On 12/11/22 1:52 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:
I wonder whether any old string will do as a Message-ID?
There is some rough formatting to it. It's fairly well documented in multiple internet email RFCs. I'd suggest glancing at RFC 5322.
The Message-ID looks like an email address, but it is not. Nor do the parts on either side actually matter beyond uniqueness.
It's by convention that the entity that adds the Message-ID header use (one of) their domain name(s). The idea is that their domain name is somewhat of a stand-in as the identity of a "naming authority".
As long as you follow the patterns of what's on either side of the at sign, it could be purely random data. -- I personally set mine to what looks like an email address that feeds a spam trap (which I manually go through).
I'm guessing the first part of that string is assigned by your email provider and is unique either to AOL or to your email address;
It /may/ be assigned by your email provider. But you can easily assign it yourself.
if so, it'd be easy enough to include a header with some string using that format, and maybe that's all Google wants to see?
Yep. You're *EXACTLY* correct on /both/ accounts; creating and what Google wants.
Although why Gmail fails text emails and not HTML I don't know. Wait, did you try sending an HTML email to a Gmail address?
I'm guessing that was luck of the random(draw). -- Grant. . . . unix || die ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
