Hi Dennis,

On 2024-11-04 18:55:04, you wrote to me:

 WV>> I think it can be improved. I agree with the wording for the reply
 WV>> direction. But for the original send direction it could be softened
 WV>> to "should not" instead of "must *NEVER*". It's not normal operation
 WV>> but I have done some tests where I wanted to sent from "PING", so it
 WV>> would trigger another response when the PONG arrived, as a way to
 WV>> test my own robot. With this wording it isn't necessary for the robot
 WV>> to check for anything in the from field.

 DS> So if I read your comment you would like to accept a ping from ping but do not
 DS> reply with ping as from

 DS> correct?

Yes, that last restriction is (very) important, otherwise PONG messages could "bounce" back and forth indefinitly...


Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523