Certainly Eric's LISTSERV has been *tremendously* helpful in reducing
network traffic!  I feel that he has done a *good* job (even though I have
disagreed with details on occasion) ==>  Keep up the good work, Eric!
 
It makes no sense to me that we (1.5i backbone LISTSERV postmasters)
should be held back (from adding new LISTSERVs to further distribute the
network traffic load) because of outdated individual LISTSERVs on the
network.  In this real-time environment of dependent, inter-connected
servers, you MUST set cut-off dates for moving to (only) supported versions.
I personally feel that Eric is doing TOO much by trying to get version
1.4 (yes!) through version 1.5i to be compatible.
 
I suggest that we only keep (for example) versions 1.5g-1.5i as supported
and remove the remainder from the backbone (and peering).  (We may never
get all those old LISTSERVs updated to 1.5i.)  This may mean that Eric
should start sending out the date that version 1.5g will be unsupported
as version 1.5j is being distributed.  I would prefer this rather than
be affected by unsupported LISTSERVs giving supported ones headaches.
 
Master Coordination of PEER NAMES seems to be a nice feature to keep the
LISTSERVs in synch.  I really hope that Eric continues this.  After all,
I can disable remote updates to it if I really wanted to update PEER NAMES
myself. (I have no desire to do this since it has worked smoothly so far.)
 
Gary
 
P.S. Surely NETSERVs are not running at all sorts of levels.