Rewriting Message-ID (was Re: [Mailman-Developers] Requirements for a new archiver)

[J C Lawrence]

On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 17:47:18 -0500 
Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:

> In the spirit of RFC 2369 we define a new header called
> List-Message-ID, and as in that standard, this field MUST only be
> generated by a mailing list, not by end users.  Nested lists SHOULD
> remove the parent's List-Message-ID and supply its own.
> List-Message-ID conforms to the same syntax as for Message-ID in RFC
> 2822.  Of course, for now read the header as if it had an X- prefix.

> When an MLM receives a message, it generates a List-Message-ID header
> which is guaranteed to be globally unique.  A cooperating archiver
> should use this header as its primary key, and must provide a
> mechanism whereby the List-Message-ID can be presented and the
> archived message can be returned.  It may fall back to Message-ID when
> there is no List-Message-ID header present.

I haven't finished musing on this (busy day, thus slow on other replies
as well), but my first thought:

  What happens when a given a message is sent to several lists on the
  same host?

Does each list do its own munge?  Do we do USENET-style crossposting?  

I want to do crossposting.  I don't think we can due to per-list
customisations.  

-- 
J C Lawrence                
---------(*)                Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. 
claw at kanga.nu               He lived as a devil, eh?		  
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/  Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.