Re: A mailing list protocol

Randall Gellens <> Mon, 10 December 2012 02:28 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48D8321F8DB7 for <>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 18:28:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.467
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.467 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.132, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HUjfovd7fp79 for <>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 18:28:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BFF021F8DA0 for <>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 18:28:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;;; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1355105537; x=1386641537; h=message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:to:from:subject: mime-version; bh=ZtF9J55sv8eq+J4IPE7ClPKJeXT7W35aK9Y2Yp8/xW0=; b=gXG2erPaP+XIzL8qvXqXqdy1rzc1Pl3gEweLbMI2PyXKQLoDiAPMmHM0 M/8JXNOh8ea9maQY+jQoDVQMIHBKjWXj5orH4YZKSOdJC4zGTpO8MiWNf Xwuf1dJ+hwlkIfIsMR2xI088DZA42sD/KAIV8Iut/kR0B3fEigQg4oK8F 8=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6921"; a="11210369"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 09 Dec 2012 18:12:13 -0800
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6921"; a="356147438"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 09 Dec 2012 18:28:46 -0800
Received: from [] ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.318.4; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 18:28:46 -0800
Message-ID: <p06240601cceaf832172f@[]>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: < m> <20121206212400.10366.qmail@joyce.lan> <>
X-Mailer: Eudora for Mac OS X
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 18:28:44 -0800
To: S Moonesamy <>,
From: Randall Gellens <>
Subject: Re: A mailing list protocol
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Random-Sig-Tag: 1.0b28
X-Originating-IP: []
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 02:28:51 -0000

At 11:43 AM -0800 12/9/12, S Moonesamy wrote:

>  Dave Cridland mentioned RFC 3676 [3].  He pointed out that it 
> primarily useful in simple replies rather than quoting.

Just to clarify: Dave didn't say that RFC 3676 is not useful for 
quoting (indeed, quoting is one of it's main points).  Dave pointed 
out that RFC 3676 didn't include a mechanism to attribute each quote 
to a specific author, which is true.  Dave also pointed out that this 
attribution could in theory be accomplished by matching the quote 
level (which is included) to the 'References:' chain, although this 
would be fragile in practice because so few clients correctly 
implement 'References:'.

>  One of the problem he encounters is a lack of in-reply-to or 
> references fields that I can use for in-thread navigation.

Used for threading in general, not in-thread navigation (I'm not sure 
I understand the difference, but to me, threading is the ability to 
group together messages in a logical thread or discussion, while 
in-thread navigation would be the ability to jump around within a 

Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
With most men, life is like backgammon -- half skill and half luck.
                                           --Oliver Wendell Holmes