0

正如我在官方rfc2822上所读到的

   The "Message-ID:" field provides a unique message identifier that
   refers to a particular version of a particular message.  The
   uniqueness of the message identifier is guaranteed by the host that
   generates it (see below).  This message identifier is intended to be
   machine readable and not necessarily meaningful to humans.  A message
   identifier pertains to exactly one instantiation of a particular
   message; subsequent revisions to the message each receive new message
   identifiers.

   Note: There are many instances when messages are "changed", but those
   changes do not constitute a new instantiation of that message, and
   therefore the message would not get a new message identifier.  For
   example, when messages are introduced into the transport system, they
   are often prepended with additional header fields such as trace
   fields (described in section 3.6.7) and resent fields (described in
   section 3.6.6).  The addition of such header fields does not change
   the identity of the message and therefore the original "Message-ID:"
   field is retained.  In all cases, it is the meaning that the sender
   of the message wishes to convey (i.e., whether this is the same
   message or a different message) that determines whether or not the
   "Message-ID:" field changes, not any particular syntactic difference
   that appears (or does not appear) in the message.

在某些特定情况下，电子邮件消息可以包含相同的 ID。例如，看一下以下两个消息头：

Return-Path: <xxx.xxx@xxx.it>
Received: from relaypsm.eng.it (xxxx.xxx.it [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx])
    by xxxxx-xxx.xxxxx.it (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v0PJ6wOD014924
    (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL)
    for <xxxxx@xxx.xxxxx.it>; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:06:59 +0100
X-Icontrol: Sent by Inrete Icontrol
Received: from MailAV (unknown [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx])
    by deliver (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52B743A4
    for <xxxxx@xxx.xxxxx.it>; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:06:58 +0100 (CET)
Received: from LBURRINIW (unknown [192.168.63.9])
    by xxxxx.xxx.it (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8D80339F
    for <xxxxx@xxx.xxxxx.it>; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:06:51 +0100 (CET)
From: "Luca Burrini" <luca.burrini@eng.it>
To: <xxxxx@xxx.xxxxx.it>
References: 
In-Reply-To: 
Subject: fatture xxxxx
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:06:51 +0100
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAHCgtCXXdtBNl+uXnP8eDHPCgAAAEAAAAGutlHZJGkpAhmPV6f+ofh8BAAAAAA==@eng.it>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
    boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00D6_01D27746.91533090"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AdCOWOCYZlK03GM4S5Cd5xo9GuRjGAAorxQwBlBUrvAFQ/QDgAew8EzACjCMyCAGU/qYMAV4vr+QBuilgWAKzjrI4AagZVDwBqrsgiAABfH4YAXsTykQBafYYmAEIBNvwBSv7j/wBgnvoHAB0wKvkAWE5BHA
Content-Language: it
X-KLMS-Rule-ID: 1
X-KLMS-Message-Action: clean
X-KLMS-AntiSpam-Status: not scanned, disabled by settings
X-KLMS-AntiPhishing: not scanned, disabled by settings
X-KLMS-AntiVirus: Kaspersky Security 8.0 for Linux Mail Server, version 8.0.1.721, bases: 2017/01/25 14:07:00 #8842754
X-KLMS-AntiVirus-Status: Clean, skipped
X-IControl-Milter-Checked: yes (IControlServer: xxxxx-NEW SrcIpType: UnTrusted SrcIpHeaderType: Undefined Authenticated: no)
X-IControl-Milter-SPF-Checked: yes (IControlServer: CEDACRIPEC1-NEW HeloSPFType: none FromSPFType: pass HeloHeaderSPFType: Undefined FromHeaderSPFType: pass)
X-IControl-Milter-MD5SUM: c803ab2c6498f91967e8cb2f5954f43a

