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

John C Klensin <> Sun, 19 July 2020 00:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC7113A0EE4 for <>; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 17:58:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 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] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id krXwwKNWlNoB for <>; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 17:58:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3EF63A0EE2 for <>; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 17:58:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (helo=PSB) by with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <>) id 1jwxeR-00082t-0k; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 20:57:59 -0400
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2020 20:57:53 -0400
From: John C Klensin <>
To: E Sam <>,
Message-ID: <5C6196E28FCDC4A312E73A00@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <52D9A14B4CDD14BB4C97C355@PSB> <> <DE8B2C33275660E19FFA513C@PSB> <>
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-Scanned: No (on; SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Simple Mail Transfer Protocol \(SMTP\) \[RFC 821, RFC 2821, RFC 5321\]" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 00:58:02 -0000

--On Saturday, July 18, 2020 18:56 -0400 E Sam
<> wrote:

> I think the max size of the header name does need to be
> addressed in RFC 5322. Seeing how email and Usenet can
> sometimes be the "wild west" I have seen really long headers
> and developing mail software the question of header max limits
> have also come into my mind.

Out of curiosity and just to be precise, are you talking about
the header field name or the field value?

> The other issues on the list are important too but this one is
> one that I have personally dealt my hands on.

I trust Pete and the co-chairs will take note.

> I look forward to seeing what comes out of the BOF.

Time zones, etc., permitting, please try to participate.  Much
of the BOF is precisely about deciding what is in or out of