Hello Maurice.

17 Feb 05 09:52, you wrote to me:

 RT>> Hmmm ... , I figure they are useful, and can be mayhap made
 RT>> better use of than they currently are, so I'm not to keen on
 RT>> dropping them (msgid's) too quickly. :-)

 MK> How are you using them?  Do they work good for that/those reason(s)?

Using them basically as MBSE BBS implements them ...

 RT>> Seems a reasonable solution ...

 MK> Offhand it does but then as Mark pointed out it is a bit of overkill.
 MK> It still doesn't resolve dupechecking but makes it a tad more
 MK> accountable methinks, even if pkt sizes aren't an issue.  If the pkt
 MK> size isn't an issue, then I can just increment the seconds within the
 MK> message loop, derive the 8.3 file naming scheme from the original base
 MK> ID, and decrease processing time simply because it doesn't need to
 MK> repeat the loop after every 16 messages.  Also it could still use the
 MK> 8 character MSGID limitation by doing the bit shifting only on the
 MK> base ID which doesn't increase processing time within the message loop
 MK> but does make it a tad less meaningful to the human eye.  I think 10
 MK> characters makes it a tad more humanly readable but that really isn't
 MK> a big deal ... is it?

No big deal, and if it is not easily readale by humans, then I'm sure 
asolution exists that can be implemented to make it so in times of need, 
ascript maybe ...

Russell

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.4.7