Re: bug with the Message-ID ?

[Brian Stafford <brian stafford uklinux net>]

On Sun,  2 December 20:30 M. Thielker wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 2001.12.02 21:27 Paul Lewis wrote:
>> On 2001.12.02 18:32 Peter Rexigel wrote:
>> > The only difference I could find between balsa and netscape  was the
>> > composing of the Message-ID.
>> >
>> > netscape: Message-ID: <3BF223EC.F2514A11@compuserve.de>
>> > balsa:    Message-ID: <3BF223EC.F2514A11@Hugo.comic.net>
> 
> The message ID is in fact generated by Compuserve not Netscape. NS will 
> submit the message without a message ID while Balsa does generate one. CIS 
> sees that as relaying and rejects the message, as far as I (also a 
> Compuserve subscriber) know.

It seems to me that ISPs in general know nothing about internet protocols.  
The configurations I come across get increasingly eccentric.

> To allow for such braindead mail servers, there really needs to be an option 
> to generate _no_ message ID

I think this is wrong, RFC 2822 requires messages to have Message-Id:  It 
might be better if the identity specified  the domain to use when generating 
the message-id: header instead.

--
Brian Stafford