SCOUG-HELP Mailing List Archives

<< Previous Message << >> Next Message >>

Date:	Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:14:26 PDT7
From:	Peter Skye <pskye@peterskye.com >
Reply-To:	scoug-help@scoug.com
To:	scoug-help@scoug.com
Subject:	SCOUG-Help: SCOUG list server timestamp violation (was: message time 2 from mr2/ice)

Content Type: text/plain

=====================================================
If you are responding to someone asking for help who
may not be a member of this list, be sure to use the
REPLY TO ALL feature of your email program.
=====================================================

Steven Levine wrote:
>
> Peter Skye said:
>
> >"PDT7" isn't supported by RFC 2822 "Internet Message Format"
>
> Talk to the SCOUG server admin about this.

Nah. It works fine here. :)

> > "SMTP servers that create Received fields SHOULD use
> > explicit offsets in the dates (e.g., -0800), rather
> > than time zone names of any type. Local time (with
> > an offset) is preferred to UT when feasible."
>
> I guess Rollin did it this way because you asked (bullied?) him into
> it way back when. At that time 822 was the defacto standard.

Not me, it was Rollin's idea. I've never liked the restamping as
implemented -- I'd prefer that along with the restamping a warning
notice be inserted at the beginning of each body whose message is more
than +- 5 minutes off or that the message be rejected entirely and
bounced back to the sender.

Things get very out-of-sequence when there's an email pileup somewhere
and a message takes a few hours or a couple of days to get to the list
server only to be restamped so it looks current.

Threading the messages (via In-Reply-To) can keep things in sequence but
only Netscape threads. MR/2, PMMail and Polarbar don't thread. I don't
know if Thunderbird (Mozilla's email client) will be able to thread or
not.

> FWIW, 2822 is still listed only as a PROPOSED STANDARD.

Right, I missed that because it's not mentioned in the actual document.

2822 is 2-1/2 years old and there aren't any modifications shown by the
rfc-editor search engine so I think it's pretty solid.

> One more FWIW. Mozilla, and perhaps Netscape, do
> not display the unsullied Date: tag. Mozilla interprets
> the date and displays it in local local time.
>
> To see what's really in the message header, you
> need to do a File -> Save As.

Hmm. In Netscape 2.02 all I have to do is View -> Source. The
displayed source is raw (no adjustments are done to the Date line).

As for displaying the message origination time in _local_ time, I think
almost all email clients do this. I can't think of one that doesn't
except TELNET.

> Mozilla [incorrectly] tagged it with:

I reported a bug way back in Mozilla 1.0 and they had it fixed the next
day. Bugzilla requests a lot of information but the developers do pay
attention to the reports. Ray, since you noticed it first, you can
report it.

- Peter

=====================================================

To unsubscribe from this list, send an email message
to "steward@scoug.com". In the body of the message,
put the command "unsubscribe scoug-help".

For problems, contact the list owner at
"rollin@scoug.com".

=====================================================

Return to [ 08 | October | 2003 ]

SCOUG, Warp Expo West, and Warpfest are trademarks of the Southern California OS/2 User Group. OS/2, Workplace Shell, and IBM are registered trademarks of International Business Machines Corporation. All other trademarks remain the property of their respective owners.