> Maybe it would be better to override the > sending time stamp only when it's, say, 2 days or more away > from the Mailman server time?
and Brad Knowles wrote:
To really do it properly, you'd have to parse the date/time stamps on every hop that the message passed through, converting them all back to a common baseline (presumably something like UTC). When the "Date:" header is out-of-whack in comparison to the date/time stamps in the "Received:" headers, then it could be corrected (re-converted to the appropriate timezone, of course).
All I care about is the one that is used by the archiver. If this date is not "reasonable" then it should be overridden. On second thought 2 days is too restrictive. Two days is fine for the future, longer would be needed for the past.
How would you tell what might have been forged versus what might have been caused by a server being down for a few days, or whatever?
Ultimately a bad guess would be better than something a decade or two in the future. Go check out http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/ and see how things like April 2024 and December 2006 make a mess.
<>< Paul
------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
