Re: msg-id

["Charles Lindsey" <chl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In <41D34892.3D3B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Frank Ellermann <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>Charles Lindsey wrote:

>If your strategy is as little derivations from 2822 as possible,
>then you in fact allow stuff like <unique@[212.82.226.0/24]> or
><unique@[http://purl.net/xyzzy/]> as Message-ID.  Do you really
>want this ?

Not particularly, but it is allowed in RFC 2822 and is technically
harmless in News.

>> Now our Chair _might_ allow us to go for something much
>> simpler such as you suggested, and it would indeed be tidier,
>> but there is no _technical_ requirement to do so

>The technical requirement to generate proper Message-IDs is to
>use an FQDN as RHS. And only if it's absolutely necessary an
>address literal.

No, there is no technical requirement to use an FQDN or IP as RHS (though
it is a practice much to be recommended, and USEAGE will indeed recommend
it).  The only technical requirement is that an FQDN or IP will at least
be a subset of what is allowed as RHS.

>   But not a CIDR, URL, ISBN. SSN, phone number,
>avian carrier license number, or what else.

All those things are permitted by RFC 2822. You have to provide a good
reason why we should rule them out, and moreover a reason that would not
have applied to email when RFC 2822 was written (eliminating NO-WS-CTL was
indeed such a reason because the new NNTP standard will not allow it).

-- 
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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx      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