[EAI] OT: Message-IDs vs. hashes
Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com> Tue, 04 October 2011 16:39 UTC
Return-Path: <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D15C921F8B33 for <ima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 09:39:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.809
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.809 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.010, BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5M2YHjzRO8ka for <ima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 09:39:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com (mail-ww0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C1EF21F8783 for <ima@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 09:39:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wwf22 with SMTP id 22so760910wwf.13 for <ima@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 09:42:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Hm1tVLXeOAU1JtStsw1AE8IhIL8y1ZfL3+wxNDhfuYU=; b=bfGasWatu9qo+IT/wDqShbEUm1TaBUiwPXuuF8bITHCBoRWMyHm45enB3igzalacGK Sgs5SOkBJrq4OshWaoppHQBrNgeKWmhlpuWM3BNkK82r3BsFSS60irseq1gKAoXDdAXR 6hXw40Xao8jmTm3+JyTeaeumRaYs4UgMBEmkU=
Received: by 10.227.19.141 with SMTP id a13mr1800980wbb.62.1317746576083; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 09:42:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.180.80.134 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 09:42:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 18:42:16 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHhFybq6q9zaMCQv=jxYKCq+E3rqfWbZb=6QaBM7o2Agv6ikdA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julien ÉLIE <julien@trigofacile.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: ima@ietf.org
Subject: [EAI] OT: Message-IDs vs. hashes
X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" <ima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ima>, <mailto:ima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ima>
List-Post: <mailto:ima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima>, <mailto:ima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 16:39:51 -0000
On 3 October 2011 23:51, Julien ÉLIE wrote: [FWIW] > I do not think there would be any major issue with INN (a news > server) because message-IDs are internally "hashed" after having > parsed them. They can be retrievable. That is an implementation detail. At least in theory Message-IDs are "globally unique forever", and a finite set: The unique part (LHS) and the RHS have known limitations such as LDH labels in the RHS. It is not required to hash the Message-IDs, they can be used "as is" for their purposes. OTOH any hash has collisions, by definition. For various reasons this WG allegedly decided (= as noted by the Chairs) to modify the Message-ID syntax. One reason I'm aware of is that "unique part" always happened to have the same syntax as "local part", only the semantics was slightly different. That could create two similar messes: Mailbox names (local parts) with different Unicode "spellings", ditto Message-IDs. The "KISS" solution to avoid this potential mess for Message-IDs was rejected: Folks claimed that nobody would get this right, IOW, it will be a mess anyway, therefore the old "same syntax" approach will be good enough. Normally I'd prefer one big mess (= WG proposal) instead of two different smaller messes. But actually I don't think that nobody would get this right (= only one smaller mess for the local parts not affecting unique parts). As long as you treat Message-IDs as opaque and don't try to modify any Unicode points the new "EAI-IDs" have the same features as the NetNews message-IDs. Notably they are not supposed to be hashes. -Frank
- [EAI] OT: Message-IDs vs. hashes Frank Ellermann