Re: [PATCH] pgarchives: parser: handle messages in which Message-ID is missing

On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 8:47 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
wrote:

> On 2021-Nov-04, Célestin Matte wrote:
>
> > > I don't think this should be the responsibility of pglister. As you
> > > say, "most MTAs do add this field" -- and the solution is to
> > > configure the MTA to do this. We already rely on the MTA to get a
> > > lot of other important things right.
> >
> > But then these messages will get delivered by pglister but pgarchives
> > will fail to archive them, although they do not actually break
> > requirements. Shouldn't we follow the RFC here?
>

I agree that the scenario is a problem, per below. I don't agree that
making up an id is a solution to that problem.

Maybe pglister should refuse to deliver messages that don't contain
> a Message-Id.
>

It should. I actually thought it did already, but apparently it does not. I
guess we've only ever used it under properly configured MTAs :)

Have you actually come across any case where a *proper* non-spam message is
sent without a message-id and passes through actual mailservers on the way?

Looking through the approximately 1.4 million mails in the postgres list
archives, not a single one has a message-id generated by the archives
server MTA (which is configured to generate it). Not a single one by our
inbound relay servers. And exactly one by the pglister server -- which
turns out to be a bounce that ended up in the archives because of a
misconfiguration back in 2018 that's not visible in the public archives.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>