IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-smtp] Email explained from first principles

"Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-ietf-smtp@hjp.at> Mon, 24 May 2021 11:27 UTC

Return-Path: <hjp-ietf-smtp@hjp.at>
X-Original-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 547DD3A242A for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:27:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 yBSqNJG0vaM1 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:27:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rorschach.hjp.at (mail.hjp.at [212.17.106.138]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A43E63A12BB for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:27:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rorschach.hjp.at (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EB8C94C39; Mon, 24 May 2021 13:27:17 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 13:27:17 +0200
From: "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-ietf-smtp@hjp.at>
To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20210524112717.GA8355@hjp.at>
References: <799F767A-9075-471A-AD1F-A6CFE9611B8F@ef1p.com> <8358a3fa-29dd-4fa6-83ea-3be8bfa6cdb3@beta.fastmail.com> <5B4B701D-DCDB-4F49-837E-997DF50CCA15@ef1p.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5B4B701D-DCDB-4F49-837E-997DF50CCA15@ef1p.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/7cR7NU3T3FTaar_KR-TL8_OscVU>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] Email explained from first principles
X-BeenThere: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Simple Mail Transfer Protocol \(SMTP\) \[RFC 821, RFC 2821, RFC 5321\]" <ietf-smtp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-smtp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-smtp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 11:27:30 -0000

On 2021-05-23 14:15:47 +0200, Kaspar Etter wrote:
> 2. List-Name header field: Mailing lists shouldn’t rewrite the messages of
> others and break DKIM signatures in the process. Since my email address was
> rewritten due to my domain policy, I didn’t receive some of the replies to my
> original message because I didn’t subscribe to this mailing list immediately.
> The List-Unsubscribe header field makes it unnecessary to include an
> unsubscribe footer in forwarded messages.

Not really, because many MUAs don't support the List-Unsubscribe header.
So for the benefit of the users of those MUAs it still makes to include
such a footer. 

> A new List-Name header field would make it unnecessary to prefix the
> Subject with the name of the list.

Same problem. Technically the prefix in the subject is already
unnecessary. We have List-Id header which the MUA could use to filter
messages, rewrite the subject, display an avatar or whatever. But most
don't, so mailing-list administrators fall back to rewriting the
subject. I doubt a new List-Name header field would change that.

        hp

-- 
   _  | Peter J. Holzer    | Story must make more sense than reality.
|_|_) |                    |
| |   | hjp@hjp.at         |    -- Charles Stross, "Creative writing
__/   | http://www.hjp.at/ |       challenge!"

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email