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