[Icom] Duplicate reflections

Sun, 27 Apr 2003 00:54:20 -0400

Uhhhh I haven't been getting dupes but when I used the reply to all feature
I get double [email protected] addresses in the "To " bar.  Could that be
it?
ED AND CARRIE YEARY
325 CUMBERLAND DRIVE
HARROGATE, TN. 37752-6942

----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Farson" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2003 7:56 PM
Subject: RE: [Icom] Duplicate reflections

> Hi Larry,
>
> Strange - I have not seen any dupes at my end. Mind you, I did cross-post
a
> couple of messages to this one and the IC-756Pro2 reflector (Yahoo).
>
> Cheers for now, 73,
> Adam VA7OJ/AB4OJ
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On
> Behalf Of Larry
> Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2003 12:06
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Icom] Duplicate relections
>
>
> A pattern(?) has started to become known. Twice, since I brought up this
> problem yesterday, I've received duplicates from Adam Farson. I'm not
> pointing any fingers just observing.
>
> This is getting more and more curious.
>
> 73 - Larry W�NFU
> [email protected]
>
>
> At 11:42 AM 4/26/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >I've got a sneaky feeling that this intermittent problem lies with my
ISP.
> >I have cable modem and AT&T just sold out to ComCast & maybe something
> >glitched on the way. As soon as wife gets off phone, I'll call them. How
> >much does anybody want to bet that they'll point and say "it must be
> >somewhere else because there's no way we could cause that to happen."
> >Thirty seven years in the computer business taught me that many outfits
> >operate on the premise that "We can't do anything wrong."
> >
> >To the phones.
> >73 - Larry W�NFU
> >[email protected]
> >
> >At 12:06 PM 4/26/2003 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> >>de WB2CPN South Central Pennsylvania   2003.04.26
> >>
> >>Perhaps the duplicates, called SUSDUP's where I once worked,
> >>are caused by the network architecture.  Some reflectors
> >>and alias machines are placed in redundant pairs or greater.
> >>These pairs update each other almost, but not quiet, real time.
> >>This arrangement provides a capability for disaster recovery,
> >>and makes access faster in some configurations.  Now, it
> >>could be that the members of a pair are getting their protocol
> >>mixed up, and you're getting replies from both, not just
> >>from one.   For what it's worth.  (You might want to look
> >>at the entire header of the duplicated messages and see if
> >>there is a clue there.)        73  Clete
> >>
> >>
> >>----
> >>Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan W6OLD, [email protected]
> >>Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.315 MHz
> >>Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/
> >
> >----
> >Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan W6OLD, [email protected]
> >Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.315 MHz
> >Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/
>
> ----
> Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan W6OLD, [email protected]
> Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.315 MHz
> Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/
>
> ----
> Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan W6OLD, [email protected]
> Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.315 MHz
> Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/
>