From: Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)
Date: Tue Feb 10 2004 - 20:36:37 CST
Charles Lindsey <chl@clerew.man.ac.uk> writes:
> Bruce Lilly <blilly@erols.com> writes:
>> Reject the article. If there is a suitable mechanism, it can inform
>> the poster of the reason for rejection. The poster can stop being
>> malicious, purchase a clue, take lessons, or complain to the supplier
>> of his broken agent, as the case may be.
> No, because there are a (very) few cases where double injection can
> occur legitimately (usually where there has been some complex
> gatewaying), and in these cases the Injection-Date will be already
> present (and MUST NOT now be changed). But there is no way in general to
> distinguish these few cases from that of the
> malicious/stupid/incompetent poster.
Then we don't and we make people who are doing complex gatewaying use some
other mechanism of loop detection or bypass the normal posting software by
using a special interface that allows preservation of Injection-Date
(like, say, IHAVE).
-- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>