From: Thomas Fini Hansen <beast@...>
Date: 2004-06-06T09:52:59+09:00
Subject: Re: Reply wasn't posted; will test new post

On Sun, Jun 06, 2004 at 08:31:37AM +0900, Austin Ziegler wrote:
> Saturday, June 5, 2004, 7:43:03 AM, Thomas Fini Hansen wrote:
> > Sounds reasonble to me, I'm not entirely up on Outlook either.
> There are plugins for Usenet/NNTP handling for Outlook, but it is not
> default.

And I wont pass any judgement on that's compliance either, as I'm not
exposed to it.

> TFH> But I did a quick investigation, in a post by Austin Ziegler:
> TFH> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0
> TFH> And it has no In-Reply-To or References.. But the Tread headers. OK,
> TFH> that's general MS evilness, there's no reason that because Outlook is
> TFH> attached to an Exchange server, that it can't make proper mails when
> TFH> sending to external addresses.
> 
> The problem could be the Exchange server, as its the one that has to
> construct the outgoing Internet message from the Outlook format
> object.
> 
> The problem is that if it is the Exchange server, then it does NOT
> have the appropriate information to construct the In-Reply-To header

Yet, it's able to construct the Thread-* headers? It must know
*something*. 

> (References is a News header ONLY).

Wrong.

RFC 2822 - Internet Message Format:

# 3.6.4. Identification fields
#
#    Though optional, every message SHOULD have a "Message-ID:" field.
#    Furthermore, reply messages SHOULD have "In-Reply-To:" and
#    "References:" fields as appropriate, as described below.

-- 
Thomas
beast@system-tnt.dk