RS> Bullshit, I SAID that it was no more out of spec than say an

PE> Rubbish, you simply said that I was sending
PE> out-of-spec messages to Dave, when I WASN'T.

Crap, I SAID that thats just mindless anal raving about what
is and is not out of spec. PARTICULARLY with an optional kludge.

RS> embedded origin line that you rave about being utterly unspeakable.

PE> Try quoting a message where I said that, Rod.  Have fun.

Try taking your dick out of your hand. You even at one time were raving
about it being completely unthinkable for a message to leave your system
which originated from a point of yours that had a perfectly legal 3D
origin line. Mindless anal raving about what is and is not out of spec.

PE> The thing I was saying was unspeakable was and out-of-spec header.

I wasnt talking about that particular one, your mindless
raving about embedded origin lines was on other occasions.

PE> Which I had warned you would be generated because of a bug in PQWK250.

Pigs arse you did on the question of an embedded MSGID.

RS> In fact BOTH are allowed and it makes no sense to bin an entire
RS> PKT which contains a single message which has one of either.

PE> Yes, it makes no sense to bin an entire PKT which
PE> contains in-spec messages.  And I don't, either.

Clearly the bulldog also thinks that it makes no sense whatever to bin an
entire PKT what contains a message which has an out of spec SEENBY either.

PE> It was NOT out of spec.

RS> Neither is an embedded origin line that you howl about.

PE> I don't "howl" about embedded origin lines.

Fraid you have on a number of occasions.
In fact demanded that there not be any.

PE> I did mention multiple origin lines as being discourteous, but never
PE> to anyone who had the courteousy of at least putting SOT/EOT around them.

Faking.

PE> x'01' is not something the user is allowed to use.

RS> Pity it doesnt say that in 'the specs'.

PE> It is generically dedicated to software, as is x'00'.

RS> Ditto.

PE> Nope, read FTS-1 yourself.  Or rather,
PE> make an effort to understand it yourself.

You'll go blind if you dont watch out. Pity the FTS chair
has noticed that you dont actually understand them yourself.

PE> It is fairly obvious you have understood neither FTS-1, FTS-4 or FTS-9,
PE> given the comments you have put forward on all three of these specs.

RS> Sure Paul, just like the FTS chair doesnt either. Mindless smoke.

PE> No idea what you're on about there, either.

RS> Sure you havent.

PE> I'm sure too.  I have had some blues with the
PE> FTS chair.  They were about inadequate documentation.

And a few other tiny matters like one Paul Edwards proclaiming that he
would be PCing on what he considers to be stuff thats out of spec and being
told that if he didnt watch out he might get flushed if he tried that.
@EOT:

---