和

Return-Path: <xxx.xxx@xxx.it>
Received: from xxxxx.xxx.it (xxxxx.xxx.it [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx])
    by xxxxx-new.xxxxx.it (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id uBSGqOAP023446
    (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL)
    for <xxxxx@xxx.xxxxx.it>; Wed, 28 Dec 2016 17:52:24 +0100
X-Icontrol: Sent by Inrete Icontrol
Received: from MailAV (unknown [161.27.15.23])
    by deliver (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0FD33AC
    for <xxxxx@xxx.xxxxx.it>; Wed, 28 Dec 2016 17:52:23 +0100 (CET)
Received: from LBURRINIW (unknown [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx])
    by relaypsm.eng.it (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7D2D83CC
    for <xxxxx@xxx.xxxxx.it>; Wed, 28 Dec 2016 17:52:17 +0100 (CET)
From: "Luca Burrini" <xxx.xxxxx@xxx.it>
To: <xxxxx@xxx.xxxxx.it>
References: 
In-Reply-To: 
Subject: fatture xxx
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2016 17:52:16 +0100
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAHCgtCXXdtBNl+uXnP8eDHPCgAAAEAAAAGutlHZJGkpAhmPV6f+ofh8BAAAAAA==@eng.it>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
    boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0092_01D26133.2135B540"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AdCOWOCYZlK03GM4S5Cd5xo9GuRjGAAorxQwBlBUrvAFQ/QDgAew8EzACjCMyCAGU/qYMAV4vr+QBuilgWAKzjrI4AagZVDwBqrsgiAABfH4YAXsTykQBafYYmAEIBNvwBSv7j/wBgnvoHAB0wKvkA==
Content-Language: it
X-KLMS-Rule-ID: 1
X-KLMS-Message-Action: clean
X-KLMS-AntiSpam-Status: not scanned, disabled by settings
X-KLMS-AntiPhishing: not scanned, disabled by settings
X-KLMS-AntiVirus: Kaspersky Security 8.0 for Linux Mail Server, version 8.0.1.721, bases: 2016/12/28 09:52:00 #8723401
X-KLMS-AntiVirus-Status: Clean, skipped
X-IControl-Milter-Checked: yes (IControlServer: CEDACRIPEC1-NEW SrcIpType: UnTrusted SrcIpHeaderType: Undefined Authenticated: no)
X-IControl-Milter-SPF-Checked: yes (IControlServer: CEDACRIPEC1-NEW HeloSPFType: none FromSPFType: pass HeloHeaderSPFType: Undefined FromHeaderSPFType: pass)
X-IControl-Milter-MD5SUM: 30378f3a90c4e4051ecd9eab79feaa02

他们拥有相同的 ID，但相信我，这两封电子邮件属于不同的传输方式。此外，他们持有不同的附件。

您能告诉我为什么电子邮件 ID 相同吗？

4

2 回答 2

1

您可以获得具有相同消息 ID 的不同消息。就是这样：

  1. 当用户 A 向 B 和 C 发送 message1 时，会生成 Message-Id 1。
  2. B 是最终目的地，它接受消息并存储它。
  3. C 是一个邮件列表。保留邮件以供审核。在稍后的某个时间点，邮件列表主持人接受该消息。邮件使用邮件列表的页眉和页脚进行修改并发送出去。B 在邮寄名单上并收到一份副本。
  4. 现在 B 有两份 message1，一份没有邮件列表信息，一份有。
于 2020-06-07T00:29:09.163 回答
0

我会试一试。

RFC 822 规定：

“消息标识符的唯一性由生成它的主机保证。”

它还在第 4.2 节中指定：一些系统允许邮件收件人转发邮件，保留原始标题，方法是添加一些新字段。这个标准支持这样的服务，通过“Resent-”前缀到字段名称。

所以：

  1. 听起来主机电子邮件程序没有更改所述 ID。
  2. message-id 是可选的，但 ESMTP 指示如果在事务期间缺少它，服务器应该添加它。（https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2821）
  3. 转发消息应该添加“resent-”，但这取决于客户端/服务器中的代码。

ESMTP ID 更改似乎表明不同的电子邮件服务器......而且主题的错字感觉是做作的，甚至像垃圾邮件一样。（“fatture Engineering”不是意大利语和英语的“Engineering Invoice”的混合体吗？）

如果是垃圾邮件，我希望消息 ID 是相似的，即使它们来自同一台服务器，因为它们实际上是同一条消息。

您是否有更多关于这封电子邮件的目的/内容的信息？

于 2017-03-01T17:19:11.690 回答