[Top] [All Lists]

Re: "Header Reordering", yet again

2005-05-31 12:16:02

At 01:33 PM 5/31/2005 -0400, Bruce Lilly wrote:
On Tue May 31 2005 12:34, David MacQuigg wrote:

> Nobody answered my challenge to provide an example of a big forwarder that
> re-orders headers, so I'm coming to the conclusion that this is FUD.

Funny, my conclusion is that many people have taken Keith Moore's

You raised this topic with your out-of-context quote from RFC-2822, and the implication that that header reordering is a big problem, something that would stop any reliance on header order.

I'm new to this list, so it wasn't clear to me that this is one of those "rathole" topics. It seemed to me that it was worth exploring, even pushing a little to see if there was some substance behind the claim. I have my answer now, so in the future, I will just refer to this thread.

I suggest that if you raise the topic again, you do it in a less "forceful" way. You could say for example - While it is common practice for MTAs to comply with RFC-2822, and not re-order headers, as always there are non-compliant systems, and we should be careful that anything we design can deal with those systems.

I would go even further and say re-ordering of headers by forwarders is very rare, but at this point I'm just guessing, so I'll keep looking for any facts to the contrary.


************************************************************     *
* David MacQuigg, PhD     email: david_macquigg at     *  *
* IC Design Engineer            phone:  USA 520-721-4583      *  *  *
* Analog Design Methodologies                                 *  *  *
*                                 9320 East Mikelyn Lane       * * *
* VRS Consulting, P.C.            Tucson, Arizona 85710          *
************************************************************     *