On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 3:06 AM, Simon Budig <simon@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Mark (wolfmane@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Simon Budig <simon@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Mark (wolfmane@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: >> >> Baloney! You really don't know what you are talking about. Unique >> >> message ID's are part of the internet mail standard. I've never seen a >> >> message that didn't have a unique Message ID. >> > >> > I get tons and tons of different spam messages, sharing the same message >> > id. Not that I care much about the spam, but there is nothing that >> > enforces uniqueness. >> >> You just shot yourself in the foot with that one: desireable messages >> do indeed have unique IDs, so if you get multiple messages with >> identical IDs, that's a very quick and easy way to identify and zap >> spam... >> >> The same thing applies to missing IDs - if it doesn't exist, send the >> message straight to /dev/null. Problem solved! >> >> So tell me again exactly how this is a negative or is a problem?!?!?! > > It is not a problem, it just shows how your original claim above > backfires on yourself. > > As I said above, I am not really talking about spam vs. ham. Your claim > did not differenciate between wanted and unwanted mail, ...because spam is irrelevant. Who cares about any attribute of spam whatsoever? At the very least, ignore it, but better yet, discard it... > and - as much as > I hate it - Spam messages *are* E-Mails and obviously nothing *enforces* > unique IDs, so it is notoriously unsafe to rely on their uniqueness. I've never had a problem relying on the uniqueness of Message IDs. To say that it is "notoriously unsafe" isn't just an exaggeration, it's a lie. Whether the uniqueness is "enforced" or not would be irrelevant if not for the fact that non-unique IDs are actually helpful in discarding spam... > Even wanted mail might have non-unique IDs since broken Mail clients are > known to exist. > If somebody insists on using a broken Mail client, that's their problem, not mine. > Not that I am surprised that you did not get the message... > > Bye, > Simon > Right, again with the insults. Really helpful... Mark _______________________________________________ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@xxxxxxxxx https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
