Re: #1416 Injection-Date: current wording proposal (corrected)

["Charles Lindsey" <chl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In <87myzwx11t.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Russ Allbery <rra@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>Charles Lindsey <chl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> Yes, but I am not expecting posting agents to be routinely adding
>> Injection-Date (except in the special case where they are
>> multi-injecting).

>Agents that add Date and Message-ID should also add Injection-Date.  I'd
>be happy to add wording to that effect.

That would certainly help if Option IR is to be retained, but it all gets
rather messy. Option IC is much cleaner, even though it may occasionally
make things worse in the short term.


>The current protocol lets posting agents add Date, which has the same
>protocol role.  Having the posting agent add Injection-Date doesn't make
>matters any worse than it is now.

My worry is that poor implementations will just create Injection-Date as a
copy of Date, which defeats the whole purpose. Your wording would need to
make it very clear that that is not good enough (and why).

-- 
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