Re: [OT]

[Adrian Knoth <adi@thur.de>]

Randy <abuse@127.0.0.1> wrote:

>>>>BTW: your postings sucks pretty much: no valid From, non-unique
>>>>     message-ID (no fqdn). Perhaps you can correct this.
>>>Could someone explain what he is talking about here?
>>>I am afraid I don't know.
>> Sometimes I help to interpret, but not when the person being unclear
>> cannot bother to use civil language.
> Yes, I hear you.  I thought he was quite rude for no reason.

I'm sorry, I never intended to be rude. I'm not a native speaker
and I don't know that "sucks" is so negative. My intention was
to only state that there are some points which could be improved.

Though I prefer complete From-lines and especially a valid
reply-to-address (which would let me tell all those things by
mail instead of disturbing the audience with it), the real
point to critizize is the violation of RFC850.

I think you're completely new to usenet so I guess you don't
know what I'm talking about. Actually it isn't even your fault,
your software is doing wrong.

If you read <http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc850.html> and especially
2.1.7 you'll see that your message-id *must* contain a real
domain name. Yours (trnddc03) isn't sufficient.

The sense of putting a valid domain name there is to guarantee
the uniqueness of message-ids. That's important to identify
every single posting all over the world. Any collision would
break the primary key property. It's like two persons sharing the
same name: you're always getting into trouble when referring
to one of them ;)

> I'm wondering why he was looking at the header instead of
> the message. Maybe he is some hacker looking for a person's
> ID to steal.  Who knows.

You're kidding?


-- 
mail: adi@thur.de  	http://adi.thur.de	PGP: v2-key via keyserver

Man kann gar nicht so viel essen wie man kotzen m�chte!