OT - EMEW (Enhanced Message-ID as Email Watermark) breaks pipermail threading

[Hugo van der Kooij]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Steve Freegard wrote:
> Hugo van der Kooij wrote:
> 
>> It is safe to assume someone has been tampering with my message
>> Identifiers. And I am entitled to block those as RFC violations.
> 
> This is a bug, not a RFC violation; show me where in any of the e-mail
> RFCs it says that a Message-ID cannot be modified.

The second paragraph clearly indicates this particular case:

   The "Message-ID:" field provides a unique message identifier that
   refers to a particular version of a particular message.  The
   uniqueness of the message identifier is guaranteed by the host that
   generates it (see below).  This message identifier is intended to be
   machine readable and not necessarily meaningful to humans.  A message
   identifier pertains to exactly one instantiation of a particular
   message; subsequent revisions to the message each receive new message
   identifiers.

   Note: There are many instances when messages are "changed", but those
   changes do not constitute a new instantiation of that message, and
   therefore the message would not get a new message identifier.  For
   example, when messages are introduced into the transport system, they
   are often prepended with additional header fields such as trace
   fields (described in section 3.6.7) and resent fields (described in
   section 3.6.6).  The addition of such header fields does not change
   the identity of the message and therefore the original "Message-ID:"
   field is retained.  In all cases, it is the meaning that the sender
   of the message wishes to convey (i.e., whether this is the same
   message or a different message) that determines whether or not the
   "Message-ID:" field changes, not any particular syntactic difference
   that appears (or does not appear) in the message.

So the Message-ID is mine when I set it and not of someone else to
mangle with in the way it is now mangled.

Hugo


- --
hvdkooij at vanderkooij.org               http://hugo.vanderkooij.org/
PGP/GPG? Use: http://hugo.vanderkooij.org/0x58F19981.asc

	A: Yes.
	>Q: Are you sure?
	>>A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
	>>>Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?

Bored? Click on http://spamornot.org/ and rate those images.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIsuHyBvzDRVjxmYERAiJ6AJ9L3kd7Duzmkl/NKk+BPQMFB7VpKwCdHGo9
cT+Ri60GkVbgZsB5SwcNh8g=
=/isO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----