| 1 |
On 2017-11-26 11:00, Ralph Seichter wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Received: from [82.69.80.10] (helo=peak.localnet) |
| 4 |
> by smarthost03d.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) |
| 5 |
> (Exim 4.80) |
| 6 |
> (envelope-from <peter@××××××××××××.uk>) |
| 7 |
> id 1eImhw-0000IJ-SK |
| 8 |
> for gentoo-user@l.g.o; Sun, 26 Nov 2017 02:30:12 +0000 |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Message #2: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Received: from [82.69.80.10] (helo=peak.localnet) |
| 13 |
> by smarthost03a.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) |
| 14 |
> (Exim 4.80) |
| 15 |
> (envelope-from <peter@××××××××××××.uk>) |
| 16 |
> id 1eImhw-0002XH-8v |
| 17 |
> for gentoo-user@l.g.o; Sun, 26 Nov 2017 02:30:12 +0000 |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Note the different host names and different IDs, these are two distinct |
| 20 |
> emails sent by you. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
No, those are Exim's local IDs, assigned by the list server host. Those |
| 23 |
are distinct from RFc 5322 Message-IDs, which are the closest thing to |
| 24 |
uniquely identify a message. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
So from the above it cannot be concluded that Peter's system sent the |
| 27 |
message twice: it might have, but it might equally have been the fault |
| 28 |
of the list server. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
FWIW, I am _not_ seeing any duplicates on this list, but I am currently |
| 31 |
struggling with dupes on another one: |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Please don't Cc: me privately on mailing lists and Usenet, |
| 37 |
if you also post the followup to the list or newsgroup. |
| 38 |
To reply privately _only_ on Usenet, fetch the TXT record for the domain. |
Archives