On 9/1/2004 13:12, "Todd K. Watson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Thanks Brad, > > This makes sense to me, and I was afraid that was going to be the > answer. I'll take a look at qmail-based solutions. However... > > Not to instigate a "who should do what", but this doesn't sit well for > me. It seems to me that the MTA should not inject any date except in a > "Received:" line -- which qmail does. Since the origination-date date > line is specified as one of the only required header lines for a message > in RFC-2822, it would seem to be something that should be fixed on > Mailman. I understand that it's up to me to have my MTA allow or deny > messages without it, but based on my relatively under-educated (I'm new > to running Mailman) opinion I would rather have the fix on the Mailman > side. > > Given that, would you recommend that I report this in bugtrack? > > Also, one thing that did turn up in my investigation into this was in > the release notes (the NEWS file in the root level of the 2.5.1 tarball) > the following highlight is mentioned in the section for > Mailman-2.1-Beta-1 (line 591): > > "o Always add an RFC 2822 Date: header if missing, since > not all MTAs insert one automatically." > > This leads me to think that this was (at least at one time) addressed. > I can't find anything to indicate that was backed-out. Also, it doesn't > specify if it was applied to both digesting and regular messages. I'm > assuming only the latter. > > Again, thanks for your response Brad! > > Todd > > > Brad Knowles wrote: >> At 1:53 PM -0500 2004-09-01, Todd K. Watson wrote: >> >>> Most MTA's and MUA's inject a Date line, but I'm using Qmail as an MTA >>> -- which doesn't inject one. It seems that it's the job of the MUA >>> (Mailman in this case) to create the Date: line according to RFC-2822. >> >> >> The MUA should include a Date: header, that's true. However, it's >> up to the injecting MTA to either make sure that the minimum required >> headers are present in the message when it accepts it, or to put the >> headers on there. Dan will violently disagree, but qmail is at fault here. >> >> There are plenty of programs available for qmail users who are in >> this boat and need to have their MTA add headers by default, which qmail >> otherwise would not do. However, you need to use qmail resources to >> find those programs. I believe Mailman should generate the required headers, including Date:, From: (which it does I think), and Message-Id: on digests (where it is pretty clearly acting as a mail user agent). Now that I know it doesn't, I'll configure Exim on our Mailman machine to add the headers if missing when--some future time--we upgrade Exim on the Mailman machine. There was a recent thread in the Exim mailing list on this general topic (although in this case the question was about Bcc: header lines). And that thread led to a query on the ietf-822 mailing list, which had discussed the Bcc: issue at length in the past. For the Exim developer's summary of the ietf-822 discussion, see <http://www.exim.org/mail-archives/exim-users/Week-of-Mon-20040816/037254.ht ml> The arguments should be similar regarding MTA's adding missing required headers (Date:, From:, Message-Id:) as for removing Bcc: headers. Basically, it's the MUA's job...when the MTA does it, it is acting like an MUA and should only do it if it can be configured to know *when* it is acting like an MUA. (Exim does it if called as from the command line with the -t option.) Exim's most recent versions have a mechanism for saying essentially "this message is a submission and you should add missing headers". (However, this control does not set up removal of Bcc: header lines...the topic of the ietf discussion.) --John ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
