Harold is right. Peer lists do NOT have to bear the same name, although I strongly recommend to use the same name if at all possible. I understand that it is not always the case, and there is no problem about setting up a peer with a different name. However, the MOVE command now requires that both the source and destination lists bear the same name. I may remove this restriction in a future release, depending on the "strategy" I choose for non-local reci- pients of the list. I first thought every server should have a list of all non-local recipients for every list (automatically maintained), but now it seems that there could be synch problems and that the resulting file would be quite large. I'll see. As for Harry's suggestion on duplicate messages: you can set the list to Ack= No, which will cause only a single message to be sent. However, my own opinion on that subject had always been: if the BITNIC server had been a FRECP11 LISTSERV, it would forward the sender's distribution options and the guy would get whatever level of information he had asked for. Since it is not, he must bear the file acknowledgements, et voila. Jeff: I'll look into your suggestion... But I think that keeping just the latest origins/date/subjects could do the trick :-) Similar subjects are possi- ble when people reply to a piece of mail, and same senders is a possibility too but same DATE would probably be something *rare* :-) Eric