Re: header-munging

["Randall C. Gellens" <[e-mail]>]

On 07 Aug 1996 11:33:39 -0400, [e-mail] wrote:

> On Tue, 06 Aug 1996 15:16:35 PDT, "Randall C. Gellens" said:
> > Examples of clients which fail to
> > produce Message-ID and/or proper Date
> > headers are everywhere, as are
> > examples of servers which munge messages
> > (often all messages) in an attempt to fix them.
>
> So what you're saying is that we should trust the people who wrote the
> broken MUAs to update them, and get *that* correct, when they can't
> get the *current* RFC's implemented correctly?

I'm saying to MUA writers who, for whatever reason, feel they can't
generate proper Message-ID, Date, or other headers, to please give the
MTA permission to fix the message.

Knowing that a message is being submitted allows an MTA to do more than
fix obviously broken headers.  It can do other replacements/editing that
may be needed for messages which go outside the company, for example.

> Sounds suspiciously like going to a mechanic, telling them "Since you
> broke the carburetor accidentally the LAST time you worked on the
> engine, I want you to replace the whole engine so it works".

If you insist on a car mechanic analogy, I think it's closer to having
the guy who is replacing the tires say "Have this car checked by an
expert -- I only do tires."

> What's wrong with this picture?

The sarcasm?



--
|Randall Gellens             |                    [e-mail]|
|[phone]              | fax [phone] can add ,,,,,,,,6350|
|Opinions are personal;  facts are suspect;   I speak only for myself|