Hello Wilfred!

 AA>> Not if the hash includes the entire msg and the date posted.

 WvV> Ok. But the serial based ones are still better. ;)


I can see that to be the case as well.  A serial-style also has  
a built-in chronological feature.

 WvV>  H:\myutils>> rando2
 AA>> lfz$bkmcmmg36ye@jll1xpieaats

 WvV> Those aren't 32 bit.

Ah... so the "serialno" part *must" be 8-char?  Then rando could  
still work like so:

H:\myutils>rando
yZn=ZRG-
i)G)0ej=
YwSj-6B+
kwg5r(aR
Fp902h8A
lFyNVofN
R)5vlK+(
Sg7y-pPE
DDvCC2Sm
mX20Wj3d
()AO8oN\
\DTe29VA
4xqhDjbB
QXK\uqOs

 :D


 WvV> there's always a change of a collision within 3 years.

Yes.. I've suspected that could be problematic.  But look at the  
variation produced above. My math for calculating the minimum  
number of possibilies (if excluding characters like "(, ), \, =,  
-, etc.." and only allowing for the letters of the alphabet,  
upper and lower case, is: 52^8  That's a lot more than just a  
plain hex version: 16^8.

Echomail traffic would have to attain avalanche proportions  
before collisions would be a concern.   ;)


 AA>> I remember something about the MSGID being referred to as a two-
 AA>> part string with "origaddr" + "serialno", where "origaddr" is
 AA>> intended to be a qualified "address of the originating system".

 WvV> No: "... address for the originating network"
 WvV>                                      ^^^^^^^


Ah.. that little word "for" makes a big difference.  :

Then the synchronet version adds some added uniqueness.

--
  ../|ug

--- OpenXP 5.0.49