Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Sun, 19 July 2020 14:44 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
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 1E6EA3A0918 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 07:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=i+CE+8Z4; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=IjDKkcM0
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 domUoo3lcerX for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 07:44:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED8003A0914 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 07:43:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 39678 invoked from network); 19 Jul 2020 14:43:58 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=9afb.5f145c2e.k2007; bh=4eRSyp5V5MHgZnhLv0RKmqmpZMJg3kdd0jksJA40yk0=; b=i+CE+8Z4R6ZtWH4kQwsQbdXnoFbHMMyh2v3WHOQdropQs97CPa9vp9Vk+92IEVnvylNSsV9DNDzvm2OAPRJCkCVoruVZSocymovmK5VPenv2irdnI3H49YO/OyANYV05f42sFOx+4ADWDrjpVmApqd73AYb7O4EZUAxAxpRecnmkyuy+QeN5t58A6FsNAeX/3n31KUkfEtdYGQvcN0LkcH1LAiLOHCjdhrKDcCIT/WvfE3bup7x+/3E9XrTchR+P
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=9afb.5f145c2e.k2007; bh=4eRSyp5V5MHgZnhLv0RKmqmpZMJg3kdd0jksJA40yk0=; b=IjDKkcM0LVeW1PXvERwzoQlvPkMr8+GgjanZJAmvnXjNtq/VwVqqx5oinsBZc6OnrjPkvSk1jTGkQ9gpdQmWBj/Wjc2UsH3JRKBxqmTbr2pRp0PrCFzGRD4deh9CJDWz9sdh8LcjOBQgkDkd8SUyh1IxAX9Kgz43wPBIiJhS5qzVh81X15abh67eRGsiK/mB+yhRsOIAVggRd6QPx8F+4HUOkDRgHasT6SAMTVIoIEPjHr0/QR1BgdKojL+P8t0Q
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTP via TCP6; 19 Jul 2020 14:43:57 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id A64221D393E2; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 10:43:57 -0400 (EDT)
Date: 19 Jul 2020 10:43:57 -0400
Message-Id: <20200719144357.A64221D393E2@ary.qy>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
Cc: winshell64@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CAKFo7wk+jLGqjs6mU=Gv3G1xAg+O5OyTmt66fjW4DLzUT5kuPw@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/E7LNSR_SOuVubxJc5s8bVoN732s>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?
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: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 14:44:02 -0000

In article <CAKFo7wk+jLGqjs6mU=Gv3G1xAg+O5OyTmt66fjW4DLzUT5kuPw@mail.gmail.com> you write:
>I think a header value limit for important headers stored in overview
>systems (From:, To:, Newsgroups:, Bcc:, etc...) could be a good
>idea... 

There's no formal limit other than the line length, but there is a registry of 
header names, shared among mail, netnews and uucp:

https://www.iana.org/assignments/message-headers/message-headers.xhtml

Adding new names to the registry requires expert review and I expect
the expert would be sceptical of proposed names that were a lot longer
than the existing ones. I don't see any over 35 characters which seems
reasonable.

R's,
John