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

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Sun, 19 July 2020 19:45 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.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 211713A07A0 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 12:45:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 FDzq9Sg3WTf4 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 12:45:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.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 E0A443A0797 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 12:45:10 -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 1jxFFE-000BBr-Be; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 15:45:08 -0400
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 15:45:02 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
cc: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
Message-ID: <1B661F1808DAEF52721162E4@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <67dd92d1-9ed6-4a1e-bff6-f9d9339dfd3a@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
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> <ce227a65-05f8-4b3a-b464-5720cd39fc3b@gulbrandsen.priv.no> <B7E061A14E80279E1E14D92F@PSB> <67dd92d1-9ed6-4a1e-bff6-f9d9339dfd3a@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
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/ietf-smtp/VN_9giWG7jdQIbW4VevGX1-AOsc>
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 19:45:12 -0000


--On Sunday, July 19, 2020 21:10 +0200 Arnt Gulbrandsen
<arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no> wrote:

> On Sunday 19 July 2020 20:19:52 CEST, John C Klensin wrote:
>> <Sounds of virtual vomiting>
>> 
>> It is interesting that every one of these starts in "X-".
> 
> It looks shorter, but uglier, if I exclude X-. Avert your eyes
> now:
> 
>  Staticcontent1_Header1_F731d3dc-Fd31-4161-Ad91-1083ba56853f
>  Staticcontent2_Header2_F731d3dc-Fd31-4161-Ad91-1083ba56853f
>  {Emails_Custom_Header_Prefix}Subscriber-Uid
>  {Emails_Custom_Header_Prefix}Campaign-Uid
>  {Emails_Custom_Header_Prefix}Customer-Gid
>  {Emails_Custom_Header_Prefix}Customer-Uid
>  {Emails_Custom_Header_Prefix}Delivery-Sid
>  {Emails_Custom_Header_Prefix}Tracking-Did
>  /Usr/Usr/Lib/Ecartis/Ecartis.Logreceived
>  /Usr/Local/Ecartis/Ecartis.Logreceived
>  Antivirus.Cortanet.Com.Mx-Mail-From
>  {Emails_Custom_Header_Prefix}Mailer
>  (Anti-Spam-(Anti-Spam-Mime-Version
>  Lcs-Mailantivirus-System-Mail-From
>  {Emails_Custom_Header_Prefix}Ebs
>  Prayed-Neutralize-Impressionable
>  Authentication-Results-Original
>  Original-Authentication-Results
>  Regenerates-Root-Insensitivity
>  Discarded-X400-Mts-Extensions
>  Require-Recipient-Valid-Since
>  Academia-Accosts-Occidentals
>  Forward-Confirmed-Reversedns
>  Sun-Java-System-Smtp-Warning
>  Antivirus-Sistema-Mail-From
> 
> Some might say that these are the worst even including X-. I,
> uh, I don't know what to say, but maybe doing these queries
> may not have been a good idea and you should shoot me now.
> "Authentication-Results-Original
> Original-Authentication-Results" oh god.

No, I think the data are always helpful.  So much for my guess
that we could address the problem by going after the "X-" stuff.
That also may suggest a review of whether deprecating the use of
"X-" and substituting a registration requirement with expert
review just encourages name-squatting without any
warning/indication.

   john