On 11/9/24 12:37 PM, Willy Manga wrote:
Hi,
On 09/11/2024 16:00, nanog-request@nanog.org wrote:
Curious what workflow/process any of you use to do so, and what the best/netizen-polite way is to end up with a reply that's appropriately threaded. Do I just need to mirror the subject line?
1. I locate the relevant message I want to reply
2. Delete everything before/after or with some mail client (like Thunderbird) , I can just select the message and hit the 'reply' button. It will include only the selected text
2. Copy exactly the subject line of the relevant message I want to reply and if it doesn't yet contain a 'Re:' in front, I insert it.
The digest is a standard mailman 2.1 digest, which means you will get a MIME email with multipart/mixed. The first part will be the topics listed and then each part after that will be an individual message. The easiest way to reply to this is to go into the individual message and open it then reply. Most MUAs will include the right headers. I've not messed with digests on NANOG in close to 5/6 years, but this was one of the things I tested at the time. Mutt and Thunderbird (and K9 on android) worked no problem. Please be sure you post a text/plain to the list, with > for the quoted text, relevant text trimmed, reply below and ensure your MUA inserts a In-reply-to header. This last one is important as mailman 3 (hyperkitty) must have references or in-reply-to to thread. mailman 2 (pipermail) does look at subject and date and will somewhat thread them. If you lack a text/plain version, your message will be blank in the archives and the digest. If using GPG/PGP you want to use the depreciated "Inline" format too, as this will show up in the archives and the digest, which will remove/truncate the extra MIME attachments that mime uses, making your signature unverifiable. Text/plain is a requirement of using MIME with rich text/HTML as your email must be readable to non-HTML users. I lament many companies/developers who should know better will make text/plain blank (Costco puts HTML in it!), or just omit it. This makes it very difficult to read in several MUAs, mutt is totally unreadable, Thunderbird will render the HTML to plain text which is a nice feature. Many blind users still prefer text/plain too when using a Braille output vs. screen reader. I do have the feeling we've gone backwards in email technology in the last 10-15 years. There is a SORT implementation to IMAP that is a threading algorithm on steroids, and I wish the archives would use implement, as nanog can't control people using broken MUAs posting to the list. <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5957> One last thing to point out is the references and in-reply-to header were defined in RFC822, so they have been the standard way of doing this. Only in RFC2822 (circa 2001) were they updated. This is well established how this should work, but blame MS for their non RFC compliant MUAs. There's no way I am aware of to properly use internet mailing lists with these MUAs. Apologies for the tardy reply, I've been flooded.. -- Bryan Fields 727-409-1194 - Voice http://bryanfields.net