On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 08:50:52PM +0200, Rado S wrote: > [...] , or at least the interests of the powers if there can't be > a 100% safe technical solution (as James requires for client control). I do not require a 100% safe technical solution for client control. I simply do not think client control is important. I would prefer there be no client control. Protocol control is the important barrier. -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/