Subj : Re: Canectic Network Test
To   : Underminer
From : Accession
Date : Fri Apr 10 2026 05:08 pm

Hey Underminer!

On Fri, Apr 10 2026 14:31:31 -0500, you wrote:

> No. You've only mentioned the address in the origin lacking
> parenthesis previously. I appreciate help in testing, but simply
> posting the spec is far less helpful if you don't report what's
> being seen on receipt. Obviously the spec was referenced during
> design.

For what it's worth, I don't see a TZUTC kludge here on my Synchronet system. Maybe it's just being eliminated upon receipt? Either that, or Synchronet processes it into the "Date" field upon display. I don't remember exactly how that works. I figured it would still display any/all X-FTN kludges separately. I see AREA, TID, MSGID, REPLY, SEEN-BY, and PATH on this specific message. If there were any others sent, they aren't on display here.
  
>> They should be delimited by a space after the colon, ie: ": ".
  
> While you're correct that they SHOULD have a space after the colon
> and if they do not I need to investigate what's stripping it during
> the outbound process, that should never impede decoding on receive
> as it IS NOT the ": " that should be taken as delineation. ^A
> delineates kludges as per spec. The space after the colon is only
> ever mentioned as a "Should" (best practice), and only during
> reference to MSGID.

While you may be only looking at "specs", You may have to sift through a ton of proposals that have been mainstreamed over the years but (for some reason) never were documented as actual standards.

Lastly, I see your MSGID here as:

21:4/103 19d78e0cbb4

Am I wrong in assuming (from memory) the second field should only be an 8 character string?

Regards,
Nick

.... Sarcasm, because beating people up is illegal.
--- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
 * Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (21:1/700)

.