newbery@rata.vuw.ac.nz (Michael Newbery) (11/04/88)
This article is being posted on behalf of a friend who noticed the anomally while writing an RFC822 parser (in FORTRAN!) I checked and he seems to be right. The curious may wonder why a New Zealand site is forwarding stuff from Norway but that is another story... ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Would anyone out there like to explain the following problem/conflict with RFC #822 (the "Standard for ARPA Internet Text Messages" used in many mail systems) :- Problem: The received message "id" in a "Received:" field is not in the specified format for all mail I have seen (and a friend confirms this also). The definition for the "Received:" field is the following ... received = "Received" ":" ["from" domain] ["by" domain] ["via" atom] *("with" atom) ["id" msg-id] ["for" addr-spec] ";" date-time The definition for "msg-id" is the following ... msg-id = "<" addr-spec ">" Now observe an example "Received:" field ... Received: from relay.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id eu17161; 20 Sep 88 1:37 EDT For a start, the id is not surrounded by angle brackets ("<" and ">"). Secondly, "addr-spec" is defined to be ... addr-spec = local-part "@" domain ... there is definitely not an "@" sign either??????? One might think that the definition of "msg-id" is incorrect; however, for the "Message-ID:" field whose definition is ... "Message-ID" ":" msg-id ... I have seen the following ... Message-Id: <8809201329.AA26050@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> ... which is in the correct format! What should the definition for the "id" section of a "Received:" field be? Are there a lot of gateways out there that have got it wrong? (My source for the RFC #822 definition is "Standard For The Format Of ARPA Internet Text Messages", dated August 13, 1982, revised by David H. Crocker). Thanks Mark Riley GECO (Geophysical Company Of Norway A/S) Internet: riley@gest01.sdr.slb.com SINet: m_gest01::riley Tel: +47 4 506437