Ok. 2025-12-07 09:50:17.448 193.107.113.122 - Ok.
MvdV> 61 2:460/5858 Stas Mishchenkov Native KCT
MvdV> HOLD f INO4
2025-12-07 09:51:49.188 callip.pl v.0.9.6.0. -c callip.conf -b -f 2:460/5858 2025-12-07 09:51:49.188 Finding last nodelist file from /bbs/nodelist/NODELIST.NDL. 2025-12-07 09:51:49.188 Last nodelist found at 0.000 seconds. 2025-12-07 09:51:49.204 Nodelist for Sunday, December 7, 2025 -- Day number 341 parsed, 940 IP-nodes processed (0.016 sec) 2025-12-07
09:52:04.261 Calling 2:460/5858 2025-12-07 09:52:04.261 burrow.g0x.ru:24554 2025-12-07 09:52:04.261 2a0b:db80:86:150:f1d0:2:460:5858 - Error: Connection timed out
2a0b:db80:86:150:f1d0:2:460:5858 - Error: Connection timed out
Thanks, I hope it fixed.
alling 2:460/5858 2025-12-07 09:52:04.261
burrow.g0x.ru:24554 2025-12-07 09:52:04.261
2a0b:db80:86:150:f1d0:2:460:5858 - Error: Connection timed out
Thanks, I hope it fixed.
89 4:902/26    Fernando Toledo       Native Claro        6DWN
89 4:902/26    Fernando Toledo       NativeÂ
Claro        6DWN
I'm online again
can you verify if connect to me via ipv6 ?
thanks!
address: 4:902/26@fidonet
address: 666:1/1@latinet
address: 21:2/151@fsxnet
address: 618:500/45@micronet
address: 46:10/182@agoranet
address: 39:943/0@amiganet
address: 39:943/1@amiganet
address: 954:895/37@hobbynet
address: 15:1/1@zudaka
address: 15:1/0@zudaka
address: 15:0/0@zudaka
address: 4:4/0@fidonet
address: 4:90/0@fidonet
address: 4:900/0@fidonet
address: 4:902/0@fidonet
address: 4:904/0@fidonet
address: 4:905/0@fidonet
address: 80:774/16@retronet
address: 64:500/16@cnet
address: 314:413/16@pinet
I'm online again
can you verify if connect to me via ipv6 ?
Stas Mishchenkov -> Fernando Toledo skrev 2025-12-12 04:58:
address: 4:902/26@fidonet
address: 666:1/1@latinet
address: 21:2/151@fsxnet
address: 618:500/45@micronet
address: 46:10/182@agoranet
address: 39:943/0@amiganet
address: 39:943/1@amiganet
address: 954:895/37@hobbynet
address: 15:1/1@zudaka
address: 15:1/0@zudaka
address: 15:0/0@zudaka
address: 4:4/0@fidonet
address: 4:90/0@fidonet
address: 4:900/0@fidonet
address: 4:902/0@fidonet
address: 4:904/0@fidonet
address: 4:905/0@fidonet
address: 80:774/16@retronet
address: 64:500/16@cnet
address: 314:413/16@pinet
Not anymore. I'm back on he.net.
2:280/1049 thecoastbbs.nl:24554
2001:9e0:8547:7c01:ac0:77:8500:100 No such AKA.
2:280/2060 fidonet.aroundmyroom.com:24554 2001:1c00:c204:4300:f1d0:2:280:2060 No such AKA.
I tested the dutch nodes in your list.
On 2026-02-04 17:18:50, you wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:
2:280/1049 thecoastbbs.nl:24554
2001:9e0:8547:7c01:ac0:77:8500:100 No such AKA.
I get an OK for this node!?
Calling '2:280/1049'. Call time: '0000-2400' UTC.
thecoastbbs.nl, 24554
Calling 2:280/1049 (2001:9e0:8547:7c01:ac0:77:8500:100:24554)
address: 2:280/1049@fidonet
2001:9e0:8547:7c01:ac0:77:8500:100 - Ok.
So?
2:280/2060 fidonet.aroundmyroom.com:24554
2001:1c00:c204:4300:f1d0:2:280:2060 No such AKA.
Indeed point 2:280/2060.6 is answering on this IPv6 address! And not the node...
2:280/1049 thecoastbbs.nl:24554
2001:9e0:8547:7c01:ac0:77:8500:100 No such AKA.
I get an OK for this node!?
Calling '2:280/1049'. Call time: '0000-2400' UTC.
thecoastbbs.nl, 24554
Calling 2:280/1049 (2001:9e0:8547:7c01:ac0:77:8500:100:24554)
address: 2:280/1049@fidonet
2001:9e0:8547:7c01:ac0:77:8500:100 - Ok.
So?
Now I got "Ok" too. Hm.
2:280/2060 fidonet.aroundmyroom.com:24554
2001:1c00:c204:4300:f1d0:2:280:2060 No such AKA.
Indeed point 2:280/2060.6 is answering on this IPv6 address! And not the
node...
Does he know about it?
And what about "connection refused" and "no route to host" results?
