ietf-nntp <0> and message IDs

Clive D. W. Feather clive at on-the-train.demon.co.uk
Sat Apr 5 06:33:27 PST 2003


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In message <m3brzlkyuh.fsf at merlin.emma.line.org>, Matthias Andree 
<matthias.andree at gmx.de> writes
>(Ceterum censeo "<0>" esse delendum).

"esse delendum" or "delenum est"?

>On the topic of how the Message-ID is to be obtained, and on the server
>providing one, the Usefor drafts make a distinction between "Injecting"
>and "Relaying" agents. Only the former are allowed to add the Message-ID
>header (and turn a "Proto-Article" (which may lack Message-ID) into a
>article that has all mandatory headers)) -- so POST might be able to add
>the Message-ID, but not IHAVE. Opinions?

I've been careful to distinguish the message-id and the contents of a 
Message-ID header. IHAVE provides the message-id in the command. POST 
doesn't provide one, so the server has to deduce one, either from the 
header or from an oracle. I think my latest wording for POST meets that 
requirement.

- -- 
Clive D.W. Feather     |  Internet Expert  | Work: <clive at demon.net>
Tel: +44 20 8371 1138  |  Demon Internet   | Home: <clive at davros.org>
Fax: +44 870 051 9937  |  Thus plc         | Web:  <http://www.davros.org>
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk 2.0.5

iQEVAwUBPo7pMCNAHP3TFZrhAQE0Cgf+JoE9yJ5yeBsa7FdmHjF6CiINSKXRHi/W
MwKtCV1NHBns3wTsMQ9NGzeAs79soVjAY9vH//ZLUulTH6ObwRzYgjLqav4Bz1UM
KdEv3VMRHdbnAZ7UaaHLzm/C3KOegn+t8sUAv/rt/k2s1EjzDDHqT4oENJiVA7R+
bTyyRZitNWEowempD8hIW28eO3YhgmZ2s45/Gh8o2Nu4euOHHwqCiLecBqhQXQXv
KUe8G+CpbMJR8AAJnL7TwrxyWbWhufo+9SyCUFLmPB0ScwRFtxYiQhXWMYf/CDmr
0wbhocV11Ac2lLJ1PVPc+JKQ0x+ub05VubhMYsFuTdafPV1ACuHU5g==
=AOwf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the ietf-nntp mailing list