Hi --

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, daz wrote:

> David A. Black wrote:
> >
> > Here are some excerpts from RFC-1036 (which obsoleted RFC-850):
> >
> >
> >   2.1.4. Subject
> >
> >   [...] If the message is submitted in response to another message
> >   (e.g., is a follow-up) the default subject should begin with the
> >   four characters "Re: ", and the "References" line is required.
> >
> >   [...]
> >
> >   2.2.5 References
> >
> >   [...] User interfaces need not make use of this header, but all
> >   automatically generated follow-ups should generate the "References"
> >   line for the benefit of systems that do use it, and manually
> >   generated follow-ups (e.g., typed in well after the original message
> >   has been printed by the machine) should be encouraged to include
> >   them as well.

[...]

> Usenet itself doesn't consider them to be invalid.  If "news.zrz"
> were to send regardless, they would make it around the Usenet
> servers.

In practical terms, though, the spelling out of the requirement in the
RFC probably means that admins who have decided to comply with it are
not likely to be talked out of it, so there's probably not much point
pursuing that particular path.  I'm not sure what that leaves us with.
Not much, I fear.  I was thinking about maybe having a dummy message,
to which all these stranded messages could be sent as replies.  It
would presumably take them out of the threads they were supposed to be
in, but at least it would get them through.


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack / wobblini.net