Hey Tommi!
On Sun, Feb 02 2025 01:53:55 -0600, you wrote:
Or is it synchronet/nntp way to put the newsgroup name to "To:" field
when there is no "To:" nor "X-Comment-To:" fields in the message?
Could be. And if so, I'd imagine it's probably some kind of standard (or a lack of specifics).
From RFC 1036:
Certain headers are required, and certain other headers are
optional. Any unrecognized headers are allowed, and will be passed
through unchanged. The required header lines are "From", "Date",
"Newsgroups", "Subject", "Message-ID", and "Path". The optional
header lines are "Followup-To", "Expires", "Reply-To", "Sender",
"References", "Control", "Distribution", "Keywords", "Summary",
"Approved", "Lines", "Xref", and "Organization". Each of these
header lines will be described below.
Note that there is no "To:" field listed there as required, or even optional at the time of that writing. It was probably added later as some sort of addendum (if that was even done), much like "X-Comment-To:" which is hard to find in any RFC.
Maybe you're confusing the difference between FTN and NNTP here. FTN always uses the "To:" field (there are even settings and patches in some of these older news clients for "fido" and "fido gating" in order to address some of this). However, when you post to a newsgroup via NNTP.. I believe the 'normal' way is to post to the newsgroup directly (exactly what you saw in my previous message), and not _to_ anyone in particular. This also fits with the "Followup-To" field and any possible cross-posting to multiple newsgroups that could/would come into play (the newsgroups cross-posted to are listed in the "Followup-To" field, otherwise this field isn't used and goes out empty).
Either way, using the "X-Comment-To:" field with who I'm replying to already works in followups, so after I realized what happened in that message I started stuffing "X-Comment-To: All" in my *new* articles posted, which should help for this specific case.
A lot of FTN related things were merged into Jam/Smapinntpd, which probably breaks a lot of regular NNTP standards. Try messing with any other NNTP servers, and you'll see quite a few differences as you dive further into it.
Regards,
Nick
... He who laughs last, thinks slowest.
--- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
* Origin: _thePharcyde
telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/700)