Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?
2020-07-21 11:10:35
Microsoft and Windows does not have a copyright with "X-" junk headers.
Junk is generated from everywhere, including from the *nix weenies
camp & especially from Google and the IETF creating protocols with
useless overhead. You, yourself, have added a new "X-" header with
"X-Original-From" while making 5322.From useless to fix a mess you are
partly responsible for where more DKIM signatures and related patch
work headers are expected to be needed. Let just wait for ARC per
node wasted overhead to be widely spilled over into the email network.
I already have plans for it but not what you think:
Today, the majority of headers are useless information to the MDA.
The most important are:
Date:
From:
To:
Subject:
Just like it has always has been since the beginning of electronic
communications time.
Networking headers like Reply-To: are needed too. MIME headers will
be needed for rendering.
For the record, our mail software, "older than dirt," has two modes,
one to keep a raw "as is" import storage and one to import/convert
into a proprietary format where unnecessary RFC5322 headers are
pruned. Once mail is received by the MDA, validated, spam or
otherwise, all the extra overhead is not needed.
--
Hector Santos,
https://secure.santronics.com
https://twitter.com/hectorsantos
On 7/20/2020 2:27 PM, John Levine wrote:
In article <B7E061A14E80279E1E14D92F@PSB> you write:
It is interesting that every one of these starts in "X-".
Presumably, by putting "X-" in front of their field names, the
perpetrators believe that they are exempt, not only from the
registry and its rules, but any rules at all. ...
No, they heard somewhere that you put x- in front of header names you
make up and the only registry they know about is the one in MS
Windows.
I did a similar sweep through my mail archive and found 1388 different
headers, all but 144 of which start with x-. Here's the longest ones,
all of which thoughtfully tell who to blame:
x-ms-exchange-crosstenant-originalattributedtenantconnectingip
x-ms-exchange-crosstenant-rms-persistedconsumerorg
x-ms-exchange-transport-crosstenantheadersstamped
x-ms-exchange-transport-crosstenantheadersstripped
x-white-heron-it-services-mailscanner-information
x-white-heron-it-services-mailscanner-spamscore
x-white-heron-it-services-mailscanner-watermark
My experience with people from Microsoft is that they are plenty smart
but often have no idea what they don't know. It might be productive to
make a few queries and see if we can encourage them to register them a
provisional names so at least there's less chance of collision.
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp
https://twitter.com/hectorsantos
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, (continued)
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, John Levine
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, Arnt Gulbrandsen
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, John Levine
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, John C Klensin
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, Arnt Gulbrandsen
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, John C Klensin
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, John Levine
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, Michael Peddemors
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, John Levine
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?,
Hector Santos <=
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, Dilyan Palauzov
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, Michael Richardson
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, John C Klensin
- Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, Hector Santos
- Re: [ietf-smtp] broken signatures, was Curious, John Levine
- Re: [ietf-smtp] broken signatures, was Curious, Brandon Long
- Re: [ietf-smtp] broken signatures, was Curious, John R Levine
- Re: [ietf-smtp] broken signatures, was Curious, Dilyan Palauzov
- Re: [ietf-smtp] broken signatures, was Curious, John Levine
- Re: [ietf-smtp] broken signatures, was Curious, Hector Santos
|
Previous by Date: |
Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, Michael Richardson |
Next by Date: |
Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, John C Klensin |
Previous by Thread: |
Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, John Levine |
Next by Thread: |
Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?, Dilyan Palauzov |
Indexes: |
[Date]
[Thread]
[Top]
[All Lists] |
|
|