I'm sending this  through LSTSRV-L@CLVM since the DEARN server  is down and I
want the US to get this this weekend.
 
  Regarding the STANFORD  mail problem, this has been fixed  in my test version
as I said (you  probably didn't get the mail until a long  time had elapsed due
to the links being down). The links have  been down a long time here in France,
and I  found with delight  that some  of my PUT  PEERS NAMES commands  had been
held at FRHEC11.  I had thought I had individually  updated those servers which
needed individual update before sending the  global PUT, but obviously this was
not the case.
 
  Considering the number of problems that have  been solved in 1.5g, I am going
to distribute  my 1.5g version as  is, without the corresponding  docs. I would
have preferred to wait  until the docs were ready but it seems  that we need to
synch out our versions ASAP.
 
  The DISTRIBUTE problem was due to the following facts:
 
1) There was an entry  in the old PEERS NAMES file  saying that BITNIC's server
   was NEWLIST not  LISTSERV. If there had  been no entry, this  would not have
   been a  problem, but  there was  an entry  with a  different userid  and the
   servers thought that LISTSERV was Ricky's version.
 
2) Ibid. some sites  have NOTIFY OFF in effect for  [log in to unmask] *** PLEASE
   PLEASE PLEASE  *** remove  this thing  ASAP, a  lot of  error mail  is being
   suppressed (ie sent to /dev/null) because of that.
 
3) I  had stupidly  decided to  protect 'old'  servers (<  1.5d) of  a security
   problem with  DISTRIBUTE. A side  effect of  the corresponding code  is that
   no entry  in PEERS  NAMES -->  DISTRIBUTE disabled. A  corollary is  that no
   :version tag --> same effect.
 
   Another side  effect is  that server  not found in  PEERS NAMES  --> invalid
   file  origin,  with the  same  corollary  about  the missing  :version  tag.
 
   To the best of  my knowledge there are still 3 sites with  an old version of
   LISTSERV. I  am going to remove  all this BS from  the 1.5g code and  if the
   aforesaid sites  don't update  their server,  it's too  bad, they  may allow
   Joe users to add  people to their lists. I don't think  it's normal that 95%
   of people get  in so much trouble  because of 5% of people  who don't update
   their code. Besides I can't keep maintaining a server which replies
   "Unknown command"  when I tell it  "RELEASE" to know its  release number :-)
   Sorry if I sound so negative but it's really becoming a pain.
 
4) The CUNYVM  entry was full  of errors. It's partly  the fault of  the person
   who prepared it,  and partly mine for not checking  the entry before placing
   it  online. There  was no  :version tag,  there were  a few  typos, and  the
   hardware machine was said to be a 3090-4  -- as I said earlier, this one did
   not cause any problem but confirms the fact that the entry was prepared in a
   hurry and was messed up.
 
  In 1.5g the processing will be slightly altered:
 
- No entry  in PEERS  NAMES file:  the server is  assumed to  be a  1.5f server
  instead of  1.4-. DISTRIBUTE jobs are  never routed to this  server of course
  (since it's not listed  in PEERS NAMES), unless it's a  PUT command. This may
  cause security problems  for people running a  release < 1.5b but  as I said,
  I  can't jeopardize  the  DISTRIBUTE  command just  because  of 2-3  servers.
  However, DISTRIBUTE  jobs from such a  server are accepted PROVIDED  that the
  userid of the server is LISTSERV. If it's not LISTSERV, jobs will be
  rejected  until  the entry  appears  in  PEERS  NAMES, for  obvious  security
  reasons.
 
- Missing  :version tag:  same  as above,  except that  since  the server  does
  appear in PEERS NAMES it will receive DISTRIBUTE jobs as if it had a
  ":version.1.5f"  tag. That's  the  same  fix as  "no  entry"  above in  fact.
 
- :version  tag indicating  a release  < 1.5:  this means  that the  DISTRIBUTE
  feature is disabled at this node. Other  servers won't send any job to such a
  server, and if one  is received it will be rejected.  However, jobs from this
  server will still be accepted (in  case the local staff re-enable DISTRIBUTE)
 
- I will make sure  to check all entries before including  them in the official
  PEERS NAMES file.  I will also make  sure to change my  password to something
  else. I  don't want  to suppress  the password display  from the  console log
  because (1)  the command is displayed  by higher-level routines BEFORE  it is
  scanned,  and (2)  the  password  can be  useful  to  diagnose problems.  Now
  everybody knows that I like Rigoletto :-(
 
---> About  this problem:  I would  like to  ask ALL  postmasters to  send only
     those tags  they have  updated when  they send me  an updated  PEERS NAMES
     entry for  their sites. If  you want  to delete a  tag, just send  it back
     with no  value, eg ":remark1.".  This will make it  much easier for  me to
     check the thing.
 
  The PEERS  NAMES should now be  synched, except the SUVM  one (they installed
1.5f and the NAMES file from the shipment overrode theirs). I had sent
individual updates to those servers which  needed it, except one which got held
at FRHEC11, and then a global update "from the other side" (sent to
LISTSERV@TAMVM1). This seems  to have updated all the  servers without problem,
but I'd suggest  waiting until 1.5g is installed to  use DISTRIBUTE again. With
the changes in the code it will probably become MUCH more stable.
 
  Eric