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

[Ned Freed <[e-mail]>]

> On 7/21/20 9:08 PM, John C Klensin wrote:

> >> I think it's slightly deeper than that, which is that every
> >> time one party adds a new header field, some number of other
> >> parties decide that they can delete or modify that field, or
> >> use it to validate or invalidate the message.   So random
> >> parties making random decisions about message headers are
> >> detrimental to email reliability.
> > I agree with that.  But that is the justification for registered
> > header field names, preferably well-documented and stable ones.

> I suspect this is not an issue that can be addressed by any combination
> of registration and/or field-naming constraints in the absence of
> instructions to message-handling software about which fields (if any)
> they can add, modify, or delete.

> I love the format's extensibility but I suspect there's a point of
> diminishing returns.   The message header has become a garbage dumping
> ground, and it might need some cleaning up.

Doors, once opened, are hard to close.

Building a door where none existed before is even more difficult. Especially
when the costs of construction have yet to be justified.

				Ned