Perhaps I am missing something, but there is an advantage to Peers lists which the Mail-via=Distribute will not address. One of the main functions of my LISTSERV is the maintenance of notebooks on all of the lists which are carried here. I am not going to get rid of my lists just because someone else wants to do direct distribution because I'm not ready to take the giant step backwards and start maintaining notebooks by hand again. This means there will still be a NODMGT-L here at UGA, with some subscribers who still have to be told that they can't send mail back to the address they received it from in the first place. I think that the best solution is a combination of both systems, with enough Peer servers around the network to provide a nearby address that people can send to and with mail being forwarded between servers (and subscribers) via distribute. Bill Rubin says he prefers Distribute since it gives a single person control of the lists. I don't have any problem with a single person controlling the lists, in fact, I will peer link all of my BITNIC lists to theirs, put INFO@BITNIC in the list header as the only owner, and then proceed to forget these lists exist. They can have complete control over adding, deleting, and moving people from list to list. I just want the lists here for the purpose of maintaining notebooks, which by the way, are on the other side of the CUNY - PSUVM - OHSTVMA links from BITNIC and cut down on network traffic across these critical links for anyone in the mid-west or south who wants to order copies of the notebooks. Harold