In a message to Robert Williamson on 08 Jun 95 17:27:08, you wrote the following:

 >  True.
 >  I consider any software that does not understand both forms, as 
 > broken.

 AC> Maximus 2.02 does not recognise domains, full stop.  Is it broken?

 AC> FTS-1 mentions zones, nets, nodes and points, but not domains.  I don't
 AC> think it is particularly wise to define FTS1-only software as 'broken'.

 True,but I doubt that the authors of Maximums have defined it as FTS1 only. ;)


 >  Interstingly,  while  writing and testing my File Forwarder, 
 > XTick, I have encountered only ONE other File Forwarder that does 
 > not understand FQFA in tic files..

 AC> "Interestingly" ?  That's the most boring thing I've heard all day.

 Then why continue your reply?

 I have found a second:  Seal does not understand FQFA, I am not sure if it
even understands 5D.

 AC> From what I understand, the TIC file format specifies that software
 AC> should support 5D-addressing where possible.  I can't remember the name
 AC> of the document that defines the TIC file format though.  I'm not
 fsc28. 
 I also just posted an extract from my forthcoming fsc of file forwarding.

 AC> surprised that most of the TIC processing software you've encountered can
 AC> handle 5D-addressing, since TIC processors are relatively recent
  You meant FQFA, since it is possible to support 5d and not FQFA.

 My  own  File  Forwarder can understand and produce per site the following
FTN addressing formats:

    Addresses  can be specified in a number of formats, the preferred being
    FQFA.   The minimum acceptable is 3d (z:net/node.) for FidoNet and FTNS
    listed in FTNLIST.  All other FTNs must be specified at least as 5D.
        Address Formats:
            FQFA  -   ftn#zone:net/node.point   (all must be present)
            5d    -   zone:net/node[.point]{at}ftn (if no point, 0 is assumed)
            4d    -   zone:net/node.point
            3d    -   zone:net/node


... Getting him to keep his word is like pinning jelly on a wall.
---