[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-smtp] [Shutup] Proposed Charter for the "SMTP Headers Unhealthy To User Privacy" WG (fwd)

2015-12-01 15:29:27
Tuesday, Dec 1, 2015 4:10 PM Richard Clayton wrote:
If you want to have very limited data in your email header fields then
you should look at the systems that you operate yourself and clean up
the information at that point. You'll probably get a poorer delivery
experience when sending to MAGY and others -- but that's your tradeoff.

Received: from localhost ( []) by 
(Postfix) with ESMTP id 01DDB1B2F31; Tue, 1 Dec 2015 11:10:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( 
[]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BPlsDC_M90ws; Tue, 1 Dec 
2015 11:10:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( 
[IPv6:2a01:7e01::f03c:91ff:fee4:ad68]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP 
id CDD061AD481; Tue, 1 Dec 2015 11:10:05 -0800 (PST)

Here are the Received: headers from the previous message I sent to the list.   
As you can see, there is no Received header at all for the submit server.   My 
submit server doesn't add one, because there's no good reason to.   I have had 
zero issues with mail I send not being delivered to any of the big providers.   
When I do have issues, the issues I have tend to be really small servers 
(typically IETF participants who, like me, run their own mail servers) that 
have all sorts of exciting steampunk gadgets filtering spam.

The issues that I have tend to be that mail to those users is delayed, not that 
it never arrives.   It's their choice to set up greylisting, and slowing down 
the reply rate for discussions like this isn't a bad thing, so I really 
wouldn't describe this as a "poorer delivery experience."

Sent from Whiteout Mail -

My PGP key:

Attachment: pgp8GFTrj1boc.pgp
Description: PGP signature

ietf-smtp mailing list
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>