Thomas Habets wrote in a message to Moderator:
 M> If it were that easy the change would have been made years
 M> ago. Consider that #1, some nets require a dozen nodes
 M> requesting a new echo before it will be hauled in and #2, I
 M> can't just rename it. Easier said than done, but still...
 TH> But can't it be duplicated and all nodes are told to get the new
 TH> one and skip the old. Then after a while delete the old?
 TH> Or is that impossible?
I see no need. Why risk losing half the nodes connected by a name change ? 
Often in such cases the old echo starts leading its own, separate life.
greetings,
Tom
tomtorfs@village.uunet.be
--- timEd/2 1.10+
---------------