On Tue, 06 Aug 2013, Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Mark Lewis:

 ml> this is not a problem any more now that fidonet is smaller and 
 ml> there are no more duplicate nets and nodes across zones...

 WvV> This is not completely true. There are still 3 duplicate nets in
 WvV> Z1 and Z2: 249, 250 and 340. But between those nets there is only
 WvV> 1 shared node number in net 250:

i confess that i didn't check to verify... my information came from a
conversation from a few years back in the one of the FTSC areas, IIRC...

[trim]

 WvV> The latter seems to be administrative only and probably isn't 
 WvV> used for echomail, because Frank has other nodenumbers in his 
 WvV> net.

yeah but you can't be sure of that... there are too many out there who are
doing just that with their administrative numbers instead of using a
regular node number for such activities :(

 WvV> So I don't think we need to keep striping SEEN-BY's in the whole 
 WvV> of fidonet, just for these 2 nodes. ;) 

agreed...

 ml> seen-bys do not need to be stripped any more...

 WvV> I agree on that!

 ml> FWIW: in FastEcho it is called "Tiny SEEN-BY" and we've
had the option
 ml> for years ;)

 ml> --- FMail/Win32 1.60

 WvV> FastEcho != FMail !? ;)

you are right! :)

my main system runs fastecho... at this time, a couple of my personal
points run fmail but that may be changing soon as there's been no new
developments that i've seen :(

 WvV> In FMail this option strips SEEN-BY's for every message it
 WvV> receive's for the particular echomail area, not just for the ones
 WvV> that just crossed a zone boundary...

yeah, there are some that do that, too... too bad it isn't really how it
was intended to be done but with no real documentation and everyone
guessing, we get what we get, ya know? ;)

)\/(ark

--- FMail/Win32 1.60