So I tested your full list. I get a few Ok's, and a few 'No such
AKA''s:
I have dedicted "AKA Mismatch" report:
https://nodelist.fidonet.cc/analytics/aka-mismatch?days=30&limit=1000& includeZero=true
So I tested your full list. I get a few Ok's, and a few 'No such
AKA''s:
I have dedicted "AKA Mismatch" report:
https://nodelist.fidonet.cc/analytics/aka-mismatch?days=30&limit=1000&includeZ
ero=true
Note that in the particular case of 280/2060, the AKA mismatch only
occurs when connecting via IPv6. There is no problem when connecting
via IPv4. So you may have to split it up and test both protocols.
And you might want to look into these: 2:5058/108 2:201/111 2:5066/35
1:104/0 binkp.pharcyde.org:24554 2603:6000:dc00:44:f1d0:1:154:10 No
such AKA.
1:114/0 binkp.pharcyde.org:24554 2603:6000:dc00:44:f1d0:1:154:10 No
such AKA.
*List of IPv6 nodes
List of IPv6 nodes
By Michiel van der Vlist, 2:280/5555
Updated 29 Jan 2026
2:280/2060 fidonet.aroundmyroom.com:24554
2001:1c00:c204:4300:f1d0:2:280:2060 No such AKA.
Indeed point 2:280/2060.6 is answering on this IPv6 address! And not
the node...
Does he know about it?
If he doesn't respond here, I'll let him know. ;-)
Note that in the particular case of 280/2060, the AKA mismatch
only occurs when connecting via IPv6. There is no problem when
connecting via IPv4. So you may have to split it up and test both
protocols.
Wow, that's amazing! I never thought someone would provide different addresses on ipv4 and ipv6. It was really beyond my imagination.
New tests will handle such cases: I was testing both ipv4 and ipv6,
but saved node information only once (ipv6 preferred). This is
actually a good case, because now I am getting node information:
binkp ipv6
binkp ipv4
ifcico ipv6
ifcico ipv4
modem ifcico
and more to come..
If it's complicated, I am having a good time testing and fixing it :)
And what about "connection refused" and "no route to host" results?
So I tested your full list. I get a few Ok's, and a few 'No such AKA''s:
1:135/220 bbs.archaicbinary.net:24554 2001:470:1d:4aa::2
Ok.
2:222/2 bbbs.net:24554 2a10:a5c0:24f:f000::1 Ok.
2:280/1049 thecoastbbs.nl:24554
2001:9e0:8547:7c01:ac0:77:8500:100 Ok.
The others don't get a connect here either. Does this answer your question? ;-)
1:135/220 bbs.archaicbinary.net:24554 2001:470:1d:4aa::2
Ok.
Strange.
[14:38:05 brorabbit logs]$ callip -c ~/etc/callip.conf -b -f 1:135/220
You have actual version.
Parsing nodelist file /home/fido/nodelist/nodelist.367
Nodelist for Thursday, February 5, 2026 -- Day number 036 parsed, 949 IP-nodes
processed (0.052 sec) Calling '1:135/220'. Call time: '0000-2400' UTC. Now is:
1139 UTC. bbs.archaicbinary.net, 24554 Calling 1:135/220 (2001:470:1d:4aa::2:24554) error (Connection timed out) Calling 1:135/220 (167.114.108.156:24554) error (Connection timed out)
I've created a report that produces the same list, but based on
real-life tests (check "Download as Text" button):
https://nodelist.fidonet.cc/analytics/ipv6-node-list
Many Russian nodes got a 6UNS status. This is because the Russian
Internet is now heavily filtered and connections from Oracle Cloud
fail during drone attacks or when new anti VPN filters are applied by
the Russian censorship authorities.
I could test them from Russia, but I think that wouldn't be accurate
at all. It's better to show that those nodes are actually unstable for other FidoNet nodes.
Yes, I too noticed that the mojority of the 6UNS nodes are Russian.
Some are in Ukraine. But there are some in "the west" as well. I
flagged then as 6UNS but they may be just as unstable with IPv6. But
my list is about IPv6, so that is what I list.
1:104/0 binkp.pharcyde.org:24554 2603:6000:dc00:44:f1d0:1:154:10 No
such AKA.
1:114/0 binkp.pharcyde.org:24554 2603:6000:dc00:44:f1d0:1:154:10 No
such AKA.
These should be fixed.
Just "interim" NC numbers I never paid much attention to and never
added to binkd. The 2-3 nodes in each have no care
in the world to be NC, and don't want to change their node number.
C'est la vie.
Thanks for the report, though!
1:104/0 binkp.pharcyde.org:24554 2603:6000:dc00:44:f1d0:1:154:10
No such AKA.
1:114/0 binkp.pharcyde.org:24554 2603:6000:dc00:44:f1d0:1:154:10
No such AKA.
These should be fixed.
It MUST be fixed.
It doesn't need to be changed, it just needs to be added. It's
assumed that this isn't a particularly technically challenging task
for the network coordinator.
| Sysop: | KrAAB |
|---|---|
| Location: | Donna, TX |
| Users: | 6 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 44:14:48 |
| Calls: | 56,907 |
| Files: | 3,065 |
| D/L today: |
3 files (1,879K bytes) |
| Messages: | 53,417 |
