Re: 6.5 References (Section_6.02.03)

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Clive D.W. Feather (clive@demon.net)
Date: Thu Oct 07 1999 - 05:04:31 CDT


Charles Lindsey said:
>> No. See my message explaining where I thought the numbers came from.
> Then what do you suggest? You message suggested keeping the first, the
> last 9, and a more-or-less random selection of the 11 in the middle. What
> is gained by that? It seems unnecessary complication to me.

It's not "a more or less random selection", but rather giving the followup
agent the discretion as to which it should keep.

> I see no benefit in keeping any of the early ones, except the first.

If somebody hasn't received the first, having another early one might help
link the threads.

> "Followup agents SHOULD NOT trim message identifiers out of a References
> header unless the number of message identifiers exceeds 21, in which case
> message identifiers SHOULD be trimmed until there are only 21.

Fine.

> Trimming SHOULD be done by removing any incomplete or otherwise broken
> message identifiers, and then sufficient identifiers starting with the
> second so as to bring the total down to 21.

What about:
    and then sufficient identifiers so as to bring the total down to 21.
    Agents SHOULD keep the first 1 and last 9 identifiers, and in the
    absence of any obvious candidates MAY wish to remove starting from
    the second identifier.

?

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  <clive@demon.net>   | Tel: +44 20 8371 1138
Internet Expert     | Home:  <clive@davros.org>  | Fax: +44 20 8371 1037
Demon Internet Ltd. | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 973 377646


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.