Martin wrote (2021-01-01):
O>> There is no "REPLYTO" kludge in Fidonet,
MF> Oh?
MF> = FUTURE4FIDO (2:310/31.3)
MF> ==================================================== Msg : 51 of 101
MF> Snt From : Benny Pedersen
MF> 2:460/58 02 Dec 20 12:05:12 To : All
MF> Subj : ... ==============================================================
MF> =================
MF> @MSGID: 2:460/58 0000054d
MF> @PID: tg_BBS_v0.6.2
MF> @CHRS: CP866 2
MF> @TGUID: 270364579
MF> @REPLYTO 2:460/58 270364579
MF> Hello :)
MF> --- tg BBS v0.6.2
MF> * Origin: Fido by Telegram BBS by Stas Mishchenkov (2:460/58) ===========
MF> ====================================================================
Sorry, I was confused and thought it had something to do with the MSGID and
reply linking. I saw REPLYID kludges generated by some software and replyTo is
used internally by some message base formats.
I still don't understand what the REPLYTO kludge is good for in this case. It
is also unspecified as a single kludge and not covered by any standard or
proposal. There is FSC-0035 (http://ftsc.org/docs/fsc-0035.001) which defines
REPLYADDR *and* REPLYTO in combination (both have to be included in the
message).
Using the REPLYTO address and ignoring the REPLYADDR could cause issues and is
not a correct implementation of FSC-0035. If this is not intended to be an
implementation of FSC-0035, maybe the Telegram Gateway and OpenXP should use
another kludge.
---
* Origin: (2:280/464.47)
|
