On 11/23/20 3:34 PM, Erwan David wrote: > Le 23/11/2020 à 20:16, @lbutlr a écrit : >> On 23 Nov 2020, at 06:49, maciejm <na...@mandzur.pl> wrote: >>> "RFC 822 Message-ID is not required" >> RFC 822 has been obsoleted several times. >> >> RFC 5322 states: >> >> Though listed as optional in the table in section 3.6, every message >> SHOULD have a "Message-ID:" field. Furthermore, reply messages >> SHOULD have "In-Reply-To:" and "References:" fields as appropriate >> and as described below. >> >> And: >> >> RFC 2119 >> SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there >> may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a >> particular item, but the full implications must be understood and >> carefully weighed before choosing a different course. >> >> So SHOULD is much stronger than "it's a good idea" and much more like "You >> better have a really good reason for ignoring this". >> >> I would feel comfortable rejecting messages without a Message-ID. >> > Maybe on smtp, but not on submission. FOr me policy there is completeley > different
I thought one strategy to handle this was that submission would detect lack of the message-id header and add one with a proper message-id. -- Richard Damon
