Hey Rob!

 RS> Backwards compatible means enhancing/fixing functionality
 RS> *without* impacting interoparability with old systems that lack
 RS> the enhancement or fix.

Not at all cost.  In this case it is the two digit year that is the source of
the problem and it will continue to propogate it's embedded corruption
throughout the network, including systems that have been doing the correct
thing all along.  The *only* true fix is to eliminate the cause which means you
and I would be further ahead by helping the old systems adapt so that the
desease they are spreading is finally cured.  I honestly see no way around that
fact.  The kludge doesn't address this need.

 RS> Control paragraphs are how new features have been introduced
 RS> into FidoNet for decades without breaking backward compatibility.
 RS> This is the way.

They are at best a placebo that ignores the real issue.  A proper cure is
needed and has been for 20 years now.  Control paragraphs do nothing to solve
the real problem which is the two digit year.  It *MUST* die.  It is the *ONLY*
way.

 RS> So you agree that existing FTN systems would break if the rest
 RS> of the network were to switch to a new date format in packets

The breakage is already there and has been for 20 years now.  The proposal as
it stands will effectively eliminate it and if it drags down systems with it
then I would suggest it is 20 years overdue as they've been more than just a
drag to the network's viability and integrity.  It is the right thing to do.

 RS> I can't tell if you're joking, but I hope so. :-)

Yes and no.

Life is good,
Maurice

... Yrre oft amyrreð monnes mod þæt he ne mæg þæt riht gecnawan.
    Anger often disturbs a man's mind so that he cannot see the right.
--- GNU bash, version 5.1.0(1)-release (x86_64-motorshed-linux-gnu)