> Roger, June; I don't think we're losing any mail; one of the costs of > a distributed list system is that every mail 'stops' more often, and > there's more chance of mail getting into SIFO rather than FIFO order; so > that when a discussion is started with a *very long* mail, as it crawls its > way through the servers folks answer it right away with short files that may > get to those of us out in the sticks a lot sooner... > /jenny > (geez, that was all one sentence, wasn't it? sorry... been reading a lot > of Faulkner lately :-) I am aware of the shortest job first queuing. It does appear that there may be a bottleneck between me and UIUCVMD, the server that I am on. One of the messages about ARPA digests arrived here about 12 hours after it had been sent. However, the message that started the discussion still has not arrived, nor has the message that I complained about not getting several days ago. I just tried a test of sending a short file from here to UIUCVMD and UGA. The path to UIUCVMD seems to be NIHCU-UMDD-UMDB-GWUVM-PSUVM-OHSTVMA-UICVM-UIUCVMD. The file (one line) waited longest at UICVM, next longest at PSUVM. The path to UGA seems to be NIHCU-UMDD-UMDB-GWUVM-PSUVM-OHSTVMA-UCCCVM1-UTKVM1-UTCVM-UGA. The UGA file arrived first, even though it was sent later. Of course, I am sending in the opposite direction from LISTSERV mail, delays may be different the other way and it was a one line file. PHIL@UIUCVMD was nice enough to send me a week's worth of messages from this list. I found at least 3 that had never arrived here, the two that I had mentioned and one other. On the subject of the ARPA digests, today I just received my third copy of Info-IBMPC Vol. 5, No. 101. It is not unusual for me to receive multiple copies, although I don't always get more than one. I asked the digest editor about this once. He said that if something interrupted the process of sending the digests to BITNET, they would start over again from the beginning.