From: Bill Davidsen (davidsen@prodigy.com)
Date: Thu Jan 03 2002 - 08:48:27 CST
On Wed, 2 Jan 2002, Charles Lindsey wrote:
> In <20020101200517.GA27196@k0deZ.scriptkiddie.net> greg andruk <gja@meowing.net> writes:
>
>
> >[Moved to a more appropriate list. Internal server behavior really has
> >nothing at all to do with NNTP.]
>
> OK, to bring readers on this list up to date, it seems that INN has a
> feature whereby, if you post to certain groups without providing a
> Distribution header, the injector may add a "suitable" one for you. The
> NNTP LIST DISTRIB.PATS command will tell you which groups this will be
> done to, if you are curious enough to ask.
>
> For example, Russ uses this in order to ensure that certain local groups
> are not allowed to leak outside of the Stanford campus. I cannot, however,
> imagine any use of this feature other than within such cooperating
> subnets.
>
> The question is whether our draft allows (or should allow) this behaviour
> (i.e., is it an infringement of the Poster's "rights").
As you note below, the poster may provide non-default values.
>
> >On Tue, Jan 01, 2002 at 12:13:39PM +0000, Charles Lindsey wrote:
> >> Hmmm! Is it considered OK for injectors to be altering or creating
> >> Distribution headers without explicit consent from the poster?
>
> >Add a default distribution? Sure. INN still allows the poster to override
> >it.
>
> >> That would be contrary to the duties of an injecting agent as laid down in
> >> Usefor.
>
> >"The injecting agent MAY add other headers not already provided by
> >the poster . . ."
>
> OK, that seems to cover it.
>
> It was intended for missing Message-ID, Date, From, Organization, and such like
> (even Sender, as we discussed recently). The only question remaining is
> whether there is some other header that could get through under this rule
> that we would rather not allow? For example, it would be rather naughty
> for it to add Reply-To different to the From, and posters might not take
> kindly to an added Followup-To.
>
> So we might, for example, say that the injector should only be adding
> missing mandatory headers (but that would exclude Distribution and
> Organization, so maybe it is best left alone).
>
> Comments?
If you really want to say anything, define a set of optional headers
for which an injector MAY provide default values.
-- -bill davidsen (davidsen@prodigy.com) "The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the last possible moment - but no longer" -me