Hey mark!

 ml> i don't know where it got changed if it was and isn't just a
 ml> display anomaly...

It looks like it didn't get changed although I cannot confirm that.  I'd need
to put the node back online to be able to verify that.  The real 'problem' is
that the ftn datetime strips the century out of the date and it was originally
done here.  Technically you should be seeing that datetime stamp in the
msgHeader.

 ml> especially those that only allocate 8 bytes for the serial number
 ml> portion of the string

I'd like to see an example.  From what I've observed over the years the MSGID
causes more problems when it isn't there than how many nibbles there are in the
 serial number portion.  Just for fun I thought it would be interesting to see
what happens if I piggy-backed a unixtime from the year 2525 on it not unlike a
 certain nameless software corrupts the address portion of the MSGID.  Nothing
to worry about since I doubt I'll be around in 2106 and I already have 2036 and
 beyond covered with an 8 nibble unixtime.  As far as the ftn msgHeader
datetime, that isn't really an issue until around 2080 or so when stored
messages from the +1980's start looking like new postings, probably from the
embedded devices you brought up in a previous message.

Fidonet robots run amock in the 2080's.  :::evil grin:::

Life is good,
Maurice

... Don't cry for me I have vi.
--- GNU bash, version 5.0.3(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
 * Origin: Little Mikey's EuroPoint - Ladysmith BC, Canada (2:280/464.113)