Phil's comments about changes to RSCS versus accepting any and all DISTRIBUTE traffic are a little misleading. There are only 41 LISTSERVs among 1200+ nodes, and in the states, as it's been observed, many of the high traffic nodes don't have LISTSERVs. Now, if two copies of a file are being distributed to our parent node, some other LISTSERV is going to realize it's "better" to send one copy to our LISTSERV and let us send two copies. Therefore, we inherently accept one reception and two sends that normally we would not see. Granted, we save any number of intermediate nodes a send/receive, but there is a greater cost to this particular node. If there was a higher concentration of LISTSERVs it might be easier to show that this wouldn't happen, but with the sparseness of LISTSERVs in the States, it might very well happen often.