LISTSERV version 1.8a and LMail version 1.2a, when operating together, extend the "global list exchange" support (also known as GLX) to the listname-request pseudo-address, and to the new listname-server address. Concretely, this means that you can write to the owners of any LISTSERV list without having to know where it is located, with the usual reservations about confidential lists and lists which are visible only to local users. For instance, to send mail to the owners of the INFOVAX list, you could write to [log in to unmask] and the message will be passed on to the LISTSERV that actually runs the list, which will in turn forward it to the list owners. Note that owner-xxxx requests are not forwarded as this mailbox is normally used only for delivery errors. It is an anomaly to receive a delivery error report for a list you are not hosting, unless it has just been deleted, and it would not be appropriate to silently toss the hot potato to another LISTSERV. The new listname-server convention can be used to send commands to the LISTSERV hosting the list without having to know where the list is located. While most commands are properly forwarded when sent to the wrong server, certain commands like GET requests for material maintained by the list owner are only available from servers which actually host the list, and cannot be forwarded properly by the other servers as they only represent a naming convention (that is, there is no way for LISTSERV@XYZ to know that 'GET CBPD13 MINUTES' should be forwarded to the server that hosts the CBPD-L list). So if you want to find out what was said this month on the INFOXYZ list, to which you are not subscribed and whose exact location you forgot, you can send mail to [log in to unmask] with a GET INFOXYZ LOG9307 command and the file will be sent to you. Another potentially interesting use of the -server convention is a means to reach the list manager associated with a particular list without having to know what flavour of software it is running (LISTSERV, Mailbase, MAILSERV, Listprocessor, etc). This however might require modifications to the other list managers, and some people will undoubtedly object that it is not an Internet standard. I don't have time to open this can of worms at the moment. Eric