User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040115 Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040115 Sample header line (added by EXIM): Delivery-date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 16:48:33 +0100 This should also solve the problems Mozilla Mail/News Bugzilla, Bug #216033, Bug #166254 The Delivery-date timestamp can be added at server side (if mailserver controleld at own site) so there is no need to loop through all (possibly manipulated) Received header lines. Sorting message list by a Delivery-date column would then also ensure that the mails are displayed in the correct order. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3.

Is delivery date available as a notice in any RFC's to-date... If not, I don't see why it would be worth adding in for a non-official extension, which servers may or may not add. Though if it is, I second this suggestion.

(In reply to comment #1) > Is delivery date available as a notice in any RFC's to-date... http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1327.html ... IPMS.MessageBodyPart The X.400 -> RFC 822 mapping is recursively applied, to generate an RFC 822 Message. If present, the IPMS.MessageBodyPart.parameters.delivery-envelope is used for the MTS Abstract Service Mappings. If present, the IPMS.MessageBodyPart.parameters.delivery-time is mapped to the extended RFC 822 field "Delivery-Date:". ... (http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2076.html) Further I can point you to EXIM configuration: http://www.exim.org/exim-html-4.30/doc/html/spec_44.html > If not, I don't see why it would be worth adding in for a non-official > extension, which servers may or may not add. According to RFCs the Delivery-Date header is an optional but you can take the date currently used in message list as "default" if the Delivery-Date is missing. At our customers mail servers can be configured this way (if not already done because all other date header lines could be faked). I was talking with a collegue about the other related issues already mentioned in my first comments and we came to the conclusion that the Delivery-date implementation could be less work for you and could also help the other guys struggling with the message sorting. Thanks for thinking about that enhancement.

This is an automated message, with ID "auto-resolve01". This bug has had no comments for a long time. Statistically, we have found that bug reports that have not been confirmed by a second user after three months are highly unlikely to be the source of a fix to the code. While your input is very important to us, our resources are limited and so we are asking for your help in focussing our efforts. If you can still reproduce this problem in the latest version of the product (see below for how to obtain a copy) or, for feature requests, if it's not present in the latest version and you still believe we should implement it, please visit the URL of this bug (given at the top of this mail) and add a comment to that effect, giving more reproduction information if you have it. If it is not a problem any longer, you need take no action. If this bug is not changed in any way in the next two weeks, it will be automatically resolved. Thank you for your help in this matter. The latest beta releases can be obtained from: Firefox: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/ Thunderbird: http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/releases/1.5beta1.html Seamonkey: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/

This bug has been automatically resolved after a period of inactivity (see above comment). If anyone thinks this is incorrect, they should feel free to reopen it.