NodelistDB

Netmail PING — 1:123/0

Every FTS-4010 PING sent to 1:123/0 (fidonet), with the path each one walked.

← All PING/TRACE nodes Node history for 1:123/0

Routed ping · 2026-10-18 23:09 UTC

No answer

Nothing came back within seven days of sending.

No answer
MSGID
2:5001/100@fidonet 6ad551b9
First hop
2:5020/715@fidonet (rule)
Handed over
2026-10-18 23:09 UTC
Note
no answer within 168h0m0s

Routed ping · 2026-10-04 23:09 UTC

No answer

Nothing came back within seven days of sending.

No answer
MSGID
2:5001/100@fidonet 6ac2dcb9
First hop
2:5020/715@fidonet (rule)
Handed over
2026-10-04 23:09 UTC
Note
no answer within 168h0m0s

Routed ping · 2026-09-20 23:05 UTC

No answer

Nothing came back within seven days of sending.

No answer
MSGID
2:5001/100@fidonet 6ab066d4
First hop
2:5020/715@fidonet (rule)
Handed over
2026-09-20 23:05 UTC
Note
no answer within 168h0m0s

Routed ping · 2026-09-06 22:59 UTC

Answered in 20m

The robot at 1:3634/12 bounced it back 20m after it left 2:5001/100.

Answered
MSGID
2:5001/100@fidonet 6a9df067
First hop
2:5020/715@fidonet (rule)
Handed over
2026-09-06 22:59 UTC
Answered
2026-09-06 23:19 UTC by SBBSecho, 1:3634/12
Robot
SBBSecho 3.11-Linux r3.173 May 23 2020 GCC 7.5.0

Outbound path

The Via chain the robot quoted back: every system the ping passed through on its way out.

2:5020/715→2:292/854→+1h 4m2:292/854→1:229/426→-1h 0m1:229/426
#NodeStampedElapsedSoftware
1 2:5020/715 2026-09-06 22:59 UTC – RNtrack 2.3.0/Lnx/Perl
2 2:292/854 2026-09-07 01:01 local – D'Bridge 4
3 2:292/854 2026-09-07 00:03 UTC +1h 4m O/T-Track+ 2.85
4 1:229/426 2026-09-06 19:03 local – D'Bridge 4
5 1:229/426 2026-09-06 23:03 UTC -1h 0m O/T-Track+ 2.85
Raw Via lines 
2:5020/715 @20260906.225950.UTC RNtrack 2.3.0/Lnx/Perl
2:292/854 @20260907.010112 D'Bridge 4
2:292/854@Ward_Dossche @20260907.000359.UTC O/T-Track+ 2.85
1:229/426 @20260906.190347 D'Bridge 4
1:229/426@fidonet @20260906.230347.UTC O/T-Track+ 2.85

Return path

The answer's own Via chain: the way back from the robot to 2:5001/100, as each relay on it recorded itself. The answer need not come back the way the ping went out, and a relay that stamps no Via line of its own leaves no mark here, so this is the relays' account of the trip rather than a verified route.

1:3634/12→1:229/426→-1m1:229/426→2:292/854→+1h 9m2:292/854
#NodeStampedElapsedSoftware
1 1:3634/12 2026-09-06 23:10 UTC – SBBSecho 3.11-Linux r3.173
2 1:229/426 2026-09-06 19:09 local – D'Bridge 4
3 1:229/426 2026-09-06 23:09 UTC -1m O/T-Track+ 2.85
4 2:292/854 2026-09-07 01:16 local – D'Bridge 4
5 2:292/854 2026-09-07 00:18 UTC +1h 9m O/T-Track+ 2.85
Raw Via lines 
1:3634/12 @20260906.231044.UTC SBBSecho 3.11-Linux r3.173
1:229/426 @20260906.190940 D'Bridge 4
1:229/426@fidonet @20260906.230940.UTC O/T-Track+ 2.85
2:292/854 @20260907.011611 D'Bridge 4
2:292/854@Ward_Dossche @20260907.001859.UTC O/T-Track+ 2.85

Evidence

Replies

Every netmail that came back about a ping to 1:123/0, newest first, as the sending node received it. Pongs and transit notices are matched to the ping they answer.

2026-09-06 23:19 UTC

pong Pong: PING

From SBBSecho, 1:3634/12 · answers 2:5001/100@fidonet 6a9df067

Path quoted in this reply

2:5020/715→2:292/854→+1h 4m2:292/854→1:229/426→-1h 0m1:229/426

This reply's own Via lines

  • 1:3634/12 @20260906.231044.UTC SBBSecho 3.11-Linux r3.173
  • 1:229/426 @20260906.190940 D'Bridge 4
  • 1:229/426@fidonet @20260906.230940.UTC O/T-Track+ 2.85
  • 2:292/854 @20260907.011611 D'Bridge 4
  • 2:292/854@Ward_Dossche @20260907.001859.UTC O/T-Track+ 2.85

Software

SBBSecho 3.11-Linux r3.173 May 23 2020 GCC 7.5.0   --- SBBSecho 3.11-Linux