Re: Oughtification of Section 5

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

From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Fri Jan 12 2001 - 03:54:18 CST


In <yld7dtmw6t.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> writes:

>Charles Lindsey <chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes:

>> There is currently no wording to say that the Injector-Info header
>> SHOULD be present (though we might add such wording).

>I personally have no problems with requiring Injector-Info at the SHOULD
>level; currently existing practice is to require NNTP-Posting-Host at the
>SHOULD level for spam filtering and trace reasons despite the fact that
>it's not as well-suited for this purpose as Injector-Info would be.

Noted. Anyone else supporting this?

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Email:     chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk  Web:   http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Voice/Fax: +44 161 436 6131      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9     Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5


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


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.