Reply wasn't posted; will test new post

[daz]

From: "Dennis Oelkers" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 3:49 PM

The point is that the policy of ruby-talk is quite sleazy whilc
they're very strict for Usenet postings. People can send almost any
garbage to the mailing list if they're subscribed to it and allowed
to post. In my opinion it is the right behaviour to drop any mail
which is not well-formed as soon as possible.

This leads to the conclusion that we'll either have some sort of
inconsistency between those two medias, or we would have to synchronize
the policies up to a certain point where those inconsistencies converge
against 0.

Hi Dennis,

You present a strong defence but I bring some grim prosecution evidence :-|

A news posting[1] by Sean Russell to c.l.ruby via Google which has an
'In-Reply-To:' but no 'References:' header (i.e. "not well-formed")
which made the trip from Sean's den around Usenet through the gateway
and out to the ruby-talk ML[2] like a Ferrari round Nurburgring.

The accusation is that your server at news.zrz.tu-berlin.de is applying
a filter to outgoing news messages which is of no help to the gateway.

I get a 441 - "Followup without a reference"

from http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc977/rfc977.html
---------------------------------------------------------------
RFC 977 - Network News Transfer Protocol
---------------------------------------------------------------

2.4.2. Status Responses

4xx - Command was correct, but couldn't be performed for
some reason.
[...]
x4x - Posting
[...]
x8x - Nonstandard (private implementation) extensions

[...]

4.7.2. Responses

441 posting failed
---------------------------------------------------------------

"Followup without a reference" looks like a private implementation
message and error code 48x is provided for use with such extensions.
IMHO, the missing postings don't fail - they're denied.

Is there any way the g/way can be made exempt from these non-RFC checks ?
(e.g. ignore errors_like_that if source == gateway)


Your endurance is much appreciated.


daz


[1] The headers (before mirroring to ML):
==================================================================================
Path: internal1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!
nntp.giganews.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!news.glorb.com!
postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: "SER" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
Subject: Re: CSV bug?
Date: 18 May 2004 06:51:12 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: odah37.prod.google.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1084888273 29869 127.0.0.1 (18 May 2004 13:51:13 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: (e-mail address removed)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 13:51:13 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
User-Agent: G2/0.1
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ruby:99924
==================================================================================

[2] After mirroring to ML http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/ruby/ruby-talk/100614

 

[Thomas Fini Hansen]

You're bashing the wrong pig here.

Perhaps, but I'm not particularly convinced.

"Outlook" itself does no news (at least older versions, I'm not
fully up to date). Instead it delegated news handling to "Outlook
Express" - a whole differnt piece of software (which I am using
btw).

Sounds reasonble to me, I'm not entirely up on Outlook either.

"Outlook Express" does a nice job inserting "References" headers,
which you can verify with this posting.

Yes, that's OE as a newsreader, but all my ranting was in the context
of O(E) as a mail client. Actually I figure it does a decent job as a
newsreader, but that'a not how most people use it.

But I did a quick investigation, in a post by Austin Ziegler:
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0
And it has no In-Reply-To or References.. But the Tread headers. OK,
that's general MS evilness, there's no reason that because Outlook is
attached to an Exchange server, that it can't make proper mails when
sending to external addresses.

Then theres daz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
And it looks good, but again, he's using it as a mailreader.

Digging through some private mail, I see some more of the Exchange
problem, and some Outlook/OE mail that do have the In-Reply-To, but no
References.

Secondly, I'm suspecting that O/OE is both using the same component to
create the mails:
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165

MS does a lot of evil, but they are not always the ones to blame.

No, but if the problem *is* related to the References header, then the
fact that Outlook forgets it in regular email, is an issue.

 

[Austin Ziegler]

Sounds reasonble to me, I'm not entirely up on Outlook either.

There are plugins for Usenet/NNTP handling for Outlook, but it is not
default.

TFH> But I did a quick investigation, in a post by Austin Ziegler:
TFH> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0
TFH> And it has no In-Reply-To or References.. But the Tread headers. OK,
TFH> that's general MS evilness, there's no reason that because Outlook is
TFH> attached to an Exchange server, that it can't make proper mails when
TFH> sending to external addresses.

The problem could be the Exchange server, as its the one that has to
construct the outgoing Internet message from the Outlook format
object.

The problem is that if it is the Exchange server, then it does NOT
have the appropriate information to construct the In-Reply-To header
(References is a News header ONLY).

-austin

 

[Thomas Fini Hansen]

There are plugins for Usenet/NNTP handling for Outlook, but it is not
default.

And I wont pass any judgement on that's compliance either, as I'm not
exposed to it.

TFH> But I did a quick investigation, in a post by Austin Ziegler:
TFH> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0
TFH> And it has no In-Reply-To or References.. But the Tread headers. OK,
TFH> that's general MS evilness, there's no reason that because Outlook is
TFH> attached to an Exchange server, that it can't make proper mails when
TFH> sending to external addresses.

The problem could be the Exchange server, as its the one that has to
construct the outgoing Internet message from the Outlook format
object.

