It is not like the SMTP list is overflowing with traffic. I just looked, and
ietf-smtp is averaging less than one message per month.
I would suggest sending a message to both the ehip and shutup lists saying they
will be shut down and the discussion will move (start?) to the ietf-smtp list.
You might also hint that people should /review/ the ietf-smtp list before
suggesting we take out all diagnostics from email transport ;-).
Then, after two weeks, shut down the ehip and shutup lists.
On Nov 26, 2015, at 8:19 AM, Alexey Melnikov
<alexey(_dot_)melnikov(_at_)isode(_dot_)com> wrote:
John/John,
On 26/11/2015 00:04, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 22:00 +0000 John Levine
<johnl(_at_)taugh(_dot_)com> wrote:
These two lists were just announced in the past couple of
days, and neither has any traffic yet other than the
announcements.
They are about more or less the same thing, ehip about hiding
info in mail headers, shutup about not recording mail trace
information.
I wasn't able to even figure that much out from the
announcement. I guessed that "SMTP headers" might mean
SMTP-provided trace header fields, but I can come up with
alternate theories and I got "hiding" not "not recording". I
did write the list managers about that, but have not yet gotten
a reply.
The two mailing lists are about related, but not exactly the same work.
draft-josefsson-email-received-privacy
My understanding is that ehip is mostly to work on draft-wchuang-grunion-01
("S/MIME Proxy Forwarding"). "shutup" is for charter discussions and
hopefully for the subsequent WG related to personal information reduction in
the Received header fields (draft-josefsson-email-received-privacy) and
encryption of other sensitive header fields when using S/MIME/OpenPGP
(https://modernpgp.org/memoryhole/).
I have my doubts about the wisdom of both, but it seems to me
that it would make sense to pick one list and close the other
down since it'll be the same people arguing about the same
issues on both.
Agreed. There is another reason as well. If the intent is to
hide trace and normal (nominally UA-UA) mail header fields in
transit, it is almost certain that the same or closely-related
mechanisms will need to be used, at least unless the plan is to
replace Internet mail's "envelope and header" model with
separate outer envelope, trace envelope, and header model
(perhaps separating part of all of the latter from message
content by more than a blank line) similar to the P1/P2/P3
abstraction in X.400-series email.
I think this would be a perfect topic to discuss on the shutup@ mailing list.
So please subscribe and let's discuss this topic there.
If the shut-up intent is either to not record trace fields or to
create and move to that more complex envelope structure, I, for
one, would prefer to have that discussion on the SMTP list,
where the right set of people are watching.
I think notifying people on the SMTP mailing list is a good idea, but I think
the chartering discussion would be better done on a separate mailing list.
Best Regards,
Alexey
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail