>>>> An ICM flag (CM for IP only) has been proposed, but IIRC
>>>> an IP specific Txy flag was dismissed as a rarity.
>>>> Perhaps this should be revisited..

>> WD> The request for an IP-specific Txy-flag never passed
>> WD> this desk and certainly never was turned-down here.

>> could that be becaue you weren't asked due to irrelavence??

 WD> If someone proposed it somewhere then this person didn't
 WD> think it was irrelevant.

understood but not exactly whay i meant ;)

 WD> My intention was only to say that if such a request was
 WD> trashcanned, it wasn't trashcanned here.

the dicsussion was in the FTSC group(s), IIRC... at that time, it was
decided that there wasn't any real reason for an IP (only?) system to have
limited hours listed because there weren't really enough people needing to
do such... the only ones whould be those that ran limited hours on POTS or
those that brought up an IP connection just long enough to get their
mail... the downing idea being that most systems running IP connections
were running them fulltime...

personally, i think that we should have IP centric flags for some of the
POTS flags... CM/ICM, Txy/ITxy, even mailer capabilities since some of us
operate different mailers on our IP connection than on our POTS
connection... and then there are some, like myself, that run more than one
mailer on my IP connection and have need to denote the capabilities of
/each/ mailer...

  ie: i run FrontDoor on POTS and telnet along with binkd...
      FD's mailer capabilities are already known and published.
      i do not have binkd set up for FREQ but even so, it has
      different capabilities than FD...

i run all my mailers, except my point mailers, with the same node
numbers... i haven't gone as far as listing seperate node numbers for the
different mailers to try to get around this twitchy situation... and then,
there's also the fact that no one has complained about not getting FREQs
via binkp connections to my system ;)

 WD> That doesn't mean the possibility of trashcanning isn't an
 WD> element if ever it were to get here either.

yeah but how far would that really go? ;)

)\/(ark