ml>> {at}REPLY: 1:123/666.0 413c4fef

 DC>> I know the the REPID works in my system.  And, I
 DC>> know that BW uses it for threading.  I'm just
 DC>> amazed that it doesn't return the favor!

 ml>> part of the problem is the ambiguity in the MSGID/REPLY spec... what
 ml>> fidonet system address should be used by bluewave to create the REPLY
 ml>> serial number with? how can it ensure that it doesn't create a serial
 ml>> number already used within the last three years by the bbs or another
 ml>> user?

 DC> See above.  The one I get from you is based on my FIDO address
 DC> plus the message number generated by my BBS.

right... my system generated that REPLY line as it should... however, your
messages arrive here with NO reply line but they do have a MSGID line...
half of the implementation that should be there...

 ml>> this is but one of the reasons that non-ftn offline mail stuff is
 ml>> broken and not a good idea to use with fidonet messages... the
 ml>> absolute *BEST* method is to become a point system and use truely
 ml>> compliant software leaving BW and others like it in the dust... they
 ml>> were born of an entirely different system that has nothing remotely
 ml>> similar to fidonet other than a few message header fields and the
 ml>> message bodies...

 DC> You KNOW I won't leave BW!

i'm sorry... can't do much to help you, then... BW stuff just don't do
everything like it should properly be done... not even BW handling
clones...

FWIW: yes, i used to be an avid offline mail reader... i was a beta tester
for one or two... session manager was one that i really enjoyed... used
SLMR, BW, and most of the others... was registered with most of them,
too... when i came to fidonet and its technology, i found out real fast how
broken that stuff was when it came to full support for FTN messaging... i
left it all behind without looking back... been better off for it, too...
and much happier ;)

)\/(ark