Draft specification for future X-Trace header
rra at stanford.edu
Wed Jul 12 05:18:05 UTC 2000
Forrest J Cavalier <mibsoft at epix.net> writes:
> There are understandable reasons to rewrite Path:, and perhaps X-Trace
> (although adding a new X-Trace makes sense to me.)
I'd much prefer to just reject if X-Trace is already present. That's what
we already do and the various suck/rpost sorts of things already cope with
that by and large.
> What case can be made for rewriting Date and Message-ID? If they are
> missing, they can be added. If the Date or Message-ID are invalid, the
> post can be rejected.
> What do the working USEFOR, et al drafts say?
Precisely that. That hasn't prevented some news server implementations
from not doing things that way, though. :/
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
More information about the inn-workers