* Stephen J. Turnbull <[email protected]>: > Note that the subject is incorrect. Mailman is not reusing the > Message-ID, it is refusing to alter it which is correct behavior > according to RFC 5322 (Message-ID is an originator field). > > I believe that according to RFC 5322 (and predecessors) Mailman SHOULD > add a Resent-Message-ID to indicate that it handled the message, but I > doubt this would change the duplicate-suppression behavior of Gmail > and MS Exchange.
I agree. The duplicate-suppression in Exchange uses both "Message-ID" and "Date" headers. > Footnotes: > [1] It's surprisingly difficult to handle duplicates truly gracefully. Ohhh yes. > For example, I personally consider the mailing list copy to be the > "canonical" copy of a post, but direct CCs often arrive more quickly. Same here. Happens all the time. -- Ralf Hildebrandt Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin [email protected] Campus Benjamin Franklin http://www.charite.de Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin Geschäftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155 ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
