From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sebastian Rose Subject: Re: Re: Sending org-mode nodes Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:22:41 +0100 Message-ID: <87hbsq5q8e.fsf@gmx.de> References: <87aayjaih8.fsf@dasa3.iem.pw.edu.pl> <873a4a29ce.wl%maus.david@gmail.com> <87hbsqu86y.fsf@dasa3.iem.pw.edu.pl> <87skca93a9.fsf@gmx.de> <874ooqty72.fsf@dasa3.iem.pw.edu.pl> <873a4a8t5b.fsf@gmx.de> <87lji2saz4.fsf@dasa3.iem.pw.edu.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NBBeo-0008Os-1S for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:23:02 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NBBej-0008M8-IF for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:23:01 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38480 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NBBej-0008M5-Bb for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:22:57 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:38819) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NBBei-0005ah-Rq for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:22:57 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87lji2saz4.fsf@dasa3.iem.pw.edu.pl> (=?utf-8?Q?=22=C5=81ukas?= =?utf-8?Q?z?= Stelmach"'s message of "Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:03:43 +0100") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?Q?=C5=81ukasz?= Stelmach Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org lukasz.stelmach@iem.pw.edu.pl (=C5=81ukasz Stelmach) writes: >> lukasz.stelmach@iem.pw.edu.pl writes: >>> Sebastian Rose writes: >>>> lukasz.stelmach@iem.pw.edu.pl writes: >>>>> David Maus writes: >>>> //....// >>>>> - Message-ID derived from node's ID. This would be quite useful f= or >>>>> associating replies with original notes/nodes. >>>> >>>> >>>> In that case, each mail sent from the subtree would have the same >>>> message-ID, which is invalid, since the ID is made to identify a certa= in >>>> email. It's supposed to be world wide unique for at least two years. >>>> >>>> Your provider would replace your (probably invalid) ID anyway. >>> >>> I've written *derived* which means >>> org--- also fits. Right? >> >> Not sure. I only remember bad things with self generated >> message-IDs. But I never tried it myself. Reading the RFCs will help. > > RFC 2822 > The "Message-ID:" field provides a unique message identifier that > refers to a particular version of a particular message. The > uniqueness of the message identifier is guaranteed by the host that > generates it (see below). (...) a good method is to put the > domain name (or a domain literal IP address) of the host on which the > message identifier was created on the right hand side of the "@", and > put a combination of the current absolute date and time along with > some other currently unique (perhaps sequential) identifier available > on the system (for example, a process id number) on the left hand > side. Still, not sure. From what I read about message IDs, they are to be produced by mail servers - not email clients. If my provider (gmx) receives my outgoing mail, it deletes the Message-ID and generates a new one. They do not want Humpdy Dumpdy to send mails with their own Message-ID, because there's a risk: it might not be world-wide unique. I would do that, too. I cannot set the Message-ID in mailers like Gnus, Evolution, Outlook, Thunderbird. If I'm wrong, I'd be interested in a way to that - so I could try it myself. Sebastian