>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