Send inn-workers mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/inn-workers
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of inn-workers digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. No Injection-Date: if Message-ID: present? (Thomas Hochstein)
2. Re: No Injection-Date: if Message-ID: present? (Thomas Hochstein)
3. Re: No Injection-Date: if Message-ID: present? (Russ Allbery)
4. Re: No Injection-Date: if Message-ID: present? (Thomas Hochstein)
5. Re: storage.conf(5) manpage name too generic?
(Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 15:25:50 +0200
From: Thomas Hochstein <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: No Injection-Date: if Message-ID: present?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi everybody.
I'm using INN 2.6.1 (Debian package 2.6.1-2) after updateding to
Debian stretch just some days ago. Debian jessie had 2.5.4, so those
Injection-* headers are quite new for me.
Today I noticed that my (locally submitted) posts don't have an
Injection-Date: header, although I have set "addinjectiondate" to
"true" in my inn.conf (which is the default setting anyway).
After a bit of testing it seems that I *do* get Injection-Date: set if
I don't submit a Message-ID: when posting (to nnrpd). If I include my
own Message-ID: to the POSTed message, Injection-Date: is *not* added
(but Injection-Info: is).
I don't think that's the way that should work.
-thh
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 15:30:47 +0200
From: Thomas Hochstein <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: No Injection-Date: if Message-ID: present?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I wrote:
> I don't think that's the way that should work.
After reading the source that *is* the way it should work:
| 390 /* Set the Injection-Date: header. */
| 391 /* Start with this header because it MUST NOT be added in case
| 392 * the article already contains both Message-ID: and Date:
| 393 * header fields (possibility of multiple injections). */
Why is that so? AFAIR NNTP-Posting-Date: was added anyway.
Is there a way to add the Injection-Date:, short of adding it by a
nnrpd filter?
-thh
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 10:18:04 -0700
From: Russ Allbery <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: No Injection-Date: if Message-ID: present?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain
Thomas Hochstein <[email protected]> writes:
> After a bit of testing it seems that I *do* get Injection-Date: set if
> I don't submit a Message-ID: when posting (to nnrpd). If I include my
> own Message-ID: to the POSTed message, Injection-Date: is *not* added
> (but Injection-Info: is).
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5537#page-17
11. If the proto-article already had an Injection-Date header field,
it MUST NOT be modified or replaced. If the proto-article had
both a Message-ID header field and a Date header field, an
Injection-Date header field MUST NOT be added, since the proto-
article may have been multiply injected by a posting agent that
predates this standard. Otherwise, the injecting agent MUST add
an Injection-Date header field containing the current date and
time.
--
Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Please send questions to the list rather than mailing me directly.
<http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/questions.html> explains why.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 20:58:31 +0200
From: Thomas Hochstein <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: No Injection-Date: if Message-ID: present?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Russ Allbery wrote:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5537#page-17
Thanks for pointing me in the right direction!
> 11. If the proto-article already had an Injection-Date header field,
> it MUST NOT be modified or replaced. If the proto-article had
> both a Message-ID header field and a Date header field, an
> Injection-Date header field MUST NOT be added, since the proto-
> article may have been multiply injected by a posting agent that
> predates this standard.
I see. (I had to read up a bit on the meaning of Injection-Date. I
didn't know a posting agent was allowed - and in some cases - forced
to add that header.)
-thh
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 13:43:40 +0200
From: Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: storage.conf(5) manpage name too generic?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
My thoughts exactly. Thank you for the reply, Russ.
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
inn-workers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/inn-workers
------------------------------
End of inn-workers Digest, Vol 98, Issue 4
******************************************
