Re: [Ietf-message-headers] Re: draft-saintandre-header-pres-00.txtetc.

Peter Saint-Andre <> Thu, 03 January 2008 15:50 UTC

Return-path: <>
Received: from [] ( by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JASLB-00049B-Rj; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 10:50:41 -0500
Received: from ietf-message-headers by with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JASLA-000491-Mp for; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 10:50:40 -0500
Received: from [] ( by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JASLA-00048t-Cy for; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 10:50:40 -0500
Received: from ([]) by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JASL8-0001Vj-3W for; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 10:50:40 -0500
Received: from ( []) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2744A4049C; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 08:50:24 -0700 (MST)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 08:50:21 -0700
From: Peter Saint-Andre <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv: Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/ Mnenhy/
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Frank Ellermann <>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-message-headers] Re: draft-saintandre-header-pres-00.txtetc.
References: <><> <><> <> <flhpkd$mmm$>
In-Reply-To: <flhpkd$mmm$>
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: ded6070f7eed56e10c4f4d0d5043d9c7
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for header fields used in Internet messaging applications." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0151303153=="

Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> You may have missed the point of the Jabber-ID header, which we
>> defined so that the community of Jabber users could experiment
>> with this usage. 
> [...]
>> Thanks for the feedback -- I'll keep it in mind if I ever decide
>> to pursue these I-Ds further (which I rather doubt).
> IMO the Jabber-ID header field makes sense, it has a modern syntax,
> and might be better than attaching a complete vCard to a message:
> Apparently the optional "profile" associated with a JID is more or
> less the same as a vCard.   The Last Called Jabber-ID draft (you
> have already fixed a minor FWS issue) only needs IESG approval and
> an RFC number.  Whatever backchamber conspiracy "persuaded" you to
> "withdraw" it - but if it was the "DEA directorate" I'll scream.

On 2007-12-04 I posted an updated version incorporating your FWS and 
Netnews suggestions, and per my request the IANA has added the header to 
the provisional registry (RFC status is not required for registration, 
in accordance with RFC 3864). It is an open question whether I will ever 
request a standards action regarding this specification. As to the DEA, 
I don't think the Drug Enforcement Administration was involved. ;-)


Peter Saint-Andre

Ietf-message-headers mailing list