[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fixing news-mail gateway [Was: Re: Newsgroups mailing-list gateway b

From: Nuno Silva
Subject: Re: Fixing news-mail gateway [Was: Re: Newsgroups mailing-list gateway broken thread]
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 20:12:19 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)

On 2018-10-19, Bob Proulx wrote:

> Nuno Silva wrote:
>> Bob Proulx wrote:
>> > AFAICT messages through the Stanford newsgroup to email relay do not
>> > include the In-Reply-To header and therefore break threading.  A
>> > message may have the References header with information about previous
>> > messages in the thread causing the message to thread before where it
>> > should thread, and if only one deep them be completely disconnected
>> > from the original thread.
>> I might be wrong, but it looks like the In-reply-to header *is* sent,
>> but the message-ids are being rewritten somewhere, so one message can
>> end up with two different message-ids, and threading by In-reply-to will
>> not work as expected. The "Message not available" entries in the web
>> archive are probably those message-ids.
> Hmm...  You are right that at least some mail messages from the
> Stanford newsgroup gateway do include In-Reply-To headers.  Most do
> not however.  In the last three months of the archive 38 messages that
> came through the gateway included In-Reply-To out of 285 messages
> total through that gateway with 247 not including it.  At least some
> of those not including it were starting a new thread and were not
> replies so that normal for those.

And you are right some (most?) don't include In-Reply-To. I checked some
messages that were sent through USENET, but somehow I avoided checking
my own messages. The message you are replying to lacks In-Reply-To (at
least here). (But it has References, which I suppose should be enough to
do threading?)

(A message posted to the group/list through USENET will probably not
break threading on the same server it was posted to.)

> This nature of it with some having it and some not having it is a good
> clue that I had previously missed.  It might indicate that one of the
> newsgroup relays is causing the issue and it depends upon how the
> message routed through the newsgroup relays before arriving at
> Stanford and getting gatewayed to the mailing list.  It will need more
> analysis to see if we can correlate it with one specific host.
> Bob

Nuno Silva

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]