ac>> 1. Why was this posted in NET_DEV?

 > Because I know Paul and his SOT/EOT proposal are active in this echo.

Perhaps netmail would've been more appropriate.


 ac>> 2. You claim to be conforming to Paul's SOT/EOT proposal.  If 
 ac>> this is correct, where are the SOT/EOT kludges?

 > They get lost due to limitations of JAM.

What 'limitations' are they?  In what way are they 'lost'?  Please be more specific.



 ac>> Also, your origin line violates Requirement 11 of the proposal.

 > Explain...

I'll let the proposal explain itself:

  11. The Origin line will contain a 4D address in brackets
  at the end (ie 5D is not allowed).  There will be nothing
  except the address in the brackets.


 ac>> 3. The data between the brackets in your origin line does not
 ac>> constitute a valid network address.  I believe this is in 
 ac>> violation of FTS-4.

 > I've explained this to you more than once, Andrew.

I mentioned this in another network.  I pointed out, as above, that it may
violate FTS-4.  You acknowledged this, yet you have chosen to continue
using it.  You have not adequately explained your decision.

andrew

--- Msgedsq/2 3.10