ietf-smtp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-smtp] broken signatures, was Curious

2020-07-22 12:29:54
In article <6464.1595370330@localhost> you write:
If the message goes through "mailman" or some other processor, then it seems
like it ought to rip pretty much every X-FOO out.  The rest of them ought to
be known headers at the time the processor was written, and it ought to
either know what they are, or it does not, in which case, it shouldn't pass
on things it does not know about.

That's not gpod advice. The point of the mystery headers is to tell
what happened to the message during its trip, and the part of the trip
before it hit the list manager is as important as the part after. When
I'm trying to figure out why something undesirable leaked through the
list manager, I need the original headers to figure out what happened.

I also don't understand what problem this is supposed to address. No
MUA of which I'm aware displays junk headers, so it can't be user
confusion.  If the concern is bandwidth, why aren't we resuscitating
the cascaded sub-list managers from prior decades, or inventing something
like STARTDEFLATE for SMTP?  Headers are in the noise when people are
shipping around giant blobs of HTML and attached pictures.

R's,
John

_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp