Hi Thomas, On Tue, 24 May 2005 22:12:48 +0700 UTC (5/24/2005, 10:12 AM -0500 UTC my time), Thomas Fernandez wrote:
G>> now the RECOMMENDED part G>> The message identifier (msg-id) itself MUST be a globally unique G>> identifier for a message. The generator of the message identifier G>> MUST guarantee that the msg-id is unique. T> Hm. Do MUST sentences in the RFCs refer to recommendations? Umm, no, the definitions of these terms, MUST, etc, as below, as to their meaning is in RFC 2119. It is difficult for me to just pick certain aspects of the RFC and copy it here, the relevant parts for a particular subject. The entire RFC should be read and digested for its full meaning :) T> OK. The point with the unique message ID was the usenet, and it makes T> sense there. I have to disagree with you here.. according to the RFC (2822), it is for email. Abstract This standard specifies a syntax for text messages that are sent between computer users, within the framework of "electronic mail" messages. This standard supersedes the one specified in Request For Comments (RFC) 822, "Standard for the Format of ARPA Internet Text Messages", updating it to reflect current practice and incorporating incremental changes that were specified in other RFCs. T> It doesn't make sense for email (as used in mailing lists), IMHO. So Tony T> is safe in my opinion, but I am not sure whether the RFCs agree. The spec does not differentiate between email, USENET, or mailing lists, but rather covers all email. Tony's message-ID header ending in @192.168.2.1 or whatever, is acceptable as the RFC only specifies the need for a unique ID, and recommends how that should be laid out, but it is not a MUST situation... There is no mandatory spec that message-ID headers must end in an actual domain name. In fact, Pine (email client) offers the ability to encrypt this (the domain part of the ID), and Pine was written by Mark Crispin, who also authored UW-IMAP, who also authored the IMAP RFC 3501... if it was not in spec, he would have not put this feature/ability into Pine. G>> This document occasionally uses terms that appear in capital letters. G>> When the terms "MUST", "SHOULD", "RECOMMENDED", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD G>> NOT", and "MAY" appear capitalized, they are being used to indicate G>> particular requirements of this specification. A discussion of the G>> meanings of these terms appears in [RFC2119]. -- Gary ________________________________________________________ Current beta is (none) | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
