From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Tue Feb 26 2002 - 04:56:31 CST
In <ylelj9cleq.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> writes:
>> SHOULD NOT change any header (apart from the explicitly permitted ones),
>> I take it ?
>I think that's a reasonable rule for Usenet at large, in part because of
>the whole mess of suck/rpost feeds and the ways in which header munging
>can mess those up, but I'm rather uncomfortable with that rule in the
>context of private hierarchies (which are *also* supposed to be served by
>this standard).
A cooperating subnet can always tweak a SHOULD of that nature.
>What if you're using Usenet articles for a request tracking system of some
>kind and want to add additional status headers to the message? Sure, you
>can just say that you're not going to follow the Usenet article format,
>but it seems a shame to have that make software only conditionally
>compliant just because it's configured for a private hierarchy.
Indeed, but our draft does not forbid the injector to ADD a header
X-Tracking: . That MAY be done. The SHOULD NOT only covers the case where
the poster has already provided his own X-Tracking: and might be miffed if
the injector were to alter it.
>Hm. Although, I guess that isn't that big of a deal; it does make a
>degree of sense to have private hierarchy software be only conditionally
>compliant with standards intended primarily for Usenet at large.
Yes, that is the "cooperating subnet" letout.
-- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk 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