Subject: Re: draft-ietf-usefor-usepro-02

From: John Stanley <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:37:24 -0800 (PST)

"Charles Lindsey" <chl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

>There is no mention of writing stuff into bodies ...

7.9.1.  Duties of an Outgoing Gateway

   1. The message identifier of the news article should be preserved if
      at all possible, preferably as or within the corresponding unique
      identifier of the other medium, but if not at least as a comment
      in the message. This helps greatly with preventing loops.

>The whole of this text is little changed from what Russ wrote years ago,
>and I see no reason to make any significant change to it now.

I do not accept the "it's too late" excuse for not correcting mistakes or 
making things clearer.

---

From: Russ Allbery <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 11:30:37 -0800

>       in the message. This helps greatly with preventing loops.

As the author of the original text here, I can say authoritatively that I
wasn't thinking of the body of the message, but rather some equivalent of
an X-Comment header in mail.  I certainly have no objections to a
clarification in that regard.  The goal is to get the message ID somewhere
where an aware gateway going the other direction could pick it out of the
message again, but without bothering the recipients of the message with
extraneous tracking information they don't care about.

If that isn't possible, it's not possible, and that's fine.  It mostly
just means that bidirectional gatewaying probably isn't a good idea for
that medium.

-- 
Russ Allbery ([email-masked])             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>