>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