On 9/24/21 10:17 AM, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
The RFC 5322 as cited is concerned about domains and their internet address, where the sender's address needs to be resolvable through DNS by the recipient.
"where the sender's address" seems to be discussing the email address, which is completely independent from the Message-ID.
"needs to be resolvable through DNS by the recipient" seems to be discussing the recipient's email system's ability to resolve something, which can include B2B partners across any intermediate network, be it a VPN or the public Internet. It also seems to mean that it doesn't matter if other DNS servers are able to resolve it or not.
If the email infrastructure serves local messages in a company, then LAN addresses get the job done. But delivering messages across autonomous systems calls for *public* fully qualified domain names and their *public* IP addresses, or the delivery will fail.
Again, email addresses and IP addresses are independent of the content of the Message-ID.
You may dislike the content of the Message-ID. That's fine. That's your prerogative to have. But your prerogative does not negate the fact that the email was successfully delivered using a Message-ID that you question. The simple fact that the message arrived at your MTA such that SpamAssassin could score based on the questionable Message-ID is evidence to the fact that the message was successfully delivered.
-- Grant. . . . unix || die
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
