On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 06:33:37PM +0100, Claus Assmann wrote: > On Wed, Feb 03, 2021, Will Yardley wrote: > > > Even if Mutt doesn't set one, the first MTA it hits will add one. Not > > Not really - a MTA should not make such changes. A MSA should do > it,
I'd say this is needlessly nitpicky--MSA is a relatively recent addition to the suite of conceptual mail agent functions. Many of us will often ignore the distinction between MTA and MSA because they formerly weren't seperate functions, and to a large extent they still aren't: All major MTAs ARE ALSO MSAs, submitting a message IS transmitting the message (even if only locally, from the user's client to the outgoing mail queue), and on most Unix systems they are indeed still the same software package (if not in fact the same program) performing both functions. The difference mostly amounts to a different port (if using TCP transmission) and some extra authorization, but is otherwise essentially the same. For most mail admins, the distinction is rarely interesting. For most users, the only time the distinction actually ever matters is when you're initially configuring your mail client. And for many of us, even then it doesn't matter--it is in fact the same program and it handles whether it is an MSA or MTA internally. > but Message-Id: is a SHOULD not a MUST. This point is also technically true, but largely irrelevant... Partially because of the above, but mainly because in practice many aspects of managing mail may or do depend on a message ID and will break without one (logging / indexing / archiving / virtual folders, client-side threading, etc.). Even if the RFCs describe it as an optional field (which as you point out, they do) it is still a de facto standard that every piece of mail-related software I've ever touched expects and/or enforces. Whether or not you personally think MTAs should add message ID headers to messages which lack them, historically they generally have, and AFAIK most (if not all) still do. They're fairly important. So to answer the original question: - AFAIK there is no way to cause Mutt to generate a message without adding a message ID, without altering its code - You should not do that; your recipients most likey need that, and you likely have no idea how they are using it (and probably they don't either). - It probably won't have much of a practical effect, even if you do, because whatever you're submitting the message to will probably do it anyway. -- Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
