North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Historical
Re: Domino and Message-ID's
- From: Suresh Ramasubramanian
- Date: Sun Nov 06 03:03:21 2005
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=SZ75O71PZleeYgLi8BjmvWnIJJkhEwn832ImJWynHwrd2oNmMlOYv32VlSjoutvLAIqjVIC+i9nyxdihciFqbcPVH4iBGuSaVkflkZY8/jH0XecSY10SLPaX7ZmCxB3SCssEZl4D9EL31xZiiiQ29dpuXnpGkKp/qPUzOVRLvVw=
On 06/11/05, David Lesher <wb8foz@nrk.com> wrote:
>
>
> I've figured out that a friend's Domino Notes server is [being
> generous..] saving energy by skimping on bits; the Message-ID
> headers are as you see below.
>
> |X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 7.0 August 18, 2005
> |Date: 03-Nov-2005 09:12:57 EST
> |Message-ID:
Notes seems to insert reasonable looking message IDs .. this one has
the domain part munged out of it, and is 6.5.4 rather than 7, but I
have seen the same with other notes versions.
Message-ID: <OF6E4D1F32.7496756A-ON88256FB8.0002C22D-88256FB8.00034533@foo.bar.com>
So unless this is some kind of bug in domino 7, I'd probably parse
this lack of message id as your friend or his notes admin goofed on
their server's config, or perhaps someone there is trying security by
obscurity, by suppressing "internal header information" etc.
srs
--
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)
|
