ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Regarding SMTP Message specification syntax ...

2003-10-01 13:32:20

Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:

Simon is saying that 2822bis Appendix B should have one item added:
"31. X-* header fields are not discussed".

I don't see a big problem with that.

nor I, if that's all that's being proposed.

I'd like to see them mentioned, that's it.  If there isn't any
agreement on the rules associated with them (which seem to be the
case), the above text seems appropriate, and is fine by me.

The text above could serve as a reminder that X-* is a potentially
controversial area, so people don't assume that their own opinion
about X-* is something that is universally agreed on.

I just don't want to reopen the discussion of whether X- fields are
good.  At least not in the context of revising this document.

Sure.

Thanks,
Simon


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>