Sun, 15 Jul 90 01:22:51 O
|
>BALT-L is peered, with a central editor. How can we remove the Comments:
>original tag is from BALT-@UKACRL which gives no practical information.
You can't, but they should not be generated. However you should know that
UKACRL is running release 1.5o, with a number of local changes dealing
with JANET and grey book, plus a bit of LISTEARN code which was
inadvertently installed, caused a thousand junk messages to be sent to my
and Harold's reader and was then replaced by a fixed piece of LISTEARN
code not causing a REXX error when the rest of the server runs 1.5o (ok,
executive summary: LISTSERV@UKACRL is a mess).
>Can the editor forward the postings to any listserv,
Yes
>(so as to avail himself of the automatical removal of the foreword
>written by listserv and to maintain the original sender)?
It has to be the UBVM one in your case because UKACRL is not running 1.6.
>Does the routing option of one list to the other, e.g SHORTHDR vs
>FULLHDR, matter, or is the routing BETWEEN listservs stripped anyway?
This option is ignored - peers automatically get FULLHDR plus some
internal tags, it can't be the cause of your problem.
>One listserv is 1.6e. A manual SET SHORTHDR generates a routing indo
>code of N, whereas an automatic default of SHORTHDR generate a blank
>code. I could not see any difference in practice. Is there any?
This is quite usual with LISTSERV: blank means "default" by definition,
and when the user explicitly sets it to something it is changed to some
other value. This way, if the default is changed through a list header
keyword (whenever applicable) or a new release introduced a new default,
people who have explicitly chose a particular behaviour via the SET
command do keep it.
Eric
|
|
|