Are we having fun yet Rob?


Oct 16 20:51 04, Rob Swindell wrote to Paul Westell:

 >> You have stated that the third field in the message ID is necessary
 >> to overcome some deficiencies in the accepted FTN format. Please
 >> detail these and how this third field avoids them. Although I am not
 >> a programmer I have some grasp of the concepts, and I know there are
 >> some as yet unheard from programmers following this.

 RS> It's been discussed to death in FTSC_PUBLIC and other echoes. To 
 RS> summarize, a
 RS> 32-bit number, alone, is not enough data to insure message uniqueness 
 RS> without
 RS> jumping through great hoops to insure that number is not re-used by 
 RS> any 2
 RS> messages from the same system.

That is a problem most seem to regard as rather minor and by itself 
hardly justifies modifying current standards.

You stated deficiencies in the plural. Are the remainder so 
insignificant that they are not worth explaining? If so then they 
hardly require fixing. Please be more forthcoming.


It could be worse ...
Paul

--- Msged/LNX 6.1.1