Re: #1083: USEPRO 5.3: Rules for generating message-ID

["Charles Lindsey" <chl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In <873b5u5y0b.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Russ Allbery <rra@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>Frank Ellermann <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> But if an injecting agent creates Message-IDs it can't afford
>> to create collisions.  It has to work if it generates more than
>> one Message-ID per second, and it has to work if its local time
>> sometimes jumps backwards into the "past".  It has to work at
>> the end of daylight savings time, and after a reboot.

>I think that RFC 2822 and USEFOR already adequately address this.

Yes, RFC 2822 covers it, but not with the emphasis that perhaps it
dererves (no use of the phrase "for all time", for example). And all
USEFOR does is to add that the uniqueness applies across the whole of
Email, Netnews and any other protocols which might be involved, rather
than just across Emails as RFC 2822 implied.

So yes, maybe S-o-1036 expressed it better, and I would have no problem
with language in USEPRO which re-emphasised this point once again, for the
benefit of casual readers. But such language would not be normative. A
NOTE in the duties of Injecting Agents would suffice. I tend to agree that
giving reasons for why things are as they are is always a Good Thing.

>> Your concept "Message-ID + Injection-Date = id" is IMO wrong. 
>> The id of an article is the Message-ID, as the name suggests.

It is an approximation which was adequate for explaining the points that
Russ was making, but I do not think that terminology should appear in
USEPRO.

-- 
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