IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] "X-" revisited

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Mon, 11 July 2011 01:18 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A7D821F869E for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jul 2011 18:18:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.155
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.155 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-3.556, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8dB+lIptFDfj for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jul 2011 18:18:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B826D21F8637 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Jul 2011 18:18:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from host9027e4f94482.mnot.net (unknown [118.209.88.245]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5733D509E2; Sun, 10 Jul 2011 21:18:48 -0400 (EDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <4E14CB64.2090403@dcrocker.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 11:18:48 +1000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0F800CD8-5E3D-4FC4-8F85-B42903BBA5FD@mnot.net>
References: <4E08CDCB.70902@stpeter.im> <4E13DC15.2080302@stpeter.im> <4E14A334.60500@dcrocker.net> <4E14BFFC.5070504@stpeter.im> <4E14CB64.2090403@dcrocker.net>
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] "X-" revisited
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 01:18:51 -0000

On 07/07/2011, at 6:53 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote:

> (Entire topic:  X- was a good idea to avoid collisions with standards, but turns out to be a much worse idea for uses that become standards.  So, don't use X-".)

Can we get this into the abstract... or make it the abstract?

Cheers,

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email