not sure why this is said but it suggests to me that you must combine
all 'message-ID: ' fields into a single 'In-Reply-To: ' field as such:
message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
becomes:
In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the RFC leaves out whether it should be a comma-separated list or not.
Ok but :
Field Min number Max number Notes
message-id 0* 1 SHOULD be present - see
3.6.4
So I still dont understand...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message sent to my personal address :
On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 19:09:28 +0100, \"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
> If there is more than one parent message, then the \"In-
> Reply-To:\" field will contain the contents of all of the parents\'
> \"Message-ID:\" fields.
>>?????????????? I don\'t understand this part
> ????????????????????????????????
not sure why this is said but it suggests to me that you must combine
all \'message-ID: \' fields into a single \'In-Reply-To: \' field as such:
message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
becomes:
In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the RFC leaves out whether it should be a comma-separated list or not.
Auke
