Re: Injector-Info.01

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

From: Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)
Date: Fri Sep 01 2000 - 00:19:04 CDT


Jonathan Grobe <grobe@netins.net> writes:

> So the obvious alternative is for this group to define several headers
> instead, such as:

> NNTP-Posting-Host
> NNTP-Posting-Date
> Complaints-To
> Trace

> Anyone prefer this approach?

I see no real utility in standardizing NNTP-Posting-Date or Trace, at
least as separate headers. They contain the same set of information.

Complaints-To is a weird case; all the rest of this information is
intended to be machine-parseable or readable by abuse desk staffers or
news administrators, but the original idea of Complaints-To was
specifically to direct complaints from people who know how to read headers
but not much more than that to the right place. If that information is
mixed in with all the rest of the information, I'm not sure it will do any
good.

I think it's worth considering going with the current Injector-Info
proposal but without the complaints field, separately standardizing
Complaints-To, and also document NNTP-Posting-Host but deprecate it in
favor of Injector-Info.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


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


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.