Hi Charles M. Gerungan
--------------------------------------------- On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, at 22:18:20 [GMT +0200] (which was 1:18 PM where I live) you wrote: > Hello Kevin, > On Fri, 2 Jul 2004 12:51:50 -0700 UTC, Kevin Amazon wrote: KA>> As a matter of fact, we have our server set up to trash messages KA>> without a message ID for spam and virus reasons. > Danger, Will Robinson! Did you know that Outlook 2003 does not generate > them? > And mind you, although the word "should" is used in the rfc, I for one > still believe that the mua should generate them. Roelof is right in the > fact that it breaks References: and In-Reply-To: header fields which > might be a significant problem should the message leave your network. > But that almost never happens, right? :) Outlook doesn't have to. This is the job of the mail server. Any legitimate mail server will automatically assign a message ID. Spammers, of course, like to spoof all the headers including message ID. -- Best Regards, Kevin Using The Bat! v2.12 Beta/7 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1
pgpaOqqypLHF9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
________________________________________________ Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
