Re: [Extra] [ietf-smtp] Fwd: [Ietf-message-headers] Registration update: Content-MD5
John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Sat, 20 October 2018 21:28 UTC
Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: extra@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: extra@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 970B3130E0C; Sat, 20 Oct 2018 14:28:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ufkm7YBjM06l; Sat, 20 Oct 2018 14:28:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (bsa2.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA698130EC0; Sat, 20 Oct 2018 14:28:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1gDynK-000H26-CV; Sat, 20 Oct 2018 17:28:26 -0400
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2018 17:28:19 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
cc: extra@ietf.org, ietf-smtp <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <2D6E95CB12593FD1605A8DBE@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <01QYO1VJX96600BGSX@mauve.mrochek.com>
References: <5BC59599.3000501@ninebynine.org> <f0f09879-cf78-edbf-17e7-edc79034c9e1@isode.com> <01QYO1VJX96600BGSX@mauve.mrochek.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/extra/O4iQA-NyQPLplwbCHV6j3XBr4ls>
Subject: Re: [Extra] [ietf-smtp] Fwd: [Ietf-message-headers] Registration update: Content-MD5
X-BeenThere: extra@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Email mailstore and eXtensions To Revise or Amend <extra.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/extra>, <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/extra/>
List-Post: <mailto:extra@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/extra>, <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2018 21:28:32 -0000
FWIW, +1 john --On Saturday, October 20, 2018 14:08 -0700 Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com> wrote: >> (Sorry for cross posting) > >> Is there any interest in deprecating use of Content-MD5 for >> email? > > Seems like a lot of effort for no real again. > > The few implementations I've seen do interoperate, so AFAIK > that's not a reason for deprecating it. > > Of course MD5 isn't cryptographically strong, but it's fine > for a checksum, which is what RFC 1864 says it is for. (At > the time the RFC was written I argued for extending its use to > crypographic applications and in the process moving the > algorithm from the name to the value to provide for algorithm > flexibility, but there wasn't sufficient interest.) > > Ned > > >> Thank you, >> Alexey > >> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >> Subject: Re: [Ietf-message-headers] Registration update: >> Content-MD5 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 08:39:05 +0100 >> From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org> >> To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, >> ietf-message-headers@ietf.org > >> Just to be clear, this is just use with HTTP that's being >> obsoleted? > >> It's also registered as a MIME header. The reason for >> obsoleting per RFC7231 appears to be inconsistent HTTP >> implementations, so I guess that doesn't apply to MIME/email? > >> # g >> -- > >> On 15/10/2018 05:30, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> > As discussed on the HTTP Working Group mailing list [1], >> > we'd like to update the registry entry for Content-MD5 in >> > HTTP. >> > >> > Proposed template: >> > >> > Header name: Content-MD5 >> > Protocol: http >> > Status: obsoleted >> > Reference: RFC2616 (obsoleted by RFC7231, Appendix B) >> > >> > Cheers, >> > >> > 1. >> > https://www.w3.org/mid/C94E5914-F5F0-46D0-BABB-D42EE45DF10D >> > @mnot.net >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Ietf-message-headers mailing list >> > Ietf-message-headers@ietf.org >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-message-headers >> > > >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-message-headers mailing list >> Ietf-message-headers@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-message-headers > >> _______________________________________________ >> Extra mailing list >> Extra@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/extra > > _______________________________________________ > ietf-smtp mailing list > ietf-smtp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp
- [Extra] Fwd: [Ietf-message-headers] Registration … Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [Extra] Fwd: [Ietf-message-headers] Registrat… John Levine
- Re: [Extra] Fwd: [Ietf-message-headers] Registrat… Ned Freed
- Re: [Extra] [ietf-smtp] Fwd: [Ietf-message-header… John C Klensin