[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: kmail no longer setting message-ID?

Hash: SHA1

Am Samstag, 28. Dezember 2002 06:06 schrieb Oswald Buddenhagen:
> On Fri, Dec 27, 2002 at 08:10:27PM +0100, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> > No, its an optional setting with default to "off"
> where did you find it? i'm unable to do so with current HEAD.

O.k., revert that, see below.

> > because the kmail programmers realized (back in KDE2.2.2) that not the
> > MUA is responsible for the Message-ID but the first MTA.
> nonsense. this would cancel any sensible threading of your own messages.
> heuristic methods as somebody else suggested are time-consuming and
> error-prone. therefore all useful muas generate msgids themselves.  true
> is that the mta should set an msgid if it is missing - but it should not
> be missing in the first place.

O.k., kmail seems to generate Message-ID anyway. In previous versions this was 
not always the case (IIRC). If a MTA is not adding it, maybe it has other 
ways of managment, who knows.

> > Why? Because all dial-up computers create non-unique Message-ID
> > because it cannot be assured that the servername part of the
> > Message-ID is unique (mostly, a local dummy name is chosen).
> that's a pretty weak argument. the probability of a clash is simply
> ridiculous.

That's pure opinion on both sides. When speaking of a _unique_ identifier, 
having a probability other than 0 is not acceptable. Kmail does it now pretty 
smart and uses the currently used email address. Truth is, that in a 
non-closed system a totally unique identifier cannot be assured.
But again, who cares? There are enough mailers out there that do not even set 
the In-Reply-To: and References: headers. Only Message-ID: won't help with 
threaded display when you depend on the other two (kmail does).


- -- 
Mein GPG-Key ist auf meiner Homepage verfügbar: http://www.hendrik-sattler.de
        oder über pgp.net

PingoS - Linux-User helfen Schulen: http://www.pingos.schulnetz.org
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)


Reply to: