Peter Palmreuther wrote: > If, and in what versions exactly, The Bat! follows this way, and/or if > there are done some slight modifications, like writing the timestamp > in hexadecimal notation or something else is not known to me; beside > that it doesn't matter as long as the MUA tries to make sure the > generated MID is unique. The described way is just a common way of > doing it, modifications are allowed as long as the 'form' is kept.
Now I have several samples, so it's easy to see that the message ID I originally got wasn't generated by TB unless the ID generation scheme was changed between versions, for instance in your message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> We can see that the message-ID contains the date in YYYYMMDDHHMMSS form before the domain (local time, not adjusted), so the only mystery is if the first part of the string is significant in any way other than a random number. So, is there anyone on the list who can answer how TB generates its message-ids, or is there a better place/person to ask the question of? Thanks, Paul -- Paul D. Robertson Director of Risk Assessment, TruSecure Corporation [EMAIL PROTECTED] ______________________________________________________ Archives : http://tbtech.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
