--On 7 August 2009 14:55:13 -0700 "John W. Baxter" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > [Catching up] > Unfortunately, having a Message-Id: header is still a SHOULD, even in RFC > 5322. So one really ought not to reject based (only) on their lack. It > would be very nice if I could. (And if running a server only for myself, > I likely would, with provision for an exception list.) > Yes, but understand the meaning of SHOULD. "SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course." The implication of ignoring any RFC5321 recommendation is that your mail may not get delivered. I think you can safely assume that people who really want their mail delivered will include a message-id. Valid reasons for not generating a message-id will look like: "My MTA is going to do it before releasing the email to the Internet, and is better placed to generate a globally unique message id". -- Ian Eiloart IT Services, University of Sussex 01273-873148 x3148 For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/ -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
