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

Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no> Sun, 19 July 2020 16:57 UTC

Return-Path: <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
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 6169A3A0B5C for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 09:57:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gulbrandsen.priv.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 1YcUzEamlK6e for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 09:57:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:91a8::3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 119CA3A0B5B for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 09:57:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:91a8::3]) by stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 400F2C0195; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 18:02:50 +0100 (IST)
Authentication-Results: stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gulbrandsen.priv.no
Authentication-Results: stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gulbrandsen.priv.no; s=mail; t=1595178170; bh=P99x7pXWmXGfRsXLe7MMpNVPgvLqyZdCWlCVNr176xM=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=meG8wdepGTBZWUf17tj1/oJ5Xz7IwZNjnY0gw/Z8ziWXgLsCoV7BExwmvtH51NWFU ikxO6s4FSsiVcnwx7+Zn1/O5xGt7Xndy+uoVfHt2r/93T+N7LUJYPexo41KRyVW7wQ u+b0or3Z8V4UljHJsIjLQBrxqHZYVman4o+I0/t4=
Received: from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no by stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Archiveopteryx 3.2.0) with esmtpsa id 1595178169-26497-26494/9/4; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 17:02:49 +0000
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 18:57:10 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <ce227a65-05f8-4b3a-b464-5720cd39fc3b@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
In-Reply-To: <20200719144357.A64221D393E2@ary.qy>
References: <81c2a19c-f19e-b495-3441-22c2a112037c@linuxmagic.com> <52D9A14B4CDD14BB4C97C355@PSB> <CAKFo7w=9_eZda47ZMUv_NE9iN1FEnGM7m3nUFy3_Wq4se+W8XQ@mail.gmail.com> <DE8B2C33275660E19FFA513C@PSB> <CAKFo7wmsm+1ck5G7Sj-NpnyXgeHd14cxGQ6K9KFeVG0_CTM1sw@mail.gmail.com> <5C6196E28FCDC4A312E73A00@PSB> <CAKFo7wk+jLGqjs6mU=Gv3G1xAg+O5OyTmt66fjW4DLzUT5kuPw@mail.gmail.com> <20200719144357.A64221D393E2@ary.qy>
User-Agent: Trojita/0.7; Qt/5.11.3; xcb; Linux; Devuan GNU/Linux 3 (beowulf)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/N69nKLVW_JPpbWSbLh3zSVZxSYo>
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 16:57:16 -0000

On Sunday 19 July 2020 16:43:57 CEST, John Levine wrote:
> 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.

My personal server currently has 559 field names longer than that. The 25 
worst offenders:

 X-Offlineimap-X706593913-6d61646475636b2e6e6574-494e424f582e647261667473
 X-Gemstorm-Computing-T/A-The-It-Company-Mailscanner-Information
 X-Ms-Exchange-Crosstenant-Originalattributedtenantconnectingip
 X-Gemstorm-Computing-T/A-The-It-Company-Mailscanner-Spamcheck
 X-Ssjmail.Ssjfinance.Com-Mail-Server-Mailscanner-Information
 Staticcontent1_Header1_F731d3dc-Fd31-4161-Ad91-1083ba56853f
 Staticcontent2_Header2_F731d3dc-Fd31-4161-Ad91-1083ba56853f
 X-Mimedefang-Relay-15b21d6f94afe8e768c451e09085c007047aae7e
 X-Mimedefang-Relay-89167b66339720c294cd81d33948afd6488b114f
 X-Ssjmail.Ssjfinance.Com-Mail-Server-Mailscanner-Spamcheck
 X-Ssjmail.Ssjfinance.Com-Mail-Server-Mailscanner-Spamscore
 X-Gemstorm-Computing-T/A-The-It-Company-Mailscanner-From
 X-Mailscan-242.Hostingdynamo.Net-Mailscanner-Information
 X-Content-Pgp-Universal-Saved-Content-Transfer-Encoding
 X-Kypusserverappliance-Kypus-Mailprotection-Information
 X-Gemstorm-Computing-T/A-The-It-Company-Mailscanner-Id
 X-Mailscan-242.Hostingdynamo.Net-Mailscanner-Spamscore
 X-Mailer.Unfpa-Bangladesh.Org-Mailscanner-Information
 X-Nugget-Enterprises-Antispam-Mailscanner-Information
 X-Ssjmail.Ssjfinance.Com-Mail-Server-Mailscanner-From
 X-Bangladesh-Open-University-Mailscanner-Information
 X-Ironport.Danmargroup.Co.Za-Mailscanner-Information
 X-Mail01lehostingservicesnet-Mailscanner-Information
 X-First-Flight-Couriers-Ltd-Mailscanner-Information
 X-Gemstorm-Computing-T/A-The-It-Company-Mailscanner

Arnt