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