Nick Leverton wrote: > Outlook 2003 (I think, some M$ MUA anyway) was changed to not add a > Message-Id, on the assumption that Exchange would.
I have no trouble with MUA clients not adding a message-id. My prefered mail client mutt does not either. It is added by the first MTA. I and I believe others were talking about the MTA that does not add a message id to the mail. The client MUA is not delivering mail directly to my mail relay host. So I should not be seeing messages without a message id from those cases. The messages I posted about (Red Cross, political campain mail, automated order processing) all come from what is effectively an MTA itself. Sure the message id is not required and sure those programs were delivering the mail directly, bypassing their primary MTA, so it never got one added. But I think they are violating at least the spirit of the contract when they are transfering mail as a mail transfer agent but not following the same rules *and conventions* that are established for doing so. The order responses at the least should have just given the message to the local MTA and let it handle it. Then it would have gotten a message id. But knowing that it handled the message directly itself I know it must have run on a non-os platform such as MS which does not usually provide OS services. In which case it should act as a full MTA and add the message id. Bob
