On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 20:10:11 +0200 (Westeurop�ische Sommerzeit) Florian Schulze 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

FS> On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 01:06:24 +0200 (Romance Daylight Time) Vadim Zeitlin 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
FS> 
FS> > On Sat, 28 Sep 2002 14:42:30 +0200 (Westeurop�ische Sommerzeit) Florian
FS> > Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
FS> > 
FS> >  I'm aware of this problem but didn't have time to look at it yet:
FS> > apparently exim (at least in some configurations) wants to have a FQDN in
FS> > the Message-ID. I don't know if it's correct or not but I suspect it is

 And now I'm almost sure it isn't. Quoting from the section 3.6.4 of the
RFC 2822:

   ... Though other algorithms will work, it is
   RECOMMENDED that the right hand side contain some domain identifier
   (either of the host itself or otherwise) such that the generator of
   the message identifier can guarantee the uniqueness of the left hand
   side within the scope of that domain.

I don't see why exim treats RECOMMENDED as MUST here. Does anyone have more
information about exim behaviour?

FS> This really seems to be the problem. I checked my old Outlook Express mails
FS> and they didn't have a Message-ID. The Message-ID was added later by my
FS> mail provider. Is this a task for the SMTP Server?

 I thought so initially but I was wrong. RFC 2822 recommends that the MUAs
add Message-ID themselves, SMTP server does it only as last resort.

 Regards,
VZ



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Mahogany-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mahogany-users

Reply via email to