That wasn't my intention. It was more a question of whether to keep
CFWS, which is allowed in the obs-msg-id, but not in (rfc2822-) msg-id
anymore, or strip it. The semantic value of the message-id would not
change. Consider e.g.
Message-ID: <ABCFD@(domain-part)
kde.org>
RFC2822 would disallow the creation of this. Now I could convert it to
Message-ID: <ABCFD(_at_)kde(_dot_)org>
or keep it exactly like I received it. The only problem I see with
converting is breaking old mailers that do not tokenize headers
according to rfc822 before interpreting them, but use the verbatim text
(incl. comment and folding wsp) to compare msgid's.
The safer thing to do is to leave it as-is, but my guess is that this
case occurs so rarely that it really doesn't matter.
Say you were replying to a message that had a newly-invalid From
address (valid under 822 and invalid under 2822). Would you create a
new address as the destination of the reply?
There are rfc822-from addresses that are invalid under 2822? Didn't know
that yet...
I think so, though I didn't check to be absolutely sure.
IIRC, the forms that are excluded in 2822 are extremely unlikely to be
used in practice.
the basic point I was trying to make is that the new syntax restrictions
in 2822 should probably not be interpreted as applying to those portions
of a newly composed message which were automagically obtained from a reply.
Keith