Hello Maurice.

11 Feb 05 08:56, you wrote to me:

 RT>> Well, that does not suprise me as he is 9-11 hours ahead of me,
 RT>> time wise ...

 MK> Yes, well those Aussies - especially the Kiwis pretending to be
 MK> Aussies - require a head start eh?  ;-)

Hmm ... :-)

 RT>> A MSGID is a valued item here, especially when it comes to dupe
 RT>> checking, so
 RT>> if you are able to generate them fast enough, then please do so.

 MK> That isn't the problem.  The problem is the machine is generating them
 MK> way too fast which is why I think it should only generate one and then
 MK> use that as a base ID for multiple messages within a session.

As long as it does not generate msgs. faster than it creates MSGID's there 
should not be a problem, even if it wastes/skips a few here and there.

 RT>> A properly generated MSGID, is valuable, and if it comes down to
 RT>> a poorly generated MSGID, and none, the none is preferable,
 RT>> methinks

 MK> I agree wholeheartedly.  Now if it were a REAL standard, with some
 MK> actual meaning, that might serve to rectify the situation.  If it is
 MK> unknown how that was generated, or worse randomly generated, then it
 MK> only serves to slow down the scanning for dupes.  However an unique
 MK> MSGID won't stop dupes from happening all on it's own.  I've seen a
 MK> BBS package toss old archived messages with non compliant MSGIDs.
 MK> Those passed under everyone's radar.

I on occasion still catch a lot of dupes especially from Bob Seaborn, I would 
have expected his system to filter out all dupes but it does not seem so, must 
still check that sometime.

Russell

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.4.7