That's what I thought.  So I don't understand what the confusion is about.  It makes sense that each peer should send an ACK counting the subscribers on that peer.  As Russ said, how else would you know if it's working?

Although I would also expect that subscriber settings on the subscribed peer should propagate to the other peers.


>>> Russ Hunt <[log in to unmask]> 12/14 8:18 AM >>>
Rich asks,

> Is a peer supposed to send an ACK to a non-subscriber or is this a
> bug in the peering code?  IMHO, its a bug (or at least a design
> flaw).

Naw, it's a feature. How else could we know the list was peered?  And
that it's working?

                                  -- Russ
                                __|~_
Russell A. Hunt            __|~_)_ __)_|~_    Professor of English
St. Thomas University      )_ __)_|_)__ __)  PHONE: (506) 452-0424
Fredericton, New Brunswick   |  )____) |       FAX: (506) 450-9615
E3B 5G3   CANADA          ___|____|____|____/    [log in to unmask] 
                          \                /
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.StThomasU.ca/~hunt/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~