From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/34952 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: `user-mail-address' for message-ids Date: 23 Feb 2001 18:27:00 -0500 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <20010223133030.B14991@mastaler.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035170779 469 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:26:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:26:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@gnus.org Return-Path: Original-Received: from lisa.math.uh.edu (lisa.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.49]) by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31C46D049F for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:27:37 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by lisa.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAB22581; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 17:27:23 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Fri, 23 Feb 2001 17:26:42 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from mailhost.sclp.com (postfix@66-209.196.61.interliant.com [209.196.61.66] (may be forged)) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA14617 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 17:26:31 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from multivac.cwru.edu (multivac.STUDENT.CWRU.Edu [129.22.96.25]) by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DBCC7D049F for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:27:00 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (qmail 21362 invoked by uid 500); 23 Feb 2001 23:27:22 -0000 Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org, jason@mastaler.com Original-To: "Jason R. Mastaler" In-Reply-To: ("Jason R. Mastaler"'s message of "23 Feb 2001 15:57:40 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090001 (Oort Gnus v0.01) Emacs/20.7 Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Original-Lines: 50 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:34952 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:34952 "Jason R. Mastaler" writes: > The point is that just because you may not find this functionality > useful does not mean others do/will not. It's more than that: I find it *counter* to usefulness. > And BTW, it is trivial to make Message-ID the only place your > hostname would show up in the header. How are you going to keep it out of the Received field that gets added *after* the message leaves your computer? The next SMTP recipient is typically going to add a Received field with an indication of where the message came from, and it's not going to trust the sender to provide that indication; it'll use DNS instead. > > But their primary purpose is to be a universally unique identifier > > for messages. Using the domain from user-mail-address would subvert > > that purpose. > > No. Many MUAs use the user's chosen e-mail address (such as Mutt) in > the message-id instead of the system's fqdn. I don't know which statement you were trying to refute, but: - Message-ID's purpose is indeed as I stated. See RFC822, 4.6.1. - The behavior you describe does indeed subvert that purpose. (It doesn't guarantee failure, but it encourages it.) > I say that if the 1st half of the message-id (before the "@") > doesn't guarantee uniqueness, then we need to rethink the algorithm > for `message-make-message-id'. The first part only needs to be unique *on that host*, and message-make-message-id does a good job of satisfying that requirement. But the Message-ID as a whole must be unique *universally*. To ensure that, you need to include the host's identification, and since different hosts may use different methods to generate the first part, the host's identification must be included in a universally uniform way, in order to avoid collisions. > > You already know how to make this change for your own Gnus. Why do > > you want to break mine? > > Because if done correctly, it won't "break" anything, So if hosts don't uniformly embed their own identification into Message-IDs, and they don't coordinate Message-ID generation, how would they guarantee uniqueness? How could it be done "correctly"? paul