RS> THE ONLY PROBLEM WITH THAT MESSAGE WAS THAT IT HAD A MSGID BETWEEN
RS> AN SOT/EOT PAIR. THAT WAS THE ONLY OUT OF SPEC THING ABOUT THAT
RS> MESSAGE. THERE NEVER WAS ANY MESSAGE WITH AN EMBEDDED ORIGIN LINE.

Nope, the address in the header was fucked.  That was what Tobruk
complained about.

RS> I CAN NOT POSSIBLY HAVE PRODUCED AN INCORRECT ADDRESS IN THE
RS> HEADER. SINCE THE ONLY MESSAGE WHICH WAS OUT OF SPEC HAD A MSGID
RS> BETWEEN AN SOT/EOT PAIR, TOBRUK MUST HAVE HAD A BRAIN FART.

PQWK 2.50 generated the incorrect address header.

RS> Welp that was the ONLY blemish in that out of spec message.

Nope.

RS> Welp, there must be some fuckup there somewhere
RS> because that was the ONLY DEFECT IN THAT MESSAGE.

Nope.

RS> Welp, its a nice theory, now try explaining how a message
RS> WHICH ONLY HAS AN MSGID BETWEEN THE SOT AND EOT CAN HAVE
RS> DONE THAT. IT HAD NO EMBEDDED ORIGIN LINE AT ALL, WHAT SO EVER.

Origin and msgid were treated the same by PQWK 2.50.

PE> It didn't!  It used the address from the fixed header!!!!

RS> WHICH FUCKING PKT ?  You are so fucking cryptic that you dont
RS> even say if you mean the PKT *I* uploaded or the PKT THAT TOBRUK

The PKT that YOU uploaded had an incorrect header.

RS> PRODUCED FROM THAT. Since you made the comment about sending it
RS> to me, I assumed that you meant after it had been thru Tobruk.

No, I was planning on sending you your packet back in a zip file,
as I presumed you would no longer have the PKT on your system.

PE> Like I said!!!!  A bug in PQWK 2.50 makes it
PE> put the incorrect address in the fixed header!

RS> Well, you originally claimed that a message of mine had an embedded
RS> origin line. 

Yeah, it was the MSGID that did it in this case.

RS> You eventually realised you had fucked that up and it did
RS> not. NOW you may be saying that PQWK 2.5 produces a PKT which has a
RS> message which has the incorrect address in the a header. Presumably you

That is correct.

RS> mean in the header of that particular message that is dud, in that PKT.

That is correct.

RS> I really havent got a fucking clue what you are trying
RS> to say since what you do say is so damned cryptic.

I told you the message header was fucked, because of a bug in PQWK 2.50.

RS> AND I CERTAINLY HAVE HAVE NEVER DELIBERATELY SEND YOUR SYSTEM A
RS> MESSAGE THAT I KNOW IS OUT OF SPEC. 

I didn't say that, Rod, I said that you were deliberately using
software which I had already said caused me problems.  In this
case, there is some excuse, because I only mentioned embedded
origin lines, not embedded MSGIDs.  BFN.  Paul.
@EOT:

---