The problem is that if it is the Exchange server, then it does NOT
have the appropriate information to construct the In-Reply-To header

Yet, it's able to construct the Thread-* headers? It must know
*something*.

(References is a News header ONLY).

Wrong.

RFC 2822 - Internet Message Format:

# 3.6.4. Identification fields
#
# Though optional, every message SHOULD have a "Message-ID:" field.
# Furthermore, reply messages SHOULD have "In-Reply-To:" and
# "References:" fields as appropriate, as described below.

 

[Robert Klemme]

Perhaps, but I'm not particularly convinced.


Sounds reasonble to me, I'm not entirely up on Outlook either.


Yes, that's OE as a newsreader, but all my ranting was in the context
of O(E) as a mail client. Actually I figure it does a decent job as a
newsreader, but that'a not how most people use it.

Ah, ok, I missed that one. Thought you were talking about news.

But I did a quick investigation, in a post by Austin Ziegler:
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0
And it has no In-Reply-To or References.. But the Tread headers. OK,
that's general MS evilness, there's no reason that because Outlook is
attached to an Exchange server, that it can't make proper mails when
sending to external addresses.

Then theres daz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
And it looks good, but again, he's using it as a mailreader.

Sounds like OE is the more mature product for the big wide world of internet
communication. AFAIK Outlook started out as an Exchange Server client, so,
yeah, I'd expect Outlook to be less compliant than OE.

Digging through some private mail, I see some more of the Exchange
problem, and some Outlook/OE mail that do have the In-Reply-To, but no
References.

Secondly, I'm suspecting that O/OE is both using the same component to
create the mails:
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165

Depends on which part of the message is done by this component. I'd guess
it's rather mime formatting only but no headers.

No, but if the problem *is* related to the References header, then the
fact that Outlook forgets it in regular email, is an issue.

Indeed.

Thanks for clearing that up!

robert

 

[daz]

Wrong.

RFC 2822 - Internet Message Format:

RFC 2822 is a not a standard, yet.

From http://www.ietf.org/iesg/1rfc_index.txt (long)

"""
2822 Internet Message Format. P. Resnick, Ed.. April 2001. (Format:
TXT=110695 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC0822) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)
"""


A References: header is accepted by:
RFC822: Standard for ARPA Internet Text Messages

and
RFC850: Standard for Interchange of USENET Messages

"... the rule is adopted that all USENET news articles
must be formatted as valid ARPANET mail messages,
according to the ARPANET standard RFC 822."

Our missing ML-> NG messages, after conversion from mail to news by rubygate,
are valid to RFC822/RFC850 standard regardless of the MUA used for posting.


daz

http://www.ruby-talk.org/102444

 

[Thomas Fini Hansen]

RFC 2822 is a not a standard, yet.


"""
2822 Internet Message Format. P. Resnick, Ed.. April 2001. (Format:
TXT=110695 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC0822) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)
"""


A References: header is accepted by:
RFC822: Standard for ARPA Internet Text Messages

August 13, 1982


# 4.6.3. REFERENCES
#
# The contents of this field identify other correspondence
# which this message references. Note that if message identif-
# iers are used, they must use the msg-id specification format.

The header is mentioned in a >20 year old spec, does contradict the
claim that it's a news header only, doesn't it? Yes, neither RFC says
that it is required, but the same goes for In-Reply-To. Both treat
them pretty much equal, so what anyone has to say about References,
goes for In-Reply-To as well.

and
RFC850: Standard for Interchange of USENET Messages

"... the rule is adopted that all USENET news articles
must be formatted as valid ARPANET mail messages,
according to the ARPANET standard RFC 822."

Our missing ML-> NG messages, after conversion from mail to news by rubygate,
are valid to RFC822/RFC850 standard regardless of the MUA used for posting.

That's reverse logic, it only claims that all news messages is valid
mails, not that all mail is valid news. And RFC850 in section 2.1.6
tells us that the References header is *required* when the Subject
header starts with 'Re: '. There's no such requirement for mail
messagees, or Outlook would be in *violation* of the specs, not just
being annoying.

But of course, all of this is just good practice, as no spec requires
either References nor In-Reply-To to be used.

 

[daz]

August 13, 1982


The header is mentioned in a >20 year old spec, does contradict the
claim that it's a news header only, doesn't it?

I think so.

That's reverse logic, it only claims that all news messages is valid
mails, not that all mail is valid news.

The claim that ruby-talk mail is converted by rubygate to RFC850 news
comes from me, supported by my (and others') empirical evidence.


daz

 

[Thomas Fini Hansen]

The claim that ruby-talk mail is converted by rubygate to RFC850 news
comes from me, supported by my (and others') empirical evidence.

OK, now you lost me. This whole subthread started out at someone
claiming that mails forwarded by rubygate got rejected because of
missing References headers (because they're not following RFC850).

So it's pretty clear (to me at least), that in order for your claim to
be true, rubygate must insert References headers on mails with a
'Re: ' subject which are missing it. Whether it's actually doing that
now, sorta got lost in the noise.