OSEC

Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
 
Re: Adding Message-ID is wrong

From: Alex van den Bogaerdt (alexergens.op.het.net)
Date: Sun May 23 2004 - 21:44:46 CDT


On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 03:16:51PM +0200, Tony Earnshaw wrote:

> > I repeat rfc2821:
> > "These changes MUST NOT be applied by an SMTP server that
> > provides an intermediate relay function."
>
> Spammers often do not include message-id fields.

Indeed. Nor do viruses. Most regular mail _does_ include a message-id.
And when spam does add a message id, it often is something recognizable.

> Without one, referring to any given message when corresponding with
> upstream postmasters is that much more difficult (at least they can
> refer to their logs). I'd expect Postfix to conform to this practice.

If you reject the message, you need not complain to the upstream. But
in order to be able to recognize the message-id missing you need to
have support from your software.

I know I am not the first one to ask about message-id. There are more
people, even on this list, that dislike adding one themselves. Others,
that includes you, want the current behaviour. So, I suggested to make
this configurable with the current behaviour as a default. Seems to be
a reasonable suggestion.

Unfortunately the subject is killed. Communication seems to be a
complex concept for some. Patronizing behaviour seems to be a good
thing here.

I am not going to waste more time on this. I have spent several hours
studying the source, and am confident I can make postfix RFC2821 compliant
at least on that small part. It will be a non-public patch, so be it.

Oh, and on RFC compatibility: "Junk mail is war, RFCs do not apply".

http://groups.google.nl/groups?ie=UTF-8&as_umsgid=%3C20011018202950.57764BC06C%40spike.porcupine.org%3E&lr=&hl=nl

Alex
--
I ask you to respect any "Reply-To" and "Mail-Follow-Up" headers. If
you reply to me off-list, you'd better tell me you're doing so. If
you don't, and if I reply to the list, that's your problem, not